26 50 1396 https://highway89.org/files/original/3c945095792013b8da27c949b0787ab4.pdf b80044718ade4f85617d1f58a5c80346 PDF Text Text 1. GENERAL SUMJ1ARY Major' impact on both environmental and visual quality of c anyon. 2. Project contradicts national energy concern. 3. 80-9 ~fo 4. "Waste poses a major engineering problem. II (Project Engineer) "It'll never be worth as much as we've put into it already." (Project Engineer) 5. of project requires cutting. (Remark by Project Engineer) TRAFFIC GROWTH FACTORS 1. UDOT uses an unrealistic exponential model. 2. A linear growth model better fits daily traffic data. 3. Linear model forecasts lower traffic levels than UOOT's projection : 4. Traffic data used by UDOT are limited to one busy section of the highway, yet are used to describe whole road. 5. Need for highway re-alignment not documented by current data. SAFETY FACTORS 1. Suggested danger of Logan Canyon "Section 111" is not .supported by current data. 2. A major discrepancy exists between accident rate data and traffic volume. 3. 1977 accident r a te figured by Utah Highway Patrol does not agree with UDOT report. 4. Statistical significance of accident data used is suspect. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS 1. Numerous spills would encroach into Logan River from planned fills 2. Silt deposits in river would destroy trout habitat and breeding cycle. . . 3. Loss of riverside vegetation, needed by trout for low light intensi 4. Creation of any culverts would impair spawning success of trout. 5. Loss of vegetative barrier lessens quality of f.ishing experience. 6. Major visual impact would result from the cuts planned, especially the two major cuts at the. Temple Fork area, which would be, by Project Engineer Gary Lindley's report, 75;\'and as much as 150' across. deep _ �I.Critique of Traffic Forecasts The UDOr projects future traffic levels in the section of canyon highway under discussion with a model which assumes expoQential grovth at 4% per year. Based on the UDOT's average daily traffic data (ADT) for Right Hand Fork, a linear traffic growth model fits the data nearly perfectly (r 2 = 0.975). Such a linear model forecasts lower traffic levels in the future than the seemingly unrealistic expon e ntial model. Average daily traffic at lZLght Hand Fork after widening of lower canyon: Year ADT 2225 2300 2450 70 71 72 73 74 75 Linear model Number of vehicles/day - -3817 + (86.43 x year) 2500 2550 2670 ~ We were unable to obtain ADT's from the UDOT for 76,77, or 78; they were said to not be available. The ADT's reported for Right Hand Fork are actually for the Logan River Bridge just below the section of road in question. Between this bridge and the narrowed roadway is the junction with the Right Hand . Fork road, which leads to a youth camp, Forest Service campground, and major hunting and snowmobiling grounds. Our observations on a July weekend afternoon (high volume) suggest that about 5~ of the traffic at the bridge actually comes or goes on this other road. The ADT projections should be scaled down 5:t from those based on ' traffic at the bridge. In the projections of the UDOT, the Design Hourly Volume (DHV) is . not a constant ratio of the Peak Hourly Volume (PHV). varying from 1.22 to 1.40, depending on the year. This needs to be explained. j �Critique, p. 2 In summa,ry, we recorrrrnend that the Federal Highway Administration not grant permission for this project before the need for it is first documented via realistic traffic projections. These should embody all recent ADT's (after lower canyon was , widened) and a realistic growth model which takes into account the projected availability of fuel for 1 I motor vehicles. Projections for the highway section in question should be 57. less than those at Logan River Bridge. A constant ratio of DHV to PHV should be used, and its absolute value justified. 1 1 These considerations could well postpone the time at which the capacitj of '1 , the existing alignment (including a new surface on it) would become I inadequate. i \ I r i I 1 i 1 j �]T . / TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN LOGAN CANYON, 1970-77 The Utah Department of Transportation (UDT) has concluded the unimproved sections of the Logan Canyon highway are especially dan gerous. This conclusion has b~en advanced as one of the major reasons for undertak i ng an improvement project for section 3 and part of section 4. This conclusion is not supported by an analysis of the currently availabl~ data. Complete data for the period (70-78) has been requested from UDT but not yet received. The UDT decision is based on data published in the report, "Preliminary Proposals and Alternatives. SR-13 (US-89) Logan to Garden City," District one Office, Utah Department of Transportation, February, 1977, and some recent updates (included as inserts for the report). In addition, an independent studY) "Accident Statistics, Logan Canyon and Rich County, 1976-77" by Utah Highway Patrolman L.D. Langford, has been made available(included). The following analysis is based on these reports. I. Errors and Discrepencies ·1. There is a major discrepenci between the accident rate data presented in the UDT report, graph p. 39 insert, and the traffic volume data) dt-athT- 2 p. 2Z. Using the accident rate of 6.1 accidents/million miles for section 3 for the period 1970-77 (graph, p.39 insert) and the length of section 3 (5.1 miles) the average daily traffic (ADT) may be calculated, given the total number of accidents in this section (120): AOT = l2Q x 10 6/ 6.1 x 365 x 7 = 150"9.5 VPO (vehicles per day). From table T-2 of the UOT rep6rt (p.28) ADT for section 3 varies from 2225 VPD (1970) to 2888 VPD 1977 festimated from 1975 by adding 4% increase· per year, as suggested by the UDT). Clearly, the 1509.5 VPD figure does not agree with the data of Table T-2. If, instead of 1509.5 VPO, an aver~ age figure for the period of 2549 VPD~ an accident rate for section 3 may be calculated: Accident rate = 120 x 10 6/ 2549 x 365 x 7 x 5.1 = 3.61 accidents/million miles. This accident rate, 3.61, is lower than the Utah State average for the same period (3.9, as seen on the graph on p. 39 insert). Therefore, either the data of table T-2 is wrong, or the accident rates used by UDT "" in the graph ofp.39 insert are grossly inflated. !f the accident rate for section 3 is, in fact, 3.61, this section : is not dangerous. Since this section has the highest rate, when similar calculations are made for the other sections it appears the Logan Canyon highway is much safer than most roads in Utah. 2. The accident rate for 1977 calculated from the La ngford study is not in agreement with that reported for the same year in the UOT graph (p.39 insert). The Langford report covers a slightly longer section (Zone II) (8.27 miles) and the data must be corrected slightly for this; this correction, however, has no significant effect on the result. Using the Langford data for · Zone II (Right Fork to Cattle Gaurd above Ricks Springs), the accident rate may be calculated (Langford report, p. 16): accident rate = 4.84 x 10 6/ 365 x 2797.6 (ADT) =4.74 accidents/million miles: Clearly, this is considerably lower than tile 7.2' value used by UOT (graph p.39 insert), and gives considerable support to the calculation in 1. above. �/ ,/ ,/ Again, this rate (which is the high est for any Zone of Logan Canyon in the Langford report) indicates Logan Canyon highway is relatively safe. II. Doubtful and Er roneous Conclusions 1. Using the data of UDT graph, p.39 insert, for accident rates for various sections of the Canyon, the question must be asked whether this distribution is si gnificant or is it, in fact, si m ply due to random variation. This question may be answered by a relatively si m ple statistical test, the chi squared test for nonnal distribution in a set of data. If there are no differences betw een sections with respect to accident rates, then all should have the same, or the average for all sections: x: ~'xi/n , xi: accident rate for each ,section, n= number Qf sections(7). x = 4.107 accidents/million miles {/?~ ch i sq ua re (7\ ) / = (( x. 1 - 2 X-) / n- 1 = 3.390 Using a chi sqare table at 6 degrees of freedom, the critical values of chi square are 2.20 at 90 % and3.45 at 75%. The calculated value for the data (3.390) indicates the probability of this distribution being random is between 75 and 90%. In other words, the distribution of the graph on p. 39, UOT report indicates there is only a probability of 10-25% of the apparent differences in accident rates for the various sections being real. The conclusion therefore, that section 3 is significantly more dangerous than section 1 or 2 (already improved) is not valid. To base a decision to improve this section on such unlikely probabilities is , at the very least, highly questionable. ' 2. On p. 40 of the UOT report, it is stated a definite relationship exists between volume of traffic and accident experience. This may be tested statistically by plotting the data of the table on p.23 of the report (traffic volume by month) against the data of of the table on p. 41 (accidents by month). It is assumed the traffic volume data distributions for 74-75 are the same as for 71-75 (since all data are normalized to percentage distributions by month, this assumption seems highly teasona~le): Thi~ plot sh~uld.be a . straight line, and the coef!icient of determlnatlon, r , for thlS llne, lS a meas~re of the correlatlon that does in fact exist between the two variables. This calculation from the UOT data gives: 2 ; , r = O. 37 . 2 2 For a 1/1 correlation, r : 1.00, and for no correlation, r : O. Anything less than about 0.9 is statistically suspect. The actual value, 0.37, is indicative of a very poor correlation at best. The conclusion that traffic volume and accident rates are correlated m ust be regarded as quite unlikely. Since this conclusion is used by uor to justify the project ( wider highway = less congestion by spreading out the traffic of high volume' periods ' = fewer accidents), it app ears UOT is grasping at straws in a desparate attempt to rationalize the constr~ction. A better conclusion would be that the safest time to travel the canyon is during periods of high volume. J �/ / TIle same calculation may be made from the data for 1976-77 from the Langford Report, normalized to percent (Langford Report, p.12), assuming the traffic volume distribution used in the UOT report applies to 1976-77. The result is: r2 = 0.32 Again, a poor correlation between traffic volume and accident frequency ' is found. These results may reflect the fact that road condition in Winter, particularly in the upper canyon (section 3) is more important than traffic volume, a factor not considered in the UOT report. III. Types of Accidents No data is yet available from UOT with respect to typ e of accident in each section. For 1976~77 from the Langford Report, 33% of the accidents in Zone II (section 3 and part of section 4) resulted in personal injury (PI), while 41 % of the accidents in Zone I (sections 1 and 2, improved) resulted in personal injury. This suggests the severity of the accidents in the new sections 1 and 2 is greater than in sections 3 and 4, but more data over a longer period is needed to confirm this. With respect to fatalities and deaths from accidents, the data are (see insert to UOT report): 1970-77 sections 1 and 2 sections 3 and 4 Fatalities 5 4 Deaths 8 4 In view of the small numbers, no statistical conclusions may be drawn; with respect to fatalities and deaths, however, there is no evidence to indicate the improved sections 1 and 2 are any safer than the unimproved sections 3 and 4. IV. Causes of Accidents The single most improtant cause of accidents is speed- traveling too fast for conditions: UOT report (insert) 1970-77 47% Langford report 1976-77 63% While the improved sections 1 and 2 were originally designed for 40mph they are signed for 50 mph. This may account for the higher PI accident rate and number of deaths in .the improved sections. V. Further Analysis UOT officials have promised a complete set of accident sta~istics (available on computer printout) will be furnished shortly. These statistics, covering the period 1970 - 77 will be analyzed with respect to accident rates, type of accidents, road conditions, and other pertinent factors, and the results will be made available as soon as possible, �, / / _III. EFFECTS OF ROAD [3UILD IriG ON THE LOGAN RIVER Utah Departm ent of Transportation personnel have stated that t hey plan to keep the Logan Canyon road as close as possible to the river tom i n i III i ze the s i ze 0 fro a d cut s . This \" ill pro ha b1y res u1tin numerous fills encroaching on the river bank and spillinj into the river. These fills contribute silt to the l' iver via runoff during r a ins to rill s, and bye r 0 s ion 0 f the s lop e b'y the r i ve r its elf. Bot h types are evident on fills created by previous construction at lower elevations in the canyon. Silt in streams creates several problems for the followin~ .re.asons. In general, the larger the size of a particle of soil or rock, ' the hiQher the velocity of water flow required to transport it downstream. Conversely, small particles can be transported by relatively low velocities (see lower curve in FiQure 1). If a silt-sized particle is deposited, because of passing into a region of low velocity or because of bein9 added to the stream during a period of low flow, it will not be picked up again without a velocity of flow above the lower line. If the particle, with others ~hich were deposited with i~ in position so as to becom consolidated, it will take a much e velocity to dislodge it (see upper curve in Figure 1). remains hi~her As can be . . seen the . finest silt and clay materials require rather high velocities to dislodge and transport them once they becom consolidated. e rlonnally in this region the heaviest runoff, and thus m ost erosion, occurs during the spring. Strea ms ap;Jear discolored because of the heavy silt load, hut stream velocities are also hi~h because of �/ - 2./ ./ /" the extra volume of water. Under these conditions silt is nlost apt to be transported downstrRam until · velocity of water flow decreases in a reservoir or marsh. The key to minimum · ~tream damage d~e · to the high transport capability of swiftly flowinQ water. silt is Ourin~ summer and fall volume of stream flO\.; is low, velocity of flO\y is m.inimum for the year, and thus transport capability is low. This is also the season of ·low erosion potential, with fully leaved trees, shrubs, and . grass interce~ting rainfall, and a layer of leaf litter protecting the soil surface in natural or undisturbed areas. Summer storms may cause a small increase in stream volume, but do not add large quantities of silt. Streams remain quite clear. Large road cuts tend to be prone to erosion. vegetative cover sparse. Raindrops from summer storms have a high probability of striking the soil washing them downhill. constructio~ Slopes are steep and surface~ dis10dging particles and Erosion from such areas can besever~. Road or any other activity which produces large expanses of bare earth changes the norn~l pattern of erosion and transoort of silt. The change adds silt to streams at the worst rossible time, during low flow periods. Large, relatively bare slopes \'t'hich result from the t'l'pe of construction being proposed are the source of too much silt to be ·. intercepted and retained by a narrow strip of vegetated land between road and river. If large fills are necessary a broad zone should be left between road and river, but this forces the road into the mountainside, creating additional problems. ~1 uc h oft he bot tom 0 f t r 0ut s t rea n1 sis 9r a vel 0r s ton e s . Invertebrates, upon which the fish feed, reside not only upon the u~per �- ~./ / / / sur f c1 ceo f the bot t 0 flJ but we 11 dis t rib ute din the s pc1 c e s bet \., eens ton e s / to depths of several inches. Young fish, shortly c1fter hatching, \- ill , seek shel ter beneath and betvleen stones on the bottom. Fish eg0s are deposited in shallow nests scooped into gravel bottoms,.and covered wi th gra ve 1 from ups tream. ~~ here s i 1t has been de[)os i ted the spaces between stones are filled, greatly decreasing the supply of food for trout. Hiding and resting places for small fish are also decreased. Silt in gravel decreases the flow of water through the gravel. Trout eggs require a constant supply of oxygen, available only, from flowing water. r-lo,rtalities of 95-100 percent are to be expected ',..,hen water flow through gravel is impeded by silt deposits. As pointed ,out above ' silt deposited during summer may become consolidated, resisting -removal by all but the highest velocity of flow. Such high velocities are not nonn?lly found prior to brown trout sra\'ming season ' in the fall. Another effect of fills encroaching into the river is the destruction of pools. Trout require areas of low velocity flows for resting, and pools next to the stream bank are particularly desirable. Such ' pools are frequently filled in when road fills encroach on a river. A rarticularly damagin9 effect of fill encroachment is the elimination of vegetation which han9s over the river. provides shade, especially in areas of low velocity trout can rest. This vegetation c u rrents~ where Brown trout require low li]ht intensities a~d slow currents for resting areas. ' In shallow rivers, such as the Logan, " low light intensities are usually found along 'banks \<lith abundant, vegetation hangin~ over the water. Elimination of such vegetation will 9reatly decrease the numbe,r of brown trout inhabiting th~ area. �There is a ~rorosal to chan~ e the location of the road ' in the vicinity of Logan Cave by cutting into the mountainside ~cross the river from the present road, crossing the river for a very short distance, and returning to the old roadbed. oblique by crossin~ ~nstalling This will r~quire an of the river . . If such a crossing is accolilplished a culvert, such a long tunnel may create an impediment to fish movement during spavming seasons. Finally, denuding the area between the stream and road to or very nearly to the river creates an undesirable fishermen~ by conditio~ fillin0 i . for , • > One of the reasons for fishing is to get away from the hustle and bustle of the working 0orld, and seek solitude and quiet. .. ..... i' • Without a vegetative barrier between the river and the road, fishermen are exposed to the sight and sound of passing traffic. This converts fishing from an experience in the wild, to a noisy session next to the highway. From the standpoint of erosive slopes, siltation of the river and scenic considerations, a wide roadbed ,is not acceptable in this canyon. • / r ~ ~ :" '~"~\~~;'::i~" I � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Local URL The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website <a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/94">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/94</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 2286995413 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 6105925 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 Critiques on Logan Canyon construction Description An account of the resource Critiques on Logan Canyon construction with a general summary, critique of traffic forecast, traffic accidents in Logan Canyon from 1970-77, effects of road building on Logan River, and an explanation of how the erosive slopes, siltation of the river and scenic considerations make a wide roadben unacceptable in Logan Canyon. Subject The topic of the resource Traffic engineering Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon Fishery resources 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. 1970-1979 20th century 1980-1989 1990-1999 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_4.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/537ac853ec196cbc45337a014cf981a1.pdf b344433e0b56291b693ad532c5454f00 PDF Text Text LOGAN CANYON HIGHWAY SCE IC BYWAY NOMINATION WASATCH - CACHE NATIONAL FOREST �WASATCH - CACHE NATIONAL FOREST SCENIC BYWAY LOGAN CANYON HIGHWAY site VICINITY MAP �BEAR LAKE �Logan Canyon Highway Scenic Byways Nomination Criteria The Wasatch-Cache National Forest nominates the Logan Canyon Highway for consideration as a National Forest Scenic Byway. Listed below are the Forest's responses to the nomination criteria. 1. Logan Canyon Highway (US 89) is primarily within the boundaries of the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. The segment to be nominated as a Scenic Byway is approximately 39 miles in length and runs from the mouth of Logan Canyon in the city of Logan, Utah to Bear Lake in Rich County, Utah. The highway is under the jurisdiction of the Utah Department of Transportation. With the exception of the following segments, the entire corridor is contained within the boundaries of the Logan Ranger District, Wasatch-Cache National Forest. a. Section 36, T12N, R1E, SLM. This segment is approximately .5 mile long and is owned by the City of Logan, Utah. b. Section 28, T12N, R2E, SLM. This segment is approximately .3 mile long and is part of a 17 acre parcel of privately owned land located on the south side of the highway. c. Section 18, T12N, R3E, SLM. This segment is approximately .2 mile long and is part of a 16 acre parcel of privately owned land located on the south side of the highway. d. Sections 24, 25, 36, T14N, R3E, SLM. This segment is approximately 2.8 miles long and is owned by the State · of Utah. e. Section 17, T14N, R4E, SLM. This segment is approximately .8 mile long and is contained within a 477 acre block of privately owned land known as Stump Hollow. f. Sections 20, 29, 30, T14N, R5E, SLM. This segment is approximately 5 miles long and is privately owned by a number of individuals. 2. The following list describes those segments not under the jurisdiction of the Forest Service. The sub-items listed below correspond to the sub-items in Criteria #1. a. and d. The Wasatch-Cache National Forest has been in close contact with the Federal Highway Administration, Utah Travel Council, BLM, Utah Department of Natural Resources, Utah Association of Governments (7 regions), Utah Association of Counties, Utah League of Cities and Towns, and the Utah Farm Bureau. Each of these agencies has pledged their support for a Scenic Byways designation for the Logan Canyon Highway and have �Logan Canyon Highway Page 2 expressed their willingness to help in any way possible. A formal meeting is scheduled for August 4, 1988 between each of the above agencies in which a formal agreement pledging support for official designation will be drafted. b. This parcel presently contains a summer home and a log structure that houses a restaurant. c. A summer home presently occupies this parcel. e. Congressman Jim Hansen, R-Utah, made a formal request before the House Interior Appropriations Committee for $1.2 million from the Land and Water Conservation Fund for the outright purchase of the Stump Hollow parcel. The request was not approved by the committee. Our hope is the request will be resubmitted for consideration next year. The private lands comprising the Stump Hollow area have been the source of a number of development proposals brought before the Cache County Planning and Zoning Commission since the 1960's. Current Cache County zoning restrictions limit new development to one building per 40 acres. f. This segment runs from the Forest Boundary to Garden City, Utah. is privately owned by number of individuals. It 3. The Logan Canyon Highway has been renowned for its scenic beauty since the days of the early Mormon Pioneers. It is the route of choice for literally thousands of summer and winter recreationalists traveling between Salt Lake City and the Jackson Hole and Yellowstone country of northwestern Wyoming. The Logan Canyon highway is situated in Cache and Rich counties of north central Utah. It is approximately 39 miles long and runs from the city of Logan, Utah to Bear Lake. Logan, the hub of the historic Cache Valley (pop 70,000), is the home of Utah State University, the Festival of the American West, the Logan Mormon Temple, historic tabernacle square, and the Summerfest Art Faire. Located just 5 miles east of the forest boundary, along US 89, in Rich county is Bear Lake. Known for its crystal-clear, turquoise water and beautiful setting Bear Lake is a popular winter and summer recreation paradise. Natural features encountered in the canyon include the Logan River and spectacular limestone canyon walls. Elevations range from 4700 feet at the mouth of the canyon to nearly 7800 feet at Logan Summit. The Logan River is a major source of water for the Cache Valley. The lower part of the canyon is deeply incised with nearly vertical limestone walls. The canyon bottoms are wooded mainly with deciduous hardwoods and brush. A mix of deciduous brush and conifer types are found on the steeper �Logan Canyon Highway Page 3 slopes. This unique blend of conifer and deciduous vegetation offers a brilliant mix of fall color that annually attracts many visitors to the area. Logan Canyon offers the forest visitor a diverse blend of developed and dispersed recreational opportunities. The Logan Ranger district administers 12 developed campgrounds, 2 picnic areas, 84 summer homes, and three organizational camps in the canyon. In addition to the existing facilities, the district is presently completing plans to develop a new campground that will support 75 family units and 4 large group areas. The highway also provides access to the Beaver Mountain Ski Area, the Utah State University Forestry Camp, and the Utah State University Management Institute, and two Forest Service Administrative Sites. Dispersed recreation opportunities accessible from the highway are almost limitless. The district has recently established the Beaver Basin X-C trail area which offers over nine miles of groomed X-C ski track. The State of Utah and Logan Ranger District jointly administer two large parking areas that provide access for X-C skiers and snowmobilers. The State of Utah grooms over 150 miles of outstanding snowmobile trail that is accessed via Logan Canyon. The pristine Logan River is a popular recreational trout fishing stream and can be accessed via -the many dispersed _recreation camping spots found along its entire length. The popular Tony Grove Lake area and the 45,000 acre Mt. Naiomi Wilderness Area are also accessed from the Logan Canyon highway. It is not uncommor. to view mule deer, elk, moose, and a mix of raptors and song birds from the highway. Other points of interest found along the highway include: the Tony Grove Memorial Guard Station (listed on the National Historic Register), the Limber Pine Nature Trail, the Jardine Juniper, Old Ephriam's Grave, the Logan Wind Caves, Logan Cave, Rick's Springs and two interpretive sites of geological interest. 4. The Logan Canyon Highway is the principal link between the Cache Valley and the Bear Lake Region and provides safe passage for the average recreational driver in a passenger car. It is officially classified as a rural minor arterial highway. The Utah Department of Transportation is in the process of conducting an Environmental Impact Statement that analyses the need to improve certain sections of the existing roadway. The draft of this EIS is scheduled for release and public review this coming fall. 5. The Forest Plan for the Wasatch-Cache National Forest states the Logan Canyon Highway will be managed as a Scenic Highway. In the latest State of Utah Highway Map, the Utah Department of Transportation has officially classified the Logan Canyon Highway as a Scenic Route. �Logan Canyon Sign Plan 1. Interpretive Signs Logan Wind Caves Lake Bonneville (redo) Brachiopod (redo) Logan Cave Ricks Spring Tony Grove Historical Site Amazon Hollow Jardine Juniper Sinks Area Limber Pine ' Trail Temple Fork Browns Roll-off 2. Informational Signs (campgrounds, picnic areas, summer home areas, organizational camps, Forest Service Administrative Sites) Bridger Campground Spring Hollow Campground Dewitt Campground Mailbu-Guinivah Campground Preston Valley Campground Lodge Campground China Row Campground Wood Camp Campground Lewis M. Turner Campground Tony Grove Lake Campground Red Banks Campground Sunrise Campground Card Picnic Area Chokecherry Picnic Area Card Summer Home Area Birch Glen Summer Home Area Chokecherry Summer Home Area Gus Lind Flat Summer Home Area Berdineau Summer Home Area Junipers Summer Home Area Brown's Roll-off Summer Home Area Cache Archery Range Organizational Camp St. Anne's Retreat Cache Council--Boy Scouts of America Card Guard Station Right Hand Fork Guard Station "Campground Ahead" and "Picnic Area Ahead" signs where appropriate. �Logan Canyon Highway Sign Plan cont. 3. Drainage Signs Spring Hollow Card Canyon Righ Hand Fork Wood Camp Temple Fork Blind Hollow Twin Creek White Pine Creek Bunchgrass Creek Franklin Basin Beaver Creek Stump Hollow North Amazon Creek Swan Flat Left Hand Fork 4. Road Junction/Directional Signs High t Hand Fork Wood Camp Temple Fork Tony Grove Franklin Basin Sinks 5. Appropriate Regulatory Signs ��BEAR co --co- �2I ( LAKE �� 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/96">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/96</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 1175960392 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 11678479 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 Nomination for scenic byway booklet Description An account of the resource Booklet for the nomination of Logan Canyon as a Scenic Byway including maps, images, and text. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Logan River (Utah) Signs and signboards United States Highway 89 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 1988-08-04 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Bear Lake (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 2 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_Fd2_Item_2.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/a94ae55b816b6e396f68bf9c47d91c8e.pdf 1ad30bf28a29ebd5997a96e0285c0c5a PDF Text Text APPENDIX �8/7/86 DRAFT TRAFFIC FORECAST ( INTRODUCTION The Logan Canyon Environmental Study requires an evaluation of present and future traffic needs. Present needs can be identified using existing information on roadway design and current traffic volumes. However, in order to assess future traffic needs, an estimate of future traffic volumes is needed. This technical memorandum describes the present traffic patterns in Logan Canyon (Canyon), the techniques used to forecast future traffic volumes, and the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume forecast for the year 2010. After the ADT has been determined, an appropriate peaking factor (based upon recorded peak hour traffic volumes) will be selected. The design traffic volume will then be established using the peaking factor (the peaking factor is the percent of the ADT which occurs during the peak hour) . AVAILABLE DATA Data on current and past traffic volumes in Logan Canyon and roads in the surrounding area is available and has been used in the preparation of this memorandum. The information available is as follows: o Permanent counting station on US 89 at the Card Guard Station in Logan Canyon, from 1973 to 1983. Daily and hourly directional volumes Monthly and annual summaries o Permanent counting station on US 89 west of Garden City, from 1983 to present (moved from Card Guard Station) . Daily and hourly Directional volumes Monthly and annual summaries o Permanent counting station on US 89 north of Garden City from 1966 to present. Daily and hourly directional volumes Monthly and annual summaries o Permanent counting station S-89-91 on Sardine Summit, from 1975 to present. 1 �Daily and hourly directional volumes ( Monthly and annual summaries o Permanent counting station us 91 at Webster Junction, north of Logan, from 1966 to present. Daily and hourly directional volumes Monthly and annual summaries o Manual counts taken during 1984, 1985 and 1986. o "1986 Baseline Projections", State of Utah, Office of Planning and Budget. The two permanent counting stations on US 89 and information presented in 1986 Baseline Projections were used as primary sources of data in the preparation of forecasts. The manual counts were used to provide classification data and distribution of traffic through the Canyon. The permanent stations on US 91 were used for reference only. CURRENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES ( The past traffic volumes in the Canyon have been summarized in Table 1. Traffic volume in the Canyon is highly seasonal. Summer ADT's are often as much as three times greater than winter ADT's and nearly twice the annual ADT. The increase in summer traffic volume is attributable to the recreational opportunities in the Canyon, the resort and condominium development around Bear Lake, and through traffic to Yellowstone and Teton National Parks. Because of the highly seasonal variation in traffic volumes in the Canyon, it is recommended that the summer traffic volumes be used to prepare a forecast ADT. The annual summaries taken from data gathered at the permanent counting stations, and the results of the manual counts taken to date, have been included as an appendices to this memorandum. FORECASTING TECHNIQUES Traffic forecasting is not an exact science. The function of our roads and highway is primarily to provide a safe, and where possible convenient, means of passage from one point to another. It is for this reason that when forecasting traffic volumes, it is necessary to look at the factors that would cause a change in traffic volume. Economic and population growth will usually bring about increased traffic volumes as will changes in land use. 2 �Table 1 RECORDED TRAFFIC VOLUME LOGAN CANYON (CARD GUARD STATION) ( Year 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982** 1984** 1985 Annual ADT (Vehicles Per Day) 1774 1558 1680 1767 1922 1902 1806 1813 1887 1848 1740 1773 * Summer ADT (Vehicles Per Day) 2793 2798 3022 3140 3461 3400 3180 3276 3424 3406 3503 3536 * **June, July and August Adjusted to reflect difference in traffic between Card Guard Station where counter was originally installed and the present location west of Garden City. The station was moved in August of 1983. 1983 data was not used. Station moved to new location in 1983 and data is from two locations. SLC82/01 �( The "Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook", published by the Institute of Traffic Engineers discusses two techniques used to forecast future traffic volume. One technique uses expected changes in population and economic conditions to estimate future traffic flows, and the other uses anticipated changes in land use. However, both of these techniques are discussed in relation to urban and regional or statewide planning. The State of Utah also utilizes a method of forecasting traffic volumes which utilizes anticipated changes in land use and population in an urban area. Cache and Rich Counties are not urban population centers and these techniques will have to be carefully applied if they are to be used and provide satisfactory results on US 89 through Logan Canyon. For this study, three techniques for forecasting have been utilized and the results of each compared before recommending a planning level ADT. These three techniques are: o o o Projection of past trends Economic and population forecasts Landuse change forecasts TRAFFIC FORECASTS PAST TREND FORECASTING A past trends forecast assumes that the trend established by past changes in traffic volume will continue into the future. If the period of record is long enough, the impact of changing economic and population conditions should be reflected in the trend. For this study, two types of analysis have been utilized in preparing a forecast using this technique. A "least squares best fit" line has been determined for the existing data and the line extrapolated into the future . •The least squares approach assumes a linear increase in traffic volume, which is not usually the case. Typically, long term growth will approximate an exponential curve, so for this study, an exponential function was also fit to the data. The increases in traffic volume forecast using the best fit and exponential analysis are summarized in Table 2. This type of analysis has two weaknesses when applied to Logan Canyon. 1) The period of record is short, especially when compared to the length of the planning period. In this case the function is extrapolated over a long period of time, 2.5 times the period of record. 2) There is also a significant scatter to the data points. With so few points and significant scatter, it is difficult to feel that the forecast is as reliable as would be prefered. 4 �Table 2 PAST TREND TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECAST LOGAN CANYON - CARD GUARD STATION ( Forecast ADT Year Linear 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 3293 3542 3792 4042 4291 4541 4790 3276 3630 3976 4355 4769 5224 5721 45 75 Percent Increase 1980 to 2010 SLC82/01 Exponential �( In an effort to overcome these weaknesses a similar forecast was prepared for the station on US 89 north of Garden City~ This station has a longer period of record and may provide an indication of the long term trend in the general area. The results of those analysis are summaried in Table 3. Upon comparing the forecast increase at each station, the summer traffic using an exponential function to fit data points, shows a total increase of 75 percent from 1980 to 2010 in the Canyon and a total increase of 77 percent on US 89 north of Garden City. The straight line extrapotalions show a larger spread (45 and 52 percent). Figures 1 and 2 graphically illustrates these past trends based forecasts. ECONOMIC AND POPULATION FORECASTING Using economic and population forecasts as a basis for estimating future traffic volumes assumes a relationship between population growth, economic activity, and changes in traffic volume. In preparing economic and population forecasts, specialists in economics, geography, demography and other social sciences all combine their expertise to develop projections of population growth and economic activity. Estimates of future changes in traffic volumes are then made based upon forecast changes in population and economic conditions. ( The State of Utah, Office of Planning and Budget prepares an annual projection of Utah's population and economic conditions. The "1986 Baseline Projections" which project population and economic conditions through the year 2010 has recently been released. In the report it states that it is, " ... an annual update of the baseline or most likely economic and demographic conditions, through the year 2010, for the State of Utah, its counties, and its multi-county planning districts ... ". Table 4 summarizes the expected populations within the Bear River and Wasatch Front areas. The area is expected to increase in population from approximately 1,156,150 in 1985 to 1,860,500 in 2010; an average compounded increase of approximately 1.95 percent per year. Using a projected annual growth rate of 1.95 percent, the ADT in Logan Canyon at the Card Guard Station would be expected to increase from 3276 vehicles per day in 1980 to 5847 vehicles per day in 2010. This compares closely with the 5721 vehicles per day forecast using the past trends techniques. The increase in traffic from 1985 to 2010, using economic and population change as a basis for traffic forecasts, is summarized . in Table 5. Figure 3 is a graphical illustration of the past trends and economic and population ADT forecast. 6 �Table 3 PAST TREND TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECAST US 89 NORTH OF GARDEN CITY ( Forecast ADT Year Linear Exponential 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 3137 3410 3683 3956 4229 4502 4775 3123 3436 3781 4160 4579 5065 5542 52 77 Percent Increase 1980 to 2010 SLC82/01 �( ( YEAR 1970 1980 1975 1985 1995 1990 2005 2000 2010 7000 6000 W // ~ ::> ...J 0 > L 5000 () /'" V"'- ~~ U. U. < a: ~ >- ...J < 0 4000 ~ W < 'a:" • • UJ > < •• 3000 • • V ~ ~: ~ ~ • 2000 LEGEND • RECORDED VOLUME STRAIGHT LINE -- - EXPONENTIAL FIGURE 1 -;;; PAST TRENDS ADT FORECAST (SUMMER)!! US-89 LOGAN CANYON ''':,.U:II1' �( ( ( YEAR 1970 1965 1975 1980 1990 1985 7000 1995 2000 2005 2010 r 6000 W :E ::) ....J 0 > V - 5000 () V/ " ~~ U. U. < a: ~ >....J ~ ~ 4000 a • w (!) < a: w > < •• 3000 ~ • •• • • • • • ~ • • '~ ~ ~ / .. :::::-~ • • 2000 LEGEND • RECORDED VOLUME STRAIGHT LINE --- EXPONENTIAL FIGURE 2 ,;;; PAST TRENDS ADT FORECAST (SUMMER)!! US-89 NORTH OF G ARDEN CITY '·:"U:Il1. �* Table 4 EXPECTED POPULATION INCREASE IN NORTHERN UTAH - 1980-2010 Year POEulation 1980 1,042,500 1985 1,156,150 1990 1,311,650 1995 1,442,350 2000 1,536,900 2010 1,860,500 Average Annual Increase 1.95 Percent * Source: SLC82/01 1986 Baseline Projections, State of Utah Office of Planning and Budget �Table 5 POPULATION AND ECONOMIC TREND TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECAST ( Year Projected ADT 1980 1985 3974 1995 4377 2000 4820 2005 5309 2010 SLC82/0l 3608 1990 ( 3276 5847 �( ( ( YEAR 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 7000~-------+--------~------+-------~-------+--------~------~------~ a: w ~ ~ 6000 ::> C/') w ~ ::> -.J 0 5000 > 0 u. u. a: « ~ >-.J 4000 ;;: 0 W (!:) « a: w > 3000 « 2000~------~--------~------~------~--~--~--------~------~------~ LEGEND ECONOMIC & POPULATION TREND BASED FORECAST - - - PAST TREND BASED FORECAST FIGURE 3 US-B9 PAST TREND VS ECONOMIC AND POPULATION ADT FORECAST �LAND USE FORECASTING Using land use as a basis for projecting future traffic volume assumes there will be a significant change in land use. Most of US 89 in Logan Canyon is in the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. The Forest has recently completed it's Forest Management Plan, and no significant changes in management of the land in and adjacent to Logan Canyon is planned. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that there would be an increase in traffic as a result of actions taken by the Forest Service. ( There is much private land in Rich Country adjacent to Bear Lake and nearby. At the present time, this private land is primarily being used for agriculture. The lower land being cultivated with the higher and timbered land being used for livestock grazing. There is much interest however in developing recreational facilities around Bear Lake. A number of cabin and condominium developments have been built and many more are planned. In 1981, a survey showed 1011 developed cabins or condominium units along the south and west shores. At that time, there were also 17,420 planned units, an increase of over 1,600 percent. If all of these units were to be completed by the year 2010 (as the developers hope), the summer ADT would increase to 53,171 vehicles per day at the end of the planning period. While continued recreational development is to be expected around Bear Lake, it is unlikely that it will have the impact on Logan Canyon traffic shown using this technique. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The past trend and population and economic growth techniques for forecasting future traffic volumes produced a surprisingly close estimate of the year 2010 summer ADT (comparing the exponential function past trends forecast with the population and economic growth forecast). A forecast based upon anticipated recreational development around Bear Lake produces a volume over nine times as great as the other two techniques. It is not unreasonable to assume that the increase in traffic volume in Logan Canyon would generally follow the increase in population in northern Utah. It is therefore recommended that the ADT for the year 2010 used in this study be 5900 vehicles per day. SLC82/01 ( 12 �·~ " � 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/98">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/98</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 1756072055 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 9346927 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 Draft traffic forecast Description An account of the resource Evaluation of present and future traffic needs by looking at roadway design, current traffic volumes, and the traffic patterns in Logan Canyon. Subject The topic of the resource Traffic engineering United States Highway 89 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 1986-08-07 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 22.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/e048667c2ec77cc43daf51e2382605d8.pdf 034254cef9ca1cc61901477476b2da4a PDF Text Text DISCUSSION OUTLINE ( __~__~ GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR COMPONENT AND ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT 1. Design Criteria Corresponding to Component Development. 'JJ of'S-1- G f\ ,~\ 0'''- Level of Service Year 2000 Year 2010 Minimum Speed · Design Typical Section Maintain status quo (no build) E 25 Existing Spot improvements DIE E 25 Existing Widening along Existing Align ( D: DIE D DIE 25 Modified Standard D D 35 Widening and improving ....---_ _- C - -- -- .....- - - n - align exi s t i- g -----2. \ ~ f\vnr"'\ -~<::>1" 0 c::J0 \11\tS 0 3. Y G~'~ '1• 0 Modified Standard Develop means to control adverse impacts to visual quality, water quality, soil, vegetation and aesthetic values. Avoid Logan River channel changes and protect natural stream characteristics by keeping construction work in the River to an absolute minimum. 4. Landscape disturbed areas to restore aesthetics. 5. Establish guidelines to control runoff on cut and fill slopes and road surface to minimize erosion and silting of Logan River. 6. Develop guidelines to stabilize soil and restore ground cover on disturbed areas including control of noxious weeds. 7. Ensure that any new drainage structures will handle peak flows. 8. Provide protection of existing and potential recreation sites from undue impacts and maintain suitable access to special use areas, fisherman and photographer turnouts, and recreation sites. 9. Provide suitable access into the highway at the road junctions, campgrounds, recreation sites, and scenic overlooks. �10. ( 11. Establish means -to treat any abandoned road sections by sculpturing and revegetating t6 restore to a near natural condition. _Identify sui~able locations for roadside turnouts and parking areas. 12. 13. Provide for improved access and parking at Ricks Spring. 15. Protect tree overhang without creating a road hazard. 16. Identify locations for disposal of surplus material from road cuts. 17. Establish guidelines to provide for public safety in location, design, and construction operations. 18. r Provide for access from the Cottonwood Parking Area to the Logan Canyon Cave. 14. ~ Identify methods to mitigate any encroachment damage to fisheries and wildlife habitat. Keep highway guardrailing to a minimum consistent with public safety. SLC/STAN/09 � 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/99">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/99</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 820765 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1035083 Bytes Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Discussion outline for component and alternative development Description An account of the resource Discussion outline for component and alternative development with handwritten notes in margins. 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 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 1980-1989 20th century 1990-1999 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 16.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/54d6597f7f5cc74697d3a35adfcedf3f.pdf 231c3d65bda49aa14ab4b611f7cd1afb PDF Text Text TYPE OF ALTERATION EXISTING VISUAL CONDITION NON-VEGETATI~ 2-6 ft. CUT SENSITIVITY RATING ______- - - - o · r- GRASS & SHURBS TREES FORB~ ~___ - _ _ fL....-_i_ -- 3 4 5 �TYPE OF ALTERATION EXISTING VISUAL CONDITION +6 ft. CUT SENSITIVITY RATING NON-VEGET ATION o GRASS & FORBS 4 SHURBS 5 TREES 6 �RIPARIAN SENSITIVITY RATING NON-VEG. 5 WET 6 RIVER 7 �I:) (J ~ (J 0 o: c- NON-VEGJ GRASS & FORBS .-- - SHURBS TREES ~ ~ - I- II. (J z w .. ... ... :) • w tn N Z I ::) l- :) ~ ~ t- .... :::». ... .. z ... (J II. (J W W CD I tn 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 3 2 3 3 4 3 4- 4 5 ._ -1..-- - .. . ..- - . f-'- - - - _1- -- - RIPARIAN . .CD •• N 01 0 3 4 5 4 5- 6 5 6 7 - ~ -~ . f-- - ~ - -~ -. -- . NON-VEG. - WET .--'--- --.-- RIVER . :. -' . �CUT OR FILL AREAS ,.....---- Type of Cut or Fill (5'cut) ~------Veg. Cover on Slope (Grass) ~---- Sensitivity Rating RIPARIAN AREAS .,......----Wet W River R (wet) ~ ______ Sensitivity Rating KEY R= N= G= S= T= Rock Non-Veg. Grass & Forbs Shurbs Trees NR= Non-Veg. Riparian W= Wet Riparian R= River Riparian 1= 1-2 ft. Cut 2= 2-6 ft. Cut 6= 6+ ft. Cut U= Unseen Fill S= Seen Fill By using a split-circle symbol shown above, an appropriate Sensitivity Rating (and the information from which is was determined) can be shown on each area of the map. Areas with improtant scenic Features or Recreation Development increased the sensitivity Rating by One. �TYPE OF ALTERATION EXISTING VISUAL CONDITION SENSITIVITY RATING o NON-VEGETATION· GRASS & FORBS ROCK CUT ' 1 SHURBS 2 TREES 3 ) �. '" ------------------ " .~ , .. TYPE OF ALTERATION EXISTING VISUAL CONDITION 1-2 ft. CUT . SENSITIVITY . RATING NON-VEGETATION . . .~~--.... fL..------_ i ___ 2 ~~ ____- - - - - 3 GRASS & FORBS ~~ SHURBS TREES 0 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/102">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/102</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 1358393504 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 3037721 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 Graphic of types of alteration and sensitivity rating Description An account of the resource Graphics of type of alterations including cut length and sensitivity rating on roads, riparian, rock cut, on the existing visual conditions. Subject The topic of the resource Traffic engineering 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 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 Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 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 5.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/4aab167326a2e50dddcd0f4d3d124809.pdf 021b884f7183484b21362be3640c017f PDF Text Text LANDSCAPE MANAGEMEHT FOR ROADSIDES IN LOGAR CANYON The management direction for the visual resource in Logan Canyon is provided in the Wasatch-Cache National Forest "Land and Resource Management Plan." The plan calls for the canyon to be managed for a Visual Quality Objective (VQO) of Retention. Retention allows man-made activities to occur which are not visually evident. This objective guides the extent of activities which can occur in the canyon. With this in mind, the roadway from Right Fork to Ricks Springs was evaluated to determine the most sensit~ve visual areas. The evaluation was based on possible changes of the existing visual 'condition on both sides of the existing highway. The capacity for the roadside to absorb alternation without losing its visual character is critical. Therefore, developed criterior to identify capacity for rating VQO' if road construction occurs. The criteria were then applied to determine an agg~egate value for sensitivity and capability to meet objectives. The following premises were used to develop the evaluation criteria: PREMISES Retention of roadside visual character Any widening of the existing highway will require cut and/or filIon the edge of the roadway. Cuts will have a greater visual impact than fills. Existing cuts and fills with dense vegetati on (trees and brush) will be more difficult to restore than cuts and fi lls with little or no vegetation. The larger the cuts, the greater the visual impact. Alteration of non-vegetated slopes and raw rock outcrops will not have a major change on the visual character of a 2iven area. Existing vegetation between the edge of the :~ ighway and river is classified as riparian (see Forest Plan, page 4-32) and should not be disturbed. The vegetation provides an impor t:.ant aesthetic unity viith the river as well as providing important Wi ld life habitat. Non-vegetated areas between the road and riv er (rip-rap) are in the riparian zone. These areas are not as visually important as vegetated riparian areas EVALUATI01L ~BITERIA The evaluation is based on the assumption that alterations may occur on either side of the existing road surface. The capacity for the roadside to absorb �these alterations depends on steepness of cuts, type of vegetation, and proximity to the Logan River. A numerical and color system is used to represent the most sensitive visual areas. The higher the number and darker the color, the more sensitive the area. Roadsides with a 0-2 rating can absorb alterations related to road improvement and still meet Retention VQO. f Roadsides with a 3~ rating can absorb alterations but will require major mitigation (retaining walls, bridges, etc.) to meet Retention VQO. Roadsides with a ~ rating cannot absorb alterations and still meet Retention, due to the high sensitive landscape character. � 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/105">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/105</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 825709449 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1068527 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 Landscape management for roadsides in Logan Canyon Description An account of the resource Evaluation of criteria for making changes to Logan Canyon according to a Visual Quality Objective and the ability for the landscape to absorb man-made alterations without losing the visual character of the Canyon. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Traffic engineering 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. 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 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 10.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/95c76aee566a1526be638b3a5d6d9ddc.pdf b8ec6eb75529d43b3121fa89004e367e PDF Text Text LOGAN CANYON HIGHWAY: DISTRICT 1 OFFICIALS: GAR'( LINDLEY DYKE LEFEVRE LES ABBEY THE, UDOT IMPORTANT NAMES , '. UDOT DIS'TRICT , # '1 128 17TH STREET OGDEN, UT ,84404 PROJECT MANAGEMENT TEAM: STAT~ OF,FICE BUILDING SALT LAKE CITy,UT , ' GENE STURZNEGGER, LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES ALSO ADVISER TO DISTRICT 1 . SHERMAN JENSEN, ENVIRONMENTAL AND SPECIAL STUDIES ALSO CO-ORDINATOR FOR THE UTAH HIGHWAY ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL (SEE B~LOW) J. Q. ADAIR, ROADWAY DESIGN JIM BRADEN, COMMUNITY RELATIONS DIR~CTOR LESTER JESTER, TRANSPORTATION PLANNING HOWARD LATHAM, PLANNING A~DPROGRAMMING SHELDON 'MCCONKIEiPRE-CONSTRUCTION ' RICHARD ' RoBERTS, FISCAL PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING , THE UTAH HIGHWAY ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: HARRY TULLIS, OGDEN, STEVE LAWSON, OGDEN DAVID LLOYD, SLC JANET MINDEN, SLC LARRELL MUIR, MURRAY BERTRAM HARRISON, PROVO JOHN BONNETT, AMI FORK HAL CLYDE, SPRINGVLLLE BATES~~ILSON, 'MOAB FEDERAL HIGH\1AYADMINISTRATION: ' 127 S STATE, SLC GEORGE BOHN '; DIVI S'lON ADMI 'NI S 'TRATOR � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Local URL The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website <a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/106">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/106</a> Purchasing Information Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item. To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a> Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2013 Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner. Checksum 3530602949 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 493264 Bytes Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Logan Canyon highway: Important names Description An account of the resource List of district officals, UDOT managment team, Utah highway environmental council, and Federal Highway Administration. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) United States Highway 89 Government agencies Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Rich County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 28 Folder 8 Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Highway 89 Digital Collections Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context MSS148VIIIB28_Fd8_Page_3.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/9710fabda5665b3df4d423b98a3e1e87.pdf 70e1979b8a2689acef3615c61f6639ab PDF Text Text October 20, 1986 DISUCSSION OUTLINE LOGAN CANYON STUDY COMPONENT IDENTI-FICATION ' ( As a result of the development of the technical memorandums, public input,- and the preliminary environmental data gathering phase, a range of possible improvements within Logan Canyon have been identified. These possible improvements (components) are listed below in order of increasing levels of improvement starting with maintaining the status quo up to widening and improving the existing alignment. In the next phase of the study (Task 2), these components will be developed and studied and will ultimately form the basis for the development of alternatives. 1. Maintain Status Quo - (No Build) No change to surface width Resurfacing as required Signing and pavement marking improvements 2. Spot Improvements No basic change to surface width Resurfacing as required Bridge and structure replacement (existing locations) Slow vehicle turnouts Recreational turnouts and parking Signing and pavement marking improvements 3. Widening Along Existing Alignment Widen lanes Widen shoulders and ditches Bridge and structure replacement (existing locations) Slow vehicle turnouts Recreational turnouts and parking Raise grade in potential flooding areas Signing and pavement marking improvements ( Widening and Improving the E~isting Alignment Widen lanes Widen shoulders and ditches Improve alignment Bridge and structure replacement (improved alignment for Burnt, Lower Twin and Upper Twin bridges) Passing lanes particularly in areas of sustained steep grades Recreational turnouts and parking Raise grade in potential flooding areas Signing and pavement marking improvements ( 1 �October 20, 1986 5. ( Bear Lake Summit . to Garden City New routing north of the existing alignment New routing south of the existing alignment SLC-STN/08 ( ( 2 � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Local URL The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website <a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/108">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/108</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 1496964602 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 932683 Bytes Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Logan Canyon Study component (improvement) identification, October 20, 1986 Description An account of the resource A list of possbile improvements to Logan Canyon including Bear Lake Summit to Garden City. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Traffic engineering Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon 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 1986-10-20 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 17.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/34a66ff1b1a4fe963598ba3f44312784.pdf 30e5a98bae56da67a540a5b190e3ebae PDF Text Text If / �� Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Local URL The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website <a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/113">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/113</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 1948647185 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1616980 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 Minutes of CNF meeting, April 30, 1987 Description An account of the resource The handwritten minutes from a meeting on Logan Canyon road on April 30, 1987, where the Forest Service asserts their role and the role of the forest plan in the developments on Logan Canyon. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Bosworth, Dale Spence, Jack Lukez, Rudy Flint, Steve Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (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 1987-04-30 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. COLL MSS 200 Utah Wilderness Association Records, 1980-2000, Series III Forest Service Box 6 Item 20 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_20.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/672416b53e331e461d2884987f1f377b.pdf c1f8247bd7e1683c22f0576150ee07cc PDF Text Text ( LOCATION: DATE: HOURS: US 89 - Tony Grove Intersection August 1, 1986 - Saturday 6:00 a.m. to 1Q:00 p.m. TRAFFIC VOLUMES: Intersection Leg Vehicle TYEe Volume West West West West West I-Car 2-Lt. T. 3-6 Wh. 4-Hvy T. 5-R.V. 2730 1474 29 25 639 56 30 489 '6 100 2590 1412 29 24 611 56 30 4666 100 244 210 0 1 40 49 42 0 0 495 100 US-89 US-89 US-89 US-89 US-89 Total East East East East East US-89 US-89 US-89 US-89 US-89 I-Car 2-Lt. T. 3-6 Wh. 4-Hvy T. 5-R.V. Total % of Total .5 .5 13 .5 .5 13 ( North-Tony North-Tony North-Tony North-Tony. North-Tony North-Tony Grove Grove Grove Grove Grove Grove I-Car 2-Lt. T 3'-6 Wh. 4-Hvy T. 5-R.V. Total DIRECTIONAL SPLIT - (Total Traffic) peak between 11 - 12 p.m. 76 percent eastbound 24 percent westbound Morn~ng Mid afternoon peak between 2 - 3 p.m. 44 percent eastbound 56 percent westbound Afternoon peak between 4 - 5 p.m. 33 percent eastbound - 67 percent westbound SLC84/16 8< �,;r SUBJECT _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ BY _ ~:f!~IIUI. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - __ _ _ _ _ DATE _ _ _ _ _ SHEETNO. _ _ _ of _ _ _ _ _ _ PROJECT NO. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( .6~ --.6 -:a Q- - ~AsrL96l/NO r~AFr/G wcJr.dCJVA/LJ rR/JF'p/c .. .,·"-. 1 ., v \U ~ / j I -.J "J / I ~ 306 ~ \( ~ I /~, . ~ / / 1 ~ / '\ / \ . \, '0 \ ~/ I D , \Q I I - ~~ /' - , r-o I /0 l I I \ -\ .\ \ \ ~~ r-/) t ,, • 0 ." 0 _0 ' '0 ,~ ~/ 'I"- A" ~~- 0.; -..1 VO """ - i I u_ / .- 6 / /' /' 6. p- i-D , ~ J / .V 1\.-\ ro-...6':":"'~fj /i I()t) I o~ \ /- o 1'-.1 • v.I / vA V4/ . r\ v·, ~ ) \~ iJ 2tJ() ~./ /:} I /V \) ~ V·' 6 · 9 /(J II • 12.: I 2- A~rl. :3 7" S 6 Port. 7 B IItJt/~ OF .£JAy Lc:/6/fN' U4Ny&1\I' T1~/'fFF/C WESr o.,c Tc;,vy GR'<7(/e .4L/6L/Jr ~ /786 ? JO �3 LEG TURNING Project No. Station No. ( Dafe· Mile Post MOVEMENT· LEFT I? Hours County City Location C/'JC#i3 D.H. V.. 0 0 10/ ~ /0 b Day ~ cJ/'1J?/R.t:JA V Weather 0 A.D. T. 0 Year C LeA;e /7?C . 72?A/Y GR<7U£ /L/J'. 8'9 -Z::'A/T£RSEcr~t:7A1 ..::;; /Y (7?YV5/'l 51 ( ~ l~ VI \H (\J '" A ~ - ----- - ~I 1/y!-'';;7''~ ~ !~~ \) t'\ N I ~ ~ ~ " 0 t " ~ '----.,--.J �3 LEG TURNING Project No. Station No. _ _ _ _ __ Mile Post_--:--_ _ _ __ county CAcI-fc MOVEMENT - RIGHT Dat~ ~ 186 Hours64,., /CJ ""WI. D v. D .H. A.D.r.O City _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Location S/NKf ,t?oA.£J Ar SUh'HIr: Day SA-T?/ROA V . Weather ~~C:Ak. . Year /~86 �3 LEG TURNING MOVEMENT - RIGHT Project No. Station No. _ _ _ _ __ Daf~ fi' /~/?6 Mile Post_-..,-..__---- Hours6-;,Wf County CAcH£- D.H. V. O City _ _ _ _ _ _ __ location R/G//r dAN'o ,paRK -/C) ft."",. A.D.T. D Doy cJArV£J1AY Weather Year C£&AI'< /9a~ � 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/120">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/120</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 246620347 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 3070931 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 Traffic volumes at Tony Grove Intersection, August 2, 1986 Description An account of the resource Recorded traffic volumes at Tony Grove Intersection from August 2, 1986, 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. Includes dot graph of total traffic for that day, directional split of east and west bound traffic, and diagrams of 3-Leg Turning Movement left and right at Tony Grove, Sinks Road at Summit, and Right Hand Fork with the numbers for cars, 2T trucks, 6-wheel trucks, heavy trucks, recreational vehicles and total vehicles. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource CH2M Hill (Firm : Salt Lake City, Utah) Subject The topic of the resource Traffic engineering Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available CH2M Hill (Firm : Salt Lake City, Utah) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1986-08-01, 1986-08-02 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. United States Highway 89 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 14.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/1cc4b0efa26655b55b2a55e4a4536545.pdf 5ddff13abebeb599a71d39a66f4058eb PDF Text Text { I I Logan Canyon Highway For the second time in nine years. the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) is proposing an expansion and reduction of curves to the 6.7~ile stretch of U.S. Highway 89 from Right Hand Fork to Ricks Spring in Logan Canyon. Envtronmental groups and concerned citizens, including the Sierra Club, the Bridgerland Audubon Society, Citizens for · the Protection of Logan Canyon and others, view this expansion as highly unfavorable and as a threat to the beauty and quality of the Logan Canyon Recreation Area. ! General Summary i i * Major impact on both environmental ~nd visual quality of canyon. * Project contradicts national energy ;concern. * S0-90 percent of the project reqUir t s cutting into existing banks and vegetated areas. ! * "Waste poses a major engineering prcbblem.rt (Quote from project engineer) Traffic Growth Factors * * UDOT uses an unrealistic expontential model. A linear growth model better fits daily traffic data. * data used by UnoT are limited to one busy section of the highway, yet are used to describe the whole road. Need for highway re-alignment not documented by current data. * Traffic Safety Factors * * * * Suggested danger of Logan Canyon "Section III" is not supported by current data. A major discrepancy exists between accident rate data and traffic volume. 1977 accident rate figured by the Utah Highway Patrol does not agree with UDOT report. Statistical significance of accident data used is suspect. Environmental Factors * Numerous spills would encroach into Logan River from planned fills. * Silt deposits in the river would destroy trout habitat and breeding cycle. * Loss of riverside vegetation needed by trout for low light intensity. * Creation of any culverts would impair spawning success of trout. * Loss of vegetative barriers lessens the quality of fishing experience. * Major visual impacts would result from the cuts planned, especially the two major cuts at the Temple Fork area, which would be, according to the engineer's report, 75 feet deep and as much as 150 feet across. " IT'LL NEVER BE WORTH AS MUCH AS WE'VE PUT INTO IT (the project) ALREADy.1I --Gary Lindley, project engineer. �'. IMPORTANT ADDRESSES i Mr. Les Abbey, Environmental Engineer Utah Department of Transportation 128 17th Street Ogden, Utah 84404 To demonstrate this is a controversial issue you should send copies to those throughout the decision-making process: Mr. George Bohn Federal Highway Administration Federal Building 125 So. State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Mr. David Watt Federal Highway Administration, Region 8 P.O. 25426 Denver, Colorado 80225 Mr. William Geise Environmental Protection Agency Suite 900 1890 Li nco 1n Denver, Colorado POINTS TO STRESS Question need for major reconstruction as planned. Proposal has major impact on both environmental and scenic qualities of canyon. Need for an enVironmental impact statement to thoroughly analyze impacts and alternatives. Ask that the EPA become a cooperating agency in the project analysis of the Logan Canyon Highway. � 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/130">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/130</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 442219902 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1157096 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 Concern about Logan Canyon Description An account of the resource Detailing the concerns, particularly from environmental groups, of the expansion and reduction of curves in Logan Canyon including a general summary, traffic growth factors, safety factors, and environmental factors. Important addresses and questions to be addressed should this project continue are noted. Subject The topic of the resource Environmental policy Traffic engineering Logan Canyon (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 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 1980-1989 1990-1999 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 28 Folder 8 Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Highway 89 Digital Collections Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context MSS148VIIIB28_Fd8_Page_6.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/fb41ad30abe11643f41965e8c7d6e86c.pdf 60a80ad5e63041eb896ef0419a73e715 PDF Text Text AGENDA US 89 - LOGAN CANYON PUBLIC MEETING #1 ( Tuesday, September 23, 7:30 P.M. Logan City Hall utah Department of ~ransportation CH2M HILL - Consulting Engineer 1. Welcome - Project Background _ Purpose of Meeting 0 N+eS+(J 2. --Introduction of Participants 3. Presentation of Transportation Needs Data and Findings A. Existing Roadway Conditions B. Safety C. Maintenance D. Traffic Characteristics E. Roadway Capacity F. Conclusions 4. Environmental Concerns - Preliminary Findings 5. Public Questions and Answers 6. Future Tasks and Public Involvement Opportunities � 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/135">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/135</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 3414916046 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 384107 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 Agenda for September 23 public meeting Description An account of the resource Agenda for September 23 public meeting at Logan City Hall Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Traffic engineering 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 (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 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 18.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/078e07287337d2621252a91cb831907f.pdf 9f0780c9f4582a1c49a9cf7d95ee33f0 PDF Text Text MEETING NOTICE ( ~ public meeting regarding the improvement study for U.S. 89 through Logan Canyon will be held Monday Novem- ~ighway ber 3, at 7:30 p.m. in Garden City Hall in Garden City, Utah. The Utah Department of Transportation and its engi- neering consultant for the project, CH2M HILL, will present the data and findings from the first task of this study and the determination of transportation needs for the segment of the highway between Right Fork and Garden City. Preliminary findings of public concerns and environmental issues regarding road improvements in the Canyon and alternative alignments from the Bear Lake Summit to Garden City will also be reported. Questions and comments will be entertained. A fact sheet is being prepared for the public on the project mailing list. This meeting will cover essentially the same areas that were covered in the public meeting held on · September 23 at the Logan City Hall. Contact: Cliff Forsgren CH2M HILL 363-0200 SLC88/06 � 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/144">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/144</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 4101962281 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 497416 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 Meeting notice for November 3 Description An account of the resource Meeting notice for November 3 at City Hall in Garden City Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Forsgren, Clifford Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) 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 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. Garden City (Utah) Rich County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 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 19.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/77dd7248dd4fa4f87ab9f7f396ce142e.pdf ef59b7645c14485578e793688379013c PDF Text Text October 14, 1986 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY COMPONENT IDENTIFICATION As a result of the development of the technical memorandums, public input, and the preliminary environmental data gathering phase, a range of possible improvements within Logan Canyon have been identified. These possible improvements (components) are listed below in order of increasing levels of improvement starting with maintaining the State's goal (do nothing) up to widening and improving the existing alignment. In the next phase of the study, these components will be developed and studied and will ultimately form the basis for the development of alternatives. 1. Maintain Status Quo No change to surface width Resurfacing as required Signing and pavement marking improvements 2. Spot Improvements No basic change to surface width Resurfacing as required Bridge and structure replacement (existing locations) Slow vehicle turnouts Recreational turnouts and parking Signing and pavement marking improvements 3. Widening Along Existing Alignment Widen lanes Widen shoulders and ditches Bridge and structure replacement (existing locations) Slow vehicle turnouts Recreational_ turnouts and parking Raise grade in potential flooding areas Signing and pavement marking improvements 4. Widening and Improving the Existing Alignment Widen lanes Widen shoulders and ditches Improve alignment Bridge and structure replacement (improved alignment for both, Lower Twin and Upper Twin bridges) Passing lanes particularly in areas of sustained steep grades Recreational turnouts and parking Raise grade in potential flooding areas Signing and pavement marking improvements 5. Bear Lake Summit to Garden City New routing north of the existing alignment New routing south of the existing alignment ;, - ~-x.s's.-h·l\~ o\'~1\ rl\eJ\1- ~j,J)1' .....J <-l b SLC-STN/08 1 \ 'V~e\N � 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/145">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/145</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 2663750795 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 665382 Bytes Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Logan Canyon Study component (improvement) identification, October 14, 1986 Description An account of the resource A list of possible improvements to Logan Canyon. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Traffic engineering Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon 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 1986-10-14 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 15.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/dcdf2ec0c0be7aaf4c543c23d4062d42.pdf fedd069da0646cbe5e5093ede8f28b18 PDF Text Text If / �� Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Local URL The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website <a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/157">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/157</a> Purchasing Information Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item. To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a> Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2013 Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner. Checksum 4032967712 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 269162 Bytes Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Discussion with Dale Bosworth about Forest Plan and EIS, May 1, 1987 Description An account of the resource Discussion with Dale Bosworth about the consistency of the Forest Plan with the draft environmental impact statement. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Environmental policy Government agencies Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1987-05-01 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Rich County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1980-1989 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Utah Wilderness Association Records, 1980-2000, COLL MSS 200 Forest Service Series III Box 6 Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv75259">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv75259</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Highway 89 Digital Collections Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context MSS200_Forest Ser_Item_18.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/05f1cb8a536173a573fc7110ef14dab2.pdf 45244ee0d7c83719fa6aa5ff3d498b70 PDF Text Text Conservationists' Spot Improvement Alternative for Sections 1 and 2, Logan Can:yon August, 1987 We consider the most important issues involved here to be safety , scenic values, and ecological integrity. Our alternative is based on the premise that rrodifications which alone or in the aggregate ltX)uld appreciably increase traffic speed in the Middle Canyon must be avoided. liVe believe that increased speed in this section 'iNOuld be likely to lead to more (and more serious) accidents. increasing the traffic speed v~uld The construction involved in seriously disrupt the scenic values for which this canyon is nationally knOtm, and wuuld seriously degrade the ecolC>g"ical integrity of the Canyon, particularly in the riparian zone. Our goal is a highway t.1rat fits into Logan Canyon with minimal ecological disturbance and maxiInum safety, rather t.~an a highway that purports to move the greatest number of people through the area at the highest rate of speed. Consistent with this emphasis, we strongly recommend enforceITent of speed limits and substantial improverrents in signing as an important part of our proposal. As a corollary, changes in the roadway in the Upper Canyon should not be so drastic as to encourage high speeds in that area and thus a possible difficulty of driver adjustment to the lower speeds of the Middle Canyon. v~ have identified several gravel turnouts which should 1:e paved, and plowed consistently in winter, to aid the Utah Pighway Patrol in pulling over speeders and to aid in the passage of the occasional emergency vebicle. �"'JD("\~fq) I i l ACTIOl',} 1 D7\ 'T TOr-..T7\ TP_ _ _"i-'._i.L :E-1PACTS ALTEP~~T rlES 1 R.."SJECI'EDA. \[) PROBLE11S WITH ] I\r"\ -------~ ---------- - ------- ----j " i 100' taper from bridge; sign: "Right Fork 1/4" Pight Hand Fork safety curve at 384. a ' preliminary sign: "NarrON winding road next 7 mi. advisory speed sign; specific curve notation I (no change in alignment) safety visual sensitivity ; erosion into river; spoil disposal safety visual sensitivity (6); impacts on river Maguire Primrose threat to threatened species II ; I I I Wcx>d Camp turnout! sign: I!~bod Camp 1/4"; and intersection plow parking area in winter above v, od Carrp, b slON veh. turnout I no change '\ -~-TI I I i pave present gravel turnout; plow in winter ! ', downstream of Burnt Bridge I not applicable law enforcement; scenic vista; parking distressed vehicles I ~------------------~------------------------_--~I------_ __-.------ -----------+-------------______________ Burnt ?ridge \ not applicable structural integrity ! widen to 28' on salle alignment; clear span 1 \ - ------------r----_--_.-----.---._ -------.----1-- -- ------· -----.. - - I i 1 - - ---·--- logan Cave I 1 I I I . - -- '--.- 1 - - Cottonwood area: (a) structure (b) parking 1 UI sign: "dangerous curve"; sign: "no parking" sign: advisory speed; no alig~nt safety change -- 1 ____ visual sensi t ivi ty; darnage to river , -+-~-__- _ _- - - - - _ I I i widen to 28' on sarre alignment I ! safety damage to river; visual sensitivity (7) I ! I pave two areas: one on visitor access to cave river side downstream \ from structure, 150' X ZO; one on rrountain side at bld Cottonwood road, 100' X :35', I tapering downstreChTTl to ! I 100' X 20'. PION in i I winter. I Forest Service and vol- ! I unteer groups construct trail to cave entrance. I I I -abo--"VI-e-c-o-t-t-o-nwood-----;If---n-o--a~:gnne::·:~e; (386.6) r~place 20 mph advisory ---------------------------~------------------------II ' safety I slgn damage to river; spoil disposal; visual sensitivity 1 - - - --- - -- -- --- - --- --------.-,- ..._ ----- --.-- ------:. . .- ---- ---.--- ...-- - ---- ---.. ------ -------f----- - - - - - - - - - - - , . 1 above Cottonwood (387.1) no alignment change I safety (avoid increasin: speed) erosion from lcx>se material �P~OPOSED - r ACT'IO!'J IMPAcrS M ID PROBID1S ~-vrTH REJEcrED ALTERNATIVES RAT I Ot--TALE I +----- -- -------- ---+\---------- ------ --- ------I "Table 2-5," continued: Intersections: ~a) Tony Grove : as in B-1 safety (b) Red Banks ro change insufficient traffic I i (c) FraTh~lin Bisin (d) Beaver no change no need (wide enough as is) as in B-1 would necessitate 3-lane bridge over Beaver Creek I Climbing Lanes: ; I (a) Red Banks to near Franklin Basin road Add clllnbing lane from m.p. 395 to cattle guard I Safety problems with high-speed traffic approaching both Red P..anks and Franklin Basin turnoff s ; damage to river and riparian zone safety; minimize cut visual quality damage I i (b) St1.ID1p HollON I Add climbing lane from just al:::ove Amazon I Hollow fill (401.5) to I to maintenance shed I 402.1. (c) to safety; minimize cut; safeguard river and riparian zone I summit Add climbing lane fromJ 404.1 to short of Sink~ Road I excessive spoil; danger at snowmobile parking safety; mini..mize cut area I i Note: Passing lane musti end short of summit, and ; there must re adrate signing, regarding the ; transition back D 2-lane road, to safeguard ; the Limber Pine ___!rail turnoff. : Signs: "Sinks 1 Sunrise Campgro4nd I I I rrable 2-6: d 1/4"; "Limber Pine Trail l f 4 " no chan:Je safety I I I I driver confusion possible 2 skewed approaches as & stripe) Overlook in B-1 (sign 1-----------------4------------------------I-----------------------·--~------------------------- multipuq:ose parking: (a) m.p. 392 pave; plow in winter (on side 0pp. river) safety (b) Bunchgrass pave; plow in winter (on river side of road) safety -r--__________________ -______ ~------------- ------- ---------~--------------------------1 r- -________________ added sign: l:elow Ricks Spring "Narrow winding road next 7 mi." safety �P~POSED ACTI ON I.J"X:ATIOtT I r I ----- - -- - ---------.- ---i --.:bel\~;} o I Lower 1\'lln Bridge; Lower 'I\-lin Bridge Move roadway Jl'aX. i I 20' replacement of bridge I °th 1east enVlronI Wl \ mental damage, consis- ~ tent with safety I toward river t:efore curV.e begi ns; widen existing cut so alignment meets new bridge parallel to present bridge. 28' width; no pier in river 0 i less cutting; rrore Slgh tI j distance o I 1- -- No Change prevent excessive speed I ' l -top-of-Du~aY--r-------- tb-Change ------ Bridge prevent excessive speed visual impacts; excessive spoil damage to river; daTffige to visual quality 1 i '--Upper -TWlr1'- - - _______________ visual impacts; excessive spoil \ above Lower Twinl place downstream of Bridge--slav vej . bridge, where present turnout road goes through cut Dugway cli.rnbing lane ' IMPACTS AND PROBID1S ~\1JTH FATIONALE ______ _ ~ REJECI'ED ALTERNATIVES _ darrage to visual quality; excessive ~_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _._Jlr __--S-po-i-l-------- widen to 28' on new : alignment immediately downstream of present bridge. No pier in river. stIuctural integrity; safety /----~----------~+-------.--------------------- -- above Upper Ywir Bridge (387.7) Temple Fork intersection 28' on sarre alignment damage to visual quali ty i excessive spoil safety advance signing: "Temple Fork 1/4" Ricks Spring area: (a) bridge safety !: !: (b) alignment (c) parking safety no change in alignment; add signs: curve; icy road safety add sign: "No Passing", safety roaintain as is (roth sides); add signs: "Ricks Spring 1/4" "Pedestrian Crossing" vehicles crossing traffic lanes to park r-----------------~---------------------------~------- "Table 2-5," B-1: bridges and structpres 28 ' iI I maintain uniformity of bridge widths alignrrents: relow North Sink no change safety encourages excessive speed below Middle SinK IX) change safety encourages excessive speed � 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/163">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/163</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 1358177675 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 2337958 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 Conservationists' spot improvement alternative for sections 1 and 2, August 1987 Description An account of the resource Conservationists' spot improvement alternative for locations within Logan Canyon with proposed action, rationale, and impacts and problems with rejected alternatives. Subject The topic of the resource Traffic engineering Roads--Design and construction Logan Canyon (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 1987-08 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 2.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/6a59b172664ab1f278f02da13669b77b.pdf 13b506706d24a2e094877e8d35015b73 PDF Text Text US-89 LOGAN CANYON Preferred Alternative �such a design is not compatible with the environmental concerns of the canyon, the committee had to identify where compromises could be made. Briefly! ~ resulted in no change in the present ~way width in the first four miles above Right Rand Pork and numerous other compro mises throughout the remainder of the canYOD. The committee fell tbat if the roadway was improved through the remainder of the canyon, by providing passing lanes, intersection channelization and improved alignment, the existin~ alignme nt in the farst four miles above Ri~t Hand Fo rk (the most environmentally SCILSItive area of the canyon) would be acceptable. US-89 LOGAN CANYON Prererred Alternatiye BACKGROUND: US-89 through Logan Canyon (between Logan and Garden City) has been destgnated as a Scenic Byway and was originally constructed in the 1930's. The ~l nine miles of the canyon (from Logan to Right Hand Fo rk) were widened in the 1960's, and" the remairuns: 28 miles from Right Hand Fork to Garden City have not been improved to meet current standards. The roadway is very narrow, traversing a steep canyon environment. Numerous sbarp curves limit sight distance and oPl?Ortunities 10 pass. The pavement needs major rehabilitation and the bridges and other PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE: In general, the Preferred Alternative incorporates ele ments of the Composite Alternative, but adds additional detail andlor refinement. Most of the elements of the Preferred Alternative would require amendme nts to the Forest Plan with respect to visual, wetland and/o r riparian resources o n National Forest Lands. New structures would be protected with parapet walls. Other hazardous locations would be protected with guardrail or other acceptable devices. Present parking turnouts would be improved and new turno uts would be placed in recognition of any eliminated turnouts. Additional turno uts which attain at least two parking stalls with adequate sight distance would also be considered. Exact locations would be determined d uring final design and in conjunction with U SPS recomme ndations. The specific ele ments of the Preferred Alternative are presented below as they pertain to each section of the project. A map (Figure 1) is also rrovided to help identify the location 0 improvements. drainage structures are narrow and have restriClcd capacity. The most recent highway improvement studies in Logan Canyon have been in progress for the past six years. During this time, input has been sought from federal, stale and local agencies, concerned o rganizations and private individuals. Considerable time and funding resources have been spent holding numerous meetings with interested groups and evaluating the needs, desires, and potential impacts. In November 1990, the draft E IS fo r this project was circulated and a public hearing was held in January, 1991. Though some differing opinions still exist, there is general recognitioD that the highway facility Deeds to be improved and that those Improvements should consider tbc sensitive beauty of the canyon and its environment. SELECfION OF THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE: A committee representing the FHWA, UDOT, and USPS was formed to develop tbe Preferred Alternative by carefully balanCing the diffe rent and conflicting ~oals. The committee gave careful consideralion 10 the following: • • • • entire length of this section would be a subject of fmal design; and. the location would be evaluated and carefully considered with respect to impacts on the following highway factors: • • • • • Features of this Section lA include: • a. Curve #5 at mp 384 andlor Curve #29 near mp 387 would be flattened if a 3 year accident analysis at the time of construction shows a concentration of curve related accidents (at either location) in excess of the Statewide accident average for arterial roadways. h. Burnt Brid~e ( mp 385.5) would be replaced With a new structure o n the sayte alignment. Structure width would be .ao. ft (approximately 4 fi wider than the '5lf approaching roadway). A detour is req,wred as the present bridge must be entirely removed before a new structure can be constructed. Ve$etation removal and river bank modificallon are required. c. Comments received on tbe draft EIS Service to the traveli~ public En,uonmenlal sensitiVIty of the canyon Practicability of construction Since US·89 is classified as a minor arterial, it would normally warrant a consistent SO mph design thro ughout the canyon. However, since Page 1 Roadway elevation would be raised about 3 fl at Logan Cave (mp 386.2), for a total length of 1000 ft. The grade e levation would allow the roadway to be placed several feet closer to the mountain and somewhat flattcn Curve #22. The river bank would be protected and revegetated as appropriate. d. A parking area would be constructed for Logan Cave visitors at mp 386.3 to accommodate as many vehicles as practical. A foot path to the cave would be constructed by the USPS in consultation with UDOT. e. Cottonwood Creek culvert (mp 386.4) would be replaced on the same alignment. SEcrION lA! This section begins at Right Hand Fork!i!m 383.47) and extends to mp 387.47, a len of 4.0 miles. Present design speed, J?OSt speed and ~ ting roadway width of 26 ft would remaJn unchanged. No features outside the existing roadway would be disturbed, except as noted below. Portions of the section havmg design speeds lower than the present speed limit would be appropriately signed. Placement of concrete curb and gutter, or gutter only, along one or both sides of the roadway in portions of or along the Roadside drainage channels Maintenance operations Protection of roadside hazards Access require me nts R olled curb applications for bicycle safety roadway during freezing conditions of the river or other higb· water events. SEcnON 1B: This section begins at my' 387.47 and extends to the end of the Middle Canyon Section (at mp 391.6), a len2th of 4.13 miles. A 34-fi roadway section woufd be constructed with a design speed of 35 mph. The maximum degree of curve would be 1S'3O', and the clear zone requirement would be 18 ft. Milepost 387.47 marks the be~ of a transition from the 2.6-ft roadway WIdth of Section lA to a 4()..ft roadway width of Section 2. For down·caoyon traffic, Section 1B would prepare drivers leaving the 50 mph design speed of Section 2 for the lower design saeed in Section 1A. Section 1B has been defined as an area which could absorb more roadway widening with less negative effect than Section lA. Features of Section 1B include: a. Curve #33 (mp 387.7) would be flattened by removing rock materiru. and creating a new cut. b. Lower Twin Bridge (mp 387.76) would be replaced on new alignment immediately upstream of the present bridge, c1eaNpanning the river. The new structure would be 38--ft wide; and the present structure would be removed when the new structure is placed in service. c. Curve #37 (mp 388.5) would be flattened by creating a new excavation into the mountain. Design and construction would be similar to Curve #33. d. Upper Twin Bridge (mp 388.76) would be replaced with a JS.ft wide structure on new alignment, immediately downstream of and about 10 ft higher than the existing bridge The present bridge and road way would serve as a detour during construction. e. Ctuves #39 and #40 (mp 388.8) would be flattened. f. At mp 386.6, the roadway elevation would be raised about 3 ft for 500 ft. This sbo uld eliminate occasional fl ooding of the Page 2 f. Tem.l?le Fork Road intersection (mp 389.2) would be improved to provide a �US-89 LOGAN CANYON Preferred Alternative Figure 1 Note.: Due to the small scale of this map. curve and milepost numbers have not been provided. Instead, the map correlates to lext by using the leUer that relates to the specific urea of improvement Cor each section of the eunyon. (The maps In the fin al EIS will show the curve and milepost numbers.) Scale In Miles ,- - o- ,- - 2 \ '--- , @ ( 6\ /!!:. '0, f ~S1~~ ~~3 8EI~O I.J PI( BEGIN PROJECT (RighI Hand Fork) �safer access. Improvements include left and right turn lanes and new river crossing. A parking area would be constructed and accessed from Temple Fork Road in a location current~ used as parkiug. The parkin.s area woul be made as large as possible 10 accordance with USFS recommendations, without e.ncroaching upon the roadway or the nver. g. In the Ricks Springs Area (mp 389.8), the roadway width would be 46 ft , which provides a 12-ft Jeft tum lane for northbound traffic. The Ricks Springs structure would be replaced. Hydraulic and clear zone requirements would be considered, with an ~nment shift toward the river recommend . All parking areas would be tt0vided On the west side of the roadway. aterial would be removed andlor retainin& walls constructed in accordance wi good desifi:i practice to provide the maximum feasl Ie parking area: All ~throvements would be coDS1Stent WI USFS recommendations. a. h. •• J. d. I. At Tony Grove intersection, left and right turn deceleration and storage lane for turns would be provided into Tony Grove Area (mp 393.7). To~ Grove Cr~ek culvert (mp 393.8) wo d be replaced on original alignment. The new crossing would be 4 ft wider than the approach roadway. Bunch Grass Creek Culvert (mp 394.2) would be replaced. •• g. Beaver Creek Structure at Franklin Basin Road ~m£in~.9) would be replaced on origin . ent. Pavement width transitions would affect total structure width, requiring a mWmum width of 58 h. Franklin Basin intersection )mp 397.0) would be improved as in (c above. L Beaver Creek Structure (mp 397.5) would be replaced on same alignment. New structure width is 44 ft. Vertical rock material (at mp 399.11 which lies within 31 ft of the centerline 0 the proposed roadway would be removed. Upbill passing lane from Garden City would end at mp 404.6, about 500 ft on the Cache County side of the Summit. Access to Limber Pine T railhead would be relocated to the StunD1.it (mp 404.75) in oonnection with the existing forest access road. US-89 would be modified to xrovide left and ri~t tum lanes. Wi th transitions are 1Ocluded. u. The drainage box culvert at Amazon Hollow, Stump Hollow and s urroun~ area (mp 399.6) would be rdclaced an widened to accommodate wi er roadway and pavement transitions (or the Beaver Mountain Road intersection. A width of 20 ft from the shoulder line to headwall on each side is required to avoid the need for fcfardrail protection. Total width wou d be at least 64 ft. Allowance would be made for snowmobile crossings to continue to occur at or near present use locations. SECfION 3A, This section is from Bear Lake Summit to Brid~erland Subdivision intersection (mp 404. 5 to 409.4), a length of 4.6 mile!:. Design speed would be 40 mph and roadway width with raassing lane would be 47 ft (three 12-ft traffic anes, One 8-ft shoulder and one 3-ft sbouldil?' This section would have a continuous uph' passing lane. Features of Section 3A include: 243, at mp 399.75) would be realigned and channelized to r0vide lert and rirt deceleration an storage lanes wit appropriate tapers on SR-243 and US-89. replaced on origmal . ent. Structure width would be 44 ft unless tapers for cam~ound widening run Onto bridge, creaUng a need for additional width. A detour for traffic and a temcorary brid3e are necessary. Red Banks ampgroun intersection (mp 394.6) would be improved as in (c) above. A climbing lane would begin at mp 394.9 and end at mp 396.5, a length of 1.6 miles. 1. m. Beaver Mountain Road intcrsection (SR- Red Baub Bri~e (",:~:.5) would be ft. Page 3 k. down" type fencing would be provided in open range area from the cattle guard near mp 391.6 to the Franklin Basin area near mp 397.2 along both sides of the roadway. Fence design would conform to USFS recommendations. c. f. SECTION 2: This section begins at mp 391.6 and extends to the Bear Lake Summit (mp 404.75), a length of 13.15 miles. There would be a 50 mph design speed and a 4O-ft paved roadway Width. except as modified by passing lanes. The 4O-ft roadw:k section would provide for two 12-ft lr IC lanes and two 8-Ct shoulders. The passing lane section would allow for three 12-ft traffic Janes and one 8-ft shou!der.Jdown!till side) and one 3-ft shoulder h~phill Sl e), With a total roadway width of 47 Retaining wall would be constructed between Beaver Creek and roadwd; at mp 398.1, 398.3, 398.6 and 398.9 to re uce impact on the creek. Roadway widening can be obtained by constructing to the retaininJ wall and placing some fLll materi on the east side of the roadway. ~Lay Cwve #45 (rop 390.1) would be flattened and existina &cassing lane from mp 390.1 to 390.7 woul removed. Roadway elevation, in the area of mp 390.2 to 391.1, would be raised about 2 ft to eliminate floodin~ of the roadway , crcated during freezmg conditions of the river or other high-water events. J. A passing lane from mp 391.6 to 3933 would be constructed, 10cludina pavement width tapers, a length of 1.7 mdes. Curve # 43 (mp 389.4) would be flattened (moving the highway down bill). h. Features of Section 2 include: n. Climbi11ane would begin at mp 399.8 and en at mp 403. 0. a. The roadway would be realigned through Curve #69, #70 and #71 (mp 400 to 400.6) to auain 50 mph design speed curves. h. ~ p. Highway widening from mp 400.6 to 402 would be obtained by removing rock material OD the up-canyon (northerly) side of the present roadway. q. ,. s. c. Curve #85 (mp 405.1) would be flattened which would require a new fill section. The existing roadway alignment would be removed and origi.nal contour elevations and vegetation restored. Present alignment would be retained at 405.2) and roadway be constructed on the do . slope. Tree removal is required and impact to aesthetics would be reviewed with the USFS throughout the design and construction process. (m s Curve Il~ wi~ tH woul Access would be provided into Sunrise ~ound }mp 4055) w;!h ,oadwa{. m cations or right and left tum anes. Access into Bear Lake View Area (mp 405.5) would be relocated to Sunrise Campground Road. AP,opriate turn lane and signinJ would Scrovided. View area wo d be re-gra ed (raise elevation), enlarged and re-Iandscaped according to USPS recommendations. Curve #76 (mp 402.2), would be flattened horizontally and vertically, to auain design speecJ. Access [Q UDOT Maintenance Station (rop 402.38) would be improved by providing left and right tum lanes. Curve #80 (mp 404) would be fl attened to attain design speed. d. Page 4 Curve #88 (mp ~ would be flattened to attain design s . A centerline shift of about 200 ft With accompanying �SECfION 3D: This section is fro m Bridjcrland Subdivision to Garden City (mp 409. to 411.75), a length of 2.75 miles. Design speed wouJd be increased to 50 mph, with a maximum roadwa width of 40 ft (47 ft in passing lane areas). oadway widening in this section would consist of approximately equal amount of cut and fill areas. earthwo rk (excavation) would be required. e. f. g. h. (7 Curves #89, #92, #94, and #95 405.9, 406.2, 406.9, and 407.2) woul be flatt ened 10 attain desiFcD speed. The prese nt alignment WOll d be removed and original contours and vegetation restored upon completion. k Features of Section 3B include: Landslide area (mp 407.5) would be stabi lize~ br a ~li~atio n of appropriate geotechmca te ruques. a. b. Begin uphill climbing lane at mp 410.6. d. Curve # 116 (mp 411.2) would be flattened to attain design speed . Accesses at mp 411.2 would be redesigned. e. Curves #101 and #102 ~mp 408.3 and would be flau ene to attain design spec . The present alignment would be removed and original contours and vegetation restored upon completion. Access at mp 410.6 would be rolocated by closing prescot access and providing a new access from anotber public strect, if possible. If tbe access cannot be closed, tben it would be relocated to an improved location, providing the best design possible. A combination with the access at mp 410.7 ma~ be practicable. The access at mp 410. would be considerC":d according to the same criteria as the access at mp 410.6. c. Curve 898 ( mp 407.~ would be flattened to altain design s~e . A centerline shift of about 670 ft WIth accompanyi1. earthwork (excavation) is require . Roadway gradient stee~ns to about 7% in this area as a result 0 the curve realignment. The present alignment would be removed and original contours and vegetation restored upon completion. Curves #109, #110, #111, and :# 112 (mp 400.7, 400.8, 410.0, and 410.1) would be flattened to attain design speed. The intersection with SR-30 at mp 4 11.75 ~d of project) would be redesigned. ft and right-turn lanes, curb, gutter and sidewalk would be provided on US-89 and SR-30 in the VIcinity of this intersection. 408.~ .. Current access to B ri~erl and Subdivision (mp 408.6) would be osed. All subdivision access would be provided as described in (k) below. J. eu""" k. Alignment from Curve # 105 to Curve # 109 (rop 409.4) would be relocated. Also, an intersection for the Btidgerland Subdivision would be constructed wilh additional pavement widening for protected left and right-turn movements. The present alignment would be removed and restored to original contour and vegetation. Intersection improvements to other subdivision access would be considered, based on use rcguirements. roadway widening possibilities, and other factors. # 103, # 104, and #105 (mp 408.8) would be fl auened into a single curve, d e~n din on the alignment shirt of (k) t be ow. rthwork q uantities appear to be minimal. NOTE: The fmal E IS will further address and evaluate the impacts and potential mitigation measures for the Preferred Alternative, as well as the No Action Alternative, Standard ArLerial Alternative, Conservationist's Alternative. Pag e 5 �The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Utah Department of Transportation (DDOT) and the US Forest Service (USPS). through their public involvement efforts realize that the public bas a great interest in regard 10 this unique project along US-89 which travels through the beautiful Logan Canyon in close proximity to Logan River. Therefore, this brochure has been developed 10 provide the public a brief, but detailed descnption of the Preferred Alternative that will be presented in final Environmental Impact Statemenl (EIS). Copies of the final EIS will be available for reVIew at the following locations: UDOT District One Headquarters 169 Wall Ave Ogden, Utah (801) 399-5921 UDOT Location & Environmental Studies 4501 South 2700 West Salt Lake City, Utah (801) 9115-4159 FHWA Division Headquarters 2520 South 4700 South, Suite 9-A Salt Lake C;ty, Utah USFS Logan Ranger Station 860 North 1200 East Logan, Utah ~ City Library 90 North 100 East Logan, Utah Garden City Hall 145 West Logan Road Garden City, Utah � 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 2585 Image Width Image Width in pixels 1125 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/172">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/172</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 1763927536 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 UDOT pamphlet, "US-89 Logan Canyon Preferred Alternative" Description An account of the resource Pamphlet explaining the preferred alternative in detail for Logan Canyon. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Pamphlets Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Utah. Department of Transportation Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 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 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. 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, Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon/Logan Canyon Coalition Papers, 1963-1999, COLL MSS 314 Box 1 Folder 13 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 MSS314Bx1Fd13 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/c2426fa2e227f35a667fc7101ded784e.pdf c9f2681871dc67d47bca3d7ce872f5be PDF Text Text · /: , Pete Morton, Ph.D. Environmental Consultant 9390 W. 14th Avenue Lakewood, CO 80215 (303) 202-0442 pmorton@du.edu February 27, 1996 Peggy Wood 67 1/ 2 S. 500 West Logan, UT 84321 Dear Peggy: Thanks for your phone call, I was hoping you would find me, as I had lost your number and address. Jill and I hope to close on our new home soon -- at which time our address and phone number will change -- so e - mail may be the best form of communication until then. As I mentioned on the phone I thought the Appeal to the Chief was excellent and raised some important and valid points. had some time to pull together environmental audit of t h e FEIS. the following pages. my initial I thoughts finally for an I will briefly outline them on If the Coalition would like me to expand the analYSis , I will have some time later this spring, but my summer and fall schedule is filling up quickly. Let me know. t1: re , Pete Morton P.S. Have you been able to obtain the Environmental Grant book from Island Press? �PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT LOGAN CANYON HIGHWAY Prepared by Pete Morton, Ph.D. 1. page 9-1 1. (9.3.2.12) . The cost-benefi t analysis was deleted in the FEIS because of the difficulty of assigning costs and benefits of aesthetic values. Although t he se non-market costs and benefits are difficult to estimate, there are many economic studies published in peer-reviewed journal s that estimate recreation, environmental and aesthetic va lues. People may also be willing to pay to insure that Logan Canyon will exist in its present form for future generations to enjoy. Such non-use, intangible benefits have also been recogn i zed in the economic literature and are included in es timates of total economic value . Some discussi on on n on-use benefits and total economic value of recreation in Logan Canyon seems warranted . 2. page 9-12 (9.3 .2.13) The traffic growth rates should be carefully examine. Do these rates take into cons ideration transportation imp'rovements planned elsewhere in the regi on? Are individual projects double counting? The r-squared may be too low and there may be other problems with the regression. How many years o f data were u sed to calibrate the regression used for the projections? 3. page 9- 1 2 (9 . 3.2.14) Forest Plan compli ance . Is this based on compliance with t h e old forest plan? The forest plans developed during the fir st round of forest planning t h at I have reviewed need serious revisions . A better question to ask is whet her the planned construction is conSistent with ecosystem management and the new concepts (e . g. landscape analysis, etc.) that should be used to develop new forest pl ans. 4. The FEIS makes assurances that a revegetation plan will be prepared and implemented to mitigate the direct and indire ct impacts to wildlife . How much will the revegetation plan cost? Where will the money come from ? What budget constrai nt s exist that will prevent full implementation of the plan? In the past , federal agencies have ignored budget constraints in planning. This failure should be a concern in these times of s h rin king federal a nd state budgets. Logan Ca nyon FEIS Morton Page 1 �5. page 9-39. The DEIS stated that mining and logging were major use s along the project area. Although this was revised in the FEIS, did this statement impact the Forest Service decision to approve the project? 6. page 9 -4 2 . The issue of noise was raised a nd its impact on recreation experiences. How did they evaluate noise impacts to determine they were less than 3 dBA? Construction projects involving heavy equipment will decrease the quality of the recreational experience . Even if temporary, the decline in recreation experiences during construction should be included as an economic cost in the benefit-cost analysis. 7. page 9-42. One of the important facto rs contribut ing to a quality recreationa l experience (whet her fishing, hiking or driving for pleasure) is scenic beauty, or visual quality . Scenic beauty should be an important management consideration because of the steep slopes in Logan Canyon. Steep slopes are c l assified by landscape architects as "visually vulnerable", meaning they have an inherent resistance or susceptibili ty to degrading visual impacts. The steeper the slope, the greater its visible surface and the greater the potential for increased visual disruption. 8. page 9-43. Conunent pl23. The FEIS states that UDOT ' s deCision not to undertake visual quality improvements for the Conservationist's alternative was because the improvements did not justify the costs. This decision cannot be made without a benefit-cost analysis -- which was dropped from the FEIS. If a B-C analysis was completed, what benefits were attributed to improvements in visual quality? The improved visual quality in the Conservationist's alternative should be counted as a benefit in a B-C ana l ysis, while the costs of decreased visual quality in the preferred a lte r native shou ld be counted as a cost. 9. page 9-45. The short term loss of Class II fisheries is a cost that should be counted as such in a B- C analysis . Will budget constraints prevent full rehabilitation of the fisheries: There is also some risk that the mitigation and rehabilitation efforts will fail . If rehabilitation efforts incl ud e the replacement of native fish with stocked fish there may be some loss of genetic diversity and some long-te rm costs in terms of a potential decline in the health of native fish populations. Page 2 Morton Logan Canyon FEIS �10. page 9-65. As pointed out by the Mayor will be significant economic impacts construction. How long is the proposed Will the Conservation Alternative be a of Garden City , there during the proposed construction project? shorter project? I did not see much discussion of the economic impacts on local communities. These impacts may be very significant for small businesses unable to survive the con s tru c ti o n-indu ced recession . The discussion of employment impacts should focus on net j ob change -- job creation l ess potential job losses . Also, not all jobs are equal. Small business owners and employees that live and spend money in a community are more important to a local economy ( may have a higher multiplier) than temporary, non-local construction workers that live and spend their paychecks elsewhere -- and who may move on after the project is completed . 11. page 9-75. Dr . Wilson points out the potential long-term impacts on fish populations from channelization, etc. Once again, these impacts represent economic costs that should be included in the benefit-cost analysis . 12. page 9-79 . Although the B-C was not included in the FEIS, Ken Theis points out that it undervalued the recreation time spent in the canyon and overesti mates the benefits of speed. This is probably correct. Researchers have estimated the benefits of recreation and an economic analysis of those recreation benefits in Logan Canyon could be completed . One method u sed is the travel cost method where recreation benefits are partially based on travel time . Typically travel time is multipli ed by a percentage of hourly wage to estimate the recreation benefits from travel . A decrease in travel time as a result of the construction may actually represent an economic cost from a recreation standpoint. In addition, if the construction increases speed, and if "speed kills", than there may be a safety cost associated with the construction. Accidents at higher speeds can be more severe and frequent. Are there any studies that contrast the safety records of wider, faster highways with slower highways with pullouts through canyons? Logan Canyon FEIS Morton Page 3 �13 . page 9-87. Comments from Brad Lengas , a doctoral student at Utah State, indicate that the FEIS ignored the impacts of the large -scale highway con s truction di s turbances o n populations of 9 different bat species. This could be significant as bats provide an ins ect control service to humans -- a service with potentially significant economic benefits. HBats consume all type s of insects, including those which are obnoxi ous to humans (one Little Brown bat can con sume 600 mosquito s per hour) and tho s e which can cause crop damag e (various beetles and bugs)." Sc ientists note that predation plays an important role i n ending pest e pidemics and in lengt hening the periods between pes t outbreaks. If the bat populations decline, insect infestations may be longe r, more frequent and mor e intense. In a ddition to increased crop damage, increased insect populations will decrease the quality o f all forms of n onwinter recreation, with a r esulting l oss of benefits. The FEIS should address the impact of constru ction on b at populations, the potential benefits of sustaining ba t s and t h e ir habita t , and the costs of not doing so. 14. page 9-89 . Scott George provides an e x ce lle n t critique of the DE IS . He raises an interesting alternative of build i ng a n add iti onal medical facility rather than extensive highway improveme nt s . How g reat is the emergency med ica l n eed of Rich County res idents? Can a small satellite c lini c or h ospital handle this n eed? What are the costs of bu ildi ng such a fac ili ty and how do they compare to the additional hi g hway constr uction costs of the chosen alterna ti ve? Potential benefits of the hospital construction al t ernative include: 1) short term con stru ction jobs ; 2) long-term, hi g h paying me dic a l jobs and residentiary se r vice jobs; and 3) improved i nfrastruc ture a nd health serv i ces that will enhance future economic development potential in Rich County. 15. page 9 -1 30 . Comme nt s by Ken Theis poi nt o u t t h e appa ren t bias in the benef it- cost calcu lus. His observations seems to be correct . Miti gat ion costs should be incl u ded in the B/C, and the recreation benefits shou l d be f ully accounted for. Page 4 Morton Logan Canyon FEIS �,I May 10, 1995 Mr. Jack Ward Thomas, Chief USDA Forest Service P.O. Box 96090 Washington, D.C. 20090-6090 Re: Notice of Appeal and Statement of Reasons USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Record of Decision U.S. Higbway 89, Logan Canyon Wasatcb-Cacbe National Forest Dear Mr. Thomas, Pursuant to 36 CFR part 215, the Logan Canyon Coalition and the Utah Rivers Conservation Council hereby appeals the USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Record of Decision concerning U.S. 89 through Logan Canyon in the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. This decision was signed on March 31 , 1995 by Dale N. Bosworth, Regional Forester. This decision amends the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan so that it is consistent with the Utah Department of Transponation's (UDOn modified Preferred Alternative, as described in UDOT' s Record of Decision. The Forest Service is also granting a transportation easement across the Wasatch-Cache National Forest to UDOT for the sake of this project. Appellants base their appeal of this decision on the reasons included herein. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, enclosure Kevin Kobe, President Logan Canyon Coalition (801) 753-5031 �NOTICE OF APPEAL AND STATEMENT OF REASONS Pursuant to 36 C.F.R., Part 215 Appellants: Logan Canyon Coalition U.S.U. Box 1674 Logan, UT 84322-0199 (801) 753-5031 (80 I) 753-0497 Kevin Kobe, President Jaynan Chancellor, Treasurer Dr. Gordon Steinhoff Tim Wagner, Vice-President Dan Miller, Secretary Dr. Thomas J. Lyon Steve Flint Don R. Hickman Utah Rivers Conservation Council 1471 South llOO East Salt Lake City, UT 84105 (80 I) 486-3161 Zachary Frankel, Director Counsel for Appellants: Ms. Kate Zimmerman 1320 Claremont Drive, Boulder, CO 80303 (303) 494-1706 Decision Document: USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Record of Decision, March 31, 1995 U.S. Highway 89, Logan Canyon Wasatch-Cache National Forest Deciding Officer: Dale N. Bosworth, Regional Forester, Intermountain Region 2 �Decision Appealed: We appeal the decision to: (i.) amend the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan so that it is consistent with the Utah Department of Transportation's (UDOT) modified Preferred Alternative, as described in UDOT's Record of Decision, and, (ii.) grant a transportation easement across the Wasatch-Cache National Forest to UDOT for the purpose of implementing the modified Preferred Alternative. We seek the reversal of this decision until UDOT provides a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement in which they better document the need for, and the environmental and economic impacts of, the modified Preferred Alternative. Also, we seek the reversal of this decision until UOOT scales down its construction proposal so as to present a genuine compromise between desired Level of Service and environmental constraints. UDOT should reconsider the Conservationists' Alternative, as described in Appendix A of this appeal. Finally, we seek the reversal of this decision until the Forest Service has reevaluated the segment of the Logan River from Lower Twin Bridge to Beaver Creek for Wild and Scenic River status. Reasons for Objecting: Appellants believe that UDOT has not adequately justified the need for its modified Preferred Alternative through considerations of safety, AASHTO design standards, traffic flow, or Level of Service. UDOT has not adequately assessed impacts to wildlife, the fishery, wetlands, or water quality in Logan River. Negative economic impacts have not been evaluated. UOOT's Record of Decision introduces aspects of road construction, such as batch plants and haul roads, which were not evaluated in the FEIS. Visual quality will be impaired in a manner inconsistent with guidelines contained in the Logan Canyon Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan. Furthermore, the Forest Service has agreed that the segment of the Logan River from Lower Twin Bridge to Beaver Creek might be eligible for Wild and Scenic River status, and that it should be reevaluated. A segment of the Logan River has been identified as having, potentially, more outstandingly remarkable values than any other river in the Wasatch-Cache Forest. Appellants are concerned that construction of UDOT's modified Preferred Alternative, with its associated impacts to the river and to the scenery, will degrade this river segment enough that it will no longer qualify for Wild and Scenic status. The Conservationists' Alternative improves the highway to an adequate extent, while minimizing environmental and economic impacts. UDOT's modified Preferred 3 �Alternative is, therefore, neither reasonable nor necessary. Appellants believe that the Forest Service's Record of Decision violates guidelines within the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resources Management Plan concerning wildlife, fisheries habitat, road construction, water quality, and economic impacts. The Forest Service is therefore in violation of the National Forest Management Act. The Forest Service is also in violation of the Federal Clean Water Act Antidegredation Policy that protects water quality and designated uses of Logan River. With its dec ision to allow extensive construction before Logan River is reevaluated for Wild and Scenic River status, the Forest Service is in violation of the 5(d) planning requirements of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The Forest Service is also violating guidelines and objectives within its Logan Canyon Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan. Finally, with its inadequate designation of 4(f) sites within Logan Canyon, the Forest Service is in violation of the National Transportation Act. Appellant's objections and reasons are described in more detail below. On January 11 , 1995, representatives of the Logan Canyon Coalition, appellants, met with Mr. Reese Pope, Forest Planner for the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. We handed Mr. Pope a copy of our agenda for the meeting that outlined our concerns with UDOT's modified Preferred Alternative. We told Mr. Pope that UDOT's safety discussions in its Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD) appear to be based upon flawed traffic and accident data. Mr. Pope told us that traffic and accident data is "not our province," referring to the Forest Service. Appellants believe, however, that ensuring the accuracy of traffic and accident data;s within the province of the Forest Service when a citizen's group that can document serious study of this data indicates that this data is problematic. Our concern is that the Fores t Service is permitting an extensive construction project in the National Forest that is unnecessary. We also told Mr. Pope of our concern that UDOT' s assessment of fishery impacts is inadequate. We told him that we are worried, for example, that UDOT has underestimated fish mortality by providing a simplistic account of the effects of increased sedimentation. Mr. Pope replied that the predicted decrease in HCI value appears to be within acceptable limits. Appellants still believe, however, that UDOT's fishery discussion, induding its analysis of HCI, is inadequate. Finally, we told Mr. Pope of our concern that proposed road construction will hann the scenic and free-flowing characteristics of the Logan River enough that it will not qualify for Wild and Scenic status when it is reevaluated. Mr. Pope expressed his opinion th at proposed construction will not hann the eligibility of this river. 4 �Appellants respectfully disagree, and will argue in this appeal that the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act requires that the Logan River receive interim protection until it is reevaluated. Several individual appellants, Dr. Thomas J. Lyon, Steve Flint, and Dr. Gordon Steinhoff, can document long-standing interest in UDOT's construction plans in Logan Canyon. We have been involved in early scoping hearings and on a UDOT interdisciplinary team. We have written many letters to UDOT and other agencies concerning UDOT' s DEIS, FEIS, and its Record of Decision. The Utah Rivers Conservation Council, an appellant, is a non-profit organization dedicated to achieving Wild and Scenic status for those rivers in Utah that qualify. The long-standing interest of this organization in Logan River is documented within the book A Citizen's Proposal to Protect the Wild Rivers of Utah, written and researched by Zachary Frankel, Director of the Utah Rivers Conservation Council. STATEMENT OF REASONS This Statement consists of the following sections: I. History and Background, 2. Safety Issues, 3. AASHTO Standards and Highway Design, 4. Wild and Scenic Rivers Issues, 5. Fishery Impacts, 6. Wildlife Impacts and Sensitive Species, 7. Visual Retention, 8. Economic Impacts, 9. Wetlands, 10. Water Quality, 11. Construction Impacts Not Evaluated in the FEIS, 12. 4(f) Sites. There is also an Appendix that contains: A. a map of Logan Canyon Highway 89, B. a description of the Conservationists' Alternative, C. photos of the sensitive areas discussed in this appeal. 1. WSTQRY AND BACKGROUND The Logan Canyon project was originally envisioned as a bridge replacement project, and has gradually evolved into a more extensive, 15 to 20 year construction project. The scale of the project has generated massive opposition by area residents, as evidenced by 309 letters in support of a lesser alternative, as opposed to 21 in support of the Modified Standard, an alternative similar to the Preferred Alternative (FEIS, Table 9-1). Hundreds of additional opposing letters were sent to the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) in response to UDOT's adoption of the Preferred Alternative as described in its Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) (on file with Nadene Steinhoff, Bridgerland Audubon Society). Numerous letters to the editor and local 5 �newspaper editorials opposing the Preferred Alternative have been published (Herald JourfUJl, Cache Citizen, The Statesman, 1988-95). Four hundred protesters rallied in the canyon in 1992 (Salt Lake Tribune, Deseret News , Herald Journal, Cache Citizen, KTVX Channel 4 News (ABC), KUTV Channel 2 News (NBC), April 25 and 26, 1992; High Country News, June 1, 1992). UDOT received 682 signatures supporting a lesser alternative prior to 1993, and hundreds of petition signatures after the release of the FEIS, including petitions from Business People for the Canyon, Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon, Logan Environmental Action Force, the Cache Sierra Club, and Bridgerland Audubon Society (FEIS, Table 9-1). Early in the process, citizens groups submitted their own highway improvement alternative. The Conservationists' Alternative is described in Appendix B. Appellants believe that the Utah Department of Transportation has never justified the need for a project as extensive as the Preferred Alternative. even as it has been modified in UDOT's Record of Decision. In the "Purpose and Need" section of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), UDOT relied heavily on the need for a reduction in travel time, pointing to the economic benefits of travelers being able to cut 4 to 8 minutes off their trip. Their costlbenefit analysis was based on inappropriate assumptions that undervalued the time spent in the canyon and overvalued the speed with which travelers moved through the canyon (DElS, Table 47). Logan Canyon has been recognized in numerous national magazines, for example, the recent Audubon magazine (Bass, 1994). It was one of the first designated Forest Service Scenic Byways. It is not merely a traffic conduit. After an extensive barrage of public criticism at the idea of trading serious environmental impacts for a 4 to 8 minute reduction in travel time, UDOT abandoned its rhetoric about the time savings (FEIS, pages 9-3 to 9-151). Travel time is not mentioned in the FEIS as a justification for this project. Rather, UDOT relies on considerations of safety and Level of Service (FEIS, 1-3 to 1-18). The DEIS clearly stated, however, that "safety is not a primary reason for this project" (DEIS, page 1-22). Less than two pages were devoted to safety in the DEIS. Appellants believe that this shift in attempts to justify the project between the DEIS and FEIS is evidence that this project is not clearly justified. The modified Preferred Alternative is, literally, a construction project in search of a justification. UDOT's traffic and accident data is seriously flawed, and yet the Forest Service has accepted this construction project even after being informed of these flaws (Bridgerland Audubon Society letter to the Forest Service dated May 2, 1993; Logan Canyon Coalition meeting with Reese Pope, Jan. 11 , 1995). UDOT's accident severity data show a correlation between high speeds and high numbers of fatalities and serious accidents on the already widened and straightened section of highway in the Lower 6 �Canyon. Appellants are concerned that the Forest Service is permitting UDOT to build a more dangerous highway. The gain in Level of Service with the modified Preferred Alternative over the Conservationists' Alternative is marginal. and comes at the cost of greater environmental destruction (FEIS, Table 2-1). UDOT and the Forest Service are not taking advantage of flexibility allowed by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), and by the Federal Highway Administration, in order to protect scenic and environmental resources. UDOT and the Forest Service also ignore recommendations from the Intermodel Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA), caUing for greater emphasis on public involvement in highway design, preservation of scenic beauty, recognition and preservation of Scenic Byways, and prevention of adverse effects on water quality and wetlands. UDOT has attempted to portray the Logan Canyon Scenic Byway, classified as a minor arterial, as a critical link in the nation 's highway system. This attempt to justify the project is dishonest. The FEIS displays maps portraying U.S. 89 through Logan Canyon as a critical undeveloped link in a highway system connecting Mexico with Canada (FEIS, Figure I-I). Logan Canyon is actually a small mountain highway that will never provide a critical link due to its mountainous, steep terrain and the fact that it has already been bypassed by alternative routes. 1- 15 is the highway that is of primary importance in the area, connecting all points south, including Provo, Salt Lake City and Ogden, with all points north, including Pocatello, Idaho Falls, Butte and Helena. 1-80 is the major east to west route for commerce, not Logan Canyon (see Appendix A). As a route from Salt Lake City and Ogden to Yellowstone and the Grand Tetons, Idaho State Highway 34 will always be faster than the Logan Canyon highway due to the more rugged terrain of Logan Canyon. Garden City, at the other end of the Logan Canyon highway, is a small town of 193 people (1990 census), down from a 1980 population of 259. UDOT is proposing extensive widening and straightening of a highway that has already been bypassed by faster, alternative routes, and that serves a town of 193 residents, with a population that has declined by 25% over the past ten years. The entire population of Rich County (in which Garden City is located) has been declining over the past ten years. The 1990 population was 1,725, down from the 1980 population of 2,100, a reduction of almost 18 %, with several key industries moving away from Rich County in recent years (Bureau of the Census 1994; Utah Governor's Office of Planning and Budget 1993). Appellants believe that this steady population decline is a good indication that High way 89 does not require the extensive modifications UDOT is proposing. By accepting UDOT's modified Preferred Alternative, without adequate justification, the Forest Service is in violation of guidelines in the Wasatch-Cache 7 �National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan concerning unnecessary road construction (1985, page IV-44). Much attention has focused on the modifications UDOT has introduced into the Preferred Alternative as it is described in UDOT's Record of Decision. We believe that these modifications don't go far enough when viewed in tenns of the countervailing requirements of the Management Plan and federal laws. Literature Cited Bass, R. 1994. Keeping Logan Canyon. Audubon Magazine, Nov.lDec. Bitton, M. 1992. Partisans of Logan Canyon protest a widened road. High Country News, June I, 1992. Lyon, Dr. Thomas J. 1992. The road gang wants to wreck Logan Canyon. High Country News, June I, 1992. USDA Forest Service. 1995. Record of Decision (ROD), U.S. Highway 89. United States Dept. of Commerce, Economics and Statistics. Bureau of the Census. 1994. Utah Department of Transportation (UDO"D. 1990. Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), U.S. Highway 89, Logan Canyon. Prepared by CH2M Hill. Utah Department of Transportation. 1993. Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), U.S. Highway 89, Logan Canyon. Prepared by CH2M Hill. Utah Department of Transportation (UOO"D. 1995. Record of Decision (ROD), U.S. 89 Through Logan Canyon. Utah Governor' s Office of Planning and Budget. 1993. Utah Demographic Report. 2. SAFETY 1SSUF.5 1. The Forest Service has adopted the FEIS, as is mentioned on page 1 of its Record of Decision. The FEIS, in its purpose and need section, uses a clearly flawed safety analysis (in violation of the requirement for agencies to insure scientific integrity of analyses as stated in 40 CFR, Ch. 5, 1502.24). Thus the Forest Service's decision to 8 �• adopt the FEIS is arbitrary and capricious, as the FEIS does not meet the "standards for an adequate statement" (40 CFR, Ch. 5, 1506.3a). 2. We have evidence that the proposed construction will result in a more dangerous road, thus violating the requirements of the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan that "public safety needs" be considered regarding the Logan Canyon highway (1985, page IV-311) . The Management Plan says about the Logan Canyon highway, "The road will not be raised to a higher standard than existing" (1985a, page 236; FEIS, page 9-88). Thus the only true justifications for highway modifications are improvements necessary for safety and replacement of deteriorated structural elements. However, the Forest Service has blindly accepted the UDOT safety analysis, despite the fact that the public had openly disputed UDOT's analysis of safety literally for two decades. The current UDOT analysis utilizes artificially inflated and manipulated traffic volumes, inconsistent with UDOT's own traffic counts, in an attempt to make the previously widened portion of the road (Lower Canyon) appear safer than the unwidened sections. In addition, UDOT has refused to make any reasonable comparisons of accident severity, although these data are available in the technical memorandums. Citizens have long contended that the type of highway modifications proposed here will make the roadway less safe. Our analysis supports this position. Accident rates are simply accidents per million vehicle miles. Only elementary arithmetic is needed for their calculation. What is being questioned here is not the method of calculation but the numbers used in these calculations. In 1986, the Interdisciplinary Team was presented with accident rate data in the fann of computer printouts. These printouts contained accident rates for specific sections, and also the section length, traffic flow, and accident numbers--all the infonnation necessary to calculate accident rates. The representatives of the environmental community on the tearn at that time (Rudy Lukez, Jack Spence, Bill Helm, and Steve Flint) discovered that the printed accident rates could not be derived from the accompanying data. The consultants, CH2M Hill, were informed of this, but presented the flawed data at the September 1986 public meeting in Logan. Rudy Lukez had to interrupt the presentation to remind the consultants of the problems with the data. At that time, UDOT and their consultants withdrew the accident rate data since they found the errors intractable. Subsequently, accident rates were never mentioned for over six and one half years. During this time the December 1990 DEIS stated, " .. . safety is not a primary reason for the project ... " (DEIS, page 1-22). Accident rates were not mentioned in the DEIS, but they suddenly appeared in Table 1-2 of the March 1993 FEIS. 9 �, It appears that the accident rates were introduced into the FEIS for two reasons. One was an attempt to make the Lower Canyon look like the safest part of the road. This was done by manipulating the traffic volumes in the Lower Canyon upward, thus reducing the calculated accident rates (the higbway here was widened in the 1960's). The second use of accident rates was to make it look like the road was quickly becoming much more dangerous. This was done by drastically reducing traffic flows in recent years along the rest of the highway. This caused the accident rates to rise, giving the appearance of a much more dangerous road in recent years. UDOT claimed a 44% increase in the accident rate as one went from the 1980-'85 period to the 1986-'90 period (page 1- 10 of the FEIS). It is a straightforward procedure to backcalculate the traffic flows (average annual daily traffic, abbreviated as ADT or AADlj used in calculating the accident rates in Table 1-2 of the FEIS. These data are shown in our Table I for each section of the highway, and the percent change in traffic flow is calculated. Clearly, if one could believe these data, there are massive reductions in traffic in Logan Canyon in recent years. In one section of the Middle Canyon, for example, the reduction in recent years is supposedly almost 80%! Since such massive reductions is clearly not the case (measured traffic flow is discussed below), the UDOT safety argument based on these accident rates is meaningless. The response of UDOT to the presentation of tbese ADT derived from their table was to issue the statement, "The ADT presented in Revised Table 1-2 are estimates made by UDOT and are used to calculate the accident rates in segments. However, estimates are changed periodically as additional information concerning census and other data is made available. The two periods shown on the table may be misinterpreted to indicate that there has been a decrease in traffic in the canyon between the two periods studied. To determine actual usage of the canyon you should examine the actual traffic count information measured in the canyon. Year to year counts should also be examined to determine the trends since variations in traffic usage occurs each year." (October 15, 1993 UDOT press release, distributed at the meeting of the State Transportation Commission). Why UDOT believes it should be able to take measured traffic counts for past years and adjust them according to census and other information is beyond belief. Clearly, they do not know wbat they are doing. At the time they issued the above statement, they issued a revision of Table 1-2, correcting some of the grossest errors for the 1980-'85 period. In examining our Table I, you will note that there appear to be periodic massive infusions and deletions of traffic from the highway. These are clearly spurious since only unpaved roads 10 �intersect this highway between Logan and Garden City. Their revised Table 1-2 corrects this, but still shows decreases in more recent years. We show this in our Table 2. Since UDOT provided ADT in the revised table, we did not need to backcalculate it from the accident rates. Actual traffic flow can be found in Figure 1-4 of the FEIS . While the FEIS does not provide a location in the canyon where these traffic volumes are reported to occur, referring to the 1987 Technical Memorandums makes it absolutely clear that these numbers represent traffic at Card Canyon (within the mp 378-383.3 section). For all other Iccations in the canyon, this number is scaled either up or down by a factor. UDOT has never provided these factors to the public, however they can be backcalculated from the traffic flow data used in the accident rate calculations. We have found that these factors vary in a curious manner from table to table. For example, in the traffic flow projections figure (FEIS, Table 1-5), the decrease in traffic flow as one goes "up" the canyon (to higher milepost numbers) is much less than is evident from the accident rate data. Thus UDOT is using vastly different factors at different times. When they want low traffic in the unwidened portion of the canyon (to make accident rates high), they use large factors. When they want high traffic in the unwidened portions of the canyon (to justify highway widening) they use small factors . Taking averages for Card Canyon, from Figure 1-4, gives 1812 cars per day for 1980-'85 and 1844 for 1986-'90. This shows a small increase of 1.8 % in the measured average annual traffic flow between these two periods, rather than the decrease shown by UDOT's accident rate data (our Tables I and 2) . It also shows that UDOT is using a traffic flow value in its accident rate calculation for the mp 378-383.3 section that is 1.6 times the measured value in Figure 1-4. There is no logical reason for this discrepancy. This high traffic flow very effectively decreases the accident rate in this section. It is blatant fabrication of data that cannot be ignored. The distortion for the section immediately below, the lower Lower Canyon, mp 374.64-378, is even greater. (UDOT has never produced a method we consider reasonable for detennining traffic flow in the lower Lower Canyon .) UDOT claims to have calculated this traffic flow using a method described on page 5 of the Appendix to their Record of Decision. A traffic flow of 14,000 cars per day is reported for the section of Highway 89 that lies below Logan Canyon, south of Utah State University (page 5 of the Appendix to the ROD, mp 373 approximately). Although this section is well outside Logan Canyon, the traffic flow for this section, representing heavy University traffic, is artificially "extended" up the canyon to increase the traffic flow in the lower Lower Canyon, mp 374.64-378 . The rate of 14,000 cars per day is averaged using a weighting method with a traffic flow of 3,000 cars per day claimed for the Lower Canyon. This calculation is reported by UDOT to yield a weighted 11 �traffic flow for the lower Lower Canyon, mp 374.64-378, of 7500 cars per day. However, adhering strictly to the formula for this calculation presented on page 5 of the Appendix actually produces a value of 4,015 cars per day. UDOT is not only "extending" University traffic up the canyon to artificially inflate the traffic flow in the lower Lower Canyon, it has also miscalculated this traffic flow to obtain a value nearly twice what the formula actually provides. We would expect to see this number, 4,015 cars per day, in subsequent tables, yet it never appears. Values of over 6 and 7 thousand cars per day are given in revised Table 1-2,4510 is used in the accident severity table (page 7 of the Appendix), and 3367 is used in the new accident rate table (page 3 of the Appendix). Part of the problem is that the milepost section shown on page 5 of the Appendix coincides with the milepost section in Table 1-2, but does not coincide with section designations in the other tables. Rather than attempting to guess how these errors occurred, we will argue that all of the traffic flows provided by UDOT for the lower Lower Canyon are excessive. The calculation method presented on page 5 of the Appendix (ROD) has no basis in reality. What it has done is take a "commuter roadway" outside of Logan Canyon (U.S. 89 south of Utah State University) and use that traffic flow for the first 0.31 miles of Logan Canyon--an area with DO intersecting roads. The only realistic traffic flow for the lower Lower Canyon would be something slightly greater than the traffic flow reported in Figure 1-4 of the FEIS. Despite ten years of time to do this, UDOT has instead fabricated elaborate methods designed to intimidate the reader (for example, the material on page 5 of the Appendix to the ROD). Their data showing literally thousands of cars daily driving into the canyon and turning around in the first few miles (there are no intersecting roads here) is blatantly absurd to anyone familiar with the location. In UDOT's Record of Decision, another attempt is made to analyze accident rates. This was done because of our repeated questioning of both the original and revised accident rate data in Table 1-2. (During negotiations with UDOT in 1994, Dave Berg ofUDOT admitted that UDOT's traffic flow data was literally "garbage," hence this additional effort to salvage the safety argument in order to show purpose and need). This new analysis is conducted for a more recent period, 1989-'93 (ROD, Appendix, page 3). This new analysis appears to be based on one day's traffic count in 1994, and gives a value of 3367 cars per day for the Lower Canyon where the counter is located. This is greatly in excess of the 1869 cars per day (1990 data) shown in Figure 1-4 of the FEIS. Clearly, one day cannot be selected to represent a 5 year period of traffic flow, because both absolute numbers of cars and the proportional change in traffic through the canyon differs during different seasons. To further complicate any reasonable comparison of data, this new analysis subdivides the road 12 �< into different segments than we find in Table 1-2 (which was retained in the ROD). How can any comparisons be made with the 1980's data? Clearly, given UDOT's inability to count cars accurately over this ten year period, we question whether any UDOT traffic flow data can legitimately be used in this EIS. Accident severity is a much more important parameter than simple accident rate. (Refer to the minutes of the interdisciplinary team meeting of August II, 1986, item #6, review of accident data. From page 3: "Duncan Silver (FHW A) said that a goal should be statistical reliance and that the number of accidents was not as important as the severity of the accidents.") In their Record of Decision, UDOT presents accident severity data for the first time since the 1987 Technical Memorandums (UDOT's ROD, Appendix, page 7). Their analysis is flawed in two ways. One flaw is that only fatalities are analyzed. Fatalities are fortunately so infrequent in Logan Canyon (8 fatal accidents for the period UDOT analyzed) that their distribution is statistically random. The second flaw is that UDOT attempted again to tie them to traffic flow, calculating a fatal accident rate. Again, the traffic volumes are inflated for the Lower Canyon (4,510 cars per day for a section with a measured traffic flow of scarcely over 1,800 cars per day). It is clear that UDOT is unable to provide any consistency in traffic flow data collection, and thus safety cannot be evaluated by any technique requiring traffic flow data. This continual manipulation of data has made a mockery of the directive for agencies to use "scientific integrity" in the process outlined in the National Environmental Protection Act, 40 CFR, Ch. 5, 1502.24. Thus, this FEIS does not meet the "standards for an adequate document" which 40 CFR, Ch. 5, 1506.3a requires for an agency to adopt an EIS. Hence, the Forest Service's adoption of this FEIS is arbitrary and capricious. We propose average accident severity as a measure of highway safety. This comparison is numerically independent of traffic flow. UDOT made these calculations in the 1987 Safety Technical Memorandum, in Table 3-7. The greatest accident severity was found in the widened section of the highway. (However, it is not clear how these calculations were done; attempting to repeat them by averaging the data in Table 3-8 of the Technical Memorandum does not produce the same average accident severity values as given by UDOT in Table 3-7.) One could argue that the more severe the accident, the greater the "weighting" it should be given. Of course these weightings are arbitrary, but it appears that the method UDOT used was strictly incremental. We have used a method of increasing the "weight" given a more severe accident in our Table 3. Again, the widened section of the highway has the most severe accidents. Clearly, driving at a speed inappropriate for a section of highway is the 13 �overriding cause of accidents (1987, Table 3-4). Widening and straightening a highway, without a large concomitant commitment to speed limit enforcement, simply increases the speed at which it is traveled. It is no surprise the severity of accidents increases. The issue of speed limit enforcement as a means of improving safety was raised during the EIS process, but UDOT ignored it. The construction alternative endorsed by the Forest Service will produce a more dangerous highway, and as a consequence, the Forest Services' s Record of Decision violates the stipulation of the Management Plan requiring that safety needs be considered for the Logan Canyon highway (page IV-3111). Literature Cited USDA Forest Service. 1995. (ROD) Record of Decision, U.S. Highway 89. USDA Forest Service. 1985. Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. USDA Forest Service. 1985a. Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan; Final Environmental Impact Statement, Ch.6. Utah Department of Transportation (UOOn. 1995. (ROD) Record of Decision, U.S. 89 Through Logan Canyon. Utah Department of Transportation. 1993 . (FEIS) Final Environmental Impact Statement, U.S. Highway 89, Logan Canyon. Prepared by CH2M Hill. Utah Department of Transportation. 1987. Technical Memoranda. Prepared by CH2M Hill. 14 �• Table 1 . Average daily traffic (ADT) bacKcalculated from Table 1-2 in th e FEIS , and the percent change as one goes from the early ' 80 ' 5 to the late '80's . sections and mileposts Lower 3 7 4. 6 4 378 . 00 Middle 383.00 384.40 387.00 388.40 Upper 39 1. 60 392.70 395 . 60 399.40 Rich 404. 75 408.20 410.10 ADT ' 80 - '8 5 from Tab 1 - 2 ADT '8 6 -' 90 from Tab 1 - 2 5710 2820 4693 2969 -17.8 5.3 2004 1815 8323 2990 2372 1815 1742 1781 18 . 4 - 0.0 - 79.1 - 40.4 5239 1840 1979 122 5 1811 1631 1614 1259 - 65.4 -11.4 - 1 8.4 2.8 1383 2247 1277 1164 1292 1228 - 15.8 - 42.5 -3. 8 Percent Change canyon - 378.00 - 383.30 - Canyon 384 . 40 387.00 388.40 391.60 Canyon 392 ;70 - 395.60 399.40 - 404.75 - County 408.20 410 . 10 - 411.87 - - �• Table 2. Percent change from the early to late 1980's using UDOT's revised average daily tra ffic (ADT) as contained in their revised Ta ble 1-2 of t he October '93 press release and (except for values with *) in their Janu a ry ' 95 ROD. The percent change for the values changed in the ROD are given in parentheses. section and '80-'85 mileposts ADT ' 86 -' 90 Percent Change ADT Lower 374.64 378.00 Canyon 378.00 383.30 6865 2824 7417* 3019 Middle 383.00 384.40 387.00 388.40 Canyon 384.40 387.00 388.40 391. 60 2824 1888 1847 1847 3019 1864 1809 1809 6.9 - 1. 3 - 2.1 -2.1 Upper 391. 60 392.70 395 . 60 399.40 Canyon 392.70 1809 16 80 1613 1257 -2.1 399.40 404.75 1847 1826 1815 1351 - 11.1 - 7.0 Rich 404.75 408.20 410.10 County 408.20 410 . 10 411.87 1299 1298 13 96* 1246 1292 1295 -4.1 - 0.4 -7. 2 395.60 8.0 6.9 (5.3) - 8.0 (-1. 8) �Table 3. An index of average accident severity using data from Table 3-8 of the 1986 Safety Technical Memorandum (the Technical Memorandums, all from about 1986, are considered the "backbone" of the EIS). We have used an increasing scale for accident severity, weighting "property damage only" as 1 , "possible injury" as 3, "nonincapacitating injury " as 7, "incapacitating injury" as 15, and "fatality" as 31. Average Accident Severity Widened roadway: Lower Canyon (section 0) 6.03 Middle Canyon (section 1) 5.00 Upper canyon (section 2) 4.07 Rich county (section 3) 3.89 Unmodified roadway: �3, AASHfO STANDARDS AND IDGHWAY DESIGN UDOT argues that they must widen and straighten the Logan Canyon Highway, and add passing lanes, in order to accomplish four major goals. They argue that they must enhance safety, satisfy AASHIO standards, improve traffic flow, and improve the capacity of the road to accommodate projected future traffic volumes (FEIS, page 1-3). We have dealt with safety issues in the previous section of this appeal. In this section we will discuss the other three goals. By accepting UDOT's modified Preferred Alternative, the Forest Service is accepting a road design that allows for unnecessary and unjustified construction in environmentally sensitive areas of the canyon. The Wasatch-Cache National Forest Management Plan specifies, as a guideline, that design speeds allowed on roads in this Forest shall be a "compromise" between desired travel speed and constraints imposed by the environment (page IV-44). Road design in the Forest must, therefore, also be a compromise between desired travel speed and environmental constraints. We shall argue that the road design the Forest Service is accepting in Logan Canyon, with its decision in favor of the modified Preferred Alternative, does not represent such a compromise. The Forest Service is therefore in violation of its Management Plan. Guidelines within this plan are to be "applied in all situations unless some overriding reason to abandon" them is supported by a Forest Service interdisciplinary analysis (page IV -24). AASHTO Standards UDOT attempts to justify the modified Preferred Alternative by appeal to safety standards that have been devised by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHIO). AASHTO standards are environmentally friendlier than UDOT admits. AASHTO recommends flexibility in the design of arterial roads in mountainous areas where the terrain limits road design. Our first criticism of UDOT's use of AASHIO standards is that UDOT is not taking advantage of the flexibility in road design that is allowed by AASHIO. In the FEIS, UDOT claims that the recommended minimum design speed for a minor arterial road is 50 miles per hour. Based on this claim, UDOT condemns the entire Logan Canyon highway, asserting that " the existing highway is therefore substandard" (FEIS, page 1-8). In the special circumstances of mountainous terrain, however, AASHTO relaxes the minimum design speed for a minor arterial to 40 miles per hour, down from 50 miles per hour, when, as in Logan Canyon, the daily hourly volume is over 400 (UDOT 1987, page 7-12; Claire Hendrickson, FHWA, personal 15 �communication), The current design speed for the section of highway through the Upper Canyon, 40 to 55 miles per hour, actually complies with standards allowed by AASHTO for mountainous terrain. UDOT has set the design speed from the Beaver Mountain intersection to over the canyon's summit at 50 miles per hour. By AASHTO standards, this design speed makes necessary a wider. straighter road. UDOT is insisting on a design speed, however, which is higher than the minimum allowed by AASHTO for mountainous terrain. In this section of highway the conditions are not appropriate for a uniform design speed of 50 miles per hour. This is particularly true at the summit, where UDOT plans to widen the road to 40 flo, and put in a passing lane and 22 ft. "clear zones" on either side of the highway. There is a beautiful grove of mature Douglas Fir at the summit. The road now winds through this grove, which has appropriately been called a "cathedral" (Bass 1994). As UDOT plans it now, in its legally-binding FEIS and ROD, a side canyon will be filled, and roughly one half of these mature trees will be torn out to make room for the widening and a big curve-cut at the summit. (please see the photo of the summit we have included in the appendix of this appeaL) The resulting destruction to the side canyon, the trees and the views at the summit strongly suggests, we believe, that conditions in the Upper Canyon do not warrant using the 50 miles per hour design speed, plus a passing lane, through this area. UDOT is using AASHTO standards inflexibly, when AASHTO allows flexibility in design in special circumstances such as these. Our second criticism of UDOT's use of AASHTO standards is that they use these standards in a manner that is arbitrary and capricious. For example, UDOT plans to widen the highway in the Upper Canyon, from the Beaver Mountain intersection to over the summit, to 40 flo The design speed is set at 50 miles per hour. Below this intersection, for about eight miles, UDOT is planning a design speed of 50 miles per hour, but they intend to widen the road to only 34 flo For this design speed, a road width of 34 ft. is below AASHTO standards (Roy Nelson, FHW A, personal communication). Exemptions from AASHTO standards are occasionally granted by the Federal Highway Administration. Why does UDOT apply AASHTO standards in this flexible fashion in the lower Upper Canyon, but insist on strictly applying full AASHTO standards above Beaver Mountain? UDOT's ROD includes an internal memo from a UDOT safety engineer, who asserts that a 34 flo road width at this design speed is adequately safe. He cites studies that report "little change on accident rate when going from 5 to 8 foot shoulder," in other words, when going from a 34 flo road width to a 40 ft. width. This safety engineer concludes that while keeping to a 34 ft. width may be substandard, "for this project" 16 �, this width "would be acceptable" (UDOT 1995, Appendix A, pages 9 and 10). We have included a copy of this memo at the end of this section of our appeal. In its 1987 Technical Memoranda, UDOT further defends the use of the 34 ft. width. They write, "A reduction from the standard 8-foot shoulder to the 5-foot shoulder can be justified in that while the 8-foot width is desirable for parking, a distressed vehicle can get out of the traffic stream yet remain on the paved surface with a 5-foot shoulder. The narrower shoulder also provides enough room for cyclists and pedestrians, with minimal interference with motorized vehicles." (1987, page 7-7) UDOT is arguing here that a 34 ft. road width is adequately safe and acceptable. In the FEIS, UDOT praises the safety record of the already "improved" highway in the Lower Canyon. As UDOT points out, this section of highway has a safety record that exceeds expectations (FEIS, page 1-9). This section of highway is 34 ft. wide. As we have described above, the summit of Logan Canyon is particularly beautiful; the road winds through magnificent old Douglas Fir. Roughly one-half of these trees will be lost if UDOT widens the road here to 40 ft. and puts in the planned passing lane and 22 ft. "clear wnes," following the alignment specified in the FEIS and the ROD. UDOT is relaxing AASHTO standards in order to use the 34 ft. width in the lower Upper Canyon, below Beaver Mountain. A UDOT safety engineer has argued that a 34 ft . width is "acceptable" from a safety standpoint, citing studies that show this. The "improved" highway in the Lower Canyon, which is 34 ft. wide, exceeds safety expectations. Exemptions from strict AASHTO standards are granted. It seems the most arbitrary and capricious of decisions to end the 34 ft. width at Beaver Mountain, and insist upon a 40 ft. width above Beaver Mountain, with the resulting unacceptable destruction to a side canyon, trees and scenery at the summit. Another example of UDOT's arbitrary and capricious use of AASHTO standards is in their plans for the highway in the Middle Canyon. In the lower Middle Canyon, up to Lower Twin Bridge, UDOT intends to maintain the current design speed of 25 miles per hour, and the current width of 26 ft. They intend to widen the road above Lower Twin Bridge to 34 ft. , increasing the design speed to a uniform 35 miles per hour. A design speed of 35 miles per hour is below AASHTO standards for a minor arterial highway, but, UDOT argues, this design speed is closer to design speeds recommended by AASHTO. UDOT attempts to justify ending the 26 ft. road width at Lower Twin Bridge by saying that "the roadway begins to move further away from the river at this point" (UDOT 1995a). This statement is patently false. The highway closely follows the river throughout much of the Middle Canyon above Lower Twin Bridge, particularly 17 �along the Dugway and at Temple Fork intersection, where the highway closely parallels the river, rising ahove the river on a very steep slope. (Please see the photos we have provided in the Appendix to this appeal.) Widening the highway in this section of Logan Canyon will negatively affect the scenery, water quality, and the fishery. These impacts could be quite serious. UDOT plans to cut 4 to 8 feet into the mountain at the Dugway for 3/4 of a mile, with extensive widening and curve cuts at and below the Temple Fork intersection. They plan to place a retaining wall in one section of the Dugway. There is the risk of extensive retaining walls being placed throughout the Middle Canyon. UDOT has told us that whenever they cannot revegetate a slope, they must install retaining walls (Lynn Zollinger, UDOT engineer, personal communication) . Located just below Lower Twin Bridge is a documented brown trout spawning area. Good conditions for trout spawning are relatively rare in Logan River. Fisheries biologists have informed us that road widening in the Middle Canyon, with associated curve cuts, will possibly increase the level of sedimentation below Lower Twin Bridge to the point that there will be significant loss of trout eggs, a sharp decline in food production for trout, and loss of juvenile brown and cutthroat trout due to clogged gills. UDOT has refused to do a quantitative analysis of sediment-related impacts, even when publicly asked to do so by the Forest Service. The possibility of serious impacts to the scenery and the fishery can be minimized by extending the 26 ft. width another four miles up to ahove the Temple Fork intersection. This would mean leaving the upper Middle Canyon at its current design speed of 25 to 35 miles per hour. Considering that the highway closely parallels the river in the Middle Canyon above Lower Twin Bridge, and considering the possibility of serious negative impacts in this narrow section of the canyon if the road is widened and straightened, it is arbitrary and capricious to end the 26 ft. section at Lower Twin Bridge. Let us summarize our concerns so far with UDOT's use of AASIITO standards. UDOT insists upon using full AASIITO standards in an area where unacceptable environmental destruction will result, even though AASIITO allows flexibility when designing a road in mountainous areas where the terrain limits what can be done. It is not the intent of AASHTO to sanction unnecessary environmental destruction (Amy Steiner, AASIITO, personal communication). Also, UDOT applies AASHTO standards in an arbitrary and capricious fashion, without good justification for decisions to apply these standards in a stricter rather than in a more flexible fashion. UDOT portrays the curves in the upper Middle Canyon section of highway, ahove the Lower Twin Bridge, as being unsafe according to AASHTO standards. On page 2-23 in the FEIS, UDOT criticizes the Conservationists' Alternative for failing to 18 �bring these curves up to AASHTO standards for the posted speed. In Utah, however, a highway' s posted speed is often a compromise between design speed and the speed that drivers actually attain. When not federally mandated, posted speed is determined by calculating the speed that 85 percent of drivers are going. UDOT's proposed design speed for the upper Middle Canyon is a uniform 35 miles per hour, with extensive widening and straightening of the road. Drivers would very likely feel comfortable driving at speeds higher than 35 miles per hour on this widened and straightened stretch of highway. After all, the current posted speed is 35 miles per hour. Following standard practice in Utah, the posted speed may again inch up above design speed, as posted speed is brought more in line with the speed that drivers actually attain. After UDOT's "improvement" of this highway, these curves would still fail to satisfy AASHTO standards for the posted speed. Even if UDOT were to keep to a 35 mile per hour posted speed, as they say they will do in their ROD, the curves in the upper Middle Canyon would fail to meet AASHTO standards for the speeds that drivers will very likely be doing through this section of highway. The problem UDOT points to in its criticism of the Conservationists' Alternative, that the curves are unsafe according to AASHTO standards, will not really be solved by the modified Preferred Alternative. The real problem, of course, is that drivers tend to exceed the speed a road is designed for. This problem will likely only be made worse as UDOT widens and straightens this section of highway. Improve Capacity of tbe Higbway to Accommodate Projected Traffic Volumes UDOT uses a range of projected traffic volumes to argue, for example, that the present highway, without improvements, will provide a dangerously low level of service by the year 2010, and that continuous passing lanes are justified throughout the canyon above Right Hand Fork (1987, page 7-11). UDOT obtains its projections of traffic volumes by fitting a linear equation to past measurements of traffic volumes on the Logan Canyon highway, and by fitting a linear equation to past measurements of the population in northern Utah, in Cache, Box Elder, and Rich Counties. UDOT obtains a range of projected traffic volumes through the year 2010 by using these linear equations to project into the future. UDOT argues that linear equations should be used, rather than exponential, logarithmic and power equations, because linear equations have been found to best fit the data (1987, pages 4- 6 through 4-11). UDOT's projections are of future swnmer traffic volumes. Since 1973, annual traffic volumes have remained constant (FEIS, Figure 1-4). UDOT is designing the canyon highway purely for anticipated summer traffic, and more exactly, for anticipated summer weekend traffic. UDOT reports that summer weekend traffic is currently double that of weekday traffic (FEIS, page 1-16). 19 �We have fit a quadratic equation to the summer traffic data UDOT provides in the FEIS, Figure 1-4, and have found that a quadratic equation fits this data slightly better than does a linear equation. According to the quadratic equation, summer traffic volumes level off over time to values that are significantly lower in 20 10 than the values predicted by a linear equation. UDOT chooses a linear equation based upon its better fit to the data over exponential, logarithmic and power equations. Consistent with this method, UDOT should choose to use a quadratic equation, with its significantly lower predictions, based upon the better fit this equation provides to the data. We have made this point in a letter to UDOT from the Bridgerland Audubon Society, dated May 2, 1993 (UDOT's ROD 1995, Appendix, Response to Comments on FEIS, page 18). In response, UDOT says, "A linear model is an accepted and reasonable model used to project traffic." We are not arguing this claim. Our statistical results show, however, that in the case of Logan Canyon. a quadratic equation is the most reasonable equation to use, based on the better fit it provides to the data. There are other indications that summer traffic volumes in Logan Canyon are leveling off over time. We have run regression analyses on the summer traffic data UDOT provides in the FEIS, Figure 1-4, dividing the data into two categories, 1980 to 1985, and 1986 to 1990. From 1980 to 1985, there is a significant increase in traffic volume with time (r2=.82, P=.02). From 1986 to 1990, on the other hand, there is not a significant correlation between traffic volume and time (r2=.46, P=.21). This means that while in the early 1980's summer traffic increased with time, since 1986 there has been no significant increase in summer traffic volume with time. This is a good indication that summer traffic volumes are leveling off. We have also made this point in a letter to UDOT. They have replied that in predicting traffic volumes it is invalid to divide the data into small sets of "selected years" (Response to-Comments on FEIS, page 17). We are not suggesting, however, that UDOT use five years of data to predict traffic volumes. Our point is, rather, that we have here another indication that summer traffic volumes are leveling off with time, and that UOOT's use of a linear equation to predict summer traffic volumes is therefore invalid, yielding predictions that are too high. The trend shown by the later traffic data suggests that UDOT is planning to build a highway that is too big for actual future needs. The fact that a quadratic equation better fits the entire data set also supports this suggestion. Finally, from Bureau of the Census reports we have found that the population in Rich County, on the other side of the canyon, has been declining over the past ten years. In 1990, the population was 1725 in the entire county, down from the 1980 population of 2100. This is a decline of 17.9%. The population of Garden City, at the 20 �other end of the canyon highway, was 193 in 1990, down from 259 in 1980, a decline of 25.5% (Bureau of the Census 1994). The population of Rich County is probably a good indicator of demand on the Logan Canyon highway, as fewer people in Rich County mean fewer reasons for people to travel back and forth along the highway between Logan and Rich County. It is unfortunate that UDOT has not provided data that shows the percentage of vehicles moving through Logan Canyon that end their journey in Rich County, and the percentage that continue past Rich County into Idaho or Wyoming. Utah motorists moving to and from more northerly destinations such as Montpelier and Yellowstone have several alternate routes, including Idaho highways 34 and 36. Salt Lake and Ogden area motorists moving to and from destinations in Wyoming such as Evanston and Rock Springs have an alternate and more direct route on Interstate 80. Most traffic through Logan Canyon is likely local traffic between Cache and perhaps Box Elder Counties, and Rich County. With the population of Rich County declining over the past ten years, the demand on the Logan Canyon highway should at least level off over time, as the 1986 to 1990 data suggests is happening. This means, again, that UDOT is planning to build a highway based on predictions of traffic volumes that are too high. UDOT uses its projections of summer traffic volumes to determine future Level of Service values for the alternative construction proposals it considers in the FEIS. UDOT argues that the Preferred Alternative would improve the future Level of Service "to a much greater extent" than would the Conservationists' Alternative (FEIS, page 99). This argument is flawed, however, given the above indications that UDOT's predictions of summer traffic volumes are too high. Likely, the highway will not have to bear the burden of traffic UDOT is predicting. Even if, for the sake of argument, we accept UDOT's predictions, it isn' t the case that the Preferred Alternative would provide a "much greater" Level of Service (LOS) than would the Conservationists' Alternative. In the Upper Canyon, the Preferred Alternative is expected to provide a LOS of C/O in the year 2010. C/O means something between C and D. The Conservationists' Alternative is expected to provide a LOS of D. Please see Table I. The Preferred Alternative provides only an incremental increase in LOS over the Conservationists' Alternative. For the upper Middle Canyon, by the year 2010 the Preferred Alternative is expected to provide a LOS of D, while the Conservationists' Alternative is expected to provide a LOS of DIE. The gain in Level of Service with the Preferred Alternative is again quite marginal. According to UDOT's descriptions of Levels of Service, in the Upper Canyon the Preferred Alternative is expected to bring about "noticeable increases in platoon formation" and "platoon size," with passing being something between "significantly reduced" and "extremely difficult" (FEIS, page 1-18). With the Conservationists' Alternative, passing is expected to be "extremely difficult." How much better off will . 21 �we be to have passing that is slightly better than "extremely difficult," as opposed to being simply "extremely difficult"? In the upper Middle Canyon, the Preferred Alternative is expected to result in "unstable traffic flow," with passing being "extremely difficult." The Conservationists' Alternative is expected to provide passing that is something between "extremely difficult" and "virtually impossible." How much better off will we be with passing that is still "extremely difficult"? It is expected that by the year 2010, both alternatives will provide Levels of Service that fall below the va lue that is professionally acceptable. "LOS C is the minimum desirable LOS for a rural highway" (page 1-19). The marginal gains with the modified Preferred Alternative, with Levels of Service that are still below the "minimum desirable,'" are not worth the much greater cost and environmental destruction. Table 1 Projected LOS by year 2010 (from FElS, Table 2-1) Preferred Alternative Conservationists' Alternative Middle Canyon (lower) Rt. Hand Fork to Lower Twin Bridge (upper) Lower Twin Bridge to Cattle Guard (MP 391.6) DIE DIE D DIE Upper Canyon C/O D We have made this point to UDOT in several letters. Their response is that the difference between the LOS values C/O and D, for example, represents a significant improvement (UDOT's ROD, Response to Comments on FEIS, page 80). This claim is unbelievable, especially given the fact that both alternatives fall below the "minimum desirable" LOS. UDOT adds that we must evaluate construction alternatives on a "corridor-wide" basis (page 22). Considering the environmental impacts of the modified Preferred Alternative in the Middle and Upper sections of the canyon, however, and considering that the gains in LOS with the modified Preferred Alternative are quite marginal in these sections of the canyon, there is good reason for UDOT to scale back its plans in these sections. The corridor-wide LOS would still be enhanced. We are not protesting UDOT's proposals for the Rich County section of highway, past the Bear Lake overlook, for example. UDOT should minimize environmental destruction in the most sensitive areas of the canyon, given the fact that less destructive, yet practicable, alternatives are available in these areas. It is likely, however, that neither alternative will bring about the reduced LOS that UDOT is predicting. since, according to severa l indications, summer traffic 22 �volumes are leveling off over time. For these reasons, flawed traffic projections, and only marginal gains in predicted Levels of Service, UDOT has not justified its choice of the modified Preferred Alternative on the basis of its traffic projections. Improve Traffic Flow According to UDOT, factors that influence traffic flow include speed and travel time, passing ability, and "traffic interruptions" (UDOT 1987, page 6-2). These factors are used to derme the qualitative measure, Level of Service. Level of Service is a slightly broader concept than traffic flow , also taking into account safety, and driver "comfort and convenience." We will briefly compare the modified Preferred Alternative and the Conservationists' Ahemative with respect to the individual factors that enter into traffic flow. While the modified Preferred Alternative raises design speeds and increases opportunities for passing, overall traffic flow is enhanced only marginally when compared to the Conservationists' Alternative, and at the cost of unnecessary environmental destruction. The Conservationists' Alternative represents a good compromise between improving traffic flow and protecting environmentally sensitive areas of the canyon. In the FEIS, UDOT does not compare the Preferred Alternative and the Conservationists ' Alternative with respect to travel time through th e canyon (Table 21). This is unfortunate, since the difference in travel time between the two alternatives is strikingly minimal. In response to letters, UDOT has admitted that the difference is !O minutes or less (FEIS, page 9-9). Proposed design speeds for the highway are generally higher in the modified Preferred Alternative than the Conservationists' Alternative. AASHTO standards detertOine the width and curvature of a road once a design speed is chosen (Amy Steiner, AASHTO, personal communication). With a lower design speed, environmental impacts are lessened. UDOT insists upon a unifortO 50 mile per hour design speed in the Upper Canyon, even though designing for this speed will result in destruction at the summit to a side canyon, the mature trees and the scenic views. UDOT has the alternative, allowed by AASHTO standards, of leaving the design speed at its present 40 to 55 miles per hour. In the upper Middle Canyon, UDOT insists upon a unifortO 35 mile per hour design speed, even though designing for this speed will mean extensive widening and curve cuts , with a retaining wall. The fishery is placed at risk through the possibility of significantly increased sedimentation and turbidity, a risk which has not been adequately analyzed. These impacts and possible impacts are simply not necessary. As they are doing in the lower Middle Canyon, UDOT has the option of maintaining the current design speed, and so designing a less destructive road. With an increase in travel time through the canyon of less than 10 minutes, the environmental impacts to the Middle and Upper Canyons are not necessary. 23 �In their Technical Memoranda, UDOT claims that "the imposition of the lower speed limits onto the sections which can easily accommodate higher speeds would increase travel time and driver irritation" (1987, page 7-13). This is, in fact, UDOT's only defense of the higher design speeds they have chosen, other than their misleading claim that the AASHTO standard for a minor arterial road is 50 miles per hour (FEIS, page 1-8). Since the improvement in travel time is minimal, UDOT' s defense comes down to "driver irritation." UDOT is designing this highway purely for the sake of drivers being able to "go fast," regardless of the minimal savings in travel time, and regardless of the environmental destruction. The modified Preferred Alternative proposes a little over 6.5 miles of new passing lanes in the Upper Canyon, along half of the highway in the Upper Canyon. Below the Beaver Mountain intersection, UDOT is proposing over 3 miles of new passing lanes. UDOT claims that below the Beaver Mountain intersection, in the Upper Canyon, the highway will be widened to 34 ft. , rather than to the originally proposed 40 ft. They label the 34 ft. width a "compromise" for the sake of protecting wetlands (UDOT 1995a). Their claim that the highway in this section will be widened to 34 ft. is misleading, however, since for over 3 miles of this 8 mile section UDOT is proposing passing lanes that will extend the width of the road to 44 ft. UDOT plans to place the 3 miles of passing lanes proposed for below Beaver Mountain in wetlands along Red Banks and below the Tony Grove intersection. Through these wetlands, UDOT's "compromise" widens the highway to 44 ft. , rather than 47 ft. The Conservationists' Alternative proposes 1.6 miles of new passing lanes in the entire Upper Canyon, avoiding impacts to wetlands. With the minimal improvement in travel time achieved with the modified Preferred Alternative, the extensive passing lanes UOOT is proposing are not worth the extra cost and environmental impact. UDOT argues that construction alternatives cannot be judged by travel time alone, but must be evaluated in terms of the wider concept, Level of Service (LOS). As we have argued, however, by UDOT's own estimate the future LOS we achieve with the modified Preferred Alternative is only an incremental improvement over the LOS provided by the Conservationists' Alternative. Considering both travel time and Level of Service, the marginal improvement we achieve with the modified Preferred Alternative does not warrant either the high design speeds or the extensive passing lanes proposed in this alternative. We have asked UDOT to consider using slow vehicle turnouts, along with a single, more modest passing lane, in the section of highway along Red Banks and below the Tony Grove intersection, for the sake of protecting wetlands. UDOT refuses to propose slow vehicle turnouts. In their Technical Memorandum, UDOT admits that turnouts are "safe when properly used," and that, "A series of turnouts at regular 24 �intervals can provide considerable delay reduction" (1987, page 7-30). UDOT acknowledges that slow vehicle turnouts are used in other western states along highways in mountainous terrain. UDOT writes that, "Turnouts are not a substitute for a passing or climbing lane of adequate length." This may be true, in the proper circumstances. Along Red Banks and below the Tony Grove intersection , however, one or two adequately placed slow vehicle turnouts, with a more modest passing lane, would be a good compromise for the sake of protecting wetlands. Considering the minimal gain in travel time and Level of Service that would be achieved by placing passing lanes along half of the highway in the Upper Canyon, there is room here for a genuine compromise for the sake of environmental protection. By "traffic interruptions," we assume that UDOT is referring to such control measures as stop and yield signs, and traffic lights. Neither the modified Preferred Alternative nor the Conservationists' Alternative propose that such measures be used along this highway. UDOT has chosen the modified Preferred Alternative, in part, because, they say, it better improves driver "comfort and convenience.'" It appears that the modified Preferred Alternative is motivated simply by the desire to build a big highway on which drivers can "go fast," without the "irritation" of having to drive at lower speeds in some areas of the canyon, and without the "inconvenience" of having to adjust speeds slightly when negotiating some curves, perhaps having to shift gears. We are arguing that, given the minimal improvements in traffic flow provided by the modified Preferred Alternative, genuine compromise can and should be made for the sake of protecting the scenery, wetlands, the fishery, and wildlife. The Forest Service has designated Logan Canyon a National Scenic Byway. Logan Canyon was once proposed as a National Park. It has received national attention, for example, in the recent Audubon magazine article by Rick Bass (1994). Given the tremendous beauty and recreational value of this canyon, compromise can and should be reached, even if drivers are constrained from rocketing through the canyon to save fewer than 10 minutes, and even though drivers may be constrained to adjust speeds slightly through some curves. Logan Canyon is uniquely splendid, and irreplaceable. The Wasatch-Cache National Forest Management Plan includes several guidelines that call for a compromise in road design in this Forest. One guideline states, "Design speed must be a compromise between the travel speed desired and that which the terrain will permit within the environmental constraints" (page IV-44). This means that road design must also be a compromise between desired travel speed and environmental constraints. Design speeds proposed by UDOT, and highway design in general, throughout the Middle and Upper Canyons, is not a good compromise with environmental constraints. UDOT has designed the highway in accordance with projections of future traffic volumes that appear to be arbitrarily high. There are 25 �several indications that summer traffic volumes are leveling off in Logan Canyon. In defense of its design, UDOT often appeals to AASHTO safety standards. In a sensitive area of the canyon, however, UDOT is using AASHTO standards in an inappropriately strict fashion, counter to allowa."ces made by AASHTO for mountainous regions. UDOT has designed this highway in an arbitrary and capricious fashion, without good justification for decisions to apply AASHTO standards in a stricter rather than in a more flexible manner, for example, at the summit and through the upper Middle Canyon. Design speeds have been chosen by UDOT, it seems, purely for the sake of drivers being able to attain high speeds through the canyon, without a significant improvement in travel time or Level of Service. By accepting UDOT's modified Preferred Alternative, without good justification for the proposed construction, the Forest Service is violating the above guideline in its Management Plan. Another guideline states, "The alignment shall lay light on the land ... Except for necessary stream crossings, riparian areas shall not be disturbed" (page IV-44). The modified Preferred Alternative cannot be said to lay "light" on the land. A 47 ft. wide swath through the mature trees and a side canyon at the summit, with 22 ft. wide "clear zones" on either side, for a total "affected" width of 80 ft. , does not count as laying "light" on the land. Extensive widening and curve cuts through the upper Middle Canyon, with hillside excavations and a 4-8 ft. cut into the mountain along the Dugway for 3/4 of a mile, complete with a retaining wall, will not produce a road that lays "light" on the land. UDOT plans 1,740 ft. of retaining walls that will be anchored in riparian areas along Beaver Creek. Such destruction of riparian areas is not necessary. The Conservationists' Alternative improves traffic flow to an adequate extent, without such unacceptable impacts upon the canyon and river. By accepting UDOT's modified Preferred Alternative when an adequate alternative design is available, the Forest Service is violating the above guideline in its Management Plan concerning unnecessary impacts of a road on the landscape and riparian areas. The modified Preferred Alternative is neither reasonable nor necessary. It is not reasonable, because this highway design has not been adequately justified. It is not necessary, because there is an adequate and less damaging alternative, the Conservationists' Alternative. By violating the two guidelines quoted above, the Forest Service is in violation of the National Forest Management Act. These guidelines are not to be violated "unless some overriding reason to abandon" them is supported by a Forest Service interdisciplinary analysis (page IV-24). Such an interdisciplinary analysis for the purpose of abandoning these guidelines has not been done. Finally, in a response to a comment on its Management Plan, the Forest Service stated, "Improvements to Logan Canyon Highway will be only minor. There is a need to provide safe bridges and some passing lanes. The road will not be raised to a higher 26 �standard than existing" (Forest Service 1985a, p.236). In violating this commitment to the public, the Forest Service is acting in bad faith . We urge the Forest Service to insist that UDOT scale down its proposal to achieve a genuine compromise between the requirements of traffic flow and Level of Service, and environmental constraints. A scaled-down proposal should be submitted before the Forest Service amends the Management Plan and grants the required easement allowing highway construction in Logan Canyon. We also urge the Forest Service to insist that UDOT reconsider the Conservationists' Alternative for the Logan Canyon highway. Literature Cited Bass, R. 1994. Keeping Logan Canyon. Audubon Magazine, Nov.lDec. USDA Forest Service. 1995. (ROD) Record of Decision, U.S. Highway 89. USDA Forest Service. 1985. Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. USDA Forest Service. 1985a. Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan; Final Environmental Impact Statement, Ch.6. United States Dept. of Commerce, Economics and Statistics. Bureau of the Census. 1994. Utah Department of Transportation (UDOD. 1995. (ROD) Record of Decision, U.S. 89 Through Logan Canyon. Utah Department of Transportation. 1995a. U.S. 89 in Logan Canyon (pamphlet describing the Preferred Alternative). Utah Department of Transportation . 1993. (FEIS) Final Environmental Impact Statement, U.S. Highway 89, Logan Canyon. Prepared by CHZM Hill. Utah Department of Transportation. 1987. Technical Memoranda. Prepared by CHZM Hill. 27 �Service, and environmental constraints. A scaled-down proposal should be submitted before the Forest Service amends the Management Plan and grants the required easement aUowing highway construction in Logan Canyon. We also urge the Forest Service to insist that UDOT reconsider the Conservationists' Alternative for the Logan Canyon highway. Literature Cited Bass, R. 1994. Keeping Logan Canyon. Audubon Magazine, Nov.lDec. USDA Forest Service. 1995. (ROD) Record of Decision, U.S. Highway 89. USDA Forest Service. 1985. Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan . USDA Forest Service. 1985a. Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan; Final Environmental Impact Statement, Ch.6. United States Dept. of Commerce, Economics and Statistics. Bureau of the Census. 1994. Utah Department of Transportation (UD01). 1995. Through Logan Canyon. (RO~) Record of Decision, U.S. 89 Utah Department of Transportation. 1995a. U.S. 89 in Logan Canyon (pamphlet describing the Preferred Alternative). Utah Department of Transportation. 1993. (FEIS) Final Environmental Impact Statement, U.S. Highway 89, Logan Canyon. Prepared by CH2M HiU. Utah Department of Transportation. 1987. Technical Memoranda. CH2M Hill. 4. WILD AND SCENIC RIVER PLANNING Section 5(d) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (Pub. L. No. 90-542, 16 U.S.C., 127 1 !:UJ;g.) requires all federal agencies to consider potential national wild, scenic, and recreational river areas in all planning for the use and development of water and related land resources. The planning responsibility imposed by 5(d) plainly requires the Forest Service to assess the values of potential Wild and Scenic Rivers on National Forest lands during the preparation of land and resource management plans pursuant 28 �to the National Forest Management Act (16 U.S.C., 1600 ~.). Section 1924 of the Forest Management Act recognizes the Forest Service's responsibility in this regard: "Consideration of potential wild and scenic rivers is an inherent part of the ongoing land and resource management planning process." According to Chapter 8 of the Forest Service Land and Resource Management Planning Handbook, rivers are identified for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System by several means, including the land management planning process. The Forest Service has elected to conduct wild and scenic river inventories as a part of its Forest Management Plan revision process. The Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan is currently being revised. Forest Service precedent is to complete the eligibility stage of the wild and scenic river inventory in a separate document prior to completion of the Management Plan revision. The suitability stage of the inventory is completed and included in the Environmental Impact Statement for the Management Plan revision. In November of 1993, the Wasatch-Cache Forest issued an inventory document identifying eligible wild and scenic rivers on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. This Inventory identified the Stillwater Fork of the Bear River as being eligible for stream wild and scenic river status. Appellants are concerned that, initially, only on the entire Wasatch-Cache National Forest, the Stillwater Fork of the Bear River, was .found to eligible for interim protection until a suitability study was performed. Appellants were involved with studying the Logan River and Beaver Creek, using the eligibility requirements from the Land and Resource Management Planning Handbook. Even though over 50 pages of information was provided to the Inventory Team (Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon, 1993), no reference was made to this material in the Inventory except a footnote. = Appellants found that certain segments of the Logan River might possess the free-flowing characteristics and outstandingly remarkable qualities for eligibility if the evaluation was corrected to use current evaluation techniques. These techniques were detailed in two letters to the Forest Supervisor (J. Logan, in a 3 page, single-spaced letter to Ms. Susan Giannettino, Forest Supervisor, 18 January 1994; also D. Parkin, in a 23 page, single-spaced letter to Ms. Susan Giannettino, 18 February 1994). These letters concurred in the opinion that the forest planners used an honest and systematic approach in preparing the Inventory. However, the main thrust of these letters was that there were "significant flaws in both the methodology and interpretation of policy guidelines" (Parkin, 1994). In response, the Wasatch-Cache Forest issued a supplemental report entitled LMP Revision Planning Record Wild and Scenic Rivers Eligibility Evaluation. This 29 �• Supplement amended portions of the November 1993 inventory. Departing from planning criteria set forth in the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (p.L. 90-542, 81 Stat. 906, as amended: 16 U.S.C. 1271 (Note), 1271-1287), the USDA-USDI Guidelines for implementing the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (USDA-USDI 1982), Forest Service Manual 1924, and Forest Service Land and Resource Management Planning Handbook (Ch. 8), the Wasatch-Cache Forest included an amendment to Appendix D which identified river segments that were "Likely to be Outstandingly Remarkable." The Forest identification team denoted with an "M" rivers that might possess outstandingly remarkable values and that require subsequent study. In this Supplement, the Logan River was resegmented into two segments, Lower Twin Bridge to Beaver Creek and Beaver Creek to its source. The segment from Lower Twin Bridge to Beaver Creek was given five out of nine "might possess outstandingly remarkable values." This segment lies within the Utah Department of Transportation' s (UDOT) Highway 89 expansion project. This segment was identified for further study due to outstanding geologic and hydrologic, scenic, general recreational, fishery and ecological values. Eighty-two rivers andlor river segments were identified in the Supplement's reevaluation, and the only river segment that comes close in score to the Logan River segment from Lower Twin Bridge to Beaver Creek is the East Fork of the Smith's Fork, which scored only three "might possess outstandingly remarkable values" (Supplement 1994). Although no precedent has been set for rivers that "might possess outstandingly remarkable values," the Forest Service Land and Resource Management Planning Handbook provides interim protection guidelines for river segments examined in this Supplement. According to section 8.12 of this Handbook: "Interim Managment of Study Rivers. Management prescriptions for river corridors identified in the National River Inventory, or otherwise identified for study [emphasis added] should provide protection in the following ways: 1. To the extent the Forest Service is authorized under Jaw to control stream impoundments and diversions, the free-flowing characteristics of the identified river cannot be modified. 2. Outstandingly remarkable values of the identified river area must be protected and, to the extent practicable, enhanced. 3. Management and development of the identified river and its corridor cannot be modified to the degree that eligibility or classification would be affected (i.e. classification cannot be changed from wild to scenic, or scenic to recreational). 30 �• Specific management guidelines for each of the river classifications can be found in the revised USDA-USDI Guidelines for Eligibility, Classification, and Management of River Areas, and in the additional standards for study river assessment and management in section 8.2 of this chapter. These management guidelines should be followed, to the extent of Forest Service authority, for all identified study rivers. The protection requirements specified above must be documented in the forest plan prescriptions and continued until a decision is made as to the future use of the river and adjacent lands." The segment of the Logan River from Lower Twin Bridge to Beaver Creek has been "otherwise identified for study" by the Forest Service in its Supplement. It therefore qualifies for interim protection under the Management Planning Handbook. L Tbe Forest Service's Record of Decision violates Interim Protection Requirements to Maintain tbe Free-Flowing Nature of tbe Eligible Logan River. According to section 8.21(b) of the Forest Service Management Planning Handbook, free-flowing is defined as: "existing or flowing in a natural condition without impoundment, diversion, straightening. rip-rapping. or other minor structures at the time any river is proposed for inclusion in the Wild and Scenic Rivers System does not automatically disqualify it for designation, but future construction of such structures is not allowed" (emphasis added). The FEIS indicates that cement retaining walls will be used in riparian areas at Beaver Creek, and that riprap may be required wherever the river is adjacent to highway expansion. These modifications are in direct conflict with the interim protection mandated by the Management Planning Handbook. U. Tbe Record of Decision Violates tbe Forest Service's Interim Protection Requirements to Maintain tbe Outstandingly Remarkable Values of tbe Logan River. A. One of the values identified for the Logan River is its outstandingly remarkable fishery . According to the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, the Logan River fishery is a Class I and II fishery that is ranked as being in the top 5% of all stream fisheries in the state. This fishery is also considered by the Utah Division of Water Rights to be one of four major fisheries in the state (Greg Mladenka, Utah Division of Water Rights, personal communication). According to the FEIS, between 4.4 and 7.6% of brown and cutthroat trout will be lost in the Middle and Upper Canyons through streambank vegetation removal. Where stream bank vegetation is 31 �• removed, the FEIS estimates a 40 to 70% loss of brown and cutthroat trout. As discussed in the fishery impacts section of this appeal, however, fish mortality will likely be greater than this. UDOT has not adequately addressed sediment-related impacts on this fishery. It is obvious that UDOT's construction project will decrease the quality of this outstanding fishery. The Forest Service Management Planning Handbook clearly mandates maintenance, if not improvement of, all outstandingly remarkable values. Unless, subsequent to this appeal, the Wasatch-Cache Forest finds the Logan River ineligible, unsuitable, or Congress formally elects not to designate the Logan River a wild and scenic river, the Forest Service has a statutory requirement to ensure that the outstandingly remarkable fishery value of the Logan River is maintained in its existing state. B. Another value identified for the Logan River is its outstandingly remarkable ecological value. The FEIS states, "The single most important wildlife habitat type within the project area is woody riparian habitat consisting of forested and scrub/shrub wetlands and riparian communities that occur along the river and streams." According to the Environmental Protection Agency, as much as 80% of all wildife species are dependant upon riparian zones for at least a portion of their life cycles. Riparian zones thus fulfill an important function in both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. The FEIS estimates that highway construction will require the removal of 3.5 acres, which equals 1.8 miles, of riparian habitat. An additional 11.2 acres of associated wetlands will be impacted. Riparian zones will be destroyed through canopy removal, the addition of fill, and rip rap or retaining walls placed throughout the eligible wild and scenic Logan River segment. This expected 1.8 miles of riparian habitat removal represents roughly 20% of the eligible wild and scenic section of the Logan River. The FEIS summarizes these impacts as follows: "The permanent loss of riparian and wetland habitat has one of the greatest impacts on wildlife. Most of the habitat loss that occurs as a result of ongoing highway maintenance activities or that would result from construction of one of the aIternatives will be permanent. Roadway surfaces along with retaining walls, parking areas, flattened curves, new alignments, etc., all permanently eliminate wildlife habitat." The FEIS further estimates that 149.3 acres of upland habitat will be impacted. This could lead to "habitat fagmentation [that] can be a significant problem for songbirds, amphibians, or small mammals." In summary, with its decision to permit proposed highway construction, the 32 �Forest Service is not managing identified outstandingly remarkable ecological values of the Logan River in the interim period as required by the Management Planning Handbook and the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, pending suitability studies or Congressional decision. C. The Logan River was also identified as requiring further study for its outstandingly remarkable scenic values. The FEIS estimates that construction will destroy 38 % and 9 % of the most visually sensitive areas within the eligible wild and scenic river segment, and 58% and 71 % of the moderately visually sensitive areas. UDOT's modified Preferred Alternative will not comply with the Visual Quality Objectives established in the Wasatch-Cache Forest Management Plan. If construction proceeds as planned, the Logan River will no longer possess the outstandingly remarkable scenic values needed to qualify for Wild and Scenic status. The "Dugway" will be excavated up to 8 ft. into the mountain, creating a huge road cut and the need for at least one planned retaining wall. Up canyon from the Dugway, the curve will be flattened and realignment will start for the replacement of the Upper Twin Bridge, producing another large road cut. Other road cuts will be made just below the Temple Fork intersection. The 8 miles of the Upper Canyon (from mp 391.6 to the Beaver Mountain intersection) will be widened to 34 ft., and areas with passing lanes, up to 3 miles in length, will be widened to 44 ft. These construction segments will produce large amounts of cut and fill and a large road base, further degrading the scenic value. Although the supplemental study indicated that the eligible Logan River segment was considered outstandingly scenic because it "Contain[s) a National Scenic Byway where the river conidor contributes significantly to the road's designation," the Forest Service is not managing the segment of the Logan River in the interim period to maintain its existing outstandingly remarkable scenic value. DL Tbe Record of Decision Violates tbe Forest Service's Interim Protection Requirements to Protect the Current Classification Status of the Eligible Logan River. In the Supplement to the Inventory released by the Wasatch-Cache Forest, no classification scheme was recommended for either stretch of the Logan River. It is the contention of the Utah Rivers Conservation Council, appellants, that the Logan River should be classified as a SCENIC river under the Wild and Scenic River System. According to the WiJd and Scenic Rivers Act, classification defmitions are as follows: 33 �• "Scenic river areas--Those rivers or sections of rivers that are free of . impoundments, with shorelines or watersheds still largely primitive and shorelines largely undeveloped, but accessible in places by roads. Recreational river areas--Those rivers or sections of rivers that are readily accessible by road or railroad, that may have some development along their shorelines, and that may have undergone some impoundment or diversion in the past." The USDA-USDI NWSRS Final Revised Guidelines for Eligibility, CFR 39458, discusses interpretation of development by stating: "Existing low dams , diversion works, rip-rap. and other minor structures will not bar recreational classification, provided the watetway remains generally natural and riverine in appearance." Appellants are concerned that the Logan River segment from Lower Twin Bridge to Beaver Creek, which "might possess outstandingly remarkable values" as indicated in the Supplement, will be exposed to inappropriate levels of disturbance by UDOT's modified Preferred Alternative highway proposal. This Logan River segment is eligible for Wild and Scenic status, and, therefore, until an adequate evaluation is complete, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act mandates no degradation of values. UDOT's Record of Decision states, "The FEIS recognizes that some screening vegetation along the river may be disturbed, but again this is estimated in the EIS to be minor and mostly temporary in nature ... the road reconstruction project will not affect the potential eligibility or classification of the Logan River" (page 38). "The FEIS also evaluated the effects of the alternatives on the resources and characteristics affecting the scenic, historic, recreation, wildlife and fish, cultural and other values associated with the river and river corridor ... there will be either no or only minor effects from the Preferred Alternative on these values" (page 37). Appellants beHeve, however, that there are numerous construction components in the Preferred Alternative that will result in significant depreciation of wild and scenic values and will in fact jeopardize the potential classification of the Logan River and Beaver Creek. Some of these construction components are described above. Appellants are concerned that UDOT's "minor effects" will be enough to change the existing classification from scenic to recreational, or from recreational to ineligibility. This is explicitly contrary to requirements specified in the Forest Service Management Planning Handbook and in the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. IV_ The Forest Service's Record of Decision Violates The National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and Forest Service Administrative Direction for Compliance with that Act. 34 �With its Record of Decision, the Forest Service is in general failing to grant interim protection to the Logan River segment that has been found eligible for Wild and Scenic River status. The Forest Service is therefore in violation of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and its Forest Service Land and Resource Management Planning Handbook, Chapter 8. Appellants are also concerned that the planning team did not assess all resource values that would qualify the Logan River for inclusion as an eligible Wild and Scenic River. Most notably, there is ample evidence to indicate that the Logan River possesses outstandingly remarkable water oriented recreation, botanical, and wildlife values (CPLC, 1993). Appellants are concerned that the Supplement does not evaluate significant tributaries of the Logan River, most notably Beaver Creek. Study and protection of tributary streams is an important component of the wild and scenic planning process because such streams and creeks are integral components of river systems. The goals of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act can best be achieved through preservation and recognition of river systems as integral wholes, with full recognition of the contribution of tributary steams. Also, management of such tributaries as Wild and Scenic Rivers will enhance the Forest Service's ability to maintain and enhance downstream riverine values. V. Tbe Forest Service Failed to Adequately Involve tbe Concerned Public in tbe Inventory Process. Although Logan Canyon is of high local and national interest, the original Inventory received a very limited distribution (Bass 1994). Even so, of those interested parties who responded, the overwhelming majority were critical of the Inventory. Of those who responded, none were notified of the subsequent reevaluation or the changes incorporated in the Table of Appendix D in the 1994 Supplement. The Forest Service has not provided sufficient documentation required for the concerned public to evaluate the criteria used to draw conclusions in the original Inventory. The Inventory refers to "detailed field surveys' (1993, pages A-19). In the Supplement we find the statement, "documentalion used to facilitate judging the merits of further study have been incorporated in this supplement...· (pages 1-10). Yet when appellants requested access to this "documentation," all that was forthcoming were copies of maps with largely unintelligible notations. Apparently, there exists no clear documentation that can be reviewed by the concerned pUblic. It is irresponsible for the Forest Service to agree to any depreciation of wild and scenic values without full involvement of the concerned public. 35 �The Utah Rivers Conservation Council has recommended that the entire Utah portion of the Logan River conidor be designated as a Scenic river under the NWSRS. This recommendation was made through A Citizen's Proposal to Protect the Wild Rivers of Utah, published by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. The WasatchCache Forest has not responded to this recommendation, other than by violating its (5d) Wild and Scenic River Act planning requirements through issuing its Record of Decision. Literature Cited Bass, R. 1994. Keeping Logan Canyon. Audubon Magazine, Nov.lDec. Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon. 1993. Letter of October 7, 1993, with numerous attachments containing information about Logan River, Logan Canyon and Beaver Creek. Logan, J. 1994. Letter of January 18 to Susan Giannettino, Forest Supervisor, Wasatch-Cache National Forest. Parkin, D. 1994. Letter of February 18 to Susan Giannettino, Forest Supervisor, Wasatch-Cache National Forest. USDA Forest Service. 1995. (ROD) Record of Decision, U.S. Highway 89. USDA Forest Service. 1994. Supplement to Inventory of Rivers on the WasatchCache National Forest Eligible for Inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. Wasatch-Cache National Forest. Salt Lake City, UT. USDA Forest Service. 1993. Inventory of Rivers on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Eligible for Inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. Wasatch-Cache National Forest. Salt Lake City, UT. USDA Forest Service. 1985. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the WasatchCache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Wasatch-Cache National Forest. Salt Lake City, UT. Utah Department of Transportation (UDOn. 1995. (ROD) Record of Decision, U.S. 89 Through Logan Canyon. Utah Rivers Conservation Council. A Citizen's Proposal to Protect the Wild Rivers of Utah, published by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. 36 �S. FlSHERY IMPACTS The Utah Department of Transportation and the Forest Service are accepting an analysis of fishery impacts that is inadequate. There is no scientific justification whatsoever for claims in UDOT's FEIS that trout populations will be reduced 4 to 8%, and that the effects of increased sedimentation will be "relatively minor and short term." From the FEIS and supporting documentation, we have no idea what impact UDOT's Preferred Alternative will have upon fish populations in Logan River. The Forest Service is also in violation of its Management Plan in not obtaining adequate analyses of required habitat indices. According to a guideline in the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Management Plan, the Forest Service must monitor BCI and HCI indices for Logan River to ensure the continuing quality of fish habitat. As amended in the Forest Service' s Record of Decision (1995), this guideline states,"ln all streams maintain the existing HCI and BCI where they exceed the minimum of 42 and 75 respectively. Allow decreases not exceeding 5% of existing condition ... " (page IV-3(0). (These indices are described in Appendix 0 of the Plan.) No BCI analysis has been done by the Forest Service or by UDOT, predicting the effect of UDOT's construction upon this index for Logan River. No macroinvertibrate baseline data is reported for Logan River. An HCI analysis is briefly reported in the FEIS, but it is, as we shall show, inadequate. By failing to obtain adequate analyses of BCI and HCI habitat indices, and by failing to commit to proper monitoring of these indices, the Forest Service is in violation of its Management Plan. The Forest Service is therefore in violation of the National Forest Management Act. The Logan River has been designated a Class I and Class II waterway on the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources' Unique Streams List. As such, the fishery in Logan River is among the top 5% of stream fisheries in the state of Utah. This fishery is considered by the Utah Division of Water Rights to be one of four major fisheries in the state (Greg Mladenka, Division of Water Rights, personal communication). The Logan River supports naturally-reproducing populations of brown and cutthroat trout, and mountain whitefish. Logan River riparian habitat is considered among the "best preserved in the state" (FEIS, page 9-59). Due to the quality of its fishery, the quality of the fishing experience in relatively pristine conditions, and accessibility, the Logan River is a favorite with anglers throughout northern Utah. Anglers who fish the Logan bring $4 million annually into the local economy (estimate for 1990, UDOT 1987, Table 7, page 18). UDOT's analysis of fish loss due to construction begins with an estimate of the length of stream bank that will be impacted by the removal of vegetation. From studies by the Division of Wildlife Resources, we have available the number of fish that are located along each foot of stream bank. This value is multiplied by the 35 ., ~ e- r ~ ~".;it ( Ci rL. c f (' .. -r\"r.N~1;., ~ <.r<.-j �number of feet of stream bank that will be impacted. We now have the number of fish that are located along the length of impacted stream bank. This number is multiplied by 40% and by 70% to obtain a range of numbers of fish that will be lost in the impacted areas. The 40% and 70 % are fish mortality rates that have been borrowed from a Utah Division of Wildlife Resources study done in 1973 on the effects of the removal of stream bank vegetation. The numbers of fish lost in the impacted areas are divided by the total number of fish in the river, to give us a range of percentages of fish lost through construction. The FEIS concludes that in the Middle Canyon, 4.4 to 7.6% of brown trout will be lost, and the same percentages of cutthroat trout will be lost. In the Upper Canyon, again 4.4 to 7.6 % of each population will be lost (FEIS, Table 4.8, pages 4-43 through 4-45). The Forest Service has asked UDOT for a more extensive analysis. In a letter to UDOT, Regional Forester J .S. Tilder noted that the analysis UDOT provides in the DEIS considers only the impact of vegetation removal, ignoring the effects on the fishery of increased sedimentation due to construction (FEIS, page 9-49). He recommended that UDOT contact Forest Service fisheries biologists for help with quantitatively estimating effects of sedimentation. He supplied names and phone numbers. (Tixier's letter is attached at the end of this section of our appeal.) The quantitative analysis of fish loss in the FEIS is identical in method to that in the DEIS, without a quantitative analysis of sedimentation. In its response to Tixier, UDOT writes that the effects of increased sedimentation are "difficult to predict" (FEIS, pages 9-15,9- 16). In an internal memo, (included at the end of this section), Forest Service fisheries biologist Jill Dufour (1989) expressed her concern that UDOT is underestimating the effects of construction upon fish by neglecting turbidity in its quantitative analysis. The discussion of fishery iropacts in the FEIS is simplistic because UDOT refuses to quantitatively predict the increase in sedimentation and turbidity due to construction. Beyond saying that such an analysis is "difficult," UDOT claims that such an analysis "would greatly oversimplify and probably overestimate sediment related effects." They add that a quantitative analysis would not properly account for UDOT's use of "best management practices" during construction (FEIS, page 4-49). Several fisheries biologists have informed us that, in fact, the models that are used to predict sediment-related effects allow biologists to factor into their analysis the use of practices that limit the sediments entering a river. "Best management practices" are accounted for in the models used by the Forest Service and others. Rather than "overestimating" iropacts, as UDOT claims, such models allow biologists to realistically evaluate the impacts of the disturbance of riparian habitat. By refusing to do a quantitative analysis of sedimentation and turbidity, UDOT is building a "best case" scenario geared, it seems, to make the effects of their construction proposal 36 �• appear palatable--only a 4 to 8% loss of fish . In reality, considering sediment-related effects, the loss will likely be greater than this. In its recent Record of Decision, the Forest Service states categorically that "the environmental effects were adequately disclosed" in UOOT's FEIS (1995, page 2). In saying this, the Forest Service is ignoring the fact that UDOT has refused to provide a quantitative analysis of sedimentation, even after being publicly asked to do so by Regional Forester Tixier. In his request, Tixier cited the "significan ce" of the Logan River fishery. The Forest Service is also ignoring Jill Dufour' s memo, available in th e files in the Regional office, expressing her professional opinion that UDOT is underestimating the effects of increased turbidity by ignoring turbidity in its quantitative analysis. The Forest Service does not indicate why they have ignored the reservations expressed by these Forest Service personnel. For this reason, the Forest Service' s decision to accept UDOT's FEIS appears arbitrary and capricious. It appears to rest upon political expediency rather than good science. UDOT provides a qualitative, and very brief, discussion of sedimentation and turbidity. They write that, "The potential increase in turbidity and possibly siltation will be expected to have a relatively minor and short-term impact on water quality, benthic invertebrates, and fish populations" (FEIS, page 4-48). They support this claim by saying that "only" 10% of Logan River's banks will be impacted through construction, that not all of the affected stream banks will be impacted at the same time, and that measures will be used to control sediments entering the river during and after construction. For example, ground cover will be reestablished along stream banks, they claim, and construction will be limited to the drier months of the year "to the extent practicable." On the other hand, UDOT admits that mature riparian vegetation, with overhanging cover for fish, "will take considerably longer" to reestablish, up to 10 to 40 years (FEIS, pages 4-31 and 4-48). Growth of new cottonwoods and other deciduous trees, "could require 30 to 50 years or might never occur again" (page 43 1) . Since mature riparian plant communities take "considerably longer" to reestablish, the loss of these communities, especially on steep slopes, will likely have some long term impact on the fishery with respect to erosion control. In an undated report, "Effects of Road Building on the Logan River," the late professor of fisheries biology, William Helm, explains that in the drier months runoff into a river during construction can be especially damaging to a fishery. In riparian areas that have had vegetation removed, runoff from summer slonns canies a large load of sediment that, in the lowered flow of the river, is not canied downstream . In the drier mon ths , sediment tends to be deposited in the areas under construction or just downstream. If those areas are critical to fish, providing spawning or feeding grounds, 37 �the effects of increased sedimentation and turbidity can be severe. Helm writes that increased sedimentation can be expected to kill 95-100% of fish eggs. Sediments fill the spaces between gravel and stones, "greatly decreasing the supply of food for trout." Juvenile cutthroat trout are found in Logan River throughout the summer season, and are highly susceptible to sediments clogging their gills. UDOT claims that it will limit construction to the drier months of the year, but, according to Helm, this is actually "the worst possible time" to add sediment to rivers. Helm's assessment has been confirmed by a fisheries biologist with the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (personal communication). UDOT has not established its claim that increased sedimentation and turbidity due to construction will have a "relatively minor and short-term impact." As Helm argues, sediment entering a river during the drier months is especially damaging to a fishery, and UDOT has admitted that mature riparian plant communities take from 10 to 40 years to reestablish. Furthermore, UDOT is planning extensive construction just beyond the riparian zone. Six curve cuts are planned along the highway through the Middle Canyon. UDOT is planning to widen the road in the Middle and Upper Canyons, just beyond, and in some places within, the riparian zone. At the Dugway, UDOT is planning to carve 4 to 8 feet into the rock and dirt wall on the mountain side of the highway, for a distance of about 3/4 of a mile. Upstream, Temple Fork intersection is to be widened, with a turning lane installed. Within the narrow riparian area between the road and the river, a retaining wall has been proposed to help stabilize the steep slope. Considering the extent of planned construction along Logan River, UDOT's claim that increased sedimentation and turbidity will have a "relatively minor and short-term impact" is unbelievable. With the loss of 10% of the riparian vegetation, and with extensive road construction in and just beyond the riparian zone, sediment-related effects will likely be major and long term. In fact, at one point in the FEIS, UDOT contradicts its conclusion by admitting that effects of increased sedimentation will be "short- and long-term" (page 4-2). A quantitative discussion of sediment-related effects would help us detennine how serious these effects will be on the fishery. Let us return to UDOT's quantitative analysis of fish mortality. It is simplistic in that it ignores effects of increased sedimentation and turbidity due to construction. It is simplistic, as well, in that it assumes that every length of stream bank is equivalent, with respect to fish spawning and feeding, to every other length of stream bank. If extensive construction takes place adjacent to sections of the river that are of critical importance to trout spawning and feeding, the impacts could exceed the estimated 4 to 8 % mortality. In a letter to CH2M Hill, preparers of the FEIS, Professor Helm (1987) reported that the river just downstream of Lower Twin Bridge in the Middle Canyon is an 38 �important spawning area for brown trout. This area features good pools and substrate, moderate water velocities and good overhanging cover. Helm discovered a relatively high number of brown trout "redds" or nests in this area, 9 redds in a . 15 mile stretch, as compared to 2 redds per mile in the river below this point. Two biologists have looked at this section of the river with us and have confinned that this area may be important for trout spawning. The extensive construction planned along the Dugway will be just above and upstream of Lower Twin Bridge. Sediments in runoff from this construction site will likely enter the river just upstream of the spawning area discovered by Helm, the sediments possibly killing eggs, damaging food production, and clogging the gills of juveniles. This would lead to a greater loss to the fishery than UDOT predicts. Jill Dufour of the Forest Service worries about the impacts construction at the Temple Fork intersection will have on juvenile cutthroat trout, and upon any spawning cutthroat trout, below the intersection. Juvenile cutthroat are found in Logan River throughout the summer, and Dufour has emphasized to us that these juveniles are highly susceptible to clogged gills from sediments (personal communication). Another fisheries biologist, Thomas Pettengill of the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, has told us that, in his opinion, the gradient of the river at the Temple Fork intersection is steep enough that sediments from construction here will likely be carried further downstream, settling out where the gradient is less steep and the river slows, at and below Lower Twin Bridge (personal communication). Sediments from construction at the Temple Fork intersec tion would co mbine with sediments from construction at the Dugway, all dumping into critical brown trout spawning and feeding areas in the lower Middle Canyon. Helm ' s data on brown trout spawning is from 1987. We do not have recent data on trout spawning in the Logan River. We also do not have recent data on fish habitat. We need a better indication of the number and distribution of good quality pools in the river, and the amount and distribution of good substrates for spawning. If good quality pools and good substrates are rare in the Logan River, as has been reported, then extensive construction adjacent to these resources could have an impact on the fishery that is disproportionate to the length of stream bank affected. The single study that UDOT relies upon for habitat information was done by Adams in 1966 (FEIS, Table 3-8, page 3-30). This study is almost 30 years old! In her memo within the Forest Service, Jill Dufour (1989) wrote concerning this study, "I question whether data from 1966 is applicable to conditions in the Logan River today." In spite of Dufour's memo, neither UDOT nor the Forest Service have provided us with any documentation showing that the habitat data Adams gathered in 1966 is relevant today. Let us return to UOOT's quantitative analysis of fish mortality. UOOT relies 39 �heavily upon a study done in 1973 by the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. It is from this study that UDOT gets the trout mortality rates of 40 to 70%. This study has not been published. A brief description of methods and results are included within an internal UDOT memo of 1974. This study is twenty-two years old! A copy of the table reporting the data from this study has been included at the end of this section . The blanks or dashes in the table mean, it seems, that no effort was made to catch fish at that station during that "electrofishing effort." Apparently, the stations were sampled unevenly. The Right Hand Fork Station was sampled only once, while the Brachiopod Station was sampled four times. This renders suspect any range of trout reduction values generated in this study, since sampling effort varies considerably from station to station. From the data presented, we cannot conclude, with the authors of this study, that riparian habitat loss will result in a 40 to 70% reduction in numbers of brown and cutthroat trout. At the stations sampled, cutthroat and brown trout numbers were actually reduced by 47 to 80%. At the Brachiopod station, the reported numbers of cutthroat are lOin the unaltered site and 2 in the altered site, a difference of 8 fish, which is an 80% reduction in the number of fish in the altered site. No station had a reduction lower than 47 %. The average percent reduction in brown and cutthroat trout, considered together, is 65 %. Using a paired-data statistical technique for estimating the reduction of trout in the population, with a=.05, we have obtained a range of 58 to 73%. We know of no statistical technique that will provide an estimate for the population of 40 to 70%, given this data with an average reduction of 65%. Unfortunately, the authors of this study do not tell us how they obtained their estimate. Our inquiries to the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, and to CH2M Hill, have produced no information on who did this study or how they obtained their estimate. Another difficulty with this 1973 study is that it does not accurately indicate effects of increased sedimentation and turbidity due to construction. UDOT argues that by providing an estimate of trout reduction in areas that have been altered by the removal of riparian vegetation during construction, this study automatically accounts for sediment-related effects on fish . UDOT bases its refusal to do a separate quantitative analysis of sediment-related effects, in part, on their claim that this study already indicates such effects. This study cannot, however, indicate effects of increased sedimentation and turbidity during and just after construction. It was conducted in the Lower Canyon, where the highway was widened and straightened in 1968. This study was conducted five years later, in 1973. It cannot, then, indicate effects of increased sedimentation and turbidity during and just after the removal of riparian vegetation. when these effects are greatest. 40 �• The most serious problem with this 1973 study, however, is that it is the wrong kind of srudy for the use UDOT makes of it. This srudy is simply a comparison of fish numbers at each sampling station. The number of fish is determined along a length of stream bank with narural vegetation and along an adjacent length of stream bank that has had the vegetation removed. The results are, not surprisingly, that fish prefer to spend time in those areas with natural vegetation. This is actually a preference study. investigating where fish prefer to spend time when there is a choice between adjacent lengths of stream bank. This srudy does not address the question of how many fish will actually be lost to the fishery with the loss of riparian vegetation to road construction. The range of values obtained in this study is not an indication of trout mortality, but rather an indication of where fish prefer to spend time between adjacent lengths of stream bank. The kind of srudy we need to estimate actual loss of fish is a study that measures fish densities along a river prior to and after extensive loss of riparian vegetation to construction. We require an actual alteration study. There is no good reason to base an assessment of fish mortality in' Logan River exclusively on a study that is not designed to answer questions about acrual fish loss. Basing a quantitative analysis of fish mortality upon this 1973 srudy is not "the best we can do." Fisheries biologists have informed us that in the fisheries literature it is common to fmd studies that measure actual fish losses in rivers that have been altered through road construction. Such alteration studies have been done in Montana and in Colorado. We have learned that these srudies can easily be located by the Forest Service through an Internet service. No such srudies are cited by UDOT in its FEIS or in supporting documentation, yet such srudies are relevant. Also, it would be helpful to have a quantitative analysis of the sediment-related effects of construction in the Logan River. It would be helpful to have in hand a recent srudy of fish habitat, with an indication of the use of the habitat by fish, so that we know where cutthroat and brown trout are spawning and feeding in relation to planned construction. By relying exclusively upon this 1973 UDWR srudy in its quantitative analysis, UDOT has provided a simplistic and inaccurate prediction of fish loss. Let us sum up our concerns with UDOT's discussion of fish mortality. UDOT's quantitative analysis incorporates mortality values that are taken from a study that is 22 years old, and is not designed for the use UDOT makes of it. This srudy does not accurately indicate effects of increased sedimentation and turbidity. Reported values of trout reduction are apparently incorrect, and so UDOT's analysis based upon these values appears to be inaccurate. UDOT fails to consider relevant studies of the actual impacts of road construction upon fisheries. UDOT has refused to predict the effects of increased sedimentation and turbidity using models that are widely used for this purpose, even after being publicly asked to do so by the Forest Service, and even after the Forest Service offered to provide help in generating the predictions. UDOT' s claim that sediment-related effects will be "minor and short-term" is contradicted by the fact 41 �that UDOT is planning extensive construction in and just beyond the riparian zone, and by the fact that mature riparian plant communities may take up to 40 years to reestablish, with a longer time for trees. Professor Helm has found that the drier season, when UOOT plans to do most of the construction, is actually the "worst possible time" to add sediment to a river. Those areas of the river that are adjacent to planned major construction may be of vital importance to the fish . Professor Helm has documented an important brown trout spawning area just below Lower Twin Bridge. UDOT is relying upon a study of fish habitat that is almost 30 years old, and, according to one fisheries biologist, is of doubtful relevance today. We do not have current information on fish habitat or fish spawning in Logan River. UDOT will respond that our concerns are no longer as valid as they might have been, since, in its Record of Decision, UDOT has modified the Preferred Alternative so that it is less environmentally destructive. Unfortunately, UDOT is still planning extensive road widening and curve cuts adjacent to, and just upstream of those sections of the river that are believed to be of vital importance to the fishery, especially through the Middle Canyon. The general problem with UDOT's assessment of fishery impacts is that, even with the proposed modifications to the Preferred Alternative, there are too many unknowns, such as sediment-related effects, that are not adequately addressed in this FEIS and supporting documentation. There is still too much potential for unacceptable destruction of this fishery . As it now stands, there is no scientific justification whatsoever for the prediction UDOT has provided of a 4 to 8 % loss of trout. In its Record of Decision (1995), the Forest Service claims that "the environmental effects were adequately disclosed" in the FEIS. Considering fish mortality, this claim is false. The Forest Service is accepting an analysis of losses to this fishery that is scientifically unjustified. A guideline in the Management Plan calls for monitoring the BCI and HCI habitat indices for Logan River. As amended by the Forest Service in its Record of Decision (ROD), this guideline states, "In all streams maintain the existing HCI and BCI where they exceed the minimum of 42 and 75 respectively. Allow decreases not exceeding 5% of existing condition where this decrease is temporary and will not reduce the HCI or BCI below the established minimums" (page IV-3(0). There has been no analysis of the effect of the Preferred Alternative upon the BCI index. No macroinvertibrate baseline data is reported for Logan River. We have no idea what the present BCI value is, so we can have no idea what would constitute a "temporary" 5% decrease in BCI value. The Forest Service's ROD includes no mention of monitoring the components of BCI either before or during construction. By ignoring analysis and monitoring of BCI, the Forest Service is in violation of this guideline in its Management Plan. Guidelines are to be "applied in all situations unless some 42 �• overriding reason to abandon" them is supported by a Forest Service interdisciplinary analysis (page IV -24). Such an analysis for the sake of abandoning guidelines has not been done. On the other hand, the FEIS briefly reports an analysis of the effect of the modified Preferred Alternative upon the HCI index for Logan River (pages 4-2 and 43). This analysis is inadequate. UDOT claims that the predicted decrease in the value of HCI is due to "removal of vegetation and short- and long-term sedimentation" (page 4-2). In fact, the calculated decrease in HCI reflects only an estimation of the amount of riparian vegetation that will be removed (Lynn Foster, CH2M Hill, personal communication). Stream environment is the only component of this index which has been recently estimated to take into account the impact of road construction. Values for the other components were borrowed from the Adams 1966 habitat study. Again there is absolutely no indication of the relevance of this 1966 study to conditions in the river today. There has been no estimation of the effect of construction upon the quality of substrate in the river, and no estimation of the effect upon the number and quality of pools. These components of HCl may be affected by increased sedimentation during and after construction (Forest Service, personal communication). There is no estimation of the effect upon stream bank stability. This is not a genuine analysis of the effect of construction upon the full HCI index. It would have been much less misleading if UDOT had simply reported their fmdings as the percentage of stream bank vegetation that will be lost. In its ROD, the Forest Service states that an analysis of changes in the HCI index "'is included in the FEIS." This statement is false. The Forest Service is accepting an HCI analysis that is based on data of questionable relevance, and which involves an estimation of the effects of construction on only a single component, ignoring effects upon those components that may indicate increased sedimentation and serious loss of fish habitat. The Forest Service is allowing a decrease of 5% in the present HCI value for Logan River. Yet, in its Record of Decision, the Forest Service does not mention any monitoring it will do of HCI. We do not know what the present He] value is, and the Forest Service has made no commitment to monitor Her to ensure compliance. By accepting this inadequate HCI analysis, and by not committing to effective monitoring, the Forest Service is violating a guideline in its Management Plan (page lV-3(0). In the section of the Management Plan, "Desired Future Condition of the Forest," the Forest Service states, "All MIS habitat will be maintained at levels that exceed requirements for minimum viable populations" (page IV-57). Cutthroat trout are listed as an MIS species (page 1I-33). The cutthroat in Logan River may actually be Bonneville Cutthroat, a species listed as "sensitive" by the Regional Forester (paul Cowley, Forest Service, personal communication). In their Record of Decision, the 43 �• • Forest Service states that UDOT's modified Preferred Alternative "will not adversely affect the viability of any Forest Service listed sensitive species" (page 8). In the case of cutthroat in Logan River, the Forest Service has no grounds for saying this. The 1973 UDWR study that UDOT is relyin.g upon for its fish mortality values presents a special difficulty in the case of cutthroat trout. This study was done in the Lower Canyon, well below the upper reaches of Logan River in which most of the cutthroat populations are found and in which they spawn. The cutthroat in Logan River are possibly genetically disposed to prefer the colder temperatures of the upper reaches (Forest Service, personal communication), Cutthroat are found in the Lower Canyon in relatively small numbers. We must question conclusions reached about cutthroat in a "habitat" study that has been conducted well below the primary range and primary habitat of cutthroat, and well below their spawning grounds. We cannot simply assume that the removal of vegetation in the upper reaches will affect cutthroat numbers in the same way that it might in the Lower Canyon. Given this problem, and the other problems with UDOT's analysis of fish mortality, such as the lack of infonnation concerning sedimentation and turbidity, we cannot conclude that only 4 to 8 % of cutthroat will be lost to construction. By accepting UDOT's flawed prediction of fish loss and its inadequate HCI analysis, by ignoring the required BCI analysis, and by failing to commit to proper monitoring of these habitat indices, the Forest Service is abrogating its responsibility for this MIS, and possibly sensitive, species. From UDOT's assessment, we have no idea what impact the modified Preferred Alternative will actually have upon cutthroat habitat or the number of cutthroat. With its decision to permit UDOT's modified Preferred Alternative, the Forest Service is in violation of a guideline in its Management Plan, and in violation of a directive in its Management Plan concerning an MIS species. The Forest Service is also in violation of its policies for sensitive species in the National Forests as outlined in the Forest Service Manual, Title 2600 (1991), section 2672.42, since they have reached a determination of "no adverse affects" based on inadequate analyses. With these violations, the Forest Service is in violation of the National Forest Management Act. We request that before it agrees to amend its Management Plan and grant the required easement allowing UDOT to construct the modified Preferred Alternative, the Forest Service insist that UDOT provide an adequate discussion of impacts to fish numbers and fish habitat in an SEIS. We further request the Forest Service to insist that UDOT maintain the current 26 ft. road width from Lower Twin Bridge to above Ricks Spring. In other words, the 26 ft. width should be maintained throughout the entire Middle Canyon. Also, there should be no curve cuts around the Temple Fork intersection. These changes would protect from construction those stretches of the 44 �., river that are most essential to the fishery in Logan River. We request that the Forest Service insist that UDOT consider again the Conservationists' Alternative for Highway 89 in Logan Canyon. This alternative satisfies traffic needs in the canyon, as we discuss in an earlier section of this appeal, and it better protects the fishery in Logan River. Again, the fishery in Logan River is ranked among the top 5% of stream fisheries in the state. It is considered by the Utah Division of Water Rights to be one of four major fisheries in the state. We urge the Forest Service to abide by its policies in giving this fishery careful attention and adequate protection. Literature Cited Adams, J.K. 1966. Memorandum to B. Reese concerning aquatic habitat quality in Logan Canyon. U.S Forest Service, Cache National Forest. Dufour, J. 1989. Memorandum to D. Baumgartner of January 18. U.S. Forest Service, Wasatch-Cache National Forest. Helm, W. 1987. Letter to Stan Nuffer of May 28. Helm reprints collection, Quinney Library, Utah State University. Helm, W. undated. "Effects of Road Building on the Logan River." Helm reprints collection, Quinney Library, Utah State University. USDA Forest Service. 1995. (ROD) Record of Decision, U.S. Highway 89. USDA Forest Service. 1991. Forest Service Manual, Title 2600, Wildlife, Fish and Sensitive Plant Habitat Management. Washington. USDA Forest Service. 1985. Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Utah Department of Transportation (UDOl). 1993. (FEIS) Final Environmental Impact Statement, U.S. Highway 89, Logan Canyon. Prepared by CH2M Hill. Utah Department of Transportation. 1987. Aquatic Resources Technical Memorandum. Prepared by CH2M Hill. Utah Department of Transportation. 1974. Memorandum from L.A. Abbey to L.R. Jester of June 17. 45 �6. wn,DLIFE IMPACTS AND SENSITIVE SPECIES 1.) UDOT's FEIS and ROD violate the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resources Management Plan. a) UDOT's FEIS and ROD violate Goal #16 of the Management Plan (page IV8) and directives within the Plan concerning wildlife (Plan Responses to Issues, Issue 9, page 1lI-2; Desired Future Condition of the Forest, page IV-56). The current productivity level of wildlife habitat will not be maintained or improved. The current capacity of big game winter range will not be maintained or increased, but will be diminished or adversely impacted. These results violate Management Plan provisions cited above. With the modified Preferred Alternative, 149.3 acres of upland plant communities will be impacted by construction, compared to 6.9 acres for the Conservationists' Alternative, over 2100% more impacted areas for the chosen alternative. According to the FEIS, upland habitat loss and the consequent impacts during construction activity will affect summer big game range and ruffed and blue grouse brood rearing areas. The FEIS states that "habitat loss is especially significant in the case of forested, scrub/shrub, and emergent wetlands and riparian communities (i.e., upland communities) that are of high value to many species of wildlife" and that "habitat fragmentation can be a significant problem for songbirds, amphibians, and small mammals." There is no mention as to which species of songbirds, amphibians, or small mammals may be affected by upland habitat loss or to what extent they may be affected, which prevents informed public participation, and leads to arbitrary and capricious decision making. No mitigation for negative impacts is proposed. , According to the Management Plan, the Wasatch-Cache ranks as the most important wildlife and fisheries Forest in the state (page 1I-3 I). Hunter days use of all key game species except elk ranks first, while the percentage of statewide habitat ranks first or second for all species except mule deer. In addition, the highest proportion of the statewide population of mule deer, moose, and mountain goat inhabits this Forest. The Wasatch-Cache mule deer population is the largest in the National Forest system. The FEIS states, "Loss of (winter range) habitat for (mule deer and moose) is especiaUy critical during severe winters when suitable mule deer winter range covers only a small area compared to the area occupied during normal winters" (page 4-40). In a letter to CH2M Hill, preparers of the FEIS, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (UDWR) expressed real concern with impacts to winter range, saying, "Loss of these 46 �ranges are particularly critical, and the limiting factor in maintaining viable populations" (George Wilson, UDWR, 13 February 1987). The National Forest Management Act specifically mandates that "habitat be managed to maintain viable populations of existing ... vertebrate species in the planning area" (36 C.F.R., 219.19). Yet, the loss of mule deer and moose wintering range for the chosen Preferred Alternative is 134 acres compared to the loss of 2.3 acres with the Conservationists' Alternative, over 5800% more impacted acres with the chosen alternative. Additionally, illustration of big game winter range in the FEIS includes only Rich County, less than 30% of the entire study area. Another negative impact given only cursory attention in the FEIS involves increased highway mortality to wildlife, especially big game. Risk associated with proximity to the highway increases with vehicle speed, effectively diminishing usable habitat. The FEIS neglects to reveal that increases in highway speeds correlate positively with increased animal-vehicle collision frequency (Puglisi et al. 1974; Arnold 1981; Reed et al. 1982; National Safety Council 1984). The FEIS claims that the mitigation cattle fencing proposed in the modified Preferred Alternative, extending from the Tony Grove intersection to Franklin Basin, 'will likely reduce ... vehicle-deer accidents" (page 4- 13). Research demonstrates, however, that deer readily jump fencing less than 2 meters in height (Feldhammer et al. 1986; Ludwig and Bremicker 1983; Reed et al. 1982), rendering UDOT's claim about the effectiveness of cattle fencing unfounded and unrealistic. The estimated impact on big game species due to increased vehicle collision frequency is not mentioned or compared for the alternatives, nor is any mitigation proposed. b) The FEIS violates Goal #17 of the Management Plan (page IV-8) and a directive in the Desired Future Condition of the Forest section of the Plan (page IV-56). The FEIS also violates National Forest Management Act regulations 16 U.S.C., 1604(g) and 36 C.F.R., 219. 19, and National Environmental Protection Act regulation 40 C.F.R., 1500.I(b). The status of classified species will not be enhanced. Maintenance of several sensitive plant species is not insured . The FEIS neglects to mention or evaluate the potential impact on numerous species of special concern and includes no provision for the description or maintenance of biological diversity. The information in the FEIS does not allow informed public participation or decision making. The FEIS mentions six species that are listed as threatened or endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, or are listed as 'sensitive" by the Forest Service: Bald Eagle (e) 47 �... Peregrine Falcon (e) Maquire' s Primrose (t) Cronquist Daisy (s) Rydberg Musineon (s) Cache Beardtongue (s) Numerous Forest Service sensitive species receive no mention in the FEIS: Boreal Owl Flammulated Owl Great Gray Owl Northern Goshawk Three-toed Woodpecker Spotted Bat Western Big-eared Bat Wolverine North American Lynx Spotted Frog Maguire Draba Logan Buckwheat Aster kineii var. kingii Many of these sensitive species were mentioned in UDOT's ROD, but at that point, when virtually the whole process was complete, very few people saw the infonnation, so in essence the public has never been presented with meaningful information on th ese species. Waiting until the ROD is published to provide information excludes the public from participation in the process. Western or Townsend's big-eared bat is abundant in Logan Cave and has been captured elsewhere in Logan Canyon; however, throughout its range in the western United States populations are declining (Brad Lengas, unpublished report to WasatchCache Ranger District 1993); Arizona Game and Fish Department 1993). The declining status of this bat warrants consideration, particularl y given its high vulnerability to human disturbance (Schmidly 1991 ; Arizona Game and Fish Department 1993), including disturbance to riparian habitat. Loss of riparian habitat, and the noise and pollution from construction, could lead to the disappearance of this bat from Logan Canyon. If recommended management guidelines do not halt the decline of this bat, it may qualify for federally threatened status (Brad Lengas, personal communication). Evidence supporting the possibility of wolverines in Logan Canyon prompted the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources to grant funding to the Fisheries and Wildlife 48 �Cooperative Unit at Utah State University to investigate this possibility. Researchers have installed automatic photographic equipment to identify which mustelid species is making observed tracks where it is thought wolverine may occur (John Bissonnette, personal communication). Published Forest Service information indicates there are wolverines in the Wasatch-Cache National Forest and cites an observation in Logan Canyon (Forest Service 1994). ~ kingii var. kin2ii. a Forest Service sensitive species, was found in Cache County during a general botanical survey carried out in conjunction with surveys for other sensitive plant species (Franklin 1990a). The discovery of this sensitive species in Cache County never appeared in any UOOT document. Only the Record of Decision even mentioned the aster, but listed its distribution in four counties, not including Cache, making any conclusion by the Forest Service that minimum viable populations will be preserved without a basis in fact, and arbitrary and capricious. A previously undescribed species of Viola. upon discovery named Viola franksmithii, was also found in Logan Canyon during the same general botanical survey (Franklin I990a). This Logan Canyon endemic species was later described in detail (Holmgren 1992). However, it is not mentioned in any UDOT document. It is the fifth known plant species endemic to Logan Canyon, including Maquire's primrose, Cronquist Daisy, Rydberg musineon, and Cache beard tongue. It is considered possible there are other undiscovered endemics occurring in Logan Canyon (Frank Smith, personal communication). The following Fish and Wildlife Service C2 candidate species are not mentioned in the FEIS. Are these listed as sensitive by the Forest Service? Western Small-footed Myotis Long-legged Myotis Long-eared Myotis Fringed Myotis Boreal Toad Discus shemeki cockerelli Oreohelix haydeni haydeni Oreohelix haydeni cQrrugata Oreohelix peripherica wasatchensis All four Myotis species have been captured in Logan Canyon (Brad Lengas, unpublished report submitted to the Logan Ranger District). All depend on the riparian areas adjacent to the river and thus adjacent to the road. These bats are not mentioned in the FEIS, making any claim by the Forest Service that minimum viable populations will be maintained arbitrary and capricious. 49 �... An undescribed snail species, genus PyrgulQPsis. was discovered along the highway at Spring Hollow by Dr. Robert Hershler of the Smithsonian Institution (Hershler 1990). Information on this discovery was provided to UDOT, along with a recommendation for further investigation prior to road construction activities. The habitat in which this and several other C2 snail species are found indicates that any of these species could occur along the highway project site (peter Hovingh, personal communication), The FEIS states, "The undescribed snail species has not been nominated as a candidate species. The species is located down canyon of the project area and will not be affected by construction activities" (page 9-14). There are 20 species of PyrgulQPsis in the western United States listed C2 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (see Federal Register, Part IV; 50 C.F.R., Part 17, November 15,1994). The species identity of this PyrgulQPsis is not known. Therefore, it is not known whether this one is a candidate species. Nevertheless, minimum viable populations must be preserved, and with no analysis there is no factual basis to claim that viable populations will be preserved. No surveys along the project site were conducted. Therefore, it is not known whether this snail species occurs within the project area, or whether it will be affected by construction activities. Pyrgulopsis is the sixth species endemic to Logan Canyon. This suggests an unusually high rate of endemism in this area. The diversity provision of the National Forest Management Act requires that national forest planning "provide for diversity of plant and animal communities based on the suitability and capability of the specific land area" (16 U.S.C.,1604(g)(3)(B». The National Forest Management Act requires inventory data on wildlife populations and distribution (id, 1604(g)(2)(B»; on identification of hazards to various resources (id, 1604(g)(2)(C»; and research on the effects of each management system (id, 1604(g)(3)(C». Likewise, in providing for diversity, "inventories shall include quantitative data making possible the eva luation of diversity in terms of its prior and present condition" (36 C.F.R., 219.26 (1984». None of these Management Indicator Species (MIS) from the Management Plan, which probably occur in Logan Canyon, received mention in the FEIS or ROD: Gray Jay Hairy Woodpecker Pine Siskin Yellow-bellied Sapsucker Warbling Vireo Mountain Bluebird Water Pipit 50 �MacGilvary's Warbler Green-tailed Towhee Vesper Sparrow Identification of Management Indicator Species is required by th e National Forest Management Act (36 C.F.R., 219. 19(a)). This regulation also specifies that "fish and wildlife habitat shall be managed to maintain viable populations of existing native and desired non-native vertebrate species in the planning area." A viable population for planning purposes is defined as "one which has the estimated numbers and distribution of reproductive individuals to insure its continued exis tence is well distributed in the planning area. " Regulations further provide that "population trends of the management indictor species will be monitored and relationships to habitat changes determined" (id, 219.19(a)(6)). But with no analysis of these MIS indicator species in the FEIS or ROD, there is no basis for claiming these provisions will be met. The FEIS makes assertions of no impact when no ground surveys were conducted to collect baseline data for the majority of all aforementioned species. Without further information to describe Logan Canyon's biological diversity, the significance of this diversity, and the potential impacts to the stability of this di versity, compliance with the National Forest Management Act's diversity mandates or the National Environmental Protection Act's assessment mandates is not achieved. 2.) The FEIS violates the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. a) The FEIS violates Section 7(a)(2) and 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act, and directives in the Management Plan concerning wildlife (plan Responses to Issues, Issue 9, page III-2; Desired Future Condition of the Fores t, page IV-56). The potential impact to the only federally threatened species in the project area (Primula maguireO was not thoroughly identified using the best scientific and commercial data available. A Biological Opinion was not written by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in response to a Biological Assessment provided by the project proponent, as required by Section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act. Information transferred between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and UDOTIFHW A does not reveal compliance with the Endangered Species Act requirement for a biological assessment and subsequent issuance of a biological opinion by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. It is not clear why th e Fish and Wildlife Service eventually concurred with the "no effect" detennination in the absence of an adequate biological assess ment. The following discussion chronologically 51 �summarizes correspondence between the Service and UDOTIFHW A. In March 1987, the Fish and Wildlife Service communicated to FHW A that Section 7 consultation would be required if the highway project would affect the primrose (Robert Ruesink, State Supervisor USFWS, to Duncan Silver, FHW A, March 4, 1987). Subsequently, Daniel Dake (UDOT, July 7, 1987) supplied the Fish and Wildlife Service with a report (Welsh 1987) in order to comply with 50 C.F.R., 402. 12(j). Ruesink replied to Mr. Dake (July 21 , 1987) that the Service was unable to prepare a biological opinion at that time, that mOTe information was necessary, and that any significant reduction of the buffering and road encroachment on the cliff at Wood Camp may have a deleterious effect on that population of primrose due to micro-climate changes, to which Maguire's primrose is sensitive. In August 1989, Ruesink again wrote, this time to Margaret Johnson of CH2M Hill, preparers of the FEIS, that a project proponent must submit a biological assessment so that the Fish and Wildlife Service could prepare a biological opinion in response to the potential impacts to the primrose. UDOT replied with a proposal to eliminate the slow vehicle turnout near Wood Camp Campground to remove the Service's concerns about the project's potential impacts on the primrose (Donald Steinke, UDOT, to Clark Johnson, USFWS, March I, 1990). In April of 1990, Clark Johnson (Assistant Field Supervisor, USFWS) wrote the FHW A and recognized UDOT's proposal to eliminate the slow vehicle turnout. However, the Service again recommended "that the FHW A submit a biological assessment on the preferred alternative of the U.S. 89 Logan Canyon DEIS when the alternative is selected and request formal Section 7 consultation at that time." In February of 1991 , Jonathan Deason (Director, Office of Environmental Affairs, Department of the Interior) wrote the FHW A to clarify that the Fish and Wildlife Service had advised the Office of Environmental Affairs of the possibility of the highway project adversely affecting a federally threatened plant, and that, if so, Section 7 consultation would be necessary in accordance with the Endangered Species Act. Deason's letter goes on to say, "Biological opinions are prepared by the FWS in response to formal consultation requests by the Federal Agency. The botanical reports relating to Primula Maeuire and other rare plant species prepared for this project do not constitute a biological opinion as defmed by the act." Eventually, in April of 1992, without further information indicated, Clark Johnson (USFWS) wrote to R. James Naegle (UDOn and concurred with UDOT's determination of no effect to the primrose. This, Johnson wrote, was based on the information which occurs in the FEIS. The only reference cited in the FEIS is Welsh 1987, which had been the basis for prior unfavorable responses by the Fish and 52 �Wildlife Service. Clark lohnson ' s 1992 letter is the fIrst and only correspondence from the Fish and Wildlife Service which concurs with UDOT's no effect determination. In 1987, Welsh' s report did not suffIce for the Fi. h and Wildlife Service to respond with a s biological opinion, and in 1990, the Service recommended the FHW A submit a biological assessment when an alternative was selected and requested formal Section 7 consultation at that time. Deason's 1991 lener from the Office of Environmental Affairs to FHW A reiterated that no report submitted up until that time constituted a biological opinion. A more current and comprehensive survey report (Franklin 1990b) was not utilized by UDOT, in spite of references to this report in a letter from the Bridgerland Audubon Society to UDOT, Feb. 12, 1991. This report systematically surveyed potential habitat in the Bear River Range and made determinations as to whether the primrose's distribution extended beyond the known locations in Logan and Right Fork Canyons. Known locations were derived from Beedlow et al. 1980, Moseley and Mancuso 1990, Padgett 1986, USFWS 1990, and Welsh 1987. One new occurrence was located north of the highway approximately . 1 mile beyond the fIrst river crossing above Wood Camp on a limestone cliff face in the narrow gorge. Franklin' s report states, "This restricted range, its rarity within that range, and the lack of detailed demographic and disturbance information on each occurrence of Maguire primrose indicate that all Logan Canyon occurrences should, at this time, be considered essential habitat. When more detailed demographic and disturbance information is available it will be possible to more defInitely ... ' identify essential habitat and those populations (occurrences) which may best ensure the long term survival of the species .. .' (FWS 1990)." Welsh (1987) states, "If the recommendations cited above are followed there should be minimal or no impact to the Maguire primrose population 4 (and no effect on the other populations)." Welsh's survey covered 2,000 feet on either side of MP 385, in the vicini ty of Wood Camp. In his report, Welsh referen ced data provided in an earlier report (Padgett 1986). Padgett surveyed Logan Canyon from the mouth to 0.7 miles south of the USU Forestry Field Station, and concluded, "Because of their proximity to Highway 89 in Logan Canyon, population numbers 3, 4, 5, 6 and the lower portion of population I could possibly be impacted by highway expansion." The FElS provides no basis to conclude that an adequate biological assessment was ever conducted. Recommendations repeated by the Fish and Wildlife Service and most surveys suggested further study. Franklin (I990b) and FWS (1990) both recommend an inventory and census of the Logan Canyon populations of primrose to "yield precise locations and extent of all P. maguirei populations ... ", yet UDOT 53 �• ignored this information in selecting its modified Preferred Alternative. It is recognized that the primrose is vulnerable to micro-climate alterations, changes in temperature and relative humidity of the atmosphere in the plant's habitat, and that construction-related production of dust particulates could impede stomate functioning on the primrose (Franklin 1990b; FWS 1990; Padgett 1986; Welsh 1986; Beedlow et.al. 1980). In addition, however, recent information suggests that removal of vegetation within the construction corridor could negatively affect primrose pollination by eliminating essential host plants visited by the primrose-pollinating bees (Wolf and Sinclair, unpublished data) . The primrose supplies small quantities of nectar, making it necessary for pollinating bees to derive supplemental nectar from other plants. Removal of vegetation in the vicinity of primrose populations may cause primrose-pollinating bees to move elsewhere, resulting in previously unforeseen negative impacts on the long-term viability of those primrose populations. Clearly, information is lacking in the FEIS, in violation of the National Environmental Protection Act, 1502. 16 and 1502.22. No recognized biological assessment was submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the project proponent in accordance with 50 C.F.R., 402.12(j). The Endangered Species Act states, "Each Federal agency shall ... insure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by such agency ... is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat of such threatened species which is determined to be critical ... In fulfilling the requirements of this paragraph each agency shall use the best scientific and commercial data available" (16 U.S.C., 1536 (a)(2)), with "species" including plants (id, 1532(16». CEQ regulations provide that impacts in an EIS shall be discussed in proportion to their significance (40 C.F.R., 1502.2 (b» and that "data and analysis ... shall be commensurate with their importance" (40 C.F.R. , 1502.15). The National Forest Management Act states that the plan must "provide for diversity of plant and animal communities ... " (16 U.S.C., 1604 (g)(3)(B)) and requires planners to "preserve and enhance the diversity of plant and animal communities" so that it is at least as great as that which would be expected in a natural forest (36 C.F.R., 219.27 (g». The National Forest Management Act further specifies: "Habitat determined to be critical for threatened and endangered species shall be identified, and measures shall be prescribed to prevent the destruction or adverse modification of such habitat. Objectives shall be determined for threatened and endangered species that shall provide for, where possible, their removal from listing as threatened and endangered through appropriate conservation measures, including the designation of special areas to meet the protection and management needs of such species" 54 �(36 C.F.R.,219.19(a)(7)). Literature Cited Arizona Game and Fish Department. 1993. Bats of Arizona. Arizona Wildlife Views 36(8) :23 . Arnold, D.A. 1979. Deer on the highway . Traffic Safety 79(5):8- 10. Beedlow, P.A., J.G. Carter, and FJ. Smith . 1980. Primula ma~\Iirei L. Wms. (primulaceae), a preliminary report on th e population biology of an endemic plant. Unpublished report on file at the Utah Natural Heritage Program, Salt Lake City, Utah . Feldhammer, G.A., J.E. Gates, D.M. Harman, AJ. Loranger, and K.R. Dixon. 1986. Effects of interstate fencing on white-tailed deer activity. 1. Wildt. Manage. 50:497-503. Forest Service. 1994. American marten, fisher, lynx, and wolverine in the western United States. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station General Technical Report RM-254. 184 pp. Franklin, M.A. I 99Oa. Report for 1989 chaUenge cost-share project Wasatch-Cache National Forest, Target species: Eri~eron cronQu istii (Cronquist daisy), Musineon lineare (Rydberg musineon) , and Penstemon cyananthus var. compactus (Cache beardtongue). Utah Natural Heritage Program. Unpublished report on file at the Utah Natural Heritage Program, Salt Lake City, Utah. 16 pp. Franklin, M.A. I 990b. Report for 1990 challenge cos t-share project Wasatch-Cache National Forest, Target species: Primula maguire i L.O. Williams (Maguire primrose). Utah Natural Heritage Program. Unpublished report on file at the Utah Natural Heritage Program, Salt Lake C ity, Utah. 10 pp. Hershler, R. 1990. Field survey and preliminary taxonomy of Great Basin Springsnails. Final Report for Cooperative Agreement P 852-A I-0035 between U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management and the Smithsonian Institution. Holmgren, N. 1992. Two new species of Viola (Violaceae) from the Intermountain West, U.S.A. Brittonia 44(3):300-305. Ludwig, J., and T. Bremicker. 1983. Evaluation of 2.4 m fences and one-way gates 55 �for reducing deer-vehicle collisions in Minnesota. Transportation Research Record 913:19-22. Mosely, R.K., and M. Mancuso. 1990. Threatened, endangered, and sensitive plant inventory of the Bear River Range, Caribou National Forest. Unpublished report by the Idaho Natural Heritage Program, on file at the Utah Natural Heritage Program, Salt Lake City, Utah. National Safety Council. 1984. Warning: AnimaUvehicle crossing. National Safety News 130(4) :60. Padgett, W.G. 1986. Maguire primrose summary report. Utah Native Plant Society, Cache Valley Chapter. Unpublished report on file at the Utah Natural Heritage Program, Salt Lake City, Utah. Puglisi, M.J., J.S. Londzey, and E.D. Bellis. 1974. Factors associated with highway mortality of white-tailed deer. J. Wildl. Manage. 38:799-807. Reed, D.F., T.D. Beck, and T.N. Woodard. 1982. Methods of reducing deer/vehicle accidents: Benefit-cost analysis. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 10:349-354. Schmidly, David J. 1991. The Bats of Texas. Texas A & M University Press, College Station, TX. pp. 137-141. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1990. Maguire primrose (Primula maeuirei) recovery plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, Colorado. pp. 1-13. Welsh, S. 1987. Logan Canyon, U.S. 89 study, Biological Assessment. Unpublished report on file at the Utah Natural Heritage Program, Salt Lake City, Utah. 7. VISUAL RETENTION The primary problems associated with the Forest Service's decision to penn it widening and reconstruction of Highway 89 through Logan Canyon, in relation to visual quality, stem from the idea that it is alright to destroy that which we are attempting to preserve. In essence, the Forest Service's decision allows for the destruction of the scenic quality that it is attempting to manage as a highly protected resource within Logan Canyon. This decision is not only arbitrary and capricious, but represents a significant change in the amount of Forest Service land managed for scenic quality. 56 �Scenic Byway Designation In 1987 the U.S. Congress created a National Scenic Byways Program to preserve and to enhance scenic byways for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations. According to the Federal Highway Administration, a scenic road is "a road having roadsides or corridors of high natural beauty and cultural or historical value. It gives the traveler glimpses of nature, history, geology, landscaping, and cultural activities along the road. Campgrounds, picnic areas, or other recreational sites may be built within the scenic corridor, or the road may provide a pleasant access to such facilities" (FHW A 1988). A scenic route "gives the driver the opportunity to leave a high-speed Interstate highway or arterial route for a scenic byway that permits safe, leisurely dri ving" (FHWA 1988). The Utah Travel Council, in cooperation with federal, state, and local agencies, has developed the Utah Scenic Byways and Backways publication which provides a description of Utah's scenic road system offering outstanding scenic beauty to the traveler. This publication offers the following: "The beaten path. It gets you there. But for those to whom the reward is in the journey, there are paths less trodden. Panoramas reserved for the adventurous, worlds away from the mainstream. Utah's Scenic Byways and Backways ... These Scenic Byways are all major roads which are regularly traveled. Some routes feature sharp curves and steep grades. Actual travel speeds are generally less than the 55 mile-an-hour speed limit. As with all motor vehicle travel, personal discretion is the key to a safe driving experience." The Logan Canyon Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan (CMP) (Forest Service 1994), sets forth the management of the scenic corridor through Logan Canyon. Item #1 under the management plan's mission statement provides for "protect(ion of the) scenic values of the Logan Canyon Scenic Byway through planning and cooperation between all agencies and government entities that have jurisdiction within the byway view shed" (CMP, page 3). One of the "overall objectives" o f the management plan is "to continue developing a consensus between federal agencies. state agencies, county and city governments and private land owners charged with the protection of Logan Canyon to identify equitable means for protecting and improving the scenic and environmental values of Logan Canyon" (CMP, page 3). One of the "overall actions" provided in the management plan for the "protection of scenic qualities" is "to include provisions in the Wasatch-Cache Forest Plan [that] emphasize the protection of scenic value and enhancement of recreation opportunities" (CMP, page 4). It has been estimated that the modified Preferred Alternative will destroy 38 % and 9 % of the most visually sensitive areas , sensitivity levels 6 and 7 , wi thin the 57 �• • canyon, respectively (FEIS, page 4-63, Table 4-12). In addition, the modified Preferred Alternative will destroy 58% and 71 % of the moderately visually sensitive areas, sensitivity levels 4 and 5, within the canyon, respectively (FEIS, page 4-63, Table 4-12). The modified Preferred Alternative does not, therefore, protect the scenic values of the Logan Canyon Scenic Byway. It also does not identify equitable means for protecting and improving the scenic and environmental values of the canyon, nor does it reflect provisions in the Wasatch-Cache Forest Management Plan that emphasize protection of scenic values and enhancement of recreational opportunities. The selection of the modified Preferred Alternative is therefore in direct conflict with the Logan Canyon Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan (Forest Service 1994). Lack of Forest Plan Consistency The Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Service 1985) sets forth management of Forest Service lands through Management Area designations. The Logan Canyon Scenic Byway is contained in the Logan Canyon Management Area (MA 13) of the Management Plan. The emphasis for this area is to manage the highway as a Scenic Byway and to protect scenic landscape qualities (Forest Service 1985, pages IV-29 I and IV-297). According to the Management Plan, this area is to be managed for the visual quality objective (VQO) of "retention" (page IV-293) . This objective provides for management activities which are not visually evident. Under "retention," activities may only repeat fann, line, color, and texture which are frequently found in the characteristic landscape. Changes in their qualities of size, amount, intensity, direction, pattern, etc. should not be evident (Forest Service 1974). The Forest Service's Record of Decision proposes to amend the Management Plan VQO ' s in MA 13 from "retention" to "modification" for nearly the entire route. A "modification" VQO would allow for management activities that visually dominate the characteristic landscape (Forest Service 1974). The Logan Canyon Management Area encompasses approx imately 12,877 acres of Forest Service land. This corresponds to approximately one percent of Forest Service land within the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. However, the Logan Canyon Management Area makes up approximately eight percent of the area managed as "retention" within the Forest. Compromising eight percent of the area within the Forest managed for retention is particularly significant when one considers that only eleven percent of the Forest is managed for retention (Forest Service 1985, page IV60). Although the Logan Canyon Management Area is a relatively small portion of the Forest, the second largest concentration of developed recreational sites within the entire Forest can be found within this area. The only other area within the Forest with a higher concentration is the Mirror Lake Highway Management Area, which includes 58 �• the only other Scenic Byway within the Forest. Within the Logan Canyon Management Area, the Forest Service administers 12 developed campgrounds, 4 picnic areas, and 3 organizational camps (CMP, page 13). The Logan Canyon Scenic Byway provides access to Beaver Mountain Ski Area, which offers downhill skiing with a lodge, restaurant and shops. It offers access to commercial outfitters offering horseback rides, snowmobile tours, and lodging. This Scenic Byway also provides access to over 300 miles of hiking trails, the Mount Naomi Wilderness area, the Great Western Trail, and miles of scenic back country auto tours (CMP, page 13). The Logan Canyon Scenic Byway is truly unique, offering some of the most outstanding recreational opportunities in the state. Implementation of the modified Preferred Alternative through Logan Canyon will be in direct conflict with the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Management Plan. Since the most visually sensitive areas of the canyon, and the most accessible views, will be impacted an average of 15% (FEIS, Table 4- 16, page 4-77) and cannot be mitigated, a visual quality objective of retention will not be maintained. The highway will not conform to management standards for a Scenic Byway. Altering primary management emphasis of an area, especially an emphasis as critical as scenic retention on a Scenic Byway, is not a non-significant amendment to the Forest Plan, but a highly significant change. Cumulative bnpacts The cumulative impacts discussion in the FEIS (Chapter 4) does not disclose the impacts associated with implementation of the ten projects proposed as part of the Logan Canyon Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan (Forest Service 1994). In some cases, these projects will have a substantial impact upon the existing environment of their respective project areas. Seven of the ten projects proposed involve clearing and grubbing existing vegetation andlor site grading activities. Five of the ten projects proposed involve the construction of paved parking areas. Four "Romtec" restrooms will be installed at four of the ten proposed project sites. Several of the projects include each of the above impacts combined. Although NEPA documents will be prepared for each of the proposed projects, the FEIS does not disclose the cwnulative impacts associated with highway construction i1l conjunction with the ten projects described in the Logan Canyon Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan. This is a serious oversight on the part of UDOT and the Forest Service, especially considering that the projects proposed under the Logan Canyon Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan have been planned since early 1993, and that a planning committee was formed in late 1991 which included a representative from UDOT. 59 �• Literature Cited Federal Highway Administration. 1988. Scenic Byways '88: A National Conference to Map the Future of America's Scenic Roads and Highways. USDA Forest Service. 1995. Record of Decision (ROD), U.S. Highway 89. USDA Forest Service. 1994. Logan Canyon Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan: Portraits in Time. Logan Ranger District, Uinta and Wasatch-Cache National Forests. Logan, UT. USDA Forest Service. 1974. (VQO Management Discussion ?????) Utah Department of Transportation. 1993. Final Environmental Impac t Statement (FEIS), U.S. Highway 89, Logan Canyon. Prepared by CH2M Hill. 8. ECONOMIC IMPACTS The Fores t Service has violated Goal #53 of the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan which states that the Forest Service must "[i]nform the public about National Forest resource management as related to the ... local economy" (page IV-2!J . The local economy is closely tied to recreation and tourism, with Logan Canyon being recognized as one of the area's most valuable economic assets (Cooper 1989) . The unspoiled landscape of the canyon and its outstanding scenic and recreational opportunities have been featured in numerous national magazines and travel guides, including National Parks, National Geographic, Audubon, Glamour Magazine, Scenic America, and America from the Road. It is not only a draw for visitors, but a draw for industry and people who are relocating. The Logan Canyon Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan (hereafter referred to as the CMP) states, "Logan Canyon is the focal point for many people who live in the Cache and Bear Lake Valleys. The scenic and spiritual amenities it provides ... are a big reason people choose to live here" (page 21). Efforts are currently underway to enhance the area economy by capitalizing on the scenic assets of Logan Canyon. Chip Sibbemsen, acting District Ranger with the Logan office of the Wasatch-Cache National Forest, is spearheading a major recreation enhancement project with the Bridgerland Travel Region, the Cache Chamber of Commerce, Cache County, Box Elder County, Utah State University, Bear River Association of Governments, and individual city governments, businesses and 60 . �• ; organizations. This project, described in the CMP, emphasizes increased marketing of the Logan Canyon Scenic Byway's recreational and scenic opportunities, devoting five full pages to "Marketing and Promotion" (CMP, Appendix A) Howeve~, UDOT's extensive construction plans may interfere with the promotion of Logan Canyon, and negate the economic benefits of the Scenic Byway project. The CMP records concerns about proposed construction activities: UDOT's construction project "has been extremely controversial and there is concern the improvements may degrade the quality of the environment and the traveling experience" (page 20). A 1989 study of tourism in the area concluded with a strong recommendation that Logan Canyon's scenic assets be preserved intact because of the economic benefits that accrue to the area from its scenic attributes (Cooper, 1989). Appellants believe that the Forest Service's acceptance of the modified Preferred Alternative will degrade one of the primary economic resources of Cache and Rich Counties. UDOT's FEIS and Record of Decision, and the Forest Service' s Record of Decision, neglect to acknowledge any long or short tenn negative economic impacts of proposed construction, including des truction of irreplaceable scenic values, monetary losses caused by disruption of road service, impacts on big game habitat, and harm to a fishery that brings in over $4 million annually (estimate for 1990, UDOT 1987, Table 7, page 18). The Forest Service also neglects to address the postconstruction viability of the area as a tourist destination. National surveys bear out the fact that tourists and recreationists value scenery, especially scenery that is relatively unspoiled. Tourists and recreationists across the country rate "driving for pleasure" and "sightseeing" among the top three recreation activities, out of 37 ranked activities (Report of the President's Commission on Americans Outdoors, 1987; Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, 1986; and Outdoor Recreation in a Nation of Communities, 1988). These surveys indicate that protection of natural environments is a critical issue for tourists and recreationists. Driving for pleasure and sightseeing are hardly as pleasurable when the view consists of concrete retaining walls, exposed slopes and c1ear zones, rather than lush forests and wild rivers . Surveys conducted in northern Utah find that the most popular recreation activity in Logan Canyon is "viewing the scenery." The third most popular activity, out of 2 1 ranked activities, is "photography" (Hunt and Cadez 1977; Hunsaker 1969). Clearly, the scenic assets of the canyon are of primary importance to its users, who inc1ude local residents and tourists. There is a c10se connection between scenic values in the canyon and the local 61 �• economy, yet UDOT's FEIS and Record of Decision, and the Forest Service's Record of Decision, fail to make any assessment of how permanent degradation of the canyon's scenic values will negatively impact the local economy. The Forest Service has therefore violated Goal /153 of the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, which states that the Forest Service must "[ilnform the public about National Forest resource management as related to the ... local economy" (page IV-21). The Forest Service has selected an alternative which may have extremely detrimental impacts to recreation, on a Scenic Byway where data shows that recreation is the primary use. The Forest Service has also neglected to address over 300 letters from forest users and business people who voiced concerns about impacts to scenery and the economy (FEIS, pages 9-3 to 9- 151). Literature Cited Cooper, EJ. 1989. Characteristics of Recreational Visitors in the Bridgerland Area. Hunsaker, L.M . 1969. Tourist recreation interests in Logan, Utah and the surrounding area. Unpublished manuscript, Utah State University, College of Education. Hunt, J.D. and Cadez, G. 1977. Bridgerland profile: From non-resident motor vehicle data 1974-75 (Report /128). Logan, Utah: Institute of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, Utah State University. Logan Ranger District, Wasatch-Cache National Forest. 1994. Logan Canyon Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan. Prepared by Chip Sibbernsen. Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission. 1986. Report. President's Commission. 1987. The report of the President's Commission on Americans Outdoors. Washington, D.C. Task Force on Outdoor Recreation Resources and Opportunities. 1988. Outdoor Recreation in a Nation of Communities. Washington, D.C. USDA Forest Service. 1995. Record of Decision (ROD), U.S. Highway 89. Utah Department of Transportation (UOOn. 1991111. Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), U.S. Highway 89, Logan Canyon. Prepared by CH2M Hill . Utah Department of Transportation. 1993. Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), U.S. Highway 89, Logan Canyon. Prepared by CH2M Hill. 62 ., • �• . .. Utah Department of Transportation. 1987. Aquatic Resources Technical Memorandum. Prepared by CH2M Hill. Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT). 1995. Record of Decision (ROD), U.S. 89 Through Logan Canyon. USDA Forest Service. 1995. (ROD) Record of Decision, U.S. Highway 89. USDA Forest Service. 1985. Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. 9, WETLANDS ISSUFS \.) In regards to existing wetlands within Logan Canyon, the Forest Service has violated the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan by issuing a Record of Decision approving UDOT's FEIS and Record of Decision. a) The FEIS states that there will be 11 .2 acres of jurisdictional wetlands impacted by the Preferred Alternative (Table S- I). UDOT's Record of Decision states that this impact may be reduced by as much as 30% (page 34). Proposed wetlands impacts is in direct conflict with the goal as outlined in the Management Plan, Logan Canyon Management Area, Watershed MIH code F04(G), which clearly states, "Avoid soil disturbing activities on steep, erosive, or unstable slopes, and in wetlands, floodplains , and meadows." This goal is supported by the Federal Register which states, "A record of decision for a National Forest System proposed action must display consistency with the relevant forest plan" (Federal Register, V.57, No. 182, page 43207). This appears to be binding language in terms of preserving existing wetlands within the scope of UDOT's construction project. The Forest Service has amended their own management guidelines concerning visual qualities and fisheries habitat for Logan Canyon, according to the Forest Services' Record of Decision. But there is no mention of amending the Management Plan pertaining to the management of wetlands. For the Forest Service to approve the FEIS and UDOT's Record of Decision, an amendment to the management goal concerning wetlands is required, with allowable period for public comment per requirements of the National Environmental Protection Act. b) Management goals are further violated by the Forest Service's decision to 63 �.. grant a transportation easement for UDOT's highway project. The Forest Service states that the modified Preferred Alternative considers "avoiding and minimizing hann to sensitive resources and maintaining the character of the Logan Canyon" (ROD, page 3). They go on to say, "As a result, minimal construction will occur in the ecologically sensitive middle canyon .. ." (page 3). Maps contained within the FEIS indicate 17 separate areas of jurisdictional wetlands (approximately 1.3 acres) within the Middle Canyon (mp 384 to 391) that will be permanently lost to road construction under the Preferred Alternative. There are 47 areas (approximately 7 acres) within the Upper Canyon (mp 391 to 400) that will be lost. This wou ld suggest that in terms of wetlands impacts, the Upper Canyon is more ecologically sensitive on an acre per mile basis than the Middle Canyon. If environmental concerns are indeed the limiting factors for the upper Middle Canyon, as UDOT claims, then it would seem consistent to keep to that intent throughout the Upper Canyon. In terms of type and the number of wetland areas in the Upper Canyon, and the fact that permanent wetland loss results in "one of the greatest impacts on wildlife," it seems appropriate that the Upper Canyon should receive equal consideration (FEIS, page 4-33). Appellants believe it is commendable that UDOT has agreed to reduce the highway width from 40 ft. to 34 ft. in the Upper Canyon, below the Beaver Mountain intersection. UDOT's Record of Decision states, "This reduces the impact on wetland and riparian areas" (page l). It goes on to say, "It is anticipated that the wetland impacts in this section will be reduced by approximately 30%" (page 34). But as the same document points out, 3.3 miles (41 %) of those first eight miles in the Upper Canyon will be 44 ft. wide to accommodate proposed passing lanes. This is only three feet narrower than the originally planned 47 ft. Without detailed surveys, it is not possible to accurately determine a 30% reduction in wetland impacts in the Upper Canyon. Appellants wonder how UDOT arrived at this 30% value. The method of calculating this has not been disclosed. Does this 30% value take into account the proposed passing lanes that will be constructed in wetlands? 2.) By approving UDOT's Record of Decision, the Forest Service has violated the National Forest Management Act. a) The National Forest Management Act specifically mandates, "Forest Planning shall provide for adoption of measures, as directed in applicable Executive orders, to minimize risk of flood loss, to restore and preserve floodplain values, and to protect wetlands" (36 CFR 2l9.23(1)). Appellants believe that "protect" is strong language requiring the agency to do just that. Appellants believe that this protection 64 • �• clause takes precedence over mitigation. The goal should be avoidance or loss of exi s tin~ wetlands. The Conservationists' Alternative, with its recommendation of slow vehicle turnouts and a smaller number of shorter passing lanes, comes closer to compliance with 36 CFR 219.23(f) . 3.) The Forest Service and UDOT are potentially in violation of section 404 requiremen Is of the Clean Water Act. a) As the Act states, " ... no discharge of dredged or fill material shall be permitted if there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge which would have less adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem ... " (40 CFR 230. lOa). UDOT and the Forest Service both state that the Conservationists' Alternative does not satisfy the purpose and need of the project (FEIS, page 4-25, the Forest Service' s ROD, page 12). They are claiming that there is no practicable alternative to construction in wetlands as is proposed in the Preferred Alternative (see FEIS, page 4-28). Appellants believe that slow vehicle turnouts in the Upper Canyon is a practicable alternative. Appellants believe the Forest Service should reverse its decision to allow construction of the modified Preferred Alternative, un til UDOT seriously considers the option of slow vehicle turnouts below th e Beaver Mountain in tersection , combined with one passing lane in lieu of two. This option has been proposed by many within the environmental community, citing that slow vehicle turnouts have been used successfu lly in other states (pendery 1994). The Forest Service should require UDOT to consider slow vehicle turnouts, along with a smaller number of passing lanes, as a practical alternative in order to minimize impacts to wetlands. The Clean Water Act further states, ..... for activities which are not water dependent, practicable alternatives that do not involve special aquatic sites are presumed to be available, unless clearly demonstrated otherwise ... " (40 CFR 230. lOa. 1). Neither the FEIS nor UDOT's Record of Decision present evidence that "clearly demonstrates otherwise." Literature Cited Environmental Protection Agency. 1989. Code of Federal RegUlations. Pendery, Bruce. 1994. Letter of August 12 to Dave Berg, Utah Department of Transportation. USDA Forest Service. 1995. (ROD) Record of Decision, U.S. Highway 89, Logan Canyon. 65 �.. USDA Forest Service. 1992. National Environmental Policy Act. Federal Register, V. 57, No. 182. USDA Forest Service. 1985. Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Wasatch-Cache National Forest. Salt Lake City, UT Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT). 1995. (ROD) Record of Decision, U.S. 89 Through Logan Canyon. Utah Department of Transportation. 1993. (FEIS) Final Environmental Impact Statement, U.S. Highway 89, Logan Canyon. Prepared by CH2M Hill. 11, CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS NOT EVALUATED IN TIlE FEIS UDOT's Record of Decision introduces new construction impacts that were never mentioned in the FEIS. Thus the Forest Service has adopted an FEIS which does not meet the "standards for an adequate statement" required by 40 CFR 1506.3a for the adoption of an FEIS. Rubble and Spoil: UDOT's Record of Decision states, "Excess materials that are not used in roadway construction or restoration of the borrow area near Bear Lake Summi~ will be disposed of in locations determined on a case-by-case basis by the CAT team and approved by the USFS. Excess materials may be ... stock piled (sic) for future use ... " (page 23). Neither the DEIS nor the FEIS ever mentioned the stockpiling of rubble for future use. It was assumed that, for any given section under construction, there would be more than enough material excavated (see FEIS, Table 4-15) and hence no need to store material in the canyon. Storage piles will act as sediment sources that will impact streams, they will directly destroy habitat, and their presence will violate visual quality requirements. Permanent disposal of rubble became a major issue upon release of the DEIS, and was addressed specifically in the FEIS (pages 4-70 and 4-71). The FEIS referred to only one disposal site in the Canyon, the abandoned borrow area near the summit. Other than this one site, it specifically stated, "The balance of surplus material will be deposited outside of the canyon area." Rubble and spoil disposal was a major issue because highway construction in the Lower Canyon in the 1960 's left a large spoil pile that has not yet revegetated to a natural appearance. As with the storage piles, rubble disposal in the canyon will be a sediment source (how can one revegetate this 66 • �• subsoil material effectivel y?), will permanently destroy habitat, and will violate visual quality requirements. None of these impacts were disclosed in the FEIS . Borrow Pits: UDOT's Record of Decis ion mentions "material sources," in other words, borrow pits (page 33). These features were never mentioned in the FEIS, yet they will have undeniable impacts. The wording in the FEIS, such as, "Spoil material will be generated during excavation. Some of this spoil material will be used for embankments and other construction related uses" (page 4-70), implies that excavation for curve cuts, etc. , will be the source of thi s type of construction material. Borrow pits and their attendant haul roads will destroy hab itat, violate visual quality requirements, and be sources of sediment-laden runoff that will impact streams. None of this was disclosed in the EIS process. Further, it appears that UDOT is still trying to suppress this information in th e Record of Decision, since th e "Construction Impacts" section makes no mention of either borrow pits or material sources (pages 23-24). Haul Roads: Haul roads are mentioned for the first time in the EIS process in UDOT's Record of Decision. They are mentioned on page 23 and also on page 33, in relation to borrow pits. There was no reason for the public to suspect their presence in past discussions, since there were no plans for borrow pits or material stockpiles. They represent a new impact with concerns as stated above. Staging Areas: UDOT' s Record of Decision reveals that there will be staging areas needed for construction (page 24). These large areas will destroy habitat, be sources of sediment and pollutant-laden runoff, and violate visual quality requirements. Never in the EIS process were staging areas mentioned. Batch Plants: The potential need for batch plants located in the canyon was never discussed during the EIS process, but is revealed on page 24 of UDOT's Record of Decis ion. In addition to the concerns listed for staging areas, batch plants raise air quality concerns. This should have been dis cussed during the EIS process. General: These issues should have been discussed by UDOT in the EIS process, since technical topics such as batch plants, material sources, etc., are not items which the general public is necessarily informed about. It appears that these technical details were purposely withheld from the public. The Forest Service has therefore adopted an FEIS which does not meet the "standards for an adequate statement" required by 40 CFR 1506.3a for the adoption of an FEIS. Literature Cited Utah Department of Transportation (UOOn. 1995. (ROD) Record of Decision, U.S. 89 Through Logan Canyon. 67 �• Utah Department of Transportation. 1993. (FEIS) Final Environmental Impact Statement, U.S. Highway 89, Logan Canyon. Prepared by CH2M Hill. Utah Department of Transportation. 1990. (DEIS). Draft Environmental Impact Statement, U.S . Highway 89, Logan Canyon. Prepared by CH2M Hill. APPENDIX A Maps of area APPENDIX B Conservationists' Alternative APPENDIX C Photos of Affected Areas 68 �United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Washington Office File Code: Date: Kevin Kobe, President Logan Canyon Coalition U.S.U. Box 1674 Logan, Utah 84322-0199 14 th & Independence SW P . O. Box 96090 Washington. DC 20090-6090 1570-1 (L) NF S# 9S-13-00-0018-A21S JUN 2 9 1995 CERTIFIED MAIL -R.R.R. Dear Mr. Kobe: W have completed our revie w of your May 15, 1995, appeal of Regional Forester e Dale Bosworth 's decision to amend the Wasatch-Cache Forest Plan and to consent to issuing an easement to the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT), in coordination with t he Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), to enable them to perform needed reconstruction and safety work on Nati onal Forest System land associated wi th rehabilitation o f u.s. Highway 89 through Logan Canyon. The Regional Forester's decision is documented in his March 31, 1995, Record of Deci s i o n (ROD) o n the FHWA's Final Environmental Impac t Statement (EI S) for the project. My review of your appeal has been conducted pursuant to 36 CFR 215 o f the Secretary's Appeal Regulations. Whereas your appeal challenges the adequacy of the FHWA 's environmental impact reports, I have limited my review to the Regional Forester's decision. In accordance with 36 CFR 215. 19, the ' Appeal Reviewing Officer has reviewed the appeal record and his wri tten recommendation on the disposition of the appeal is enclosed. As the Reg i onal Forester stat es i n h is Record of Decision, the Forest Service is not (emphasis added) making a decision to improve or how to improve U.S. 89. The FHWA and UOOT have already made the decision to improve the r oadway. See FHWA 's ROD for U.S . Highway 89, project # F -021(7). The bases for the project, as well as known and anticipated environmental effects, are ide nt ified and discussed in the associated Nat ional Environmental Policy Act (NEPAl documents. Mitigation measures have been prescribed for potential and known adve rse environmental impact, including those concerns identified by the Forest Service. In my review of the record, I find that Appellant has actively participated in the NEPA process and that Appellant's concerns have been considered in the formulation of the FHWA 's Fi ••al EIS and ROD. In fact, it appears Appellant's members were involved in a special citizen group formed to advise the FHWA and others on how best t o achieve this project in an environmentally sensitive manner. See faxed letter dated May 31, 1995, from Lauren M. Keller, Chairperson, Citizens for the Protection o f Logan Canyon. The FHWA 's ROD contains many of the reco mmendations proposed by that group (Citi zens f o r the Protection of Logan Canyon). My finding is re i nforced further by Douglas E. Thompson, President of the Cache Chamber of Commerce. In his l ette r as an inte r ested party dated May 31, 1995, Mr . Thompson gives a detailed description of the how the project was developed and the Chamber's opposition to Appellant's current assertions. Cari n g for the Land and Serving People Pnn:eo on Aecyc!ecI Paper FS-6200·28Q (12/93) ."'i .... �Kevin Kobe, President 2 Reasonable people can be expected to disagree, even when given the similar facts . We have carefully examined the decisions and mitigation measures taken by the Regional Forester and find them reasonable and supportable. It is fully appropriate that use and occupancy of National Forest System land be authorized by an easement. It is also required that changes in Forest Plan direction be documented through amendment to the Forest Plan. In this case, the adjustments are minor, thus, the Regional Forester is correct to provide for a non-significant amendment to the Forest Plan. Accordingly, Regional Forester Bosworth's March 31, 1995, decision for the U.S. Highway 89 rehabilitation project is affirmed. My decision on your appeal constitutes the final administrative determination of the Department of Agriculture (36 eFR 215.18). Sincerely, c;2~:1I~XW~~ Appeal Deciding Officer Associate Deputy Chief National Forest System Enc l osures cc: Regional Forester, R- 4 Zachary Frankel, Director, URce Caring for th e Land and Serving P eo p le ?tlnted on Recycled Paper "5-6200·280 {12193) .#f!:a ." �united States Department o f Agriculture Pile Code : Route To: Subject: To: Fores t Serv ice 1570 14th & Independence SW P. O. Box 96090 Washington. DC 20090·6090 Washington Office Date: June 15, 1995 Appea l Reviewing Officer Recommendation Appeal No. 95-13-QQ - Q018-A215 Appeal Deciding Officer This is my review of the substantive quality of the March 31, 1995, decision made by Regional Forester Dale Bosworth to amend the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP ) to be cons i stent with the Fe deral Highway Administration's (FHWA) and the Utah Department of Transportation's (UOOT ) deci si o n to construct improvements to U . S. Highway 89 from Logan to Garden City . This decision adopts the UDOT and FHA U,S, Highway 89 Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) . The Forest Service was a cooperating agency for the development of this EIS. The Regional Forester 's decision changes the visual quality objectives from retention to parcial re tenti o n for the highway easement near Logan Cave and to modification for the remainder o f the r o ute. It also changes t he guidel ine s for fisheries habitat indices to permit decreases not e xceeding 5 percent of the existing popUlation when the decreases are temporary and the resulti n g index exceeds established minimum standards. This decision will grant a transportation easement over approximately 72 additional ac r es of the Wasatch· Cache National Fo rest whi ch is required for expansion of the highway corridor . As part of my revi e w, I have 'considered the arguments presented in the appeal by the Logan Canyon Coalition (LCC ) and the Utah Rivers Conservation Council. Addi t ional ly, I have revie wed the comments submitted by UDOT, Cit izens for the Protection of Logan Canyon (CPLC l. the Cache Chamber of Commerce. Appeal Summary (al Appellant objections The appellants have raised the following issues : lack of demonstrated purpose ane need, safety, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Of f icials (ASSHTO) standards and highway design, wild and scenic river planning. fishery impacts and Bonneville Cutthroat Trout, wildlife impacts and sensitive species, sensitive plants. visual retention, economic impacts, wetlands, water quality, lack of disclosure of construction impacts, and the application of Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act. �Appeal Deciding Officer page 2 (b) Informal meeting results There was no resolution to the issues discussed at the ~~y 30, 1995, informal disposition meeting with LCC. Appeal points discussed were safety, highway design, wild and scenic rivers planning, and impacts to fish including the 80nneville Cutthroat Trout. (c) Intere sted Party comments In their comments, UDOT states the issues raised by the appellants were addressed in the EIS and its Record Of Decision (ROD). They also state the resource requirement s (mitigation ) imposed by the coope rating Federal agencies have been met. In the comments received from CPLC, this group explained that the modifications to the Preferred Alternative for the FHWA ROD was a result of hours of negotiations with UOOT. They also state the LCC was formed from members of CPLC "who felt the compromise did n ot go far enough to protect the canyon. " The Cache Chamber of Commerce provided specific comments on the issues. They stated no new issues are raised by the appellants and the Chamber's fundamental reason for supporting the project is traffic safety. They emphasi zed every writte n opinion by elected officials representing Cache and Rich Counties supports the project. Findinas (a) Clarity of the decision and rationale I find the clarity of the decision and its rationale meets agency standards. The nature of the action under the Regional Forester's decision (FS ROD) is clearly stated. He states the limits of his decision and informs the reader that he is "not making a decision to improve or how to improve u.s. B9" as t~at decision was already made by FHWA and UDOT with Forest Service parti cipation (FS ROD page 1) The FS ROD clearly discloses the logic and rationale for this decision. Comments from both the public and cooperat ing agencies were considered in making the decis i on. Required mitigation measures are disclosed. (b) Comprehension of benefits and purpose of proposal The purpose and need for the project is found in Section 1.2 of the £IS. The need and scope of the Regional Forester's decision is found in the introduction to the fS ROD. This decision reflects the determination found in t~e FHWA ROD {p o 15l that an amendment to the LRMP is necessary to implement the modified Preferred Alternative. The No Action Alternati ve was given full consideration. �Appeal Deciding Officer page 3 This proposal was generated by FHWA and UDQT, and the decision to amend the L~1P will make the proposal consist ent with agency policy and direction. Gr~~ting the transportation easement is an appropriate use of National Forest System Lands. (c ) Consistency of the decision with policy, direction and supporting information Contrary to the appellants concerns that environmental and procedural laws have not been met, I find that the Regional Forester's decision is consistent with agency policy, direction, the EIS, and its supporting documentation. Therefore, I do not believe his decision is arbitrary or capricious. I have not found any violation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPAl, the National Forest Management Act, the Multiple Use-Sustained Yield ACt, the Endangered Species Act, the National Hist oric Preservation Act, the Clean Water Act, the Department of Transportation Act, or any other law. Of particular interest was the appellants' statement tha t the "Forest Service management policy for Logan Canyon is inconsistent from document to document" (Appeal p . 4 ) . In reviewing and comparing the Regional Forester's decision , the FHWA ROD, EIS and LRMP, I find no inconsistency. Plans like the appellants mentioned Logan Canyon Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan are analysis and evaluation tools and are not part of the Forest Service's two levels of decisionmaking process. The determinat ion that this is a non-significant amendment to the W asatch-Cache National Forest LRMP is appropriate. The decision reflects site-specific amendment needs related to the implementation of the project and not s weeping changes to the Forest-wide standards and guidelines. (d) Effectiveness of public participation activities and use of comments There has been an extensive public participation process for this project. Not o nly were the minimum NEPA scoping and notification requirements met, additional public information meetings were held, a "Citizens Review Committee" was used to determine whether the Draft EI S addressed the issues in an understandable and appropriate manner, and any person who commented on the Draft EIS received a brochure explaining the Preferred Alternative. Comments were taken on concerns raised by the Preferred Alternative prior to the release of the Final EIS. Before making their decision, FHWA and UDOT modified their preferred alternative through nego tiati ons with CPLC to address and mitigate concerns. A£ter the FWHA decision and prior to issuing his own decision, the Regional Forester met with members of the LCC to discuss their concerns over the project . In his decision, the Regional Forester states "these concerns were considered in formulation" of his decision (FS ROD p. 10 ) . The EIS demonstrates other agencies with jurisdiction, the Fish and Wildlife Se~ice and the Army Corps o f Engineers, were contacted and they provided �Appeal Deciding Officer page 4 information for the development of the EIS and its alternatives. State agencies, elected officials, various organizations, and the media were all contacted about the project . (e) Requested changes and objections of the appellants The appellants are very knowledgeable about the project and its environmental consequences . However, mOGt of the appeal points raised by the appellants are outside of the scope of the Regional Forester's decision to amend che LRMP and to grant an easement. In their appeal, the appellants have provided specific information which they believe contradicts the conclusions of the EIS. They have put forth an extensive, site-specific argument for the implementation of ~a less damaging alternative" (Appeal p. 4). Specifically, they believe a reduction of the designated speed for the road would more adequately meet the safety issue without the environmental loss due to construction . Their issues were raised early in the NEPA process and alternatives with appropriate mitigation measures were developed to address their concerns. However, they claim the FHWA ROD ~introduces new construction impacts that were never mentioned" in the EIS (Appeal p. 86). These construction impacts include rubble and spoil disposal, material sources, haul roads, staging areas, and batch plants. Construction impacts are discussed in section 4.25 of the EIS, and were raised as comments to the Draft £IS. Reco1lU!lendation I recommend that the Regional Forester's decision be affirmed. As a result my review, I find the Forest Service was an active cooperating agency in the developmen~ of the EIS, the Regional Forester correctly limited the scope of the decision' to within the jurisdiction of the Forest Service, there was extensive public participation in trying to resolve the environmental issues, and the required mitigation measures are appropriate for the minimizing of environmental impacts while meeting the purpose and need for the project. Furthermore, I find that the issues raised by the appellants were adequately addressed in either the decision or its supporting documents. Atd!/c/ DAVID L. HESSEL Director Timber Management �.' " CPLC Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon P. O . Box 3608, Logan, Utah 84323 - 3608 USDA-FS Appeals Reviewing Officer P.O . Box 96090 Washington, D .C . 20090-6090 Re: Statement of Appeal for Logan Canyon U .S . 89, Logan, Utah. Dear Sir: In the Forest Service Appeal, submitted by the Logan Canyon Coalition and othen, there is no reference to how the Modified Preferred Alternative was created. Members of Qur orgtlnization. Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon, spent countless hours in negotiations with the Utah Department of Transportation. The Modified Preferred Altcmatlve is the result of those negotiations. Logan Canyon Coalition was fonned from members of our group who felt the compromise did not go far enough to protect the canyon. rfyou have any questions please feel free to contact me at 801 - 752-0706. __ tcrdY~~ Lauren M . Keller Chairperson �655 Canyon Road Logan, UT 84321 July 14, 1995 Lauren M. Keller, Chairperson QlLC P.O. Box 3608 Logan, UT 84323-3608 Dear Lauren, I think you'd better take me off the CPLC Steering Committee. I haven't ever done much for the organization, to justify a leadership position, even nominal, and now I am experiencing a certain undeniable discomfort. Given recent events. maybe it's better if I give up the idea of trying to be a bridge between CPLC and LCC. I wasn't consulted about the idea of writing an interestedparty letter to the Forest Service, but if I had been , I would have argued strongly against it. First, the official position of CPLC, the one voted on in October, stated that if the Forest Plan were violated, there could be an appeal. The Forest Plan, quite clearly, is violated several different ways by the ROD. So, even though it's a different group who made the appeal to the Forest Service, CPLC (I would have argued) should at least remain silent. Second is the moral dimension . CPLC's letter to the Appeals Reviewing Officer aligns CPLC with the Modified Preferred Alternative and says, in effect, that LCC is illegitimate. I am afraid this indicates that CPLC may be more interested in political turf than in protecting the Canyon. Why should CPLC have feared a successful LCC appeal? In the appeal, LCC produced the most comprehensive, accurate, detailed, and devastating analysis yet done on the proposed construction . Anyone dedicated to protecting the Canyon should respect its thoroughness, and be gratefu l for the work of the compilers. Nothing better -- nothing even close -- has been done on Logan Canyon . CPLC should not have given the Forest Service any help in this matter, and certainly should not have undercut a fellow environmental organization. That is not simply bad manners -- it denies the whole morality of environmentalism, which is that the environment comes first. Sincerely, Thomas J. Lyon �r r om : (eche Chfimberl Brid e riend FaH phone: B01 153 ~ , ue lity : me CACHE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE /""-160?'\ORTH YiAC-: • LOG.'\.'\ . L"TA H S-B11 • (80 11751-11 6 1· FAX (801 ) 75:--?>. U6 May 3 1. 1995 USDA-Forest Service Appeals Reviewi ng Officer P.O. Box 96090 Washington. D.C. 20090-6090 FAX 202-205-1758 [Eight tQ[al pages including this one] Response to Notice of Appeal and Statement of Reasons From Logan Canyon Coalition Regarding the Re cord of Decision . U.S . Highway 89 . Logan Canyon Wasatch-Cache National Forest I am Douglas E . Thompson. president of the Cache Chamber of Commerce . a 600-member chamber for all Cache County. and supervisor of the Bridgerland Travel Region Board . which promotes tourism for Cache and Rich Counties . As a party interested in the Logan Canyon Highway Project. I am compelled to make comment on the appeal.. Because time constraints and board meeting schedules precluded getting formal approval of thi s statement from the respective board s. this statement is my own . It. however.. is based on past discussions and statements formally approved by both boards . Appellants' appeal is very well written and documented . On the surface . it appears to be forceful and mo tivatin g . However. careful analysis by those familiar with the project and the process that led to the compromise Record of Decision shows many critical flaws in fact and logic in appellants' document.. No matter how good appellants' rhetoric is . simply saying it does not make it so . Errors and misleading sta tements in appellants· document will be deli neated roughly fo11m\/ing the outline they used in the app~al. Introduction Appellants' basic assertions lack foundation in fact.. The record o f public hearings . discu ssio ns. and public input clearly shows that there has been full and earnest compliance with NEPA requirements. The construction project has already been sca led down from the Preferred Alternative recognizing the needs of the Logan Canyon environment. The Conservationists' Alternative has been honestly and straightforwardly considt!red time and again . The compromise represen ted by the ROD leans heavily in favo r of the Conserva tionists' Alternative bu t still provides an acceptable level of service and safety. This project is the best and most complete attempt at compliance with NEPA requirements of any project in UDOT's hi story. It is the apparent opi ni on of o.ppeJl:mts that until eve ry square inch of affected soil.. water and air affected has been analysed and considered . applying only methodologies accepted by appellant s . the project is not in absolute compliance with NEPA reqUirements . That level of proof is infeasible and impractical.. Reaso n should rule. The ROD represents a finely craned compromise that reasonably but not absolu tely protects the environment. On the other hand . it reasonably protects lives anu safery o f the people whtl use the highway . �Cache Chamber ofComme:rce Response To Logan Canyon Coaltion Appeal Page 2 Extreme views have no place in the process now. Extreme views for protection should have no more right to be heard at this time than the extreme views for development. The ROD does not satisfy those who favor greater development but the process does not :lUOW the pro·development extreme to reiterate their positions. The process gives ear only to those who want les~ than the ROD. The group presenting the appeal is a minority within a minority. The large r environmental community that participated in the discussions and the negotia tions that led to the compromise could never document that they represented more than a few thousand people. The appellants are a very small splinter group of a vocal but well orga nized minority. The clear majority of the citizens of Cache and Rich Counties suppo rted the Preferred Alterna ti ve. EVERY. REPEAT EVERY. ELECTED OFFICIAL REPRESENTING CACHE AND RICH COUNTIES W HO HAS WRITTEN AN OPINION SUPPORTS THE PROJECT. The largest local repre se ntative elected bodies. the Cache Counry Council. the Rich County Commission. and the Cache Mayo rs Association. have repeatedly stated their support of UDOT project plans. The vote o f approval of the ROD by the Cache County Council was not unanimous because some council members felt the ROD did not improve the highway eno ugh . I. HISTORY AND BACKGROUND From the very beginning. those most closely associated with tourism in Logan Canyon have had significant input to the project. The proposals for National Scenic Byway status and the recent successfullSTEA grant for Byway Enhancement were carefully coordinated among the Forest Service. UDOT. and the Bridgerland Tra vel Board. Nothing in the ROD will significantly reduce scenic tourism. in fact. the project will improve the safety of and access for tourists. That the scale of the project received "massive opposition" is an exaggeration. The opposition was vocal, media savvy, and very well organized. but it was never very large. Its largest demonstration claimed only 400 participants: I was there and counted about 250. And its petitions were critically flawed. One was so misrepresented that one mayor. to hi s profound embarrassment. signed it t hin~ng it was for the project. On seve ral occasions. the Chamber polled its members regarding th'e project and the plurality for the projec t never dipped below 70 percent. Lack of Demonstr ated Purpose and Need 1 am not a safety engineer and do not feel adequate to respond to the technical questions of safety. However. I drive the canyon often and can speak as a user. When no one else is o n the road. it is safe enough and the travel time from Logan to Garden Cil)' is acceptable. That is why the travel speeds have no t been a major issue with proponents. But no o ne driving the Canyon on a summer weekend would say the canyon highway was safe o r that travel times were acceptable. To completely alleviate delays during peak traffic would reqUire a project acceptable to only a very few. But to leave it essentially as it is. with a few rurnouts. as the Conservationists' Alternative suggests. is neither safe nor reasonable. Bear Lake and Logan Canyon are the region's two most popular tOUlist attractions. dra\\'ing large numbers from the populous Wasatch Front (Sal t Lake City. Ogden and ProvO). The traffic studies do not show the increase in numbers and size o f recreational vehicles and boats traveling to Bear Lake. Without passing lanes to relieve their length. vehicle convoys on summer weekends and holidays become accidents waiting to happen. In the opinion of the Chamb;;!f. the �C ache Chamber of Commerce Response To Logan Canyon Coaltion Appeal Page3 ROD is inadequate [0 alleviate heavy ho liday traffic pressure but it will hdp. On oth e: r days. passin g lanes. wider pavement and safer turn s that the ROD sug gests 3re accept3ble. [h~ When it comes to commerce and demographics. the appeal is wro ng and misleading. 1-80 is n ot the east access road for commerce out of C ache County: Logan Canyon is. The map in the Appeal 's Appendix A is extremely mi sleading becau se it eliminates the criti cal connec ting road between Kemmerer and Little America. where commercial traffic joins 1-80. The following companies (representing ove r 5.000 employees in Cac he Valley ) have weekly and often daily shlpments in and o ut of Cac he Valley using Logan Canyon: Presto Products (plastic bag products. headqu3rters in Wi sconsin ) Cache Valley Cheese (heavy distribution to the east. strong supplie s in the east) Gossner Foods (dairy foods. strong distribution to the east) E.A .Mille r (meat packer. strong distribution to th e east. supplies from eaSL). WeatherShield (window manufactu rer and di stributio n center with \Visconsi n headquarters) L.W . Miller (custom freight) Miller Transportation (custom freight) Pe pperidge Farms (cookies. strong distribution to the east ) LeG rand Johnson (road construction and cement) Jack Parson (construction and cement) Logan Coach (horse trailers. strong midwest distribution) Logan Manufacturing (strong midwest and eas tern distribution) Simplor Dairy Products (custom cheese wrapping. strong eastern distribution ) Schreiber Foods (processed cheese. supplies grocery stories and fast foods from the Mississippi west) These are only the largest. There are many other Cache Valley businesses that depend on a passable and safe Logan Canyon fo r their livelihood. To ask the se businesses to use 1-80 for their eastern based commerce would cost millions of dollars every year in increased miles and delivery time. Logan Canyon is promoted locally. statewide and nationally as the best and most sce ni c route from Salt Lake City to Yello,,:,stone. It is promoted locally by Blidge rland Travel Region. statewide by the Utah Travel Council. and na tio nally by Heart of the Rockie s and the American Automobile Association (AAA). Even tho ugh it is slightly longer in time than 1- 15 and mile s than Idaho 34. and higher elevation than either. Logan Canyon is the ro ute recommended by AAA for Yellowstone to Salt Lake City. not 1- 15 or Idaho 34. The appeal takes pains to poi nt to the 1980-90 decline in Rich County permanent population. It does not reveal the reason for the dec line was the boornlbust o f the sou thweste rn Wyoming oil fields. The 1980 census figures were artificially high because of the boom. The: 1990 figures show a slow but steady grow th from 1970. The se are permanent po pulation numbers. T he primary industry of Rich County has shifted to tourism and Garden City is becoming a resort community with a very high part-time resident population. Now. there are about as many parrtime residents as full-time. Tourism is in creasin g rapidly . Unemployment is running near two percent and assessed property valuati ons have increased dramatically . While not in a boom. Rich County's economy is improving steadily. In summary. :.t si mple analysi s o f Rich County ce nsus figures is misleading when used to predict lower traffi c volumes. Cit ing the decreasing rale of gro\.vth fo r ca nyon tr:.tffic vol umes is al so misle:::tdi ng because thaI analysi s does not consider the underlying rea so ns. Su mmer traffic in LC'gan Canyon will always �',om, :" Cache Chamber of Commerce Response To Logan Canyon Coaltioo Appeal Page4 have a hil.!h correlation to (he water level of Bear Lake. The mid-1980's repre se nt near· record high water levels and consequential higher traffic volumes. The latter years of the study period represent near-record low lake levels. During those years reliable access to the lake was available only on the east side of the lake. persuading Wasatc h Front traffic to go through Wyoming to Laketown. The summer of 1994 was the first year in the last five that large sail boats CQuid be safelY launched. As the lake level increases. as it has alway s done in its historical cycles. Logan Canyon traffic volumes will undoubtedly also increase . Other non-demographic factors will increase Canyon traffic . The improvements and promotion s financed by the ISTEA Byway Enhancement Grant will draw more tourists. The Forest Service 's own Great Western Trail promotions will attract more. And the first new commercial tourism property on Bear Lake in two decades. Harbor Village. will bring even more. With growth in commerce in Cache Valley. in parr-time Rich County residents, and in touri sm at Bear Lake and in Logan Canyon. UDOT traffic volume projections will be low. 2. SAFET Y ISSUES The fundamental reason that the Chamber supports the ROD is safety. As traffic volume increases. and the Chamber firmly believes it will. safety becomes the only reason to improve the highway. C urrent travel time for commerce is acceptable. especially when compared to the 1-80 and Idaho 34 alternatives. But already safety is an issue . It is difficult for semi-trailers to negotiate the tighter turns in the Middle Canyon without having back wheels run off thl! road. It is possible for two commercial vehicles to pass on Burnt Bridge and the T win Bridges but both vehicles will likely lose side mirrors. It is not safe for bicyclists to travel in Logan Canyon past Right Hand Fork because the hard surface shoulder literally disappears for seve ral miles through the middle canyon. With bicycle touring growing in popularity. it is unfair to not allow safe bicycle use of the canyon highway. It is important to note that the majority of the people in Cache Valley re mained publicly silent in this whole processes. The best way to gauge their feeli ngs is by the people whom th ey elected to repre sen t th em. Witho ut exception. at every public hearing and in every written respons.e fro m e lected officials . they unequivocally supP0rled the need for a safe r hi gh way. Regarding the safery o f the lower. improved section of highway and the greater number of accidents: it is qUite Si mple . There is su bstantially more traffic in the lower canyon. that 's where the largest campgrounds are and where the larger fishing facilities are . With more traffic and more frequent entries and exi ts on the highway. there will be more accidents. We accept UDOT safety and accident analysi s and numbers. Appellants do not. If one were to disregard UDOT traffic figures and look only at Forest Service records of usage for lower campgrounds compared to higher ones in relation to accide nts. accidents per camper wou ld be higher in the upper canyon. 3. AASHTO STANDARDS AND HIGHWAY DESIGN Fundame ntal to appellants' arguments is the "arhitrary anll capricious" applicati on of AASHTO standards. 1 can nN speak to ASSHTO stanllards but I can say thOot nothing in thi s ROn is "a rbitrary or capricious." Th e environmental community has see n to that. Although tht> �Cache Chamber of Commerce Response To Logan Canyon Coaltion Appeal Page5 Chamber and extreme environmentalists often disagreed. particularly in the early stages of the process. anyone associated with the process will agree that the environmental community has been te naci ous. Th ey forced UDOT and their consultants to exami ne and reexamine their analysis and conclusions. Working close ly with UDOT. and other State and Federal age ncie s associated with the process. I vouch for the earnestness and sincerity of the. bureaucra ts trying to respond to the questions of the environmentalists. To say that any of the ROD is "arbitrary and capricious" denies the very material and effective role that the environmental community has played in the process. Improve Level of Service of the Highway to Accommodate Projected Traffic Volumes Once again. in their rush to analyse the appellants did not consider why traffic level gro\vth has slowed. Undoubtedly . commerce. real esta te. and tourism will cause traffi c levels to increase. Already. tourism is the greatest contributor to annual cyclica l increases. As promotion increase. so will tourism volumes. Impr ove Traffic Flow On page 27. appellants claim that UDOT has not adequately considered the Conservationists' Altema(ive and have not compromised "for the sake of environmental protection." From the view of the Chamber and Travel Region Board. most of the compromises have come from UDOT. Only in the latest stage s of negoti:ltion did CPLC compromise mu ch. Before that time. all of the changes in the project had been in the direction of the Conservationists' Alternative. So much so. that the Chamber was beginning to wonder when and where it would stop. Until the ROD. Chamber members readily supported UDOT 's proposals. Many Chamber members. particularly commercial truckers had to be persuaded to approve the ROD . In essence. they said. "Not one more inch of reductions." They had compromised their positions enough. To say that UDOT has not genuinely compromised is absurd to anyone who has observed the process. 4. WILD AND SCENIC R{VERS Lacking expe rtise in thi s field: we have little to say excep t that it appears to us thaI bringing up this issue at this late date is only a stalling tactic. If appellants had been sincere in their concern for the status of the river. they should have brought the issue to the table long ago. They had ample opportunity . Furthe r. it is my observation that every precaution is being taken to protect the river. The bridges will be constructed with no piers in the river and the bridges with pi ers in the river will be removed . The ROD should actually improve the free flow of the river. 5. FISHERY IMPACTS AND BONNEVILLE CUTTHROAT TROUT Again. every pre caution is being taken to protect the river. Sedime.nt:ltion will be ke pt to a minimum in volume and duration. Concern about sedimentation from work along the dugway borders on the ludicrous. Th e work along the dugway will be at least dozens of feet away from the liver anu as far away a~ ~ quarter of a mile . �CacheCbamber of Commerce Response To Logan Canyon Coa ltion Appeal Page6 T he disturbing aspect of the appeal is that it clearly places a greater yalue on fish and flowers m than it does on hum:: life and safety. Because of compromise to protect fish habitat. Ihe Temple Fork intersection has been downgraded 10 the point that it will still be da ngerous by design to make a lef! tum going down canyon. The fish and thl! river are being protecteu at the expense of huma n safety . 6. WILDLIFE IMPACTS AND SENSITIVE SPECIES and 7. ADDITIONAL CONCERNS WITH SENSITIVE PLANTS The requests for studies a re for species increasingly obscure and further down the evolutionary chain. In the May 30. 1995. Forest Service hearing. appe ll an ts req uested studies of macroinve rtabrates. Will subseq uent studies be asked for bacteria and vi ru s? T he studies have been reasonably complete. certainly acce ptable fo r NEPA. 8. VISUAL RETENTION Of all the affected groups. the Bridgerland T ravel Region shou ld be the most concerned with the scenic visual aspects of the canyon. The Region has repeatedly voiced its support of the canyon project and has not changed its positio n in the Slightest. 9. ECONOMIC IMPACTS It is the o pinion of the Cache Chamber of Commerce. the BridgerJa nd Travel Region. the Rich Coun£)' Commission. the Bear Lake C hamber of Comme rce (Garden City). the Cache Coun£)' Council and every local governme ntal body that has writte n an opi nion. that the Logan Canyon highway project will have only positive economic impacts. T he on ly possible negati ve impacts may be during actual construction because travelers may :lvoid th e canyon. But that can be minimized by keeping the highway o pe n throughout construction . AAA has indicated they will continue to recommend travel through the canyon during construction. 10. WETLAND ISSUES One of the major compromise~ from the Prefe rred Altemalive 10 the ROD is narrowing (he pavement from (he "cattle guard" to Beaver Mountain to red uce the amo unt of wetlands affecteu by the project. Along with the concern for wetlands demonstrated in the FEIS. the ROD takes great care to avoid damage to wetlands. The concerns of appe llants have been heard at every public hearing on [he proj ect. W etlands conce rns have been more [han adequately addressed. 11. WATER QUALITY AND DESIGNATED USES Concern for Logan River and the quality of wate r have been one o f the d tiving forces for the design of the highway project. The re may be mino r. localized. very short tenn damage done durin g construction but the entire project has been modified to protect the river and irs W:lter quality. Appellants' description of damage a re from the FEIS for the Preferred Allernative. The ROD will subs[antially reduce eve n the short tenn impacts. 12. CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS NOT EVALUATED IN THE FEIS Beca use the very nature of highway cons truction precluues prellicting every possible impact. several prec':lUtions have been taken to adjust Ihe.: projt::ct to elimi nate or minimize unfor..:seen impacts. The project e nvironme ntal engineer anll rhe Coope rative Advi sory T:;!am will \\'::atch for �Cache Chamber of Commerce Response To Logan Canyon Coaltion Appeal Page 7 immediate problems. Design review of each phase will also reduce pOtential impacts. Even though LCC was not given a position on the CAT. legitimate concerns brought to the CAT will surely be acted on. 13 . 4(f) SITES To include the highway and rights-of-way as protected recreation is a stretch in any reasonable person 's imagination. The Forest Service respected the letter and the intent o f secti on 4(f) when it designated the 154(0 sites. -len SUMMARY Appellants have had access to the Environmental Impact Study process from the very beginnin g of the Logan Canyon Highway project. Their concerns have been heard and have had a profound affect on the ROD . Appellants had complete and unfettered access to the process. To alter the project now to suit the appellants is unfair to the cooperators from all sides who worked so hard within the syste m developing the ROD. Appellants had the opporruni ty (0 speak. they were heard . and their concerns we re acted upon. What more can citizens ask of the system unle ss it is their intention to bring process to its knees thro ugh stalling practices. The EIS process panders to an intellecrual elite while it appears to disre gard the wishes of elec ted official and long es tablished community organizations. A very small group. armed with a thorough knowledge of statistics and the willingness to spend the time to analyse each set of data. could effectively stall a project by challenging the methodologie s used to arrive at the data in the E IS. That is happening now . Appellants are abusing the system because their personal agendas for the project have not been mel. Once a group or an individual agrees with an E IS for a project. they no longe r have a place in the process. There is no way to defend a position. After accepting an EIS. aU one can do is watch his position erode away as disagreeing parties are given continued access to the system. As you review the appeaL please bear in mind th at literally thousands of reasonable people of good will have acted in good faith to produce the project represented in the ROD. The !a\VS h:lve been satisfied. The public has been heard. A super-majority represen ted by elected officials. and establi shed civic organizations support the ROD . Now is the time 10 move forward with :l project that will save human lives while it more (han adequate ly protects a canyon that we all love. Sincerely. Douglas E. Thompson_ President Cache Chamber of Commerce cc: Senator Orrin Hatch Congressman James Han sen Marsha BaiT. US Forest Service Regional Appeals CoonJinator �United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Region 324 25th Street Ogden, UT 84401-2310 File Code : 1950 Date : March 31, 1995 Dear Reviewer: In January, most of you received notification of the Utah Department of Transpor tation (UDOT) and Federal Highway Administration's decision to r econstruct portions of U.S. Highway 89 t hrough Logan Canyon . For the next step of t he process, it was necessary that decisions be made pertaining to National Forest System lands. My decis ion and amendment for the Wasatch· Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan are enclosed. This has been a long and arduous task for all parties involved and many of you have participated for several years. I first became familiar with this project as Forest Supervisor of the Wasatch-Cache National Forest . Now several years and many improvements later, I believe the decision made by UDOT and the Federal Highway Administration will protec t the valuable re sources in Logan Canyon yet allow for r oad improvements to be made. Throughout the environmental analys is, the Forest Service wo rked close ly with these agencies. If you have any que st ions about this decision, please contact Chip Sibbernsen, Acting Logan District Ranger, at (801) 755·3620 . Sincerely, - V1 . 6-...... ..----DALE N. BOSWORTH Regional Forester Enclosure Caring for the Land and Serving People Printed on R«:vcIecI Paper F5-62O).28b (f2/93) G �• RECORD OF DECISION us HIGHWAY 89 LOGAN CANYON HIGHWAY - CACHE AND RICH COUNTIES, UTAH FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (FEIS) AMENDMENT OF THE WASATCH-CACHE NATIONAL FOREST LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND CONSENT TO GRANT A TRANSPORTATION EASEMENT ACROSS THE WASATCH-CACHE NATIONAL FOREST USDA FOREST SERVICE, INTERMOUNTAIN REGION I. Introduction Th i s document contains my decision to amend the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management plan (Forest Plan) to be consistent with the Fe deral Highway Administration's (FHWA) and the Utah Department of Tra nsportation's (UDOT) decision to construct reasonable and necessary improvements to U . S. 89 from Logan to Garden City. This document also contains my decision to consent to grant a transportation easement over approximately seve nty-two additional acres of the Wasatch-Cache National Forest required for the project. It is important to clarify that I am not making a decision to imp rove o r how to improve u.s . 89; FHWA and UDOT, with our participation, haVE' al ready made the decision to improve the roadway. II. My Decis ion and Rationale Base d on the environmental analysis contained in the FE IS and FHWA's Record of Dec i si on, I have decided t o amend the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Re sourc e Management Plan to be consistent with the decision of FHWA and UDOT t.o cons truct reasonable and necessary improvements on u.s. 89 across National Fore s t lands in Logan Canyon . This non-significant amendment to the Forest Plan is attached as appendix to this Record of Decision. This amendment cha nge s the Visual Quality Objective from retention to partial retention for t he highway easement near Logan Cave and to modification for the remainder of t he r oute . It also changes the guidelines for fisheries habitat indiciee to pe rm i t decreases not exceeding 5 percent of the existing when the decreases al·e tempo rary and the resulting index exceeds est~lished minimum standards set in the 19 85 Forest Plan. Because the project will result in expansion of the highway corridor in some a re as I have also decided to consent to the FHWA's issuance of a Highway Eas ement Deed, or series of deeds, to the Utah Department of Transportation fCor t he phased construction of reasonable and necessary improvements on U.S. 89 . The de cision for which I am amending the Plan is described in the FElS as the Pre f e rred Alternative as refined in FHWA's Record of Decision for this FEIS . To se rve as a basis for this decision, I am adopting the FElS as it relates to the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. This is pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.3. FHWA a nd UDOT issued a Record of Decision on January 18, 1995, to implement the Pr e ferred Alternative as refined in their Record of Decision. The FEIS was pr e pared by FHWA and UDOT with the full participation of the Forest Service a s a cooperating agency ,. The effects on and associated with National Forest �System lands, including consistency with the Forest Plan and meeting transportation needs, are disclosed in the FEIS and further addressed in FHWA's Record of Decision. I concur with their decision that the Preferred Alternative, as refined and described in their Record of Decision, represents t he best approach. As a cooperating agency throughout the analysis process, the Wasatch-Cache National Forest was closely involved in ensuring National Forest needs were met. Of particular importance to the Forest is to protect sensitive and endangered species, water quality and fish and wildlife habitat capability; to maintain the scenic values of Logan Canyon; to maintain the overall character and values of Logan River and Beaver Creek; and to maintain the potential for undeveloped recreation along these water courses. Because of the mitigation measures incorporated into the decision, many of the impacts to the Logan River and Beaver Creek fisheries will be minimized. Most potential impacts to water quality will be effective ly mitigated. Furthermore, impacts to visual quality will be minimized to the extent practical while still allowing for alterations to the existing roadway. Mitigation measures relating to Forest Service decisions are highlighted in the next section. Throughout the drafting of the planning documents for this project both FHWA and UDOT have been sensitive to the concerns of both the Forest Service and the public that Logan Canyon's natural resources and character be preserved. Numerous suggestions for environmental improvement s to the project design and monitoring to ensure environmental protection were incorporated into the FEIS and FHWA's Record of Decision. The Preferred Alternative, as refined in FHWA's Record of Decision, is the only alternative which represents a significant improvement in highway function and service without seriously impacting visua1 resources and water quality in Logan Canyon. The Forest Service staff of resource specialists reviewed the FEIS and determined that the environmental affects were adequately disclosed. In reviewing the Environmental Consequences in Chapter IV of the FEIS and the refinements to the preferred alternative and responses to comments in FHWA's Record of Decision, I have determined that all practicable means to avoid or minimize environmental impacts within my authority, have been adopted. It is clear that some impacts will occur, but taking into account the extensive mitigation and the improvement in design and safety of the road, I concur with the decision of FHWA and UOOT that the Preferred Alternative, as refined in their Record of Decision, will best serve the needs of all concerned. III. Mitigation Measure s The Forest Service participated as a cooperating agency in development of the FEIS. In cooperating with FHWA and UDOT, the Forest Service participated in developing the extensive mitigation described in the FEIS. In addition the mitigation measures described in the FEIS for the Preferred Alternative, FHWA incorporated additional mitigation measures in their Record of Decision. I have reviewed these and concur with these. The measures highlighted be low relate to issues pertinent to the decisions I am making as described in Section I of this Record of Decision. These measures are described in detail in the FEI S as further refined in FHWA 's Record of 2 • �Decision. Numerous other mitigation measures were a lso incorporated into the decision of ODOT and FHWA. These are descri bed in their Record of Decision. In addition to these measures, I am also including some additional measures to protect the environment. These are identified with an asterik (*). consenting to arant a transportation easement: Throughout development of the Preferred Alternative, and subsequent refinements as described in FHWA's Record of Decision, consideration was given to avoiding and minimizing harm to sensitive resources and maintaining the character of Logan Canyon. Protection of the river and surrounding wetland/riparian edge, avoidance of threatened and sensitive species, avoidance and minimizing harm to wetland/riparian habitat, visual and recreational resources of the canyon played an important role in its development and selection. As a result, minimal construction will occur in the ecologically sensitive middle canyon, bridges will clear-span the river. retaining walls will be minimized but employed where needed t o limit encroachment into sensitive areas, and treatment of clearzones will be modified from AASHTO recommendations . All practicable measures to avoid impacts and minimize environmental harm have been incorporated into the conceptual design described in the FEIS as refined in FHWA's Record of Decision. The specific measures are described for the Preferred Alternative in the FEIS and further expanded in FHWA's Record of Decision. The Forest Service will participate in the detailed final design phase emphasizing avoidance of impacts and minimization of environmental harm. Horizontal and vertical alignments will be manipulatE:d to provide a "best fit". The Forest Service will participate and coordinate with ODOT in accordanCE: with the terms of the two Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) between the Forest Service, UDOT and FHWA that are applicable to this project (see appendix to this Record of Decision for the general state-wide MOO and the appendix to FHWA's Record of Decision for the supplemental MOU specific to us 89 in Logan Canyon). In addition, the Forest Service will work and coordinate with ODOT and FHWA in the final design, construction and monitoring of specific projects: 1. As a member of the Cooperating Advisory Team in the final design phase for individual projects, the Forest Service will emphasize avoidance of impacts and minimization of environmental harm. 2. In development and subsequent approval of revegetation plan s. construction/post-construction monitoring plans for individual projects. 3. In development of other plans (e . g., Wetlands Mitigation Plan) as described in the FEIS and the "Measures to Minimize Harm" section of FHWA's Record of Decision. 4. By approving on-Forest staging, batch plant, and wetland mitigation areas. 3 �5. ··The mitigation measures prescribed in the F£I5 and this Record of Decision will be monitored and e nforced as described in the "Moni toring or Enforcemen t Program " section of FHWA's Record of Decision. Through its representation on the CAT, the Forest Service will identify contractual measures prior to construction to ensure the measures prescribed in the FEIS and FHWA's and this Records of Decision are implemented. If and where necessary and in accordance with Forest Service Policy. the Forest Service will specify easement stipulations prior to construction to ensure the measures prescribed in the FErs and in this Record of Decision are implemented.** Amending the Fisheries Habita t Requirements in the Forest Plan ; The portions of the Logan River within this project area have been rated by the State as a Class 2 fishery (of great importance to the State) . The river and its tributaries provide habitat for cutthroat trout (possibly Bonneville cutthroat, a USFS sens itive species) and numerous other aquatic species. Issues pertinent to this decision include wetland, water quality and fisheries impacts. Mitigation measures include all those listed in and incorporated by reference f r om the "Water Quality ImpactS", ~ Permits ", "Wet lands and Botanical Resources", and "Water Body Modifications and wil dlife Impacts" parts of the "Measures to Minimize Harm" section of FHWA's Record of Decision. The following mitigation measures, which correspond to other mitigation requirements in FHWA's Record of Decision, provide additional fisheries mitigation: 6. Best Management Practices and UDOT's Standard Erosion Control plans will be employed to control sedimentation and siltation, minimize water quality and habitat degradation, minimize vegetative removal , and minimize cut and fill. Detailed Best Management Practices will be developed during design for each project. 7. A construction/post· construction monitoring plan will be developed and implemented by UDOT and approved by the Forest Service during design of individual projects in order to identify sensitive areas where monitoring is needed. Monitoring required will be identified in the project plans and specifications for each project. B. The design of clearzones will focus on preservation of aesthetic and ecological features to the extent possible while considering safety. The prime directive will be to minimize impacts to wetlands and riparian habitat without jeopardizing safety. 9. All work will be conducted on the inland side of the highway where possible to avoid in· channel activities and minimize riparian habitat and riverbank disturbance. Road widths described in the FEIS as further reduced in FHWA's Record of Decision were incorporated to avoid or minimize impacts. Use of retaining walls or guardrails will be considered where needed to reduce harm to wetlands and related resources. This includes work on the Dugway, Temple Fork, in the lower Upper Canyon, near Rick Springs and other segments described in the FEIS and FHWA ' o Recor d of Deci sio n. , �10. The design o f passing and turn lanes ' will be evaluated further during detailed design to assess additional measures to avoid or minimiz e harm to wetlands. Use of retaining walls or guardrails will be c o nsidered where needed to reduce impacts. This includes work in lower Upper Canyon, culverts near Amazon and Stump Hollows. intersections at Tony Grove, Beaver Mountain and Franklin Basin; and othe r segments described in the FEIS and FHWA's Record of Decision . 11 . A revegetat ion plan will be d e ve l oped by UDOT and approved by the Fore s t Servi ce during design of individual projects to ensure that critical habitat and disturbed areas are appropriately revegetated . 12. Bridge and culvert openings will be sized so that floodplain e levati ons will not be increased . 13. Construction staging sites identified during design and approved by the Forest Service will be kept out of aquatic, wetland and riparian habitat. The contractor will be limited to the use of the identified staging sites. 14. Construct i on work zones will be delineated through the use of fen c ing in sensitive areas to ensu r e contractor compliance with environmental limits of operations. 15. Curbing will be considered at Rick Springs to minimize vehicular off-pavement impacts to vegetation near and along the riverbanks . 16. Prior to the wet season all disturbed areas ··which could contribute sediment into the river·· will be revegetated or reseeded and ··erosion matting installed . ·· 17. Rock and debris generated during the construction will not be indiscriminately placed along the river banks . ··1£ locations with excessive erosion are identified where some of the rock may be beneficial, Forest Service approval will be obtained and the appropriate permits acquired prior to placing the material .•• 18. ··In - river piers will be removed or partially removed where possible with minimal streambed disturbance.·· 19 . ··During design phase and prior to any in-river activities, the Fo rest and UDWR staff will identify when it is necessary for one or both agencies to be contacted and on-site to assist UDOT in minimizing aquatic impacts.·· 20 . ··All concrete work on the bridges being replaced will be designed and completed to minimize any leaks of liquid cement into the river. No washing of cement trucks will take place in locations where the material could wash into the river.·· 5 �Amending the Visual Quality Objectives in the Forest Plan: US 89 through Logan Canyon i s both a Natio nal Fo rest Scen i c Byway and a State of Utah Scenic Byway. I n addition, thi s area li es within the Logan Canyon Management Area . The Forest Plan presc ription for this management area e mphasizes pro te c tion of scenic qua l i tie s . Issue s pertinent t o the de c i sion to amend the VQO ' s include vegetative recovery, road and clearing de sign featur e s and direct visual impacts. Mitigation meaaures include all t hose liste d i n and incorporated by reference from the "Visual Impacts, Batch Plant Locations, and Section 4(£ )" parts of the "Measures to Minimize Harm" section of FHWA ' s Record of Decision. The f ol lowing mitigation measures, whi c h correspond to other mit i gation requirements in FHWA's Re c ord of Deci s ion, provide additional v i~ual mitigation: 21 . Design o f t he Pre ferred Al ternative as refined in FHWA's Record of Decisi on pl aced a strong emphasis on minimizing visual impacts. Road alignments were designed to minimize the amount of visual impact to the e xtent prac t ical wh i le s t ill p roviding f o r reasonable and necessary impro ve ments. Aestheti c impacts will be reduced by manipUlat i ng the horizontal and/or vertical alignment, and by moving the alignme nt away from the river. This includes the work described in the nDesign Considerations " part of the nMeasures to Minimize Harm " section of FHWA's Record of Decision. 22. The design of clearzones will focus on preservation of aesthetic and ecol ogical features to the extent possible while considering safety . No clearzo ne will be provided in the first four miles of the middle canyon; however, substantial hazards within this area will be considered for protection. 23. A revegetation plan will be devel oped by UDOT and approved by the Forest Service during design of individual projects to ensure that areas of high visual quality are a voided, where practicable, and that disturbed areas are appropriately revegetated. 24 . A constructi on / post-construction monitoring plan will be developed and implemented by UDOT and approved by the Forest Service during de sign of individual projects in order to identify sensitive areas where monitoring is needed. These areas and types of monitoring required will be ide ntified in the project plans and specifications for each project. 25 . Best Management Practices will be used to minimize water quality degradation, minimize vegetative removal, and minimize cut and fill. 26. Dust suppression measures will be implemented during construction. These measures will include water sprinkling, speed limits on haul road, and use of environmentally safe stabilization chemicals . 27 . Construction staging sites identified during design and approved by the Fo rest Service will be ke pt o u t o f sens i tive visual areas . The contrac tor will be limited to the u se of the identified staging sites . 28. Construc tio n wor k zone s will be d e lineate d and sensitive areas fenced to ensure contractor compliance with environmental limits of operations . 6 �29. Burnt Bridge will be construc~ed in stages, with widening occurring on the upstream side, eliminating the detour presented in the FEIS. 30. In additi on to the reduced width presented in the FEIS f or the Middle Canyon, the previously proposed nominal roadway width of 40 feet for the first 8 miles of the Upper Canyon section has been reduced to 34 feet to further minimize impacts to wetlands , visual and other resources. (NOTE: this is nominal roadway width .. . passing lanes on 3.3 miles increase roadway width to 44 feet where they are present). 31. The amount and necessity of riprap required f or erosion control at bridges will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis during final design. Riprap will be used only where required to stabilize the streambank and will not exceed 100 feet along both banks up and downstream from each bridge. Although it is possible this could total as much as 1,000 feet of the river's length, it is anticipated that riprap will not be required at each of these locations and the actual use of riprap will be minimal. Existing rive r and c reek hydraulics will be maintained by avoiding the encroachment of required riprap into the channels . 32. Fill slopes will not be steeper than 2:1 to promote bank stability and reclamation. 33. Riparian habitat will be maintained along the river and creek wherever possible. 34. Larger mature trees and their root systems will be protected where it. does not conflict with vehicles and passenger safety. 35 . Prior to the start of the next wet season, disturbed areas, where possible will be stabilized, reseeded and revegetated. 36 . Rock and debris generated during the construction will not be indiscriminately placed along the river banks. ··1£ locations with excessive erosion are identified where some of the rock may be beneficial, Forest Service approval will be obtained and the appropriate permits acquired prior to placing the material .• • Th reatened. Endangered and Sensitive Species; In addition to the mitigation described above, the Forest Service has special concern over impacts to threatened, endangered and sensitive species of fauna and flora. During preparation of the FEIS, UDOT and FHWA consulted with the US Fish and Wildlife Service and Utah Division of Natural Resources concerni ng potential impacts to these species. Consultation is documented in the Appendix "Letter From US Fish and Wildlife Service" section of FHWA's Record of Decision . This correspondence documents the US Fish and Wildlife Service's determination that the Preferred Alternative as refined in FHWA's Record of Decisi on and mitigated through measures described in the "Threatened and Endangered speci es" part of the "Measures to Minimize Harm" section of FHWA's Record of Decision would not affect Federally listed threatened and endangered species. This includes the Maguire primrose (Primula maquirei) . These mitigation measures are incorporated by reference into this Record of Decision. 7 �In addition to federally threatened and endangered species, the Forest Service recognizes other sensitive species. The effects of the alternatives on these species were evaluated. Forest Service policy requi r es preparation of a biological assessment and biological evaluation prior to the Forest Service offic ial signing of a decision document. These scientific documents describing impacts to threatened, endangered and sensitive species have been prepared. The original assessment completed in September of 1993 was recently supplemented to include the most current information. The original assessment (included in the appendix to FHWA's Record of Decision) and supplement are included in the project record. These document that the Preferred Alternative, as refined in FHWA's Record of Decision, will not adversely affect the viability of any Forest Service l isted sensitive species. Wild and Scenic Rivers: Consideration of potential wild and Scenic RiverE is an inherent part of the ongoing land and resource management planning process (Forest Service Manual 1924). Forests must eva l uate each river to identify rivers meeting the eligibility crite ria specified in section lib) and 2(b) of the wild and Scenic Rivers Act and determine the river's potential classification (wild, scenic, recreational, or a combination thereof) for those found eligible. wild and Scenic Rivers were evaluated during preparation of the Wasatch-Cache Forest Plan approved in 1985 and it did not propose any rivers for further study as National wild and Scenic Rivers (FE I S for the 1985 Forest Plan, page IV-55). Since t he time period when the Forest Plarl was approved the philosophy for river eligibi li ty assessment has evolved. The Forest determined a re-assessment was appropriate and in December of 1993, the rivers on the Forest were inventoried to identify those eligible for inclusion in the National wild and Scenic Rivers System. Both Beaver Creek and the Logan River were inventoried. Neither were found to be eligible f or inclusion in the National wild and Scenic Rive rs System, though the Logan River upstream of Temple Fork was f o und to possess values significant within the State. Regardless of the 1985 and 1993 Inventory · findings; the effects of the project, should Beaver Creek and/or the Logan River ever be determined eligible, were considered. Forest Service policy (Forest Service Handbook 1909.12, Section 8.14) requires the Forest Plan to provide for protection of a river area considered eligible but where the suitabil ity determination has not been made, until a decis ion is made as to the future use of the river and adjacent lands. For eligible rivers, the Forest has to make a determination whether projected will affect the eligibility or classification of the reaches of the stream influenced by the project. This requires determining if: - the "free-flowing" characteristics of the river are mOdified; - the potential outstandingly remarkable values for the r iver area al·e modified; and - the potential classification of the stream has changed. The effects of the project on river characteristics which affect its free-flowing nature, potential outstandingly remarkable values and potential classification are thoroughly described in the FEIS: 8 �The effects of the alternatives described in Section 4.15 . 1, Water Body Modification, of the FBIS show some minor rip-rapping near bridges may occur where necessary to stabilize the streambank. This would not extend over 100 feet along ' both banks up- and down-stream from each new bridge, It is anticipated that riprap will not be required at each of these locations and the actual use of riprap will be minimal . Existing river and creek hydraulics will be maintained by avoiding the encroachment of required riprap and/or retaining walls into the channels. Therefore, the existing river and stream characteristics pertaining to free-flowing character would not be altered from the present status . The FEIS thoroughly evaluated the effects of the alternatives on the resources and characteristics affecting the scenic, historic, recreational, wildlife and fish, cultural and other values associated with the river and river corridor. As clearly summarized in Table S - 2 and as described in more detail in Chapter 4 of the FEIS, there will either be no or only minor effects from the Preferred Alternative, as refined in FHWA's Record of Decision, on these values . In addition, the FEIS notes that many of the minor effects created will be either temporary in nature or may possibly be mitigated during final design. Consequently, no potential outstandingly remarkable values will be eliminat ed. Highway 89 currently parallels the river for much of its length. As described in the FEIS, no additional · river crossings will be built nor will additional stretches of the river be followed. The FEIS recognizes that some screening vegetation along the river may be disturbed, but again this is estimated in the BIS to be minor and mostly temporary in nature. Therefore, the potential wild and Scenic River classification would not change. Based on the environmental effects summarized above, the road recons t ruction project will not affect the eligibility or classification potentials of the Logan River and therefore, the opportunity for designating these reaches of Logan River and/or Beaver Creek as a recreational river(s) in the future is not foreclosed by allowing the highway improvements described in the Preferred Alternative, as refined in FHWA's Record of Decision. IV. Public Involvement A no tice of intent initiated by FHWA was published in the Federal Register on January 23, 1987. To initiate the scoping process and solicit input, a mailing list containing nearly 100 entries was compiled to include governmental agencies, associations, the media, and interested individuals . Entries on the mailing list received a public involvement pl~ which coordinated public and agency activities. Public information meetings were held in Logan, Utah on September 23, 1986, and in Garden City, Utah on November 3, 1986 . 9 �An Interdisciplinary (10) Team composed of transportation planners. civil and environmental engineers. envi ronmental advocates and recreation and wildlife s pecialists met frequently in 1986 and 1987 to review technical aspects of the project and provide insight and perspectives on issues germane to the project . UDOT used a Citizens Review Committee to review the final Draft Bnvironmental Impact Statement (OEIS) to determine whether the document addressed the issues in an understandable and appropriate fashion. The Committee was composed of representatives of various city and county governments in the project area. Three formal Beoping meetings were held in March, 1987, to identify major concerns and re ceive public comments. The meetings were attended by 333 individuals, 64 of whom offered comments. Nearly 200 letters, commenting o n the proj ect, were received from the public, advocacy groups and government agencies. A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the project was issued in November, 1990 . UDOT received 457 comments letters expressing various ideas and sentiments about the Logan Canyon project. Some issues addressed in the comment letters included: safety, travel time through the canyon, scenic values, bicycle traffic, fisheries, alternative routes, wetlands, water and quality and threatened and endangered species. These issues and comments were addressed i n the DEIS and/or the FSIS. The Preferred Alternative was presented to the public in a brochure which was sen t to those who commented on the DEIS . In response to this brochure, a pproximately 400 letters were received prior to release of the FEIS. These comments were reviewed and a determination made that they were addressed in tt.e FEIS or FHWA's Record of Decision. The FEIS for the project was completed in February of 1993 and made available to the public for comment. In response, approximately 200 letters were received . Individual responses to these letters were provided where addresses were available. Detailed comments were not directly answered, but the commenter was informed that they would be considered and where appropriate responded to in FHWA's Record of Decision . In FHWA's Record of Decision, a summary of comments and responses was provided. The comment letters and responses are maintained in the UDOT's project record. All comments received on the FEIS were reviewed and given consideration during development of FHWA's and this Record(s) of Decision. Between issuance of the FEIS and issuance of FHWA's Record of Decision, numerous coordination meetings, field reviews, discussions and correspondence were held. This effort led to the refinements in the Preferred Alternative described in FHWA's Record of Decision and referenced in this Record of Decision. A summary of the comments received on the FEIS and responses is contained on pages 28 through 43 of FHWA's Record of Decision. Since FHWA's Record of Decision was iSBued, members of Logan Canyon Coalition have met and or conversed with Fore st Service representatives regarding concerns over the project. These concern s were c onsidered in formulation of this Record of Decision. 10 �• V. Alternatives Considered The following four alternatives were analyzed in detail in the Final ~nvironmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for U.S. Highway Route 89, Logan Canyon Highway. Preferred Alternative: The Preferred Alternative as described in the FEIS has been refined in response to comments received. A detailed description of this alternative is contained in FHWA's Record of Decision and is incorporated by reference here . In general, this alternative will replace bridges. make minor alignment adjustments, maintain no clearzone and maintain the existing 26 foot roadway in the first 4 . 1 miles of the project area (lower Middle Canyon sectionl. In the 4 miles of upper Middle Canyon the roadway width will be 34 feet, a clearzone provided, bridges and culverts replaced, Temple Fork intersection improved, and minor alignment adjustments made. In lower upper Canyon a 34 feet wide roadway will be maintained (except as modified by passing and turn lanes), a clear zone provided, bridges and culverts replaced, intersections improved, and the range fenced where appropriate. In the remainder of Upper Canyon the roadway will widen to 40 feet (except as modified by passing and turn lanes), intersections improved, a clearzone provided, and alignment adjustments made. From the Bear Lake Summit to Bridgerland subdivision intersection a 47 feet wide roadway (including a continuous passing lane) will be established, clear zone provided, numerous alignment adjustments made, intersections improved, and one landslide area stabilized. From Bridgerland subdivision to Garden City a 40 feet wide roadway width (47 feet where there are passing lanes) will be established, clearzone provided, intersection and access points improved, and several alignment adjustments made. The Preferred Alternative, as refined in FHWA's Record of Decision, would cause a decline in the Habitat Condition Index for the Logan River and Beaver Creek. The refined Preferred Alternative would also result in a Visual Quality Objective of partial retention for the highway easement near Logan Cave and modification for the remainder of the route. The refined Preferred Alternative thus does not comply with the Forest Plan . The Forest Service would consent to grant a transportation easement for approximately 72 additional acres. No Action Alternative: The existing roadway width would be maintained although considerable road maintenance, including improved signing and replacement of bridges and pavement would be necessary. The No Action Alternative complies with the Forest Plan. Transportation easements covering additional lands would not be required. Standard Arterial Alternative: Improve the highway to current national highway standards for a minor arterial road with the construction of passing lanes throughout much of the route and recovery areas resulting in a roadway width of forty to forty· seven feet and a typical improved area of sixty·six to ninety·eight feet. The Standard Arterial Alternative would cause a decline in the Habitat Condition Index for the Logan River and Beaver Creek and would achieve a Visual ~ality Objective of Modification rather than Retention. The Standard Arterial Alternative would therefore not comply with the Forest Plan . The Forest Service would consent to grant transportation easements for approximately 83 additional acres. 11 �Conservationi sts' Alternative: Spot improvements such as improved signing. replacement of bridges, slow vehicle turnouts, climbing lanes and paving and plowing of parking areas . Existing roadway widths would be maintained in most instance s. with a roadway width of forty · three feet for climbing lanes. The Conservationists' Alternative would fail to comply with the Forest Plan Visual Quality Objective in the vicinity of Burnt Bridge. The Conservationists' Alternative would result in a change of the Visual Quality Objective of the Burnt Bridge area from Retention to Partial retention . The Forest Servi ce would consent t o grant transportation easements covering about 11 additional acres . The following alternatives were considered in the OEIS but not advanced in the FEIS. Corridor Alternatives: The Corridor Alternatives considered other potential rout es connecting Cache and Rich Counties. The Corridor Alternatives were dropped because there is no projected need for the additional r outes for the next twenty years, the environmental consequences of additiona l highway construction, and the duplicate spending of operational and maintenance funds for the new route and the existing highway in Logan Canyon . Modified Standard Alternative: The Modified Alterna tive proposed a modified standard along the existing alignment for the road width in the Middle Canyon section only. It was intended to reduce the impacts of the Standard Alternative in the Middle Canyon section. The Modified Alternative was dropped because of unacceptable environmental impacts in the M iddl e Canyon, especially the alternative's impacts on wild trout populations in the Logan River. Spot Improvements: The Spot Improvements Alternative provided a small , incremental modification of the No Action Alternative. The notable difference between the two alternatives was the inclusion of 7.5 miles of climbing lanes in the Spot Improvements Alternative. The Spot Improvements Alternative was not included i n the FEIS because it resulted in no improvement in traffic-carrying capacity or safety and thus did not meet the purposes of the project. Rich County Alte rnative Alignments: Several alternative corridors in the Rich County section of the project were proposed. These alternative alignments would have resulted impacts on ·winter habitat for deer and elk, and disruptions to existing real estate development. Rich County strongly opposed the alternative alignments . Thus, t he Rich County Alternative Alignments were not considered in the FEIS. VI . Findings Required by other Laws The Wasatch-Cache has begun preliminary efforts directed towards the Forest Plan revision scheduled to be completed in 1996 . However, Forest Service policy and regulations provide for implementation of existing Forest Plan decisions until amended or revised and do not mandate retention of future management options. This means the Management Area direction for Management Area 13, as amended, will continue to be imp lemented until the Forest Plan revis ion is finalized. 12 �The Wa satch-Cache Forest Plan has been reviewed and a determination made that while the overall direction and intent of the plan will not be affected, this decision contains inconsistencies with the Forest Plan which will require amendment. The actions in this project comply fully with the goa ls of the Forest Plan, the Management Area Direction, and the Forest-wide standards and guidelines (See Chapter IV of the Wasatch-Cache Land and Resource Management Plan) except for the Visual Quality Objective and the fisheries habitat i ndicies for the Logan River and Beaver Creek. The Visual Quality Objectives will be changed to Partial Retention in one spot in Middle Canyon and modi ficati on throughout the remainder of the highway easement. The Habitat Quality Index for the Logan River and Beaver Creek will be changed to allow temporary minor decreases provided minimum index l eve ls are still exceeded. ~ FEIS 4 - 2. Specific changes are documented in the attached plan amendment . Analysis of these changes is included in the FEIS . I conclude that this is a non - significant amendment to the Forest Plan as defined in 36 CFR 219.10(e) in that it does not significantly alter the multiple use goals and objectives for long term land and resource management for the Forest. VII. Environmenta l ly Preferable Alternative The No Act i on Alternative has been identified as the environmental ly preferable alternative. VIII. Implementation Date and Appeal Opportunities This decision is subject to appeal pursuant to 36 CFR 215 . 7. A written NotiCEof Appeal must be postmarked within 45 days after the date this notice is published in the Ogden Standard Examiner, Ogden, Utah. The Notice of Appeal should be sent to: Chief, USDA Forest Service, P.O. Box 96090, washington, D. C. 20090-6090 Appeals must meet content requirements of 36 CFR 215.14 . For further inf orma tion on this decision, contact Reese Pope at Wasatch-Cache National Forest, 8236 Federal Building, 125 South State Street, Salt Lake City, UT 84138 or by phone at (801) 524-5188. If no appeal is received, implementation of this decision may occur on, but not before, 5 business days from the close of the appeal filing period. If an appeal is received, implementation may not occur for 15 days following the date of appea l disposition. - trlAH , I 1995 , Date DALE N. BOSWORTH Regional Forester Intermountain Region 324 25th Street Ogde n, UT 84403 13 �(2 I. ~ot:> Is Y 01::' 1> ,fGlt tiff . C 17tf1 jill '2-. (001::> 6-at--:; ( c-- . "3 'If • To ttt-/WA- M otVTH$ , ~'tl.Ji) y) -; • R0 p lr-f'i:1If . 6-dt:-s 7/0 U.rPS _ g o ~ D cAtV AMpvf) 17{--c t=fjyLPV!t-tlI· {IV H 4V't' [YO n-{-AT I iD OW r-./ ~o-o 1 \ I 5'1 ( :> r r/E I/-f-f:( r( - AtlfDTM::~ ? MONtH'? ') $0: WE M{u-Hi tf41£ {O /fA. (I,1/Ttis - �r;.r{), ~ &+-e.t,,~ I "I'i? So ~oo I.N 1..--0 a""', U\ ------ --To"" L.y un G ::,-s- CAr-.~o 1\ p. Q. UT 'iN 3;J.., I �Dec. 7, 1994 Dear Tenacious member of the Logan Canyon Coalition, I have enclosed a rough draft of some proposed changes to UDOT's ROD. I've spoken with some of you about this proposal, and I've incorporated many of your ideas, including some ideas from the Conservationists' Alternative. I've tentatively called this new proposal the "Citizens' Alternative." Catchy title, right? It seems to me that the sooner we decide on the changes we wish to see through our Forest Service appeal, the more focused and efficient our work will be. Anyway, we will have to declare, in our appeal, exactly the changes we wish to see. Please look over this draft, and let me know what you think. I'd like to discuss this further at our next meeting. In this proposal we should indicate the changes we want, and also briefly discuss our reasons for requesting each change. Further, indepth, discussions will come in the body of the appeal. This is not a final draft! It is for the sake of discussion at our next meeting. Please feel free to make suggestions that will reflect your own point-of-view. I strongly believe, however, that we should present a proposal to the Forest Service that is not too "radical," rejecting all improvements to the road except for bridge replacement. We should allow for further changes that really might improve safety. We should try, in other words, to appear reasonable, while still defending what needs to be defended. We should, rt we can, reflect concerns that the Forest Service and other agencies might themselves have with UDOT's ROD, for example, UDOT's proposed extensive changes at Temple Fork. With this approach, we might have a good chance of success with our appeal. In our proposal, we should not try to shut down everything UDOT wants to do. If we do, we will likely be dismissed too easily by Forest Service administrators. On the other hand, I do not want us to agree with UDOT's plans rt we really believe they will unnecessarily harm the canyon. Please let me know what you think. I would like to reach a good consensus. Yours in Tenacious Defense of our Canyon, Go rQM S'{-e..I!\\...oqf 753-0497 �Citizens' Alternative Proposal for Improvement of the Logan Canyon Highway 89 Our alternative is identical to the revised Preferred Alternative proposed by UDOT in their recent ROD, with the following changes. 1. Keep the 26' road width up to just beyond Ricks Spring. Extend section 1b, described in the FEIS as remaining at 26', up to just beyond Ricks Spring. This would prevent unnecessary damage to the river, which runs very close to the road along this stretch. This change helps protect the river and its fishery at the lower Twin Bridge and the Temple Fork intersection. 2. At the Temple Fork intersection, keep the road to only two travel lanes, without a right hand or left hand turning lane. The river along this intersection probably provides very good spawning grounds for cutthroat trout. Along the entire river, there are very few good spawning grounds for cutthroat or for brown trout, making this section of the river at Temple Fork extremely valuable to the fishery in the Logan river. The road at Temple Fork passes very close to the river. Widening this section of road to accomodate turning lanes would seriously damage these spawning grounds and so the fishery in the entire river. UDOT presents no data on the number of vehicles that turn into the Temple Fori< road, and emerge from the road. This is an unimproved, dirt road that meanders into an unimproved recreation area. UDOT has not justified the severe damage to this fishery that would occur here with widening and with turning lanes. 3. Do not flatten curves at and around the Temple Fork area. Curves 39 and 40, at milepost 388.8, and curves 43 and 45, at mileposts 389.4 and 390.1, should be left on their present alignments. The road gradually curves along this section as it follows the river. These curves are gradual. They are not sharp, so they are not particularly dangerous at a reasonable speed. UDOT has presented no data showing that these curves are particularly dangerous. The scenery through here is spectacular. There is no loss in "driver comfort" as one negotiates these gentle curves and enjoys the views of the river and canyon walls. The only reason for flattening these curves is to achieve a straighter road so that drivers can "go fast." The resulting slopes may not be revegetated successfully. The run-off from construction would have to enter the river at some point, and the increased sedimentation may seriously damage this sensitive cutthroat spawn· ing area. There would be loss of recreational and scenic values here, with no good justification of the loss. , �4. At Logan Cave, as the road is elevated, use a retaining wall to keep fill out of the river. There should be no more encroachment into the river. This is consistent with the ROD, in which UDOT agrees to maintain the '1ree flowing" nature of the Logan River. (The Conservationists' Alternative called for the road to be "moved away from the rive~' as it is elevated. This would mean that the mountain on one side of the road would have to be carved out to create room for the road as it is shifted away from the river. Is this preferable to use of a retaining wall?) 5. Maintain the 34' road width past the Beaver Mountain intersection and over the summit to just past the Bear Lake overlook. Do not increase the width in the upper canyon to 40'. 6. Do not construct a climbing lane over the summit. End the proposed climbing lane below the summit. Changes 4 and 5 will possibly allow the road to be kept in its present alignment, without too much damage to the old-growth forest. If the road is increased to 40', and a climbing lane over the summit is constructed, the road will need to be moved to a different alignment in order to avoid severe damage to the forest. But this will involve a huge amount of fill in a side canyon, with destruction of deer forage and mountain mahogany. The older road would probably never be completely removed. It would be much less damaging to keep to the original alignment, with a narrower road. Furthermore, a wide, straight highway at the summit, complete with a climbing lane, would encourage drivers to increase speeds to dangerous levels. This is a north· facing slope at about 8000 feet. The grade of the road may approach 10%. In the winter, with ice and snow on the road , higher speeds could be especially deadly. At the summit there is the popular Umber Pine trailhead turnOff, and just past the summit is the Sunrise Campground turnoff. The road would be safer ~ drivers were not rocketing over the summit, past these intersections, at excessive speeds, especially in the ice and snow. 7. Do not construct a passing lane just past the cattle guard. Instead, construct a slowvehicle pullout, and put up a sign informing drivers that a passing lane will begin in a mile. This would eliminate unnecessary destruction of wetlands along the road. The sign would help encourage drivers to be patient until they reach the passing lane. �8. Maintain a 26' road width along Beaver Creek. Do not increase the width here to 34'. The road from Ricks Spring to Beaver Creek will be widened to 34', but through the corridor along Beaver Creek the road will be kept at its current 26', wrth possibly a slightly lower posted speed. Widening this road to 34' would involve unacceptable impacts to the creek and aSSOCiated wetlands. The road is simply too close to the creek and wetlands, on both sides of the road. UDOT claims that it would work in only a narrow construction zone, but any construction here would seriously damage riparian habitat and probably wetlands. Beaver Creek contains important spawning grounds for cutthroat trout, and it contains a population of beaver that have only recently returned after being driven out by road construction 60 years ago. Any slight gain in "driver comfort" by widening here is not worth destruction of the cutthroat trout fishery and important wildlde habitat. UDOT will object to the "bottleneck" in traffic flow that would be created here d our proposal is implemented. In our proposal, there are two "bottlenecks," one in the middle canyon and one at Beaver Creek, with a narrower road and slightly lower posted speeds in each. Possibly, two bottlenecks will better protect the future health of both of these areas. 9. Insist that no new riprap be used in the canyon. UDOT should be required to stabilize all damaged riverbanks using natural vegetation, and UDOT should be required to expend the time and money necessary after construction to ensure that all revegetation efforts are successful. The Logan Canyon has great recreational and scenic values. These values would be harmed with the "easy solution" of riprap. If UDOT goes into the canyon to widen and straighten some sections of the road, and replace bridges, UDOT should be required to mitigate in a manner fully consistent with the recreational and scenic values of this canyon. This means use of natural vegetation that is carefully maintained at UDOTs expense well after construction. 10. UDOT should specdy more explicitly the measures it will take to minimize harm to the river, to fisheries, and to the scenic value of the canyon. It should also specdy more explicitly measures rt will take to mrtigate damage from construction. Too often UDOT simply says that it will use "best management practioes" This is too vague. UDOT wishes to leave detailed discussion of the exact measures it will use to minimize harm to "deSign phase." This does not give the public and appropriate agencies sufficient information to properly evaluate UDOTs proposal before approval of the project is given by the state transportation commission and the federal highway administration. Evaluation of the impacts of proposed construction must include consideration of the exact measures UDOT intends to use to minimize harm and mitigate damage. Especially when construction will seriously impact particular sites, such as Temple Fork, Logan Cave and the lower Twin Bridge and Burnt Bridge, UDOT �should be required to give a site-specdic discussion of exact measures that will be used. When culverts are replaced, does UDOT intend to use culverts that are graded and baffled, allowing fish to move through culverts during high water flows? UDOT mentions that ~ will use' sediment basins to collect sediment from run-off, but does UDOT intend to change the filters in these basins at appropriate times after construction is completed? In the FEIS, UDOT provides no discussion of how revegetation will be accomplished after construction, and no estimates of how successful revegetation efforts will be on the slopes that will be left after curve-cuts. Will UDOT carefully maintain new vegetation after construction is completed? UDOT should be required to speedy and discuss exact measures ~ will use. These discussions should be in an EIS, appearing before approval and funding of the project. �United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Uinta and Wasatch-Cache Nationa l Forests 8236 Federal Building 125 South State Street Sa l t Lake City, UT 841 38 (801) 524-5030 Reply to : Date: 1950 December 7 , 1994 Dear Interested Forest User , The Uinta and Wasatch-Cache National Forests, Ashley National Forest and Bureau of Land Management have begun t he process of preparing a Suppl ement to the North Slope Oil and Gas Leas ing Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The original analysis examined non-Wilderness Federal lands wi t h Federal mineral righ ts that should or should not be made available for oil and gas expl oration, development, and production on the North Slope of the Uinta Mountains. A decision on the EIS was appealed which l ed to the roadle ss a r ea being removed from l easing until further analysis could be completed. This Supplement will focus only on t he issue of roadless areas. Comments and suggestions concerning this ana l ysis will be accepted through January 12. 199~ . Comments should be concise and specific to the fo cus of this Supplement. Please mail comments to Evanston Ranger District. P.O. Box 1880, Evanston, WY 82930. The Draft Supplement is expected to be available fo r publ ic r eview in early February 1995. A 45 day comment period will follow release of the Draft. Upon analysis and consideration of these comments. the Fi nal Supplement and a new Decision will be prepared and released. If you have any questions or concerns. please contact Liz Schuppert at (307) 789-3194 . Sincerely. 0?~","~ P. k.J;.." ~d' PETER W. KARP Forest Supervisor �> • Supplement to North Slope Leasing Environmental Impact Statement Wasatch-Cache and Ashley National Forests Summit and Daggett Counties THE APRIL 94 LEASING DECISIONBeginning in the fall of 1991, the Wasatch· Cache and Ashley National Forests began the analysis to determine whi ch lands across the North Slope of the Uinta Mountains should be administratively available for leasing and if they were to be made available for leasing, what stipulations should be appli ed. A final decision was made in April of 1994 to allow leasing on 219,000 acres and to not allow leasing on about 23,000 acres. Four valid appeals were received on thi s decision. As part of the appeals process the Forest Supervisors met with appellants to discuss resolution of their appeal issues. One of the primary appeal points was whether or not leasing should be allowed in the "road less area" portion of the study area. As the Forest Supervisors took a hard look at the decision made in April and some of the issues raised in the appeals, they determined better information was needed about the "roadless" portion to make a well informed decision since oil and gas leasing cou ld influence the area for a long time. This led to a August 18 decision to withdraw the decision for the "roadless area" portion of the study area (about 80,000 acres). The remaining 160,000 acres within the study area will be leased as determined in the April decision. A BETTER LOOK IN A SUPPLEMENTThe North Slope Leasing EIS analyzed effects for roadless acres across the North Slope and cumulative effects for all roadless acres contiguous with the High Vintas Wilderness. As the Forest Supervisors studied their decision and analysis what they found lacking was a description of the unique roadless characteristics of the major drainages within the study area. For example, what is the solitude of the Middle Fork Blacks Fork drainage? What is the natural integrity of the Beaver Creek drainage? Are there other acti vities ongoing or planned for the future that need to be considered? In other words, they felt there were enough differences in the road less characteristics in each major drainage to warrant a more detailed look in a supplement to the Environmental Impact Statement. Once these characteristics are described , new alternatives will be considered if the 7 alternatives in the EIS do not provide an adequate mix of leasing scenarios. Peter W. Karp, Forest Supervisor of the Uinta and Wasatch· Cache National Forest and Brent McBeth, Acting Forest Supervisor of the Ashley National Forests are the responsible officials for this action. THE SIX ROADLESS CHARACTERISTICSThe following roadless characteristics will be considered in each major drainage across the North Slope: �1 > Natura l int eg r ity is the extent to which long-term ecological processes are intact and operating. Impacts to natural integrity are measured by the presence and magnitude of human induced change to an area. Such impacts include physical developments (e.g roads, utilityrights-of way, fences, lookouts, cabins), recreation developments, domestic livestock grazing, mineral developments, wildlife/fisheries management activities, vegetative manipulation, and fire suppression activities. Appare nt n at u raln ess means that the environment looks natural to most people using the area. It is a measure of importance of visitors' perceptions of human impacts to the area. Even though some of the long-term ecological processes of an area may have been interrupted, the landscape of the area generally appears to be affected by the forces of nature. If the landscape has been modified by human activity, the evidence is not obvious to the casua l observer, or it is disappearing due to natural processes. R em o t e n ess is a perceived condition of being secluded, inaccessible, and out of the way. The physical factors that can create "remote" settings include topography, vegetative screening, distance from human impacts such as roads and logging operations (s ight and sound), and difficulty of travel. A user's sense of remoteness in an area is also influenced by the presence or absence of roads, thei r condition, and whether they are open to motorized vehicles. Solit u d e is a personal, subjective value defined as isolation from the sights, sound and presence of others, and the developments of man. Common indicators of solitude are numbers of individuals or parties one may expect to encounter in an area during a day, or the number of parties camped within sight and sound of other visitors. Impacts related to primitive recreation experiences are normally expressed in changes to t he physical setting, activities occurring in the area, of to the social experiences of users. Spec ia l features are those uni que geological, biological, ecological, cultural, or scenic features that may be located in roadless areas. Unique fis h and wildlife species, un ique plants or plant communities, outstandi ng landscape feat ures such as unique rock formations, and sign ificant cultu ral resource sites are some examples of the items Th e M a n ageability/ B ound ari es elem ent relates to the abili ty of the Forest Service to manage an area to meet size criteria and the five elements discussed above. Changes in the shape of an area influence how it can be managed. If broken into narrow corridors or small islands interspersed with areas of non-conforming management practices, many of the 6 elements may be compromised. WHAT WE NEED FROM YOUTo be most helpful in this analysis, please submit specific comments related to the 6 roadless characteristics within the major drainages (see attached map). Please submit written comments to Liz Schuppert, Evanston Ranger District, Box 1880, Evanston WY 82930 by January 12, 1995 . T he draft supplement is expected in February 1995. If you have any questions or concerns call Liz Schuppert at (307) 789-3194. �Wasatch-Cache &Ashley NatWl1flt forests • . - u~s USFS Regian Faur NORTH SLOPE OIL AND GAS Svpple?l!ntal Analysis • - - - •• •• •• ~ ~ , ·SliIIwater/Heydan 2·Eul Fork Bear 3-Wesl Fork Blackl 4-Middle Fork Blecks 5-E. Fork Blacks Fork S.W. Fork Smith Fork 7-Gilbart Creek 8-e. FOlk Smith Fork 9-Hen'Y' FOlk 10-Belver Creek Mil e s o 6 12 18 11·Burnt Fork{Thomp.onIKabeli 12·No. Fork Sheep Creek 13-Mehogany/Oeath VaJley Ceneral area. Legend ~!ll1l'Tlf ~ Area \4 -----Yf ? ,...,.... Ir IoU ..,. ,"""" J,. r ...., ...... ,.. �To: Keller, lauren 18-5-94 4:45p. FrOll: OCT~-l994 15:34 FRD1 TO ENiItEERIi'I:i SERVICES 918e17536139 p. 1 of l P .01 October 5, 1994 PACSIMD..B TRANSMlTl'AL COVER SHlllIT TIllS TRANSMl'ITAL CONTAINS 3 PAGES (INCLUDING COVER PAGE) SENT BY: LORRAlNB RICHARDS UDOT HNVIRONMENTAL DIVISION 4$01 S 2700 W, SLC, UT 84119 PHONE t: (SOl) 965-4159 FAX I: (SOl) 965-4796 SENT TO: LAUREN KEIJJ<I! FAX #: 753-6139 , COMMBNTSfINSTRUcnONS: Attacbed is • clean copy of the revisions you ...:elved yesterday and the changes we c:U.scuSKd in yCSlCIday's mec:d.n, fur yuur ~view. Pk::a:io::il!lC that Shawn and Paul .mccive a copy. Thanbl ............ PlBASB NQ'IUlY RECIPIENT AS SOON AS POSSmLB •••••••• �18-5-94 4:45p. To: Keller , Lauren OCT-ffi-l994 15:34 FR01 EN3It-EERIt-t3 SERVICES 910017536139 TO p. Z of 3 P.02 PROPOSIW LilNGUAGB CHANGRS TO 9 - 27 REVISION U9-89 LOGAN CANYON Page 2, Last Paragraph. 4th Sentence~ Since the roadway already serves ae a US Higbway and was designated as such in accordance with previous legislation, the determination has been made that this action would not change the use of the highway. Page 6, Insert new p~ragraph "l"h.:I.. :a.eeds JIIOre work, after second paragraph. pu1l some lULgua.ge ~rOJD. previou.s :z paragraphs and add the ~ollowing* A new intersection providing ace... to the sridgerland Subdivision will be constructed~ Intersection improvements to other existing and proposed subdivision accesses will be considered. Page 21. Second Paragr5ph . A band at riparian habitat will be maintained along the river and creek wherever possible to provide overhanging cover tor fish and to filter surface runoff. Page 21, Seventh Paragraph. Fishery studies will be conducted for individual projects which have the potential to ~ct tisheries. Prior to construction, available UDWR fish@ries studies will be assessed and it necessary updated to provide baseline data to dete~ine project impacts to fisheries. Post construction fishery studies wil1 be conducted. It study results show additional mitigation measures are warranted as a result of project activities, mitigation directed at wild fish stocks will be carried out under the direction ot USFS & UDWR biologists as explained in the PBIS on pg 5-6. �To : Ke ller, lauren 18-S-94 4:46p. OCT-05- 1994 15:35 FRD'1 ENitt-EERlt-I:i SERVICES TO 910017536139 p. 3 of 1 P. 03 US-89 LOGAN CANYON RDD REVISION. CHANGES AS PBR 10-3 - 94 MTG Page 12, 2nd Paragraph Replace 5th sentence. This team will participate in the development ot all aspects of design and 1n the resolution of unforeseen problems that ariss during construction and post construction. MOr. inoluded ' on page 26 ( ••• below) . page 24, Batch plant Locations * The traffic, safety. recreatioD, and air quality tmpactB associated with hauling material from the city versus setting up a batch plant in the canyon will be identified on a project by project basis in design. The affect o~ these t.pacta on both the canyon environment and the city environment will be considered. Th. a •••• ~t will inclu~. u.p.ats OD the LoWer Canyon lUlc:l compat1bility with future proj.ct.. The .c.t suitabl. location will be i~entifled in the project -.peoifioatioaB and the contractor wd11 be required to conduct hi. batch plant operations in accordance with the•• ~.QlflQatiOD •• Page 26, 1st paragraph MOnitoring and enforcement of the above proposed measur~s to minimize har.m will be accomplishe~ in accordance with the Memorandum of understandi.ng (MaU) between ut>OT, PHWA, an(l VSFS. The MOU is included in the Appendix of this ROD. It identifies how the individual projects wll1 be selected, identified and managed, and how coordination wi1l be accomplished. The MOU takes each project through design, construction, and postconetruction periods. It commits to the deve10pment of a revegetation plan, wetland mitigation plan, and a construction/post-construction monitoring plan, and commits to the development of a Cooperating Advisory Team (CAT) which consists o~ var~ous agencies and indiv1duals. This team w111 provide recommendations of regulatory and permit requirements, input on enhancement opportunities, mitigative treatments and overal l content of the design of the project, ~th tinal decisions being UDOT's responsibility. Th. CAT t.am. will be invo1ved. throughout the development of: all aspeets o~ de.iSPl, inc1uding' review o~ .lignment options and other d_lgn featur.s. During construction aDd po.t construction, the CAT team will be Coordinated with ~o r.so1v. unEoreseeD eDviroamantal problem. to ensure that ~t1gative e~~ort8 are succe.s~u1. � 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 3323 Image Width Image Width in pixels 2602 Local URL The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website <a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/294">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/294</a> Purchasing Information Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item. To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a> Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2013 Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner. Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 300 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Checksum 2543550165 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 LCC correspondence Description An account of the resource Multiple correspondences from members of the Logan Canyon Coalition including a notice of appeal and statement of reasons, and discussion of the modifications proposed for Logan Canyon. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Morton, Pete Kobe, Kevin Wilcox, Sterling Hessel, David L. Lyon, Tom Thompson, Douglas E. Bosworth, Dale Steinhoff, Gordon Karp, Peter W. Richards, Lorraine Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Environmental policy Department of Transportation--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 1994 1995 1996 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. 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 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/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 MSS314Bx1Fd7 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/05b4509697d71b211192d00e5e8d3f2d.pdf ad56f6a6ea7d4aa7e33551593c0d90c4 PDF Text Text Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (P.L. 90-542, as amended) (16 U.S.C. 1271-1287) 1An Act To provide for a National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, and for other purposes. Be It enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America In Congress assembled, that, (a) this Act may be cited as the 'Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.' Congressional declaration of polley. (b) It Is hereby declared to be the policy of the United States that certain selected rivers of the Nation which, with their immediate environments, possess outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational , geologic, fish and wlldllle, historic, cultural, or other similar values, shall be preserved in freeflowing condition, and that they and their immediate environments shall be protected for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Congress declares that the established national policy of dam and other construction at appropriate sections of the rivers 01 the United States needs to be complemented by a policy that would preserve other selected rivers or sections thereof in their free-flowing condition to protect the water quality of such rivers and to full ill other vital national conservation purposes. Congressional declaration of purpose, (c) The purpose of this Act is to implement this policy by instituting a national wild and scenic rivers system, by designating the initial components of that system, and by prescribing the methods by which and standards according to which additional components may be added to the system from time to time. Composition of system; requirements for State-administered components_ SECTION 2. (a) The national wild and scenic rivers system shall comprise rivers (i) that are authorized for inclusion therein by Act of Congress, or (ii) that are designated as wild, scenic or recreational rivers by or pursuant to an act of the legislature of the State or States through which they flow, that are to be permanently administered as wild, scenic or recreational rivers by an agency or political subdivision of the State or States concerned, that are found by the Secretary of the Interior, upon application of the Governor of the State or the Governors of the States concerned, or a person or persons thereunto duly appOinted by him or them, to meet the criteria established in this Act and such criteria supplementary thereto as he may prescribe, and that are approved by him for inclusion in the system, including, upon application of the Governor of the State concerned, the Allagash Wilderness Waterway, Maine; that segment of the Wolf River, Wisconsin, which flows through Langlade County; and that segment of the New River in North Carolina extending from its confluence with Dog Creek downstream approximately 26.5 miles to the Virginia State line. Upon receipt of an application under clause (ii) of this subsection, the Secretary shall notify the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and publish such application In the Federal Register. Each river deSignated under clause (ii) shall be administered by the State or political subdivision thereof without expense to the United States other than for administration and management of federally owned lands. For purposes of the preceding sentence, amounts made available to any State or �political subdivision under the Land and Water Conservation [Fund] Act of 1965 or any other provision of law shall not be treated as an expense to the United States. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to provide for the transfer to, or administration by, a State or local authority of any federally owned lands which are within the boundaries of any river included within the system under clause (ii). Cfassification. (b) A wild, scenic or recreational river area eligible to be included in the system is a free-flowing stream and the related adjacent land area that possesses one or more of the values referred to in Section 1, subsection (b) of this Act. Every wild, scenic or recreational river in its free-flowing condition, or upon restoration to this condition, shall be considered eligible for inclusion in the national wild and scenic rivers system and, if included, shall be classified. deSignated, and administered as one of the following: (1) Wild river areas -- Those rivers or sections of rivers that are free of impoundments and generally inaccessible except by trail, with watersheds or shorelines essentially primitive and waters unpolluted. These represent vestiges of primitive America. (2) Scenic river areas -- Those rivers or sections of rivers that are free of impoundments. with shorelines or watersheds still largely primitive and shorelines largely undeveloped, but accessible in places by roads. (3) Recreational river areas -- Those rivers or sections of rivers that are readily accessible by road or railroad. that may have some development along their shorelines, and that may have undergone some impoundment or diversion In the past. Congressionally deSignated components. SECTION 3. (a) The following rivers and the land adjacent thereto are hereby deSignated as components of the national wild and scenic rivers system: (1) CLEARWATER, MIDDLE FORK, IDAHO. -- The Middle Fork from the town of Kooskia upstream to the town of Lowell; the Lochsa River from its junction with the Selway at Lowell forming the Middle Fork, upstream to the Powell Ranger Station; and the Selway River from Lowell upstream to Its origin; to be administered by the Secretary of Agriculture. (2) ELEVEN POINT, MISSOURI. -- The segment of the river extending downstream from Thomasville. to State Highway 142; to be administered by the Secretary of Agriculture.l a (3) FEATHER, CALIFORNIA. -- The entire Middle Fork downstream from the confluence of its tributary streams one kilometer south of Beckwourth, California; to be administered by the Secretary of Agriculture. (4) RIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO. -- The segment extending from the Colorado State line downstream to the State Highway 96 crossing, and the lower four miles of the Red River; to be administered by the Secretary of the Interior. (5) ROGUE, OREGON. -- The segment of the river extending from the mouth of the Applegate River downstream to the Lobster Creek Bridge; to be administered by agencies of the Departments of the Interior or Agriculture as agreed upon by the Secretaries of said Departments or as directed by the President. (6) SAINT CROIX, MINNESOTA AND WISCONSIN. -- The segment between the dam near Taylors Falls. Minnesota, and the dam near Gordon, Wisconsin, and its tributary, the Namekagon, from Lake Namekagon downstream to its �Wild and Scenic River Issues STATEMENT OF REASONS Introduction The Original Forest Service Inventory of Potential Wild and Scenic Rjyers Was a Gross Depreciation of the Logan Riyer and Its Significant Tributaries As identified by the Utah Division of Wildlife, The Utah Sierra Club, The Nature Conservancy, the Bureau of Reclamation's Western Water Plan, and the American Whitewater Association, portions of the Logan River are 'NCll known and highly valued. Throughout the Inventory, the Logan River and its significant tributaries 'NCre undervalued. An indication of the extent of undervaluing is Ihe Forest Services' revised evaluation that identified five outstandingly remarkable values that might be recognized for the Logan river and its significan tributaries. Wasatch-Cache Revision Planning Record Wild and Scenic Rivers Eligibility Evaluation, Supplement I, June 1994 (hereinafter "Supplement"). The current UDOT ROD (page 38) is based entirely on the superficial treatment of the original inventory. It is inconceivable that the Forest Plan could approve the uoor ROD until a full and complete reevaluation of wild and scenic eligibility for the Logan river and its significant tributaries is completed. The Forest Service ROD ignores inconsistency in there own repons. Even though the original Inventory found no segments of the Logan river and its significant tributaries to be outstandingly remarkable, the identificaiton of five likely to be outstandignly remarkable va1ues in th Supplement resulted in the conclusion that, "No changes were made based upon this reconsideration." (Supplement p. 1-9). How can such a substantial difference in potential eligibility be ignored? In order to protect management standards in the Forest Plan, a detailed stud y of the Logan river and its significant tributaries must be conducted and the criteria used in evaluation must be capable to withstand the scrutiny of all concerned publics. A further example of the lack of appreciation of the regional importance of the Logan river is the fact that the Oneida Narrows of the Bear river has been nominated for eligibility by the Bureau of Land Management. By any reasonable comparison, the Logan river and its significant tributaries far exceeds the Oneida Narrows section of the Bear river in wild and scenic values. Consideration of Potential WUd and Scenic Riyers in the Forest Planning Process Section 5(d) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, Pub. L. No. 90-542, 16 U.S.C. §1271 III WI., requires all federal agenCies to consider potential national wild, scenic, ad recreational river areas in all planning for the use and development of water and related land resources. 16 U.S.c. §1276 (d). The planning respnnsibility imposed by §5(d) plainly requires the Forest Service to assess the values of potential Wild and Scenic Rivers on national forest lands during the preparation of land and resource management plans pursuant to the National Forest Management Ae~ 16 U.S.C. §1600 III WI· Section 1924 of the Forest Management Act recognizes the Forest Service's responsibility in tbis regard: "Consideration of potential wild and scenic rivers is an inherent part of the ongoing land and resource management planning process." Chapter 8 of the agency's Land and Resource Management Planning Handbook, set forth agency policy and planning requirements for integrating the evaluation of potential wild and scenic rivers into the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) planning process. Pursuant to these directions, consideration of potential �wild and scenic rivers in national forest plans follow a relatively straightforward procedure. Each forest plan should: (I) Determine whether eam river within the forest boundaries is eli&ible for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System in accordance with the criteria set forth in Section I(b) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (Le.• whether the river is free flowing and possesses one or more "outstandingly remarkable" values); (2) Determine the appropriate classification ("wild", "scenic", or "recreational") for rivers found to be eligible; and (3) Either study eam eligible river in the plan itself to determine its suitability for inclusion in the Wild and Scenic River System or conduct such an evaluaion as a subsequent, separate river study. Forest Service Land and Resource Management Planning Handbook, Chapter 8, § 8.14 (hereinafter "Handbook Chapter 8"). While eligibility is a threshold determination which properly focuses only upon the statutory criteria, i&., whether a river is free-flowing and possesses ODe or more outstandingly remarkable values, evaluation of a river's suitability for inclusion in the national rivers system involves a balancing of the relative values of the river and its adjoining lands as a part of the national rivers system against other uses for the river area, and practical considerations of the feasibility of administration of the river corridor as a component of the system. Handbook Chapter 8, § 8.23. As a substantive decision regarding the appropriate management of a sensitive area, the planners' decision regarding suitability must be accompanied by environmental analysis pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act. Ill.. § 8.31. During the study process, the values and potential classifications of eligible rivers must be protected by detailed management standards in the forest plan. Rivers determined to be suitable for designation are to be protected until Congress acts upon the Forest Service's recommendations. ld... The Forest Service ROD violates the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and Forest Service administrative direction for compliance with that Act. The Wasatch-Cache Planners erred in certain findings of NonEli&ibility of the Logan River from Lower Twin Bridge to Beaver Creek and from Beaver Creek to its source for potential Wild and Scenic Status Section 5 (d) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act establishes a broad mandate to federal agencies to consider potential wild and scenic rivers in their land and resource management planning. Forest Service administrative direction implementing that proviSion makes clear that forest planners should consider all streams on a forest. Chapter 8 of the R)[est Service Land and Resource Handbook directs that forest planners consider rivers identified through Congressional or Secretarial action, through listing on the National Park Service's Nationwide Rivers Inventory ('''NRr'). or through the land management planning process itself. Handbook Chapter 8, §§ 8.11. 8.14. The Handbook stresses that consideration of rivers other than those listed on the NRI is "particularly important" where the NRI is incomplete, and that consideration should be given to rivers identified in other studies, such as the Pacific Northwest Rivers Study, in State river assessments, or by other federal or State agencies or private interests. !d.., § 8.11. The Wasatch-Cache planners complied with the broad mandate of section 5 (d) and Forest Service administrative policy and took an independent look at streams nowing on the Forest, including the Logan River and Beaver Creek. The resulting document, "Inventory of Rivers on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Eligible for Inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System" was published in November 1993 (bere- �inafter "Inventory 1993"). Appellants are concerned that initially, only .one. stream on the entire Wasatch-Cache National Forest, (the Stillwater Fork of the Bear River), was found to be eligible for interim protection until a suitability study was performed. Appellants were involved with studying the Logan River and Beaver Creek, using the eligibility requirements from the Land and Resouoce Management Planning Handbook. Even though over 50 pages of information was provided to the Inventory Team, no reference was made to this material in the Inventory except a footnote. (Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon. 1993). The appellants found that certain segments of the Logan River might possess the free-flowing characteristics and outstandingly remarkable qualities for eligibility if the evaluation was corrected to use current evaluation techniques. These techniques were detailed in two letters to the Forest Supervisor. (J. Logan, in a 3 page, single-spaced letter to Ms. Susan Giannettino, Forest Supervisor; 18 January 1994: Also D Parkin, in a 23 page. single-spaced letter to Ms. Susan Giannettino; 18 February 1994). The letters concurred thm the inventory used an honest and systematic approach in preparing the report, However. the main thrusts of these letters was that there were "significant flaws in both the methodology and interpretation of policy guidelines" (Parkin, 1994). At a later dae (June, 1994) the Logan River was re-segmented in two segments, Lower Twin Bridge to Beaver Creek and Beaver Creek to its source. The segment from Lower Twin Bridge to Beaver creek was given five out of nine "might possess outstandingly remarkable values". Neither of the above-mentioned commentors were aware of this document, however, both are mentioned in the document. The responsiveness of the planners to the commentors is reflected in this updated inventory. Eighty-two rivers andlor river segments were identified in the re-evaluation and the only river segment that scores anywhere near what this segment of the Logan river is the East Fork of the Smith's Fork, which scored only three "might possess outstandingly remarkable values". (Supplement to Inventory, 1994). The supplement represents an improvement over the Inventory of 1993 . Appellants are concerned, however, that the planning team did not assess all resource values that would qualify the Logan River for inclusion as an eligible wild and scenic river. Most notably. there is ample evidence to indicate that the Logan River possesses outstandingly remarkable water oriented recreation, botanical, and wildlife values. (CPLC, 1993). The appellants are also concerned that the supplement does not evaluate significant tributaries of the Logan River, most notably Beaver Creek. Study and protection of tributary streams is an important component of the wild and scenic planning process because such streams and creeks are integral components of river systems. The goals of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act can be best achieved through preservation and recognition of river systems as integral wholes, with full recognition for the contribution of tributary steams. Also, management of suc h tributaries as wild and scenic rivers will enhance the r"Orest Service's ability to maintain and enhance downstream riverine values. Tbe Forest Service ROD Fails AdeQuately to Protect The Loean River's Potential Wjld and Scenic Status The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act provides tha each component of the system shall be "administered in such a manner as to protect and enhance the values which caused it 10 be included in said system ... " Section 100a); 16 U.S.C. § 128I (a). This section of the Act bas been interpreted as stating a " nondegradation and enhancement policy for all designated river areas." S-". Interagency Guidelines,47 Fed. Reg . 39454, 39458. Appellants are concerned that the Logan River segmenl which "may possess outstandingly remarkable values" as indicated in the Supplement to the Inventory will be exposed to inappropriate levels of disturbance by UDal's Preferred Alternative Highway Project due to improper classification. The UDOT ROD states that ..... the road reconstruction project will not affect the potential eligibility or classification on the Logan River" �(p. 38). As stated above, the Logan River segment from Lower Twin Bridge to Beaver Creek is most likely eligible and therefore, until an adequate classification is complete, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act mandates no degradation of values that could inhibit the river from eligibility. The UDOT ROD states on Page 37. "The FEIS also evaluated the effects of the alternatives on the resources and characteristics affecting the scenic. historic. recreation, wildlife and fish. cultural and other values associated with the river and river corridor... there will be either no or only minor effects from the Preferred Alternative on these values." The uoor ROD states on Page 38, "The FEIS recognizes that some screening vegetation along the river may be disturbed, but again this is estimated in the EIS to be minor and mostly temporary in nature." Appellants believe that there are numerous construction segments in the Preferred Alternative that will result in significant depreciation of wild and scenic values and will in fact jeopardize the potential classification of the Logan River and Beaver Creek. These will cause enough degradation to the eligibility requirements that the river will be dropped from consideration before it has been honestly evaluated for eligibility. Appellants are concerned that these "minor effects" will be enough to degrade the eligibility requirements and disqualify the river. These include: Scenic yalues 1. The appellants are concerned that the Preferred Alternative will not comply with the Visual Quality Objectives established in the Forest Plan. If this is the case, then the classification of the Logan River will also not meet the outstandingly remarkable scenic values needed to qualify the Logan River. 2. Tbe "Dugway" will be excavated eight feet into the uphill side, creating the potential for a large road cut or retaining wall. Up canyon from the dugway, the curve will be flattened and realignment will start here for the replacement of the upper twin bridge, producing another large road cut. 3. The curve flattening and widening of the road at Temple Fork will produce a large road cut. 4. The eight miles of the Upper Canyon (from mp 391.6 to Beaver Mountain road intersection) will be widened to 34 feet and areas with passing lanes (could be up to two miles in length) will be widened to 44 feet. These construction segments will produce large amounts of cut and fill and a large road base. further degrading the scenic value. Other Impacts I. Bridge rip-rap. Extensive rip-rap (FS ROD p. 7 and p. 9) "could total as mucb as 1,000 feet of the river's length ..... This will depreciate the free-flowing nature of the river and will adversely impact the potential for eligibility in tbe Wild and Scenic program. 2. Wet-lands mitigation. Wet-lands otitigation, in general, is a farce (Scieoce, 1993, 206: 1890-1892.) It hasn' t 'WOrked in the past and there is no reason to expect it will work now . Any activities that call for wetlands mitigation activities will JesuIt in the depreciation of wild and scenic values of the Logan river, and should, therefore. be found in violation of the Forest Plan. The Forest Plan does not specifically deal with this issue and should be amended to do so. 3. General cut-and-fill that will be required to widen the road. In the original Inventory, restriction of �the potential free-flowing nature of the Logan river was used as justification of finding the lower section of the river to be ineligible (Inventory, p. 12-13). How is it possible that the Forest Plan could allow the same activites on the upper section of the Logan river tha led to disqualification of the lower section? Such action inconsistent with both the intent and the Jetter of Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, and the Forest Service's own Planning Handbook. The Forest Service Failed to AdeQuately Involve Concerned Publics in the Inventory Process. Although Logan Canyon is of high local and national interest, the original Inventory received a very limited distribution. (Audubon, NovemberlDecember 1994). Even so, of those interested parties who responded, the overwhelming majority were critical of the Inventory. Of those that responded, none were notified of the subsequent reevaluation or the changes incorporated in the Table of Appendix D, June 1994 Supplement. The Forest Service has not porvided sufficient documentation required for concerned publics to evaluate the criteria used to draw conclusions in the Inventory. The Inventory refers to "detailed field surveys" (Inventory, pp. A-19 1993), and the Supplement references, "documenlation used to facilitate judging the merits of further study have been incorporated in this supplement.. ... (Supplement. pp 1-10). Yet when appellants requested access to this "documentation", all that was forthcoming were copies of maps with largely unintelligible notations. Apparently. there exists no documentation that can be reviewed by concerned publics. It is irresponisble for the Forst Service to agree to AllY depreciation of wild and scenic values without full involvement of concerned publics. �Literature Cited Bass, R. 1994. Keeping Logan Canyon. Audubon . NovlDec. Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon. 1993. An October 7, 1993, letter containing information about Logan River. Logan Canyon and Beaver Creek. with numerous .. tachments USDA Forest Service. Wasatch-Cache National Forest. 1985. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Wasatch-Cache National Forest. Salt Lalce City, UT. USDA Forest Service. Wasatch-Cache National Forest. 1993 . Inventory of Rivers on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Eligible for Inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. Salt Lake City, UT. USDA Forest Service, Wasatch-Cache National Forest. 1994. Supplement to Inventory of Rivers on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Eligihle for Indusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. Salt Lake City, UT. Logan, J. 1994. A January 18 letter to Susan Giannettino. Forest Supervisor, Forest. Wasatch-Cache National Parkin, D. 1994. A February 18 letter to Susan Giannellino, Forest Supervisor, Wasatch-Cache National Forest. �c o A. L Working for the T I protection of I Logan o Canyon This is reprinted from our AURUSt 1996 issue of Can.';an Wind b.y Drew Parkin. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act requires federal land management agencies to include wild and scenic river evaluations as part of their normal decision-making processes. In the case of the Forest Service this means that forest plans must specifically consider wild and scenic river eligibility. It also means that any Environmental Impact Statement that involves river resources must address this issue. Further - and this is the important part - once the Forest Service identifies a river as being eligible, it must, in adherence with its own administrative directives, manage the river "in a marmer consistent with the purposes of the Act, and such that the outstandingly remarkable values which make it eligible for inclusion are not diminished to the point where eligibility is negated. In no event should the free-flowing characteristics of the river be modified."In response to a threatened law suit, the Forest Service some ten years ago set out in earnest to identify potentially eligible wild and scenic rivers. Individual forests were entrusted with this and many responded admirably. Unfortunately, wild and scenic evaluations have never been high on the list for forest managers in Utah. Pressured by concerened citizens, the Wasatch-Cache National Forest undertook a year-long river study and, in November of 1993, released its inventory. The Inventory started by identifying 37 streams that forest planners deemed worthy of being studied. Next, the larger streams on that list, including the Logan River, were subdivided into "segments." In all, the Forest Service study considered 59 stream segments. Of these, 18 segments were rejected out-of-hand as being insignificant. Beaver Creek was one of these. An additional 11 segments were rejected for not being free-flowing. These included streams that had been subjected to water withdrawals, channelization, or other degradation. All of the Logan downstream of Temple Fork was rejected for this reason. This left 30 stream segments that were actually included in the study. The inventory considered nine separate resource features: cultural, wildlife, botanical, geological / hydrological, scenery, water recreation, general recreation, fisheries, and ecological. The idea was to determine the significance of each of the 30 segments with regard to each resource feature. A stream could be rated as either (1) typical, (2) significant at a statewide USU Box .1674 • L 0 8 a n • U t • h • 843 2 2 - 0 1 9 9 �level, or (3) significant at what the Forest Service termed a "provincial" level (an area compris-ing all of the Rocky Mountains). A rating of 3 for any given resource feature would qualify a stream segment for wild and scenic river designation. The result? Of the original 59 stream segments, only one - the Stillwater Fork of the Bear- was found eligible based on a "3" rating for its scenic features. No other stream received a 3 and all were therefore rejected, including the Logan River. I was stunned when I heard of the findings. Based on several years of professional experience with wild and scenic rivers, and having a detailed knowledge of the Logan River, it was my judgement that the Logan River not only met but exceeded eligibility requirements. After pouring over the report, I concluded that the study team's basic asswnptions were wrong and applying these asswnptions greatly skewed the findings. The decision to use "provincial" significance as the cut-off for eligibility was the most pervasive error. The Forest Service Manuel itself directs that "statewide" significance is an appropriate measure for judging wild and scenic status. Several national forests have used it as the basis for their decisions, and it is accepted practice for National Park Service and BLM planners as well. Had the Wasatch-Cache report used statewide significance as the threshold, the Logan River would have been included easily. If anything, I believe that the above Forest Service ratings for the Logan River are low. I question the ratings for wildlife, water recreation, and, especially, scenery. Even if the Forest Service ratings are correct, it is obvious the Logan River is an extremely important resource with statewide significance. In five of the nine resource categories, the river received a statewide significance rating. No other stream had more than two. The Logan River was rated as the most significant stream in the Wasatch-Cache National Forest for five of the nine resource categories. Again, no other stream could claim more than two. The conclusion is inescapable. The Forest Service report absolutely confirms that, when compared to other streams on the forest, the Logan River is the crown jewel and is most certainly eligible for wild and scenic designation. (Drew Parkin is a river policy consultant in cambridge, Mass., and serves on the board of directors of the Pacific Rivers Council. He previously managed Wild and Scenic River programs for the National Park Service. He is a native of utah and spent several seasons working for the Forest Service in Logan canyon.) USFS data on the Logan River between Temple Fork and White Pine Creek Rating compared to other Wasatch-Cache streams Logan River rating Cultural resources Statewide significance Wildlife Typical Typical Botanical resourses Geology/Hydrology Scenery Water recreation General recreation Fisheries Ecology Highest rating in the forest Rated in top 5 Rated in top 5 Highest rating in the forest Rated in top 10 Highest rating in the forest Rated in top 10 Tied for highest rating Tied for highest rating Statewide Significance Typical Typical Statewide s ignificance Statewide significance Statewide significance This infomtlltion W4S fQkm directly from t~ report For more information visit our web page at: http://www.logancanyon.org �CACHE ANGLERS Support Wild and Scenic designation for the Logan River Cache Anglers would like to express its support of the effort to have the Logan Ri~r designated as Utah's first Wild and Scenic River. While the designation will not affect the regulations nor the current use of the river by sportsmen of all types. we believe that it would be an important step in protecting the river against further private and commercial development which would harm the river and its riparian habitat. We firmly believe that this river. one of the finest cold water fisheries in the state of Utah, needs to be protected and preserved for future generations to enjoy. Regardless of the different purposes for which this beautiful river is used, the Wild and Scenic designation would be a great step in preserving what is left of Logan River's natural water ways and make them available for all sportsmen now and in the future . Jason Swan, President Cache Anglers �A RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE LOGAN CITY COUNCIL OFFERING ITS OFFICIAL SUPPORT FOR THE DESIGNATION OF THE LOGAN RIVER INTO THE NATIONAL WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS SYSTEM. WHEREAS, the Logan City Council recognizes the natural beauty and splendor of the Logan River, the phYSical, economic, and spiritual benefits provided to local citizens by the river, that it is a unique river in its own right, and that it is a river worthy of protecting for our families and our future; WHEREAS, the Council has been requested by local citizens and organizations to offer its official support of the designation of the Logan River into the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System; WHEREAS, the Council received this official request on December 9, 1998 and again reviewed the request in a public workshop on March 10, 1999, to consider the proposed resolution; WHEREAS, the Council recognizes that the Logan River has been found eligible by the u.s. Forest Service for designation into the System and must now go through a suitability study, that such a designation must then be introduced by legislation for consideration into the U.S. Congress; or, be recommended fo r designation by the Governor to the U.S. Secretary of Interior; WHEREAS, the Council recognizes that said resolution does not in any way carry forth official legislation or regulation regarding the Wild and Scenic deSignation, but that it provides for local support needed as the proposed designation proceeds through the appropriate process; NOW, THEREFORE, the Council has voted in a public meeting on _ _ _ _ _~ in favor of the proposed resolution, offering the official support of this governing body for the designation of the Logan River as a Wild and Scenic River. Passed and Adopted this __ day of _ _ _ _ _~, 1999. Chair �·. • Date: Wednesday, September 30, 19986:54:46 PM Date: Wed, 30 Sap 1998 09:50:46 -0600 From: River Network <rivernet-info@lgc.apc.org> To: rivernet@igc.apc.org. rlvernet-info@igc.apc.org Subject: Dam decommissioning Strategy Workshop Proceedings The proceedings from the July 1998 International Rivers Network (IRN)-sponsored International Dam Decommissioning Strategy Workshop are now available. They contain discussion outcomes. participant information, and a list of articles. press releases and publications of interest, and can be ordered for $10 through IAN's library Coordinator, Yvonne Cuellar (von@irn.org). You can also find much of this information on IAN's decommissioning web page at: www.irn .org At the July workshop, activists formed "Living Rivers: the International Coalition for the Restoration of Rivers and Communities Affected by Dams,· as the seed for growing a global movement on dam decommissioning and river restoration issues. To help service and build this coalition, IRN is not only circulating information, but also encouraging organizations around the world to join Living Rivers, by endorsing the Walker Creek Declaration, which appears below. To sign your organization on to the declaration and join the coalition please contact IAN's Decommissioning Coordinator (rani@irn.org). Please feel free to circulate the declaration to other organizations who may be interested in supporting it as well. WALKER CREEK DECLARATION Founding Statement of LIVING RIVERS The International Coalition for the Restoration of Aivers and Communities Affected by Dams 25 July, 1998 WHEREAS: Free-flowing, living rivers are an essential, life-giving feature of our natural and human environment. They fulfil a multitude of ecological, economic, spiritual, cultural, and aesthetic needs and wants. Worldwide, these invaluable rivers are now degraded by hundreds of thousands of dams, which have flooded huge areas of the world's most beautiful and ecologically rich habitats and the homes and lands of tens of millions of people. Dams have impoverished countless communities which were dependent on the bounty of free-flowing rivers and riverside lands, and endangered public health. Dams have blocked flows of nutrients and sediments and the passage of fish and other aquatic lifeforms. Dams have contaminated river water. Dams have eliminated essential natural flooding regimes thereby degrading the ecosystems, farmlands and fisheries which depend on floods . And dams have caused the decline and extinction of riverine species and the ecological degradation of estuaries and coastlines. Many dams provide services for society, including the generation of electricity, the storage and diversion of water, flood protection, navigation and flat-water recreation. But we now know that these services come at a high economic, ecological and social cost and often can be met in other less damaging ways. We also have learned that costs and benefits of dams are unequally shared - those who reap the rewards are rarely those who must bear the costs. After decades of experience, we now know that the promised benefits of many dam projects have never been realized, and their adverse effects are more serious than predicted. Trying to recreate artificially the complex natural cycles and functions of undammed rivers has proven to be far more difficult than was once thought. Efforts to mitigate the adverse effects of dams have often proven expensive and ineffective. �The knowledge learned over the past decades has led to the continuing improvement of standards for planning. designing. and operating dams. This has included social and environmental impact assessments, access to Information. public participation in decision-making. and periodic re-evaluation of a dam's impacts and operations. Many existing dams would never have been built if they had had to comply with current bestpractice planning principles. procedures and standards. Some are illega l because they were constructed in violation of existing laws. or because required environmental mitigation and social compensation measures were never implemented. Many dams are now obsolete. Many have reached the end of their functional life span and no longer serve a purpose that justifies their negative impacts. Many are unsafe. threatening the lives of millions of peopl e. as well as property, fish and wildlife. For many dams the cost of maintenance and of environmental and social mitigation exceeds the benefits to be gained from dam operation. The cost of removing dams Is In many cases proving less than the cost of continuing to operate them. even without taking full account of the social and ecological benefits of dam removal. A movement Is now growing around the world which recognizes the vital importance of living rivers. People are calling for major changes in the operating patterns of dams to lessen their negative impacts, the decommissioning and removal of obsolete and dangerous dams. the restoration of rivers and the provision of reparations for past damages suffered by riverine communities affected by dams. THEREFORE: We now establish Living Rivers. an international coalition for the restoration of rivers and communities affected by dams, by means of dam reoperation, decommiss ioning or removal. Independent and transparent evaluations must be carried out periodically to identify which dams should continue in operation. which should have their operations altered to mitigate adverse impacts. and which should be decommissioned or removed. The continued existence and operation of individual dams must be justified on the grounds of ecological and social impacts. economics and safety. Decommissioning plans must be prepared for all dams. whether existing. planned or under construction. These plans should Include dam removal and river, reservoir zone and floodplain restoration. The plans should also include mechanisms for raising the funds needed to pay for decommissioning. Dam owners and the beneficiaries of dams must be held responsible for the costs of mitigating the impacts of their continuing operation. of reparations for past damages, and where relevant of decommissioning or removing the dams. Funding mechanisms must be established to pay for decommissioning abandoned dams or for dams where the owner has insufficient financial resources. International agencies which have financed dams should share the responsibility for thei r decommissioning or removal. Rigorous dam safety standards must be developed and enforced. including the preparation and pub lication of flood inundation maps and emergency evacuation plans. and the purchase of liability insurance. The safety records of dams must be made public. The costs of implementing improved dam safety standards should be borne by dam owners and beneficiaries and, where relevant, international funding agencies. Scientific. engineering and sociological research and education on dam decommissioning must be promoted by governments and dam agencies. Watershed management and energy plans must be developed In a participatory and transparent manner. Watershed management plans should integrate sustainable agriculture and fisheries, urban planning, flood management, water supply and environmental restoration. Regional energy services plans should incorporate demand-side management and the most environmentally benign and cost-effective forms of generation. �Dams have had huge negative Impacts on rivers and river communities ~ removing dams Is an economically, technically, socially and environmentally viable and sensible option for reversing these impacts and restoring living rivers. Investment In living river systems will produce substantial benefits for our human and natural communities, today and tomorrow. Let our rivers live! ENDORSED BY: American Rivers, USA; Assembly of the Poor, Thailand; European Rivers Network, France/ Europe; Florida Defenders of the Environment, USA; Friends of the Earth, USA; Friends of the Eel River, USA; Glen Canyon Institute, USA; International Rivers Network, USA; John Muir Project, Earth Island Institute. USA; Let's Help the River Movement, Russia; Narmada Bachao Andolan, India; Pedder 2000, Australia; River Alliance of Wisconsin, USA; Save Our Wild Salmon Coalition, USA; SOS Loire Vivante, France; WaterWatch of Oregon, USA; Wildlife Fund ThaI/and; Zeleny Svit - Green World, Ukraine Since July 25, this declaration has also been endorsed by the following organizations: Foundation to Protect the Hungarian Environment. Hungary; Friends of the River, USA; Global Response, USA; Idaho Rivers United, USA Rani Derasary International Rivers Network (IRN) 1847 Berkeley Way Berkeley, CA 94703 USA Phone: (510) 848-1155 (510)848-1008 Fax: Email: rani@irn.org WWW: www.lrn.org For more information, please contact River Network at <rivernet@igc.apc.org> or visit our website: http://www.rivernetwork.org. �In the 1960s, the country awoke to the fact that our rivers were being dammed, dredged, diked, diverted and degraded at an alarming rate. To lend balance to our history of use and abuse of our waterways, Congress created the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. In October of 1968, the freshly penned Wild and Scenic Rivers Act pronounced, It is hereby declared to be the policy of the United States that certain selected rivers of the Nation which, with their immediate environments, possess outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural or other similar values, shall be preserved in free-flowing condition, and that they and their immediate environments shall be protected for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Congress declares that the established national policy of dams and other construction at appropriate sections of the rivers of the United States needs to be complemented by a policy that would preserve other selected rivers or sections thereof in their free-flowing condition to protect the water quality of such rivers and to fulfill other vital national conservation purposes. - ---- While ! sometimes criticized as not reaching its full potential, there is little d ~bt that when applied, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act has usually peen a JOlI,sing su<;~, helping to prot some of this nation's ath, Manistee and premiere riveri. Aliagash and Alieghen~Kern an McKenf ie. The Wild\ and Scenic Rivers Stem n prote s many of the ur Muir's rivers lo~ our historYt literature, our n tion' t;YOuth. Jo Tuolum e River and is famous, losing battle t stop the flooding of HetchUJ tchy Valley; t e Delaware ~iver of our American Revolu~n; Zane Grey's famous flyfishing river, the l')Iorth Umpqua; the Missouri of Lewis and Clark''sJpurneys. Great rivers IT om our past, guaranteed to be great rivers in our future. But designation as a wild and scenic river is not designation as a national park. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act does not generally lock up a river like a wilderness designation. The idea is not to halt development and use of a river; instead, the goal is to preserve the character of a river. Uses compatible with the management goals of a particular river are allowed, change is expected to happen. Development not damaging to the outstanding resources of a designated river, or curtailing its free flow, are usually allowed. The term "living landscape" has been frequently applied to wild and scenic rivers. Of course, each river designation is different, and each management plan is unique. But the bottom line is that the Wild and Scenic Rivers System is not something to be feared by landowners or sportsmen _ .;.. As you <!'!!l1.h t guess, a large per~enta~ nd-sceni rivers flow through the PacifiC-Northwest. Oregon's spectacular Klamath I ~ nd - 1- �its incredible abundance of wildlife -- was recently added to the Wild and Scenic Rivers System following a 15-year battle over the proposed Salt Caves Hydroelectric Project. The last section of the Columbia River in Washington not lying behind federal and private dams is being considered for designation. (Curiously enough, this reach is eligible because it has lain protected within the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, the site of Cold War atomic bomb production.) The Wallowa River in northeastern Oregon was recently designated as a wild and scenic river by Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt, becoming part of one of the most c ompletely protected river systems in the country. And the closing of the 104 th Congress saw the addition of Elkhorn Creek in Oregon to the list of protected Northwest rivers. (The Lamprey River in New Hampshire and the Clarion River in Pennsylvania were also designated in the closing days of the 104th Congress.) And, hopefully, others will follow. Whether the Wild and Scenic Rivers System grows or not, there are many rivers already protected for you to enjoy. Grab a flyrod, load the kayak on the car, slip on your most comfortable walking shoes. Get out there and savor your natural heritage. But go slow, and enjoy every minute of your trip to the river. Because of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, you've got the time. - 2- �This disc was prepared for the National Park Service by the U.S. Geological Survey with additional contributions from: U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, National Biological Service, Bureau of Reclamation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, National Resources Conservation Service, Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management U.S. Department of Interior National Park Service Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program (202)343-3780 THE NATIONWIDE RIVERS INVENTORY I. Background and Authorizations Section 5.(d) of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1271-1287) requires that "In all planning for the use and development of water and related land resources, consideration shall be given by all Federal agencies Involved to potential national wild, scenic, and recreational river areas.· It further requires that -, .. the Secretary of the Interior shall make specific studies and Investigations to determine which additional wild, scenic, and recreational river areas .. . shall be evaluated in planning reports by all Federal agencies as potential alternative uses of water and related land resources Involved." The Nationwide Rivers Inventory - In partial fulfillment of the Section 5(d) requirements, the National Park Service has compiled and maintains a Nationwide Rivers Inventory (NRI), a register of river segments that potentially qualify as national wild, scenic, or recreational river areas. The NAI qualifies as a comprehensive plan under Section 10(a)(2)(A) of the Federal Power Act. Presidential Directive - A presidential directive requires each Federal agency, as part of its normal planning and environmental review processes, take care to avoid or mitigate adverse effects on rivers Identified in the Nationwide Rivers Inventory compiled by NPS. Further, all agencies are required to consult with the National Park Service prior to taking actions which could effectively foreclose wild, scenic, or recreational status for rivers on the inventory. Stalewide River Assessments and Inventories - Pursuant to Section 11 of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, NPS has been providing technical assistance to states in the conduct of statewide river assessments and inventories. These efforts provide a source for potential future additions to Ihe Nationwide Rivers Inventory and the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System especially as State administered components. Public Law 88-29 - Outdoor Recreation Act of 1963 authorizes the Secretary of Interior to prepare and maintain a continuing Inventory and evaluation of outdoor recreation needs and resources including rivers ; provide technical assistance; encourage interstate and regional cooperation in the planning, acquisition, and development of outdoor recreation resources; sponsor and engage In research and education; cooperate with and provide technical assistance to Federal departments and agencies; and promote coordination of Federal plans and activities generally relating to outdoor recreation resources including rivers and associated trail corridors. These responsibilities are also assigned to the National Center for Recreation and Conservation of the National Park Service. �II. Initial Listing and Updates of the NRI The original inventory was conducted to by the Department of Interior with the cooperation of State and local agencies, and completed in 1982. To be listed, river segments had to meet three basic criteria: be free flowing (and generally be 25 miles or longer) be relatively undeveloped (both river and corridor) possess outstanding natural and/or cultural values A major update of the NRI was initiated in 1993. The first phase completed in December, consisted of adding the river segments found to have outstanding wild, scenic. or recreation potential by the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and the National Park Service in accordance with 5(d) of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. There is no minimum length specified by this section of the Act. River segments are classified according to extent of development as follows: Wild: Those rivers or sections of rivers that Bre free of impoundments and generally inaccessible except by trail, with watersheds or shorelines essentially primitive and waters unpolluted. These represent vestiges of primitive America. Scenic: Those rivers or sections of rivers that are free of impoundments, with shorelines or watersheds still largely primitive and shorelines largely undeveloped, but accessible in places by roads . Recreational: Those rivers or sections of rivers that are readily accessible by road or railroad. that may have some development along their shorelines, and that may have undergone some impoundment or diversion in the past. The second phase of the NRI update, initiated in 1994, added river segments found eligible through statewide river assessments and inventories. GIS and watershed referencing for all NRI segments will complete the update. �III. How To Contact National Park Service Offices For Information or questions on policy and update status: National Park Service National Center for Recreation and Conservation Post Office Box 37127 Washington, D.C. 20013 202-343-3780 For information or questions on specific river segments: ROCKY MOUNTAIN STATES Conservation Assistance Branch National Park Service 12795 West Alameda Parkway Post OHlce Box 25287 Denver, Colorado 80225-0287 303-969-2850 COLORADO, MONTANA, UTAH, and WYOMING �~ -4l'''' """ . - -..-r- 3 ,." ~ (~ '" ," 0 1'rr-r-o!J j) (all,k," ,(A- quO') . r ~ f\ ... ,.... , • c ... ", 1)e.b (f( a /.\ F sL,,/1>1 a '" , ;Y3 t- W loa 5 Lo9lMA , llT 1' "1,, I" I" II ,II J,I", /I ,',,' ,I, ,',',' I, ,I ,11,1"',, ,',,' ,II �1JM fr5hl'/& ___ I/",. l (a c he /11tf)Z.,j p");t.'l'1; 19.(' ~ , , �31 74 Camino Arroyo Carlsbad, CA 92009 December 3, 1998 Logan City Council Logan, UT 84321 Dear City Council , My wife and I lived in Logan from 1955, when we came as college students, until just last year. We raised three sons in Logan, and Logan will always be our hearts' country. We absorbed Cache Valley. The silhouette of the mountains, east up the canyon and west across the valley, is still the horizon line of our life. I wouldn't mention this background if I didn't think a great many people share such feelings. Few things go as deep as the sense of home. Unfortunately, sometimes the deepest values get taken for granted. We're all very busy. We can even forget to think about the absolute beauty and purity of Logan River, coming down the canyon and through the town. Surely there can't be many towns anywhere in the world that can say: a wild, clean river comes down out of the mountains to us; there is no one, no town, upstream. I think about Logan River a lot these days. Our iririgation and drinking water here in coastal California is sparse, it comes a long way, and it has been used several times. There is no way, with all the engineering capability in the world, we could create the kind of situation Logan has. So, speaking from deep care for Logan and from the knowledge of how easy it is to lose natural resources, and how hard if not impossible it is to get them back, I respectfully urge the Council to endorse Logan River as a Wild and Scenic River. Logan River is lifeblood. Please protect it. Sincerely, fl.t ifWt "-' 1-' " Thomas J. Lyon IJ'V, �p.o. 60x 3501 ~tm, Utcdi 84323-3501 25 October, 1998 Mr. Dan Miller, President logan Canyon Coalltion USU Box 1674 Logan, UT 84322-0199 Dear Mr. Miller, Bridgerland Audubon Society wishes to unequivocally endorse your efforts to urge the U.S. Forest Service to designate the Logan River through Logan Canyon as " Scenic" within the Wild and Scenic River System lnventory. The Logan River is a Iynchpin in the history, culture and ecosystem of Cache Valley and the Bear River Range. It is an historical artery of commerce, source of culinary water for Logan City, recreational refuge for land and water users, habitat for many species of migrant and yearround animals, and a source of beauty and wonder in every season. Designating it as " Scenic" should not compromise any of these attributes, but rather help to preserve its value to this and future gene'rations. It would be an honor to have the Logan River designated as the first " Wild and Scenic River" in Utah . There is nothing to lose, and everything to gain in such a designation . Please keep us apprised of the status of the project, and include our support in your efforts to achieve this designation. \1" '::'IY, ~jf=f?'~ t:O). 1:1 _ PrinhKI 01'1 ...... �What is the Wild & Scenic Rivers Act? The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 is unique among environmental laws in the world because of its potential to protect free-flowing rivers and river-sections in their condition at the time of designation. Unfortunately, the potential of this Act still has not been tapped. Less than I percent of the nation's total river miles have been included in the Nation's Wild and Scenic Rivers System. NOT ONE of Utah's beautiful rivers has this outstanding distinction. What Does Designation 001 • offers three levels of protection- Wild. Scenic, and Recreational, which correspond to existing development and the extraordinary values of the river. • provides blanket protection against federally licensed dams, diversion, and other on-river development which cannot be overridden by a FERC hydropower license. • provides flexibility in working with local landowners to protect the designated river's riparian corridor through the creation of a management plan. • will actually increase the market value of surrounding private property. • maintains the conditions existing at the time of designation, including local lifestyles and land uses within the river corridor. • will not stop highway improvements. Although, the Utah Department of Transportation will have to respect Logan River's outstandingly remarkable values and can't change the rivers character. • Designation as a Wild and Scenic River is not deSignation like a national park. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act does not lock up a river like a wilderness designation. The idea is not to halt development and use of a river; instead, the goal is to preserve the character of a river. Uses compatible with the management goals of a particular river are allowed, change is expected to happen. Development not damaging to the outstanding resources of a designated river, or curtailing its free flow, are allowed. The term "living landscape' has been frequently applied to wild and scenic rivers. Of course, each river designation is different, and each management plan is unique. But the bottom line is that the Wild and Scenic Rivers System is not something to be feared by landowners, water users or sportsmen. For more information visit our web page at: http://www.logancanyon.org �Leave A True Legacy The Logan as Utah's First Wild and Scenic River We the undersigned hereby declare our support for segments of the Logan River to be designated as Utah's first Wild and Scenic River under the federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, as long as that designation doesn't interfere with traditional uses now enjoyed by the public. Signature Print name Street ctty RETURN COMP LETEO PETITIONS TO THE LOGAN CANYON COALITION, USU BOX '1874 , LOGAN , UTAH 84322·0"111 Stale Zip �c o 4. L Working for the T I protection of I Logan o C;lnyon Leave A True Legacy The Logan as Utah's First Wild and Scenic River Thirty years after the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act was passed by Congress, there have been over 154 Wild and Scenic designations in the United States. Not one of Utah's beautiful rivers has this outstanding distinction. The Logan River and its watershed is a critical resource of recreation, economic stability, and most importantly, a source of culinary water for Logan and Cache Valley residents. A Wild and Scenic designation would not encroach upon existing uses of the river, but would provide longterm protection for this precious resource. Utah citizens deserve a Wild and Scenic River. Let's all join together and leave this true legacy for our families and our future. Support the Logan River as Utah's first Wild and Scenic River. For more information visit our web page at: USU Box #1674 • Log a n • http://www.logancanyon.org Uta h • 84322·0199 �c 04. L WorklDS for the I T protection of I LOBan o Canyon Logan Canyon Coalition's Executive Summary Logan Canyon Coalition is a grassroots citizens organization in northern Utah dedicated to promoting reasonable improvements in the narrow, winding canyon while protecting the canyon's scenic and environmental resources. Lee is devoted to protecting logan Canyon. logan River and its eco·systems. Currently. lee's efforts are directed towards protecting the logan RiYer from excessive development from its proximity to a nearby highway and a proposed land swap that will create state and private lands above the river. Lee Is running a campaign to have a portion of the Logan River deSignated as Utah's first Wild and Scenic River. In May, 1998 the Forest Service and other environmental experts gathered to expound on the overwhelming data that argues in favor of deSignation. LCC will direct Its resources through community outreach and initializing several campaigns toward Wild and Scenic designation. For more information visit our web page at http://www.logancanyon .org usu Box '1674 • Log a n • U I • h • 843 2 2 - 0 1 9 9 �c o A. L Working for the T I protection of I Logan o l\T Canyon FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 30th Anniversary of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act The 30th anniversary of the most important piece of federal legislation ever written to protect rivers-The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act-will be celebrated across the country during the month of October. Thanks to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, many of our nation's most outstanding free-flow- ing rivers are protected from dams and inappropriate development. The Act. signed in 1968, protects rivers with remarkable scenic. recreational. geological. fish and wildlife. historic, cultural. or other similar values. To date, segments of 154 rivers have been designated . cov- ering nearly 10,764 miles. Not one of Utah's beautiful rivers has this outstanding distinction. The logan River was passed by during the first two rounds of Wild and Scenic recommendation by the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. But as a result of public pressure, the Forest Service is currently conducting a third inventory of Wasatch-Cache National Forest rivers Including the Logan. The Logan River and its watershed is a critical resource of recreation, economic stability, and most importantly, a source of culinary water for Logan and Cache Valley residents. A Wild and Scenic designation would not encroach upon existing uses of the river. but would provide long-term protection for this precious resource. "We (LCC) want to leave a true legacy," said Dan Miller. LCC President. "We are seeking to have the Logan River designated as Utah's first Wild and Scenic River. Utah citizens deserve a Wild and Scenic River within their borders, and I ask that we all join together to leave this true legacy for our families and our future ." USU Box '1674 • L 0 8 it n • U I • h • 843 22- 0 1 9 9 �Wild and Scenic rivers are an important part of the country's heritage, offering the public recreation opportunities, enhanced tourism economies, the preservation of plant and animal species, and dependable supplies of clean water. Many communities along Wild and Scenic rivers benefit from an Increase in land values that accompany a Wild and Scenic river designation. While the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act has had great success, much work still remains. According to the National Park Service's Nationwide Rivers Inventory, more than 60.000 miles of rivers qualify for inclusion in the Wild and Scenic Rivers System. American Rivers, the nation's leading river conservation organization, is working to stem the extinction of our most outstanding rivers and bring more rivers into the Wild and Scenic Rivers System. "We hope the Logan River will someday be apart of that system:' Miller said. For more information please visit our web site at http://www.logancanyon.org Dan Miller. President Logan Canyon Coalition e-mail: Dmil123S@aolocom ph#: 435/258-'1432 �Please Write To LEAVE A TRUE LEGACY and Support the Logan as Utah's first Wild and Scenic River NOT ONE of Utah's beautiful rivers is recognized for its outstanding qualities through induction into the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. To be eligible for this status. a river just has to be free-flowing and posses at least one outstandingly remarkable value which may include: fish, wildlife, scenery, geology, archaeology, cultural, historical, and recreational. After studying the river, citizens groups have identified the following outstandingly remarkable values on the Logan River: Fish and Wildlife. Scenic. Geologic, and Recreation. Surprisingly. the Logan was passed by during the first two rounds of Wild and Scenic recommendation by the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. But as a result of public pressure, the Forest Service is conducting a third inventory of Utah's rivers. The opportunity still exists for the logan to be recognized for its outstanding qualities. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT in this process is extremely important. PLEASE WRITE the Wasatch-Cache National Forest and urge them to recommend that the logan River be inducted into the Wild and Scenic Rivers System. Attn. Bernie Weingardt Wasatch-Cache National Forest 8230 Federal Building 125 South State Street Salt Lake City. Utah 84138 �ACTION ALERT! The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act was signed into law in 1968. Thirty years later, Utah and Nevada are the only two states in the West without a designated river. The U.s. Forest Service recently determined the Logan to be eligible for designation. Next it must be determined to be suitable, largely dependent upon local sentiment, and then designated by Congress. You can help make the Logan River Utah's first Wild and Scenic river. The Logan City Council has been asked to issue a proclamation supporting such a designation, which will then be forwarded with our petition onto our Congressional delegation. Please call or write OUf City Council members and the Mayor asking them to support such a proclamation. They will be voting on such a measure March 4th. Mayor Doug Thompson 255 North Main Logan, UT 84321 750-9800 Alan Allred, Logan City Council 1535 E. 1500 N. Logan, UT 84341 752-6441 John Harder, Logan City Council 289 E. 200 N. Logan, UT 84321 753-6300 Janice Pearce, Logan City Council Steve Thompson, Logan City Council 37 South 200 West Logan, UT 84321 753-8254 Karen Borg, Logan City Council 1670 N. 1600 E. Logan, UT 84341 753-6963 727 N. 150 W. Logan, UT 84321 753-3599 Sponsored by the Logan Canyon Coalition �LOGAN RIVER DRA INAGE SEGMENT 39.0 Logan River: Ida bo statelin e to confluence with Beaver Creek - 6.6 miles POTENT IAL OUTSTANDINGLY REMARKABLE VA LUES Fish DESC RI PTION Gener al - This segment of Logan River, from the Idaho stateline to its confluence with Beaver Creek, is located on the Logan District in Cache Counry, Utah. A recent land exchange with the State of Utah in the upper reaches of the river have made most of the lands through with it flows pan of the National Forest system, although about 1 mile still flows through private lands. Bio/physica l setting - The segment of the Logan River is a relatively small up river portion of the stream where the river is natural in character and has few highway and road encroadunents and crossings., The stream flow is perennial; however during low flow periods a portion of the stream can go underground for about 100 to 200 yards. Elevations ranges along the stream from about 7,500 feet at the state line to about 6400 feet at Beaver Creek. In the upper reaches of the segment the somewhat confined channel is character· ized by poo!·riffie·run and it runs through a broad open valley. Adjacent uplands are primarily dominated by aspen and sagebrush communities and some conifer communities. Subalpine fir is succeeding aspen communities in some areas. Riparian communities are characterized by thinleaf alder and various willows. Dispersed recreation impacts are common along the upper poslion of the ri\·er segment, resulting in soil compaction, loss of some woody vegetation, and the presence of some introduced herbaceous species. No threatened. endangered, or sensitive plants occur along this segment of the Logan River. Fish species present include rainbow trout, pure strain Bonnevill e cutthroat trout (a sensitive species), brook trout, and brown trout. The Bonneville cutthroat population here is pan of a larger metapopulation of the species that occupies the Logan River basin and tributaries, and is considered to be critical to the overall preservation of the species. The State of Utah rates the fishery here as a Class II, unique. No endangered or threatened mammals exist on this segment. H um an dimension · Acc ess to the base of segment is provided Scenic Byway, and by Forest Road 006 (a din road) whi ch runs veloped Forest Service campgrounds are present in the upper part sian of Parks and Recreation operates a winter sports trailhead Highway 89 and the Franklin Basin Road. V-54 by US Highway 89, a National parallel to the segment. No de· of the segment. The Utah Divi· parking area at the junction of �DETAILED EVALUATION OF ELI GIBILITY Evaluation of Free-flowing Condition - This segment of the Logan River has n Ol been substantially modified by the dirt road that runs along it or by other construction or diversion. The segment is free-flow ing. Evaluation of Outstandingly Remarkable Values - The Bonneville cutthroat population of this stream is pan of a larger self-sustaining continuous meta-population of this species. The fi sh is a sensitive species which is currently incl uded in a conservation agreem ent. Spawning of the species occurs in this stream and other Logan River tributaries. In comparison to other known and documented populations of Bonnevill e cunhroat trout this is a very special population that is and wi ll be important to the overall survival of the species. Eligibility and Classification - Since this segment of the Logan Ri ver is free-flowing and has an outstandingly remarkable fishery popUlation, the segment is eligible for the National Wild and Sceni c Rvers System. The stream can be classifi ed as a scenic river. V-55 �SEGMENT t 39.1 Logan River : Con fluence wit h Beaver C r eek to Third Dam - 20 miles POTENTIAL O UTSTANDING LY REMARKABLE VALUES Scenic, Recreation, Geo logical, Fish, Ecological DESC RIPT ION General - This segment of Logan Ri ver, from the confluence with Beaver Creek to Third Dam is about 19 mil es long. It is located on the Logan Ranger Distri ct in Cache County, Utah. This segment is managed entirely by the Forest Service. Bio/pbysical setting - Elevations range from 5,200 feet near Third Dam to 6400 feet at Beaver Creek. Along this segment the terrain changes from a relatively narrow gorge j ust below Third Dam. and runs through a classic canyon landscape to a much more open and rolling setting in the uppennost 8 miles above the Temple Fork confluence. The geological features mosl apparent along the course of the ri ver are some of the karst fea tures, notably Ricks Springs cave, Logan Cave. and Wi nd Cave. Other caves al so ex ist. and undoubtedly many more remain to be di scovered. Ordovician quartzite strata near Right Fork contain unusually well fonned and preserved fuco idal structures (foss ili zed casts of ancient wonn borrows which appear like seaweed mats frozen in the stone). At the west end of the corridor. lake terrace gravel deposits of prehi stori c Lake Bonneville perch above the ri ver bed and mark the upper level of a lake with enormous significance in the Great Basin. Well-defined faults and shear zones cut and displace the sedi mentary strata in se\'eral road cuts along the corri dor. some of which also show geologically interesting small-scale folding of the strata. Uplands are dominated by Douglas fir on cooler north- facing slopes with mapl e, sagebrush. mountain mahogany, and juniper communities on south-facting and other drier sites. Riparian vegetation is characteri zed bi rch/dogwood, box elder, and yellow willow communi ties. Crack willow, an introduced species. is a common component of some of the camping and ipicnicking areas in the lower sections of the segment. One federall y listed Threatened plant, Primula maguirei (Maguire primrose), occurs along this segmentin more mesic limestone cliffs. In addi tion, several Intermountain Region sensitive species. including Viola frank smithii ffranksmi th violet), Eri geron cronquistii , and Draba maguirei, occur on the dolomitic limestone outcrops. No endangered or threatened wildlife species exist on this segment. However, the western bigeared bat, an Intennountain Region (Forest Service) sensitive species, has been verified here. Fish spec ies present include rainbow. brook. and brown trout, and the sensitive species - Bonneville cutthroat trout with has relati onships to both pure and potentially pure sub populations in adjacent tributaries. This popUlation of Bonneville cutthroat in Logan River can be considered pan of a meta-population that occupies the upper portion of thi s river drainage, (in biological tenn s - a population that has imponance beyond the local scale). I • , [ J t J I r t \ . �Human dimension· Parallel access is provided by State Highway 89, a designated National Scenic Byv..'ay. This highway is used by through travellers driving between the Wasatch Front and Idaho or Wyoming. or by recreati on users who are interested in destinations al ong the river and highway. I I I t 1 • f t I ] 1 I I f t Recreation pressure in the corridor, both dispersed and developed. can be considered moderate to heavy depending on season and day of the week. The Forest Service provides many developed campgrounds and picnic sites in the lower ponicn of the segment, and upstream the most notable is the Tony Grove recreation complex, snowmobile parking and other facilities. Other interesting viewing sites include Rick Springs. Access to the river for fishing and tubing is very easy. Two geological markers are present: one explaining about ancient Lake Bonneville and the other about deposits of fucoidal quartzite. Logan Wind Cave is also a destination for hikers. Rock climbing is very popular aiong the segment. Below Ricks Springs some kayaking occurs depending on the water level. Between Third Dam and Right Hand Fork slopes are quite steep, and vegetation diversity shows a high degree of patterning owing to considerable variability in altitude, slope, aspect, soils, etc. Views are not especially long or vastin the lower section, but are some of the more attractive available in northern Utah. The narrow canyon from Right Hand Fork up [0 Chicken Creek provides pleasant scenery to passing motori sts who are nearly enclosed by the canyon and its heavy riparian forest. For those \\·ho stop, a more leisurely viewing experience may be appreciated at a local campsite or picnic area. Scenery above this point changes considerably and ranges from the deeply encised gorge near the twin bridges to wide-open expansive uplands draped with sagebrush and aspen around Tony Grove and Red Banks. Tony Grove Memorial Ranger Station, a National Regi ster site, is within the seb'lllent. TIlls complex has a unique log cabi n and later CCC period buildings that relate to earlier periods in the hislOry of Nationa l Forest land management. Fishing along the Logan River is common, and the experience is considered to be high quality. The State of Utah ranks the upper portion of the segment at Class II , a unique fishing segment. Hunting is also a common endeavor in areas adjacent to the river. The Utah State University Field Station is located in the upper portion of the segment. Portions of the area are in the Logan Canyon Cattle allotment. There are no commercial fishing, hwlting, or recreation activities on the segment. Although some of the several stream-crossing structures may impede peak stream fl ows, there are no fu ll-scale impoundments in this reach above the inundated area above the Third Dam. No sig-nificant diversions have been made that could have any noticeable effects on stream flows or instream water uses ; however, there are probably several minor diversions for adjacent domestic and irrigation uses . DETAILED EVALUATION OF ELIGIBILITY Evaluation of Free-flowing Condition· Although Highway 89 runs the length of thi s segment and has some effects on its free-flow, these are not so substanti al that most observers would notice changes from a purely natural character. In general the ecological functions of the river are V-57 �natural along the segment. Over the last several decades construrction efforts and active management have intended that natural appearance and functions might be preserved. The segment is free-flowing. Evalu ation of Outstandingly Remarkable Values - The Bonneville cutthroat population of this stream is part of a larger self-sustaining continuous meta-population of this species. The fish is a sensitive species which is currently included in a conservation agreement. Spawning of the species occurs in this stream and other Logan River tributaries. In comparison to other known and documented populations of Bonneville cutthroat trout this is a very special population that is and wi ll be important to the overall survival of the species. Scenery along the segment has been recognized as outstanding by the creation of the National Scenic Byway fo r Highway 89. This scenery is diverse and variable, a scenic smorgasbord of this part of the Wasatch Range. The recreation opportunities in this segment are about as broad spectrum as are provided in any simil ar setting northern Utah. If one were to look for a typical northern Utah outdoor recreation, the Logan River area might be a good model for the type. For its variety, length of season, quality, and appropriate scale of facilities, the recreation experience along the Logan Ri ver is outstandIng. nti s segment meetS the criteria for outstandingly remarkable geo logical \'alue due to the diversity and abundance of fear. .lfes \vhich together form an area with high educational and scientific interest. In broad scale, the entire river corridor presents an unparalleled cross section of the geo logic structure and middle and lower Paleozoic carbonate stratigraphy of the west flank of the Bear River Range. A myriad of smaller geologic features fall within the confines of the corridor which contains the geologically-interesting meanders of the Logan River. Ecologically, thIS segment contains a wide variety of plant, animal , and aquatic communities that are functioning in a relatively heal thy manner, especially when compared to the proximity to local urban populations. The use of the corridor as a setting for education for local schools and the uini versity community has been appreciated for many decades. Due to the location of the river in close proximity to Utah State, more is known and written about the local natural setting than for most areas of the western U.S. The ecological setting and its value to local and broader communities can be considered outstanding. Eligibility and Classification - Since this segment of the Logan River is free-flowing and has outstandingly remarkable values. the segment is eligible for the National Wlld and Scenic Rvers System. The stream can be classified as a recreational river. V-58 • I r I I �SEGM ENT 39.2 Logan RiYe r : 1 bird Da m to Fo rest Bound a ry - 3 mil es POT E:\TlAL O UTSTA!\" DI:"IGL Y RE~ I A RKA BL E VALUES Ecological. Scenic 1 DESCRl PTl O!\" I Gener a l - This segment of Logan River, from TIlird Dam to the western boundary afthe WasatchCache Nati onal Forest is about 3 miles long. It is located on the Logan Ranger District in Cache County, Utah. I J , I J Bio/ phys ic a l settin g - The narrowest part of Logan Canyon is the sening for this segment. Here the river cuts a gorge through the \Vasatch Range to emerge in Cache \"alley at Logan. Elevations on the segment range from about 5200 feet to 4800 feet. Upland vegetation along this ponion of the stream is characterized by sagebrush and mountain mahogany on dryer sites and bigtooth maple in the foothills: Douglas fir occurs on more mesic nonh-facing slo pes. Riparian communities are dominated by cO llonwood. box elder. and crack willow trees with ycllow willow and coyote willow , river bi rch. and red-osier dOf,'wood along the narrow riparian conidor. One federally listed TItreatened plant. Primula maguieri Maguire primrose), occurs along this segment. In addition , several Intermountain Region (Forest Service) sensitive species. including Afusineon lineare (Rydbcrgs musineon), Erigeron cronquistii. and Draba maguirei. occur on the dolomitic limestone outcrops along this segment. Plant communities along this segment appear somewhat altered in many areas because of road placement which channelizes the river, planting of nonnative trees and shrubs. and building locations. There are no threatened, endangered or sensitive fish species in this segment, nor any endangered or threatened wildlife species. Sensitive wildlife species have not been verified. I • • • I iI Human dimension - US Highway 89, a National Scenic Byway, runs along the segment for its complete length. There are three developed Forest Service recration sites in this segment and a geological marker explaining about ancient Lake Bonneville. No significant archeological or historic sites are present. Because of the relatively narrow stream conidor and traffic density recreation opportunities are limited compared to further upstream on the river. Fishing is common, but not generally so satisfying an experience as that upstream . Tubing and some kayaking are popular activities. While the scenery is that of a narrow rocky canyon and quite pleasant, vistas are not so expansive as further upstream where the canyon opens up. There are no commercial recreation ventures in this segment, and linle opportunity to develop any . There is a restaurant which takes advantage of the riverine sening for dining. No commercial hunting or fishing is permined. Due to highway and dam construction over the past century, thi s segment of the Logan ri ver has been heavily modi fi ed. Adjacent floodplains and meadows have been significantl y modifi ed anddeveloped. Oxbows exist, but usually have been cut off by the highway, or they have been fi lled . V-59 �Highway 89 pinches the stream for much of its length channelizing it and decreaing its naturalness. The Highway corsses the river once in this segment, while five small er bridges span the river for access to summer homes and the National Forest. The stream flow is perenniaL Logan City is required to maintain 20 cfs between Second and Third dam. Below Second Darn no minimwn is required and during dry periods the flow is minimal. . DETAILED EVALUATION OF ELIGIBILITY Evaluation of Free.flowing Condition - This segment of the Logan River has been substantially modified by construction of Highway 89 which runs along it or by other construction or diversion. The segment is not free-flowing. • • • Evaluation of Outstandingly Remarkable Values· Because the stream has been found to be not free-flowing there is no further consideration of the values for which it might potentially have been eligible. Eligibility and C lassifi cation - This segment of the Logan River is not free-flowing and therefore not eligible as a Wild and Sceni c River. , J F t ! f V-60 �SEGMENTS The discussion and eval uation of th e following rivers have been combined. as all are being considered potentially outstandingly remarkable fo r the same related va lue. the Bonneville cutthroat trout fish population. j 39.3 39.4 39.S 39.6 39.8 39.9 Beaver Creek: Idaho State Line to Mouth - 6.5 miles \Vhite Pine C reek: Source to Mouth - 5.9 miles Temple Fork: Source to Mouth - 5.6 miles Spawn Creek: Source to :'\Iouth - 3.8 miles Bunchgrass C reek: Source to Mouth - 5.0 miles Little Bear Creek: Source to Mouth - 4.0 miles POTENTIAL OUTSTANDINGLY REMARKABLE \' ALUE Fish j i 1 I • I DESCRIPTIONS General - These segments are located on the Logan Ranger District, and are all tributary streams to the upper Logan River. Most of the streams flow exclusively through Nati onal Forest, although recent land exchanges in the area of the upper Logan River, White Pine Creek, and Beaver Creek have change ownership status there. Bio/physical setting - All six of the streams in this section are tributaries of the upper Logan River. As such they have some anributes in common and some that are unique. Each has vegetation in uplands which includes sagebrush. lodgepole pine, SUbalpine fi r. aspen, Douglas fir and some limber pine. Riparian communities are typicall y narrow and include willows. dogwood, aspen and conifers. ~o threatened. endangered or sensiti\'e plants are known to occur within these corridors. The flammulated owl, a sensitive species, has been located within the area. The corridors include habitat suitable for boreal owl, goshawk, wolverine and three-toed woodpeckers; none of these sensiti ve species are known to occur within the corridor. Several beaver ponds lie within these corridors, and the lower reaches of some provide big game winter range (moose, elk and deer). Fish species include rainbow, brown and brook trout, sculpin and Bonnevi lle cutthroat trout (a sensiti ve species). While all the fish species in these tributaries can add to visitor enjoyment or the overall wildlife diversity in the upper Logan River drainage, the Bonnevill e cunhroat trout population is of special interest and value. The range of Bonneville cutthroat includes most of the eastern Great Basin (See Appendix F, Regions of Comparison, Fish Values). These several streams in addition to the upper portions of the main Logan River are occupied with a meta-population (that is a genetically interactive larger population of the species) that, if protected, can insure the preservation of the species, which is currently under some considerable pressure to survive due to pressures of exotic species introduction, fi shing pressure, and habitat fragmentation, destruction, andlor degradation. The upper Logan River population of these fish is probably the largest and most di verse subpopulation with habitat connectivity that remains. Fish abundance for the Bonneville cutthroat is high, and the population is self-sustaining through natural spawning in both the main Logan River and these tributaries. This river system is of critical importance to Bonneville \'-6 1 �r cutthroat because of its lack of migratory obstructions, the large number of connected populations, and the overall strength and diversity afthe population. Human dimension - Access up the main Logan River to the lower portions of most of these streams is by u.s. Highway 89, the Logan Canyon National Scenic Byway. From this main highway smaller Forest Roads are present up Temple Fork and Beaver Creek, while even more ephemeral roads and trails are present along the other streams (e.g. White Pine Creek). At times the presence of these roads has impacted these streams and plans for some roads (e.g. Temple Fork) include reducing these impacts by reconstruction. Developed recreation sites are few within the upper Logan drainages compared to further downstream along the main Logan River. Dispersed camping and hiking use can be light to heavy depending on which stream is in question and season or day of the week. Fishing use is along these streams variable dependent on access and seasons. A catch and release policy has been in place. Several sites providing access and other recreation opportunities are found within these corridors or close by. Included are: a snowmobile parking area and groomed snowmobile and crosscountry ski trails are located near the junction of Highways 89 and 243 ; a snowmobile route connecting Utah to the Yellowstone area passes through the corridor; Beaver Mountain Ski Area; a commercial outfitter/guide offers horseback rides near the ski area; and portions of the Great \Vestem Trail in Beaver Creek and upper Temple Fork. There are few known prehistoric sites within these corridors, although occasional scatters of chipped stone materials attest to Nati ve American use of the streamsides for seasonal hunting and fishing camps, as well as access ways to upland areas. The Temple Fork Sawmill historic site and historic Tony Grove Ranger Station are within the corridors of consideration. Sheep and catt le graze most of the areas within which these rivers flow. There are no dams or di versions on these segments. In some places U.S. Highway 89, and Forest Roads, and other old roads affect the stream channe ls, flood plains, and water quality by crossing the segments or running along side them. DETAILED EVALUATION OF ELiGmILITY Eva lu ation of Free-flowing Condition - These six tributaries of the Logan River have not been modified to any significant extent by human uses. All six may be considered free-flowi ng . Evaluation of Outstandingly Remarkable Values - The Bonneville cunhroat trout fis hery withi n these tributary streams to the upper Logan River is a significant population. because of its size. diversity, di stribution within several suitable habitats. self-sustaining natural reproduction and the size and vigor of the fish. The importance of thi s meta-population of Bonneville cunhroat trout is an outstandingly remarkable value. Eligibility and Classification - All six of the streams listed below are eligible for the !\ational Wild and Scernc Ri vers System as they are free-flowing and fo r their remarkab le Bonnneville cutthroat fishery. V -62 t I �1 , They may be classified as indicated below: Beaver Creek: Idaho State Line to Mouth - Scenic White Pine Creek: Source to Mouth - Wild Temple Fork: Source to Mouth - Scernc Spawn Creek: Source to Mouth - Wild BWlCbgrass Creek: Source to Mouth - \Vild Linle Bear Creek: Source to Mouth - Wild 1 t I J J I I I1 - V-63 �BIO / WEST, Inc. I 063 'West 1400 North Log~n , Utah 84321 Phone: (435) 752·4202 Fax: (435) 752-0507 January 21, 1999 Logan City Mayor and Council . 255 North Main Logan, UT i4321 Re: Log an River Wild and Scenic-River Designation and Logan Canyo n Highway Ladies and Gentlemen: I have been asked to provide you with a brief, independent assessment as to the potential effects of a Wild and Scenic River (WSR) Designation for the Logan river on the ongoing Logan Canyon Highway Improve ment Project. As you are probably aware, a number of the aspects and implications of a WSR designation on the highway project are not totally clear, thus the information below is somewh.at speculative and my own opinion, rather than definitive facts . First, you should be aware that designation on USDA Forest Service land is a threestep process: 1) a determination of eligibility, which includes an inventory (evaluation) of resources and an assessment of the required presen, e of both "free f1owing~ c . characteristic~ and one or more "outstandingly remarkable features"; 2) classification'of eligible portions of a river as either recreational, scenic, or wild, based upon the results of item 1; and 3) an evaluation of the suitability for designation in terms of worthiness for inclusion in to the national system, status of land ownership in the area, potential land uses, local governmental interest, cost, and other issues. Suitability is typically add ressed in a detailed study report which includes environmental consideration (analysis, public involvement, preparation of an enyironmental document, etc.) and integration into th e pertinent local (Wasatch-Cache National Forest in this case) Forest Management Plan. If the river meets all of the above criteria, it can be recommended by the Forest Service (Washington level) for Congressional designation. Obviously, the above process, particularly approval by Congress, can take a very long time. Howeve r, the Forest SerVice is mandated to manage and protect the area in accordance with the selected classification during this interim period once the first two steps are completed, which is apparently the current statu s of the Logan River study. As I understand it, the Forest Service has rece ntly determined that portions of the 'upper Logan river are eligible' for designation, and has tentatively classified the portion from Third Dam to its co~fluence with Beaver Cre'ek (near Franklin Basin) as "recreational " -- .. .. " ,I �, Logan City Mayor and Council January 21 , 1999 Page 2 and the portion from the confluence to the Idaho border as "scenic", They are now working through the details of how to integrate these classifications in their Forest Manqgement Plan and determining at what level approval for any forthcoming proposed activities in the area will be made, My personal opinion is that nothing UD,OT is proposing as a part of the current highway project (some improvements and structural replacements between Tony Grove and Franklin Basin) will impact or be impacted by the anticipated river protection, UDOT has 'continued to be very proactive in developing plans that avoid or minimize any impacts to the river or its associated wetland I riparian communities. Their designers and construction engineers have worked very closely with us to develop and adhere to . mitigative measures, and to insure that their contractors do li~llwise, Given their solid commitment in this regard and the preliminary plans which have been developed thus' far, it would seem unlikely that anyone could reasonably argue for changes or a delay as a result of any level of WSR designation on the river. The only aspect for which I have concern is the potential for someone to delay the project by filing some type of protest (frivolous or otherwise) against it on the basis of a violation of tlie interim protection afforded the river under the Wild and Scenic Rivers ' Act. Unfortunately, it appears that the Forest Service does not have any proscribed process for addressing and responding to such a complaint, and thus some delay could occur. There is some 'effort underway at this time to get a handle on this issue, with the goal of having the Forest clarify exactly how and with what time frame they would deal with it should it arise. . Thank you for your confidence, and I hope this helps you somewhat. At your request: I am more than willing to discuss the matter further with regard to this or other aspects of the project. Sincerely yours, ~~\~ Thomas M.. Twedt, PhD Principal �Ten ways dams damage rivers ( I) Dams reduce ri ver levels Dams remove water needed for heaJthy in-stream ecosystems. (2) Dams block rivers Dams prevent the flow of plants and nutrients, impede the migration of fish and other wildlife, and block recreationaJ use. (3) Dams slow rivers Many fish species depend on steady flows to flush them down river early in their life and guide them upstream years later to spawn. Stagnant reservoir pools disorient migrating fish and significantly increase the duration of their migration. (4) Dams alter water temperatures By slowing water flow, most dams increase water temperatures. Other dams decrease temperatures by releasing cooled water from the reservoir bottom. Fish and other species are sensitive to these temperature irregularities, which often destroy native populations. (5) Dams aJler timing of flows By withholding and then releasing water to generate power for peak demand periods, dams cause downstream stretches to aJtemale between low water and powerful surges that erode soil and vegetation. These irregular releases destroy natural seasonal flow variations that trigger naturaJ growth and reproduction cycles in many species. (6) Dams fluctuate reservoir levels Dramatic changes in reservoir water levels degrade shorelines and disturb fisheries, waterfowl, and bottom-dwelling organisms. (7) Dams decrease oxygen levels in reservoir waters Then the oxygen-deprived water is released from behind the dam, it can kill fish downstream. (8) Dams hold back silt, debris, and nutrients By slowing flows. dams aJlow silt to collect on river bottoms and bury fish spawning habitat. Silt trapped above dams accumulates heavy metals and other pollutants. Gravel, logs and other debris are also trapped by dams, eliminating their use downstream as food and habitat. (9) Dam turbines cut up fish Following currents downstream, fish are drawn into and cut up by power turbines. (10) Dams increase predator risk Warm, murky reservoirs often favor predators of naturaJly occurring species. **************************** s, a cheaper and less hannful SOIUli atts of power, that ************************* ** �Over the past 100 years, the United States has led the world in dam building. The US Army Corps of Engineers has catalogued approximately 75 ,000 dams greater than 6 feet along the waterways of the United States. So "on average, we have constructed one dam every day since the signing of the Declaration of Independence." Dams have depleted fisheries, degraded river ecosystems, and diminished recreational opportunities on nearly all of the nation's rivers. Hydropower s hould not be considered as clean power because of the destruction of river ecosystems and its many social impacts. Dam designers often fail to account for the impacts of droughts, meaning that dams often produce less power than promised. When these risks of low river flows are factored into calculations of the costs of electricity it can be seen that hydropower is now an expensive fonn of power generation. Private investors in power projects are largely avoiding dams and prefer to invest in cheaper and less risky gas-fired power plants. There has been a grow ing movement to remove dams where the costs - including environmental, safety, and sociocultural impacts - outweigh the benefits - including hydropower, flood control, irrigation, or recreation. FLOOD CONTROL can often be accomplished more effectively and for less money by restoring wetlands, maintaining riparian buffers , or moving people out of the floodplain. Updating antiquated irrigation systems and replacing inappropriate crops can dramatically reduce the need for dams and reservoirs in the arid West. *** *** *** *** ********* 10 KEY POINTS **** *** ** **** ** ** The Players: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (PERC) Symbiotics, Rigby Idaho Ecosystems Research Instate, Logan Because of the political climate change in our nations capitol, Symbiotics is attempting to take advan tage of the situation to make a quick buck with no thought, or consideration to the devastation they might leave behind. THE MOTION STATES THAT: the application is invalid Symbiotics' admits that the company has no intention of either building or operating the 100 plus projects it has proposed. Further, the company admits that it has no idea at this point who will build and operate the projects. This is directly contrary to the Federal Power Act and the FERC regulation requirement that an applicant be the person who will operate the project. The law is very clear that when an application is fi led by someone who has no intention of actually operating the proposed project, that the application is invalid. the application is incomplete Symbiotics does not comply with FERC's regulations because it does not include any information on the financial aspects of the project. This is further evidence that the applicant is engaged in an uniformed, unplanned, shot gun approach to grab up any potential hydropower sites in the off chance that it might be able to tum a profit by selling the sites off to another business venture capable of actually carrying a project to fruition. Symbiotics fails to disclose the source or amount of financing available as required by PERC regulations and then makes a vague statement that it "expects" financing to come from "private investors and members of the applicant. " �UINTA NATIONAL FOREST DIRECTORY Forest Supervisor's Office 88 West 100 North PO Box 1428 Provo, Utah 8460 I FTS and COMM 80 1-342-5100 FAX 801-342-5144 Heber Ranger District 2460 South Hi ghway 40 PO Box 190 Heber City, Utah 84032 FTS and COMM 80 1-342-5200 FAX 801-654-5772 Pleasant Grove Ranger District 390 North 100 East Pleasant Grove, Utah 84062 FTS and COMM 801-342-5240 FAX 801 -342-5244 Spanish Fork Ranger District 44 West 400 North Spanish Fork, Utah 84660 FTS and COMM 801-342-5260 FAX 80 1-342-5272 �Protest Bear River Dams! Write, Call or Email Your Elected Official! Legislative District #1 Eli H. Anderson 8790 West Hwy 102 Tremonton, UT 84337 435-854-3760 ehanderson@ut.gov Legislative District #5 Brent D. Parker 2953 W. 6900 s. Mt. Sterling, UT 84401 435-245-6275 brentparker@ut.gQv Legislative District #3 Craig Buttars 540 s. 1600 W. Lewiston, UT 84320 435-258-5015 Senate District #24 Peter C. Knudson 1209 Michelle Dr. Brigham City, UT 84302 435-723-6366 cbuttars@ut.gov pknudson@utahsenate.org Legislative District #4 Loraine Pace 435 E. 900 N. Logan, UT 84321 435-753-6154 lorainepace@ut.gQV Senate District #25 Lyle Hillyard 175 E.IOON. Logan, UT 84321 435-753-0043 Ihillyard@utahsenate.org Find Your Representative or Senator: Legislative District #1. Eli H, Anderson Amalga, Benson, Clarkston, Mendon, Newton Legislative District #3. Craig Buttars Northwest Logan, Cornish, Cove, Hyde Park, Lewiston, N . Logan, Richmond, Smithfield, Trenton Legislative District #4. Loraine Pace Logan, part orN. Logan Legislative District #5. Brent D. Parker Southwest Logan, Collcg/Young Ward, Hyrum, Millville, Nibley, Paradise, Providence, River Heights, Wellsville Senate District #24. Peter C. Knudson Cliffside area and south and west zones in Logan, CollegeNoung Ward, Hyrum, Millville, Nibley, Paradise, Providence, River Heights, Wellsville Senate District #25. Lyle Hillyard Logan, Amalga, Benson, Clarkston, Cornish, Cove, Hyde Park, Lewiston, Mendon, Newton, N. Logan, Richmond, Smithfield, Trenton �NOTEWORTHY AVIAN RESOURCES OF THE GREAT SALT LAKE Prepared by Don Paul o~ th~ Utah Di~si6n of Wildlife Resources The following table outlines ·selected avian population and status values attributed to Great Salt Lake habitats. The Great Salt Lake ecosystem is one of the most important wildlife habitats on ihis hemisphere. . . SPECIES WI1~on's Phalarope - POPULATION AND STATUS VALUES • 800,000, Largest staging concentration in the world. 1998 count Red-Necked Phalarope- 280,000 in a single day estimate, Paul 1986 American Avocet- 250,000, many times higher than any other wetland in the Pacific Flyway, Shuford 1994 Black-Stilt- 65,000 many times higher than any other wetland in the Pacific Flyway, Shuford 1994 Marbled Godwit- 30,000, the onlistaging area in the interior USA, Shuford 1994 S~owy 10,000, the world's largest assembJage, representing 55% of the entire breeding population west of .the Rocky Mnts., Paton 1 .992 Plover- Western Sandpiper- 17,000, on.-flock, Paul 1994 Long-Billed Dowitcher- 32,000, single day count, Shuford 1994 White Pelican- 18,000 breeding adults, one of the three largest colonies in western North America, Paul 1994 White-Faced Ibis- 7,500 breeding adillts, worlds largest breeding population, US Fish & Wddlife Service status reporis 1982 California GoU- 160,000 breeding adults, worlds largest breeding population, White 1992 Eared Grebe- • 1.4I)1jJjj!,n--!O£Ond largest staging population in North America, 1998 count Per~grineFalcon- 11 active pairs of this listed endangered species, Paul 1994 Bald Eagle- Over 500 wintering bald eagles associated with GSL, one of top ten winter populations in the lower 48 stat~s, National Wildlife Federation mid-winter bald eagle survey reports Bank Swallow- Over 10,000 in one flock, GSL represents one of the largest . migratory corridors in Western North America, Paton 1994 �- NOTEWORTIIY WATERFOWL RESOURCES · OF THE GREAT SALT LAKE Prepared by Tom A1dricb oftbe Utah Division ofW~dlifeResources < BREEDING MIGRATION SPECIES Tundra Swan ~ 0 60,000 · Ipoqooo Pintail . Gadwall- . 2000 100,000 40,000 Cinnamon Teal - 80,000 40,000 ~. 500,000 <65,000 60,000 15,000 600,000 Rare 50,000 2,000 150,000 · 20,000 50,000 Minor 100,000 10,000. Mallard Ruddy- . Green-winged TealCanada Geese Redhead - Canvasback ~ Shoveller - "Approximately 30 percenl (3,000,000 of 10,000,000) of the ducb of the Pacific and Central Flyways use the Great Salt Lake marshes". Rawley, Wildlife of the Great Salt Lake · . . �Logan City Mayor Members of the Logan City Council Regarding the "Wild & Scenic" designation of the Logan River, find attached one viewpoint regarding the economic implications that can surround a quality fishery. Thanks for your consideration, Tim King Conservation chair Cache Anglers, a Trout Unlimited chapter �& U€,> &Maybe 1've mellowed some in recent years, or maybe I just got tired of the lopsidedness of having infinite patience with fish and almost none with my fellow humans, but I'm beginning to get a somewhat different perspective on crowded trout streams. It turns out there is more than one way to look at this. For one thing, fish eries conservation-as a subheading under conservation in general-is a serious political issue that will only get more important with time . W ith that in mind I can now som etimes look up and down a river and see not so much a crowd as a constituency: a mob of people that any politician would be happy to see at a rally if they supported him , o r terrified to see if they dido't. There are days when I even wish there we re two or three more people on the water, like maybe the go'·emor and a couple of congressm en . Not even the President of the Un ited States is immune to what he ca ll s, with typica l style. "the environmental thing." Exchange the politician fo r an investment banker and anothe r pe rspective kicks in . Call it environmental economics or , if you prefer, econom ic environmentalism. No fly fi sherman has [ 0 be shown studies to know that large amounts of money are spent on the s port-not just on tackle and licenses, but also on food, travel, lodging, guides, beer and so on . Nor dQC!s he have to be told that trout a re an indicator species that need cold , clean , unspoiled water. When m ost of us look at a hog hole on a normal day, we see a fine piece of trout water that's twenty times m ore crowded than it should be , but a sharp investment type sees something else: H e sees a si tuation where a healthy natura l environment is not an im pediment to the development of industry; he sees that in this case a healthy envi ronment is the industry . Yes, I have been hang ing out with with some of these guys lately . A lot of them like to fish. When access is finall y limited on som e of these waters, most fishermen will see it as a shame, but already some businessmen I know are say ing things like, " Wait a minute. You mean you have a product so good you have to tum away customers ?" I cringe at the thought, but if we assume for the moment that wild trout are a product and fishermen are the custome rs, there are some interesting implications. For instance, m aybe the raving radical environmentalist who was running around a decade ago demanding that the envi ronment be saved and citing truth, beauty and poetry as reason s can now come back and say. "My associates and I would like to show you how minimum flows and special regula tions on your stream could bring somewhere between one and three million dollars a year into the local economy." As an earth-hippie you were treated with strained politeness at best, but now, suddenly. they're calling you "Mister" and paying for your lunch, even though your agenda hasn 't changed a bit . r JOIf<.! 6, £/'LIfB' �To put it another way. you can make conservation work by convincing people that preserving this forest or that trout stream is the right thing to do, or you can show them that it's not only right, but lucrative . What we're talking ahout here is a modest local industry, but it 's one that involves no factories , no pollution , no new housing, schools, sewers, water taps, fire trucks, police, etc. Or you can see it as a tourist anraction that doesn't have to turn the town into a carnival and half its citizens into cheap hucksters in coonskin caps. A good trout stream won't bring in the wealth of an oil field, but it will be clean, Quiet, dignified, permanent and profitable enough to make looking into ih~ wa ter rights WO,1:hwhile~ -;;:;;;;;;;:;;;;;;;;;;======~-:.:..: ::::~====~ - " Will this actually work?" asks o ne 01 the skeptics In the chamber of commerce. "Well," you can say, "look at that quality stretch of the Such-and-such Riv. r. So many people fish it they're trying to figure out how to cut down on the crowds ." At that moment you remember being elbowed out of your fa vo rite run fondl y, because you can say with conviction, "Trust me, if the trout are here, the people will come ." Hell, they won't even have to advertise. You know how hard it is to keep good fi shing a secret . To man y activists, ,hi s kind of thing amounts to swimming with the sharks. 1 suppose it does when you think about it, but it 's still possible that the most environmentally meaningfll l thing you can do right now is teach a h2n:"cr new to fish and' then take him to the jewel in the crown of the state's fisheries on a Saturda~' :afternoon. From an economic standpoint , this kind of thing requires what can seem like some radical thinking. After all, what we're talking about is existing in some kind of long-term harmony with the natur II environment and making a decent living at it. but we're " at talking about getting fabulou sly rich overnight. We're I. ' king at the possibility-or maybe I should say the necessity --of being reasonabl e for a change . Still (believe it or not) there are some bu sinessmen out there who understand th.. : nur old boom-and-bust, exploitthe- resource-a nd-move-.m program is just not going to work anymore. The problem i:., even if you can bring yourself to sanction rape for profit , the re's getting to be a crucial shortage of victims. And I th ink being reasonable should include us fisherm en , too . Unfortunately, some of us have gotten into a kind of junk bond mentality from fishing the hog holes. I 've actuall y talked to guys who won't admit the fishing was "good" unless they were tuna-boati n~ 20-inch trout all day long. But the fact is. many of our be ho.~ holes are tailwater fi sheri es that have been arti fi cially Haled by the effects of bottom draw dam s. Some of them veren't as good when they were wild rive rs. and I know of . t least one that held carp ins tead of trout before the dam we rll in . �On the other hand, a normal, run-of-the-mill, healthy trout s tream that's managed properly with minimum flows and appropriate regulations will likely produce something less spectacular; say, 12- to 14-inch wild, pretty trout with the occasional 16· to IS-inch bomber. Some of us could easily lin with that, and maybe 3 few more of us ought to. If we spread out a little more, we'll not only have more _ ._.__ ..=_ ====:.=I.~OO: --..... , - ___ = -, _ _ _ ~ ~ ..fi.&h..mou-\Q.l\.t.w4~~~! S5t>2 :oM~:C-'~3tlnU hi iiiOf€ 0') to ~ &ee.-w~:!I~also--opreaa..ttr~·wari:n=dOIM,$"""'\illOuild ~_ _ _ -== y businesses in more little towns.• and the local chambers of commerce will begin to make the obvious connection: The better the fishing is, the more money they'll make. It's just conceivable that if we developed all our fisheries to their full potential, the economic benefits would be enough to make it worthwhile. In the end it's a matter of attitude. (Remember that much of life, not to mention some great ideas, depends on nothing more than your point of view.) Crowded hog holes can be seen as proof that the sport is headed for ruin, or they can be used as evidence of just how much a good trout stream is worth in dollars and cents . And if you measure value in mor.e spiritud and aesthetic terms, fine. Just between you and me, that 's what it really comes down to in the end. All the rest of this is just a convenient illusion , but it is convenient. I know this sounds like an oversimplified romantic idea, but then so did catch-and-release fishing a generation ago. I know there is at least a handful of businessmen out there who are beginning to like the economic approach to conservation (or vice versa), and it 's easy to see how this could be used to lever those politicians who are telling us we can have a healthy environment and a healthy economy. Many of those guys made that promise off the tops of their heads because it sounded good. Imagine how relieved they'd be to learn that it could actually happen. . �March 9, 1999 Mayor Douglas Thompson, Members of the Logan City Council 255 North Main Street Logan, Utah 84321 RE: Logan River Wild and Scenic River Designation Proposal Dear Mayor Thompson and Members of the Logan City Counci1: I am writing to provide information relevant to the proposal that the Logan City Council support designation of the Logan River as a wild and scenic River. By way of introduction, I am a natural resource consultant with 25 years of river policy experience. I am a recognized expert in the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, having managed wild and scenic river programs for the National Park Service and consulted with both the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management on wild and scenic river issues. I have drafted Federal Wild and Scenic River legislation and was the originator of many of the guidelines currently used by Federal agencies to evaluate wild and scenic river eligibility. t am also a native Utahn (though exiled to Massachusetts for the past 20 years) and was a resident of Cache Valley for several years. I am very familiar with the Logan River: I served as supervisor of recreational guards for the Logan Ranger District and have visited the canyon frequently since then. I provided substantive comments on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest's 1994 and 1999 draft rivers inventories. The Federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act is a complex piece of legislation, and there is no end to the misinformation regarding its effects on land use, private property rights, water rights, etc. To aid in your deliberations, I have taken the liberty to address some of the questions that might arise on this subject (please note that, while I favor protection of the Logan River, I have consciously tried to set my opinion aside and to present objective, verifiable information based on my professional knowledge of the Federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and of rivers that have been designated as wild and scenic rivers): What are the general effects of a river being deSignated as a wild and scenic river? The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act has two primary consequences for designated rivers. First, no new dams may be constructed within a designated river segment. Second, no Federal action may be taken that wouJd have a negative effect on the river's natural functioning or on the natural resource values for which it was designated. The term "Federal action" refers to: (a) Federal permits, (b) Federal funding, and (c) Federal lands management. This does not mean that Federal permits and funding are prohibited, only that these must be compatible with the continued conservation of the river. The effect on Forest Service land management is discussed below. What effect would designation of the Logan River as a wild and scenic river have on forest land use? The Forest Service would continue to manage Logan Canyon and the river corridor. Campgrounds and picniC areas along the river would continue to serve public needs and other land uses couJd continue. However, in making management decisions, the Forest Service would have to explicitly consider the effect of its actions on the river and would be prohibited from taking actions that would harm the river or the natural and recreational resource values for which it was designated. (For Logan River, these values include fisheries, scenery, geological and hydrological values, recreation, and, pOSSibly, wildlife.) This means that campground improvements, trails, etc., would need to respect the river's natural processes (this would be required regardless), and grazing permits would need to be monitored to ensure that the natural condition of riparian areas is maintained and water quality is not impaired. Forestry and hunting would not be affected. How would designation affect private property? Most of the lands along the affected portion of Logan River are in Federal ownership. There are a few private parcels and a block of State land. Private property will continue to be subject to the same State and local land use regulations as is now the case (designation only affects Federal actions). The lands that are part of the State/Federal land swap will likewise be subject to State and local land use regulations. While the �Federal government could not dictate how these lands are used, it is reasonable to think that the State might wish to cooperate with the Forest Service in conserving these important riverine areas. Several creative land management strategies could be employed that both meet State needs and protect the river corridor. Note also that research suggests that wild and scenic designation would have a positive effect on private land values. This is because buyers are willing to pay a premium to live near natural areas when there is a guarantee of continued conservation. What effect would this have on tourism? Only a select few rivers are designated as wild and scenic. No Utah river has been designated as such yet. It stands to reason that designation of the Logan River would be perceived as an attraction for visitors considering coming to the area. Research on the subject bears this out, but also suggests that the extent to which tourism is enhanced depends on how actively local interests publicize this. (I am personally aware of rivers where designation has been publicized and others where it purposely has not been publicized. Both strategies have been used to good effect.) I would suspect that, in the case of the Logan River, Cache Valley civic and business interests would be wise to tastefully publicize designation. For example, the State tourist map could be modified to note this, as could Cache Valley tourism brochures. Tourism-related businesses, Utah State University, and others could use the designation to demonstrate their proximity to important scenic resources. From a national perspective, Federal maps showing important natural areas would include the river. Would designation prohibit highway expansion? Wild and scenic designation does not preclude bridge repair, resurfacing, or even roadway relocation. However, as referenced above, Federal permits (Clean Water Act, 404 permits, Forest Service special use permits, etc.) and Federal funds could only be made available if these actions were compatible with continued conservation of the river and its corridor. With regard to the Logan Canyon, decisions regarding whether or not the proposed action would meet the standards of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act would be made by the Forest Service. Based on the information I have on the highway proposal, it is my professional opinion that .designation as a wild and scenic river would not ereclude improvement to the highway. It would, however, r uire that UDOT take special precautions, bot in desi~ and construction to ensure that the road does not and scenic resources are preserved, an at short-term ISru tions a ter ow re 'mes, that 1m or an na "to t e river are mimnuz . ven if this costs a Itt e more, It wou a resuIfin a supenor project at meets ong: term multiple needs. Would designation affect existing downstream uses? Designation would not affect the existing diversion of water to the North Logan Canal (which is govemed by State law), nor would the downstream dams or power plant be affected. Repairs to and management of these dams could continue as in the past. Designation would not affect downstream diversions, land use, etc., as the river flows through Logan and into the lower valley. How would downstream water quality be affected? This is an area often overlooked. Currently, the City of Logan has very little control over upstream Federal actions that could have an adverse impact on wa ter quality. Designation of a river as wild and scenic places significant constraints on upstream actions that would increase sedimentation, water temperature, or pollutants. It also increases opportunity for local input into the Forest Service decision process. I can think of few other actions that would ensure long-term protection of downstream water quality more than designation of an upstream area as a wild and scenic river. In the long run, this may be the most compelling reason for the City to support wild and scenic designation. Can we trust that future management of the river will be in keeping with the concepts outlined above? If the river is designated as a wild and scenic river, a management plan would be prepared that would guide future management. Active involvement in the development of this plan by the City would help to ensure that local interests are represented. Also, it is entirely appropriate for the Federal designating �legislation to contain specific provisions that will guarantee certain agreements. For example, provisions could be included that guarantee that the existing downstream hydro facility would not be affected by designation. Or, it could be directed that the City of Logan have an active role in implementation of certain aspects of the management plan. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this information. If you have further questions about the effects of wild and scenic river designation, please feel free to contact me. [f I don't have the answer, I will research it for you or put you in contact w ith others who can help you. You can reach me by phone, fax, or email. In dosing, I wish to emphasize that the Logan River is a very special place. It is the last intact large river system along Utah's population belt. It is also, as was made evident in the recent Forest Service rivers inventory, the most Significant river in the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. You are very fortunate to have this special natural resource in your backyard, and it is in Logan's interest to ensure that it continues to be available for the use and enjoyment of future generations. Sincerely, Drew O. Parkin 15 Thingvalla Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 (617) 876-6173 (617) 491-3450 Drew _Parkin@msn.com �February 16, 1999 Bernie Weinga rdt, Forest Supervisor Wasatch-Cache Na tional Forest 8236 Federal Building 125 S. State Salt Lake City, UT 84138 Dear Supervisor Weingardt, Thank you for sending us a copy of the draft Wild and Scenic eligibility study for ri vers in the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. We are pleased to see that seve ral rivers in the Logan River drainage have been identified as eligible for desig nation. We appreciate the opportunity to pro vide some co mments on this study. We are especially concerned about the eligible segment of the Logan Ri ve r from Beaver Creek to Third Dam. We would like to discuss two issues: the tentative classifica tion of this river segment, and the w ildlife a long this segment. 1. Classifica ti on of the Logan River from Beaver Creek to Third Da m This segment has been given a preliminary classification of Recreational. We are curi ous why it has received th is rating, as the stud y provides no reason whatsoever. We believe this classification is not correc t for the upper stretch of th is segment. We recommend that this segment be divided fo r the purpose of classification. The segment from Beaver Creek to just below Lower Twin Bridge should be classified as Scenic, while the segment from just below Lower Twin Bridge to Third Dam can be classified as Recreati onal. The segmen t of the Logan from Beave r Creek to just below Lower Twin Bridge sa tisfies the criteria for a Scenic river as outlined in the draft eligibility study, page E-14. The criteria for a Scenic river are: "'Free of impoundmen t. According to the draft eligibility study, there are no "full-scale" impoundments in this segment (page V-57). "'Largely primitive and und eveloped, with no substantial evidence of human activity. Although highway 89 runs along the length of this segment, the ri ver and its banks are largely primiti ve and undeveloped. The study notes that few obse rvers of the river would notice any changes from a purely natural character (VS7). There is excellent riparian vegetation along much of this segment screening the highway from the river and giving the river and its banks a na tural appea rance. From the perspective of the river and its banks there is no substantial evidence o f human activity. *The presence of grazing, hay production or row crops is acceptable. The study does not identi fy any concerns with grazing, hay production or row crops. "'Evidence of past or ongoing timber harvest is acceptable, provided the forest appears natural from the riverbank The study does not identify any concerns here. �"Accessible in places by road . The river is accessible in places by road. "Roads may occasiona lly reach or bridge the river; the existence of short stretches of conspicuous or longer stre tches of inconspicuous road s or rail roa ds is acceptable. Highway 89 runs along the length of this segment, but for most of this distance the road is screened off from the river by the ripa ria n vegetation. Logan Ri ver ripa rian vegeta tion is considered am ong the "best preserved in the state" (U tah Department of Transportati on, FEIS, U.S. High way 89, 1993, page 9-59). Along most of this segment the road is inconspicuous from the river and its banks. People who fish, kaya k, picnic, and walk along the banks enjoy a na tural ri ver environment w ith little or no intrusion o f highwa y sights and so und s. This segment of the Logan satisfies the criteria for a Scenic river. It far exceeds the stand ard s for a Recreationa l river, which allows low dams, river diversions, development, and "substanti al evidence of human activity" (E-lS). This segment should therefore be classified as Scenic. The segment from just below Lower Twin Bridge to Third Dam contains an impoundm ent, the inunda ted area above Third Dam . Also, the highway is quite close to the river, with little screening. This segment can be class ified as Recreationa L We are pleased to note that, according to the d raft eligibility study, the Logan Ri ver from Beaver Creek to Third Dam has five outstandingly rema rkable va lues, scene ry, the fishery, ecology, geology and recrea tion. The study shows tha t this segment has more outstandingly re ma rkable va lues than any other river in the forest. This provides an argument for a Scenic classifica tion. The Logan fro m Beaver Creek to just below Lower Twin Bridge should be classified as Scenic in ord er to better p rotect its fi ve outsta nd ingly remarkable values. A Scenic classificati on woul d be an effective management too L It is not consistent with the construction of dams and dive rsions, and with the development of the ri ver area for residential or agricultural use. The re may be "no substanti al evidence of hum an activity." This man agement prescripti on would help protect especially the scenery, fishery, and ecology of this river segment. A classificati on of Recreational, on the other hand, might be interpreted as allowing d evelop ment ha rmful to these values. . Wildlife conce rns As we sta ted in our letter of October 20, 1998, we believe tha t the comparison region used in this study for eva lua ting wildlife is too la rge. It stretches north to include Yellowstone and the Bighorn Moun tains, east to include the Colorado Rocky Mounta ins, and south to almost Albuquerq ue. Rivers in the Wasa tch-Cache a re compa red to ri vers in Yellows tone National Park, Grand Teton Na tiona l Pa rk, and Rocky Mountain Na tiona l Pa rk for di versi ty and un iq ueness of species a nd hab itats. It's an unfa ir compa rison. The Wasatch-Ca ch e is not managed for "big and showy" species such as bison, wolves, and grizzly bea rs. The Wild and Scenic Rive r Review in the State of Utah, Process and Criteria for Interagency Use, 1996, states "Compa rative regions should not be so large as to unreasonabl y limit outstandingly remarkable rive rs to only those few that stand out as the very best in the nation." We believe the comparison region fo r wild life in this stud y is inconsistent with this policy. Furthermore, we are concerned that the discussions of w ildlife in the draft eligibility stud y a re incomple te and possibly incorrect. The segment of the Logan from Beaver Creek to Third Darn is about 20 miles long, yet the only wildlife species mentioned in the discussion of this �segment is the western big-eared bat. This d iscussion seems incomplete. There is no men tion of other important wi ldlife species known to occur in Logan Canyon, for example, the boreal owl, flammulated owl, goshawk, and the three- toed woodpecker (Biological Assessment / Evaluation, 1995, Record of Decision, U.s, Highway 89, Logan Canyon, Wasa tch-Cache National Forest), The wolverine has a medium probability of occurrence in Logan Canyon. These are all Forest Service sensitive species. For these species, population and/or habitat viabili ty is of concern. By the wildlife standard reported on page E9 of the study, these species should be included in the discussion o f w ildlife in this segment. The stud y also does not mention moose and mule deer, yet these species a re frequently seen along the Logan Ri ver. Elk are also sighted along the river. For the upper tributaries of the Logan, including Beaver Creek, the study reports the presence of moose, elk and deer. It also reports the presence of the flammulated owl. It reports the presence of suitable habitat for the borea l owl, goshawk, wolverine and three-toed wood pecker, but states that "none of these sensitive species are known to occur" along these tributaries. However, the Wasatch-Cache in its ]995 Biological Assessment / Evaluation reports the presence of these species in Logan Canyon. We recommend tha t the discussions of wildlife in the Logan River drainage be rewritten to be more complete. They should reflect information in the 1995 Biological Assessment/ Evaluation. Also, the study should also adopt a more reasonable region of com parison for w ildlife. We believe the segmen t of the Logan from Beaver Creek to Third Dam is outstandingly remarkab le for wildlife based upon the presence of moose, mule deer, elk, and at least fou r sensitive wildlife species including the western big-eared bat. The upper tributaries are outstandingly remarkable for wild life based upon the presence of moose, mule deer, elk, and at least four sensiti ve species including the flammulated owl. Thank you for considering these comments. Since rely, Dan Miller, President Logan Ca nyon Coalition cc: Gordon Steinhoff, Board Chair Tom Scott, U.s. Forest Service Drew Parkin, Consultant in Ri ver Resource Management, Planning and Policy � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Image Height 3329 Image Width Image Width in pixels 2602 Local URL The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website <a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/365">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/365</a> Purchasing Information Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item. To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a> Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2013 Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner. Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 300 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Checksum 2445154653 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Correspondence/reports related to the Wild and Scenic River designation for the Logan River Description An account of the resource Wild and scenic rivers act, reprints of articles printed in "Canyon Wind" Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Government agencies Environmental policy United States Highway 89 Logan River (Utah) Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Correspondence Administrative records Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1996 1997 1998 1999 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1990-1999 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon/Logan Canyon Coalition Papers, 1963-1999, COLL MSS 314 Box 1 Folder 9 Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv63458">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv63458</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Highway 89 Digital Collections Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context MSS314Bx1Fd9 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/c820729cd20e24154407dab2a040c450.pdf f0da73e259e64a0cc0dd405108bdc581 PDF Text Text • RECORD OF DECISION US Highway 89 Right Fork in Logan Canyon to Garden City Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) Cache and Rich Counties, Utah A. DECISION The Federal Highway Administration (FHW A) concurs with the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) in its selection of the Preferred Alternative as modified in this Record of Decision (ROD) for improvements to US Highway 89 (US-89) between Right Fork, milepost (mp) 383.47, and State Road 30, mp 411.75 , in Garden City . The modified Preferred Alrernative is described in Section B below. The modified Preferred Alternative is as presented in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) with the following modifications made as a result of input received on the FEIS and subsequent meetings and field reviews in order to further minimize harm to wetland/riparian habitat, visual resources and Section 4(0 resources : • The Lower Middle Canyon section has been extended 500 reet to mp 387.57 to better fit the surrounding terrain. The roadway begins to move further away from the river at this location. • Conso lidation of parking for Section 4(f) Site 6 , Ricks Spring, has been e liminated. This eliminates the left turn lane and retaining wall adjacent to the river. A shorter retaining wall set back from the river may still be required just south of the site. • Section 4(f) Site 13 , Winter Access Parking, will be reestablished at a lower elevation so that • Relocation of the Limber Pine Trailhead has been eliminated . • The detour at Burnt Bridge has been eliminated and widening will occur on the upstream side. This reduces the impact on riparian habitat. • For the first eight miles of the Upper Canyon (from mp 391.6 to Beaver Mountain road intersection), the previously proposed roadway width of 40 feet has been reduced to 34 feet. This reduces the impact on wetland and riparian areas , For areas with passing lanes through this eight miles, the previously proposed roadway width of 47 feet has been reduced to 44 feet. • • • The left turn lane at Temple Fork has been eliminated. Minimum roadway improvements at this site include a 34' section on US·89 and an improved vertical grade approach of Temple Fork road. Other improvements , such as an uphill right turn lane and an improved horiwntal angle of approach of Temple Fork Road , are secondary improvements which will only be constructed if they do not impact the river or require a substantial retaining wall . access can be maintained. US·89 Through Logan Canyon. ROD (Draft of October 13, 1994) Page 1 Section A: Decision �The above modifications are within the scope of the FE IS and their implementation will reduce the impacts from that presented in the FEIS . Therefore , the modifications are not of a nature that would require a Supplemental EIS . • I The purpose of and need for this project is to improve safety and the traffic carrying capacity of US89 from Right Fork in Logan Canyon to State Road 30 in Garden City. Safety will be improved by correcting existing substandard geometries , unsafe conditions. and deteriorated structures. The capacity of the highway will be increased to meet existing and projected traffic demands for a 20year planning horizon . Due to funding restraints , this project will be implemented through the development of several smaller projects. The first includes the urgent bridge upgrading and replacements. Other improvements in the canyon that will be implemented as runding becomes available. The selection of the modified Preferred Alternative was based on substantial input received by various federal and state agencies, local governments and the public , evaluation of technical repons , the Environmental Impact Statement, and further analysis and coordination made during development of this ROD . The sensitivity of the environment played an important role in the development of the modified Preferred Alternative. Numerous compromises to current highway standards (as recommended by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, AASHTO) were incorporated because impacts on the aquatic , wetland , riparian and visual environment would have been too great, and in some cases constructability was cost-prohibitive. Other actions taken into consideration in making this decision includes the recent nomination of US89 through Logan Canyon for inclusion on the National Highway System. This would change the classification of the highway from a minor arterial to a principal arterial. Though Congressional approval is pending , consideration has been given to how this would affect the decision being made for this project. Since the roadway already serves as a US Hiehway and Was desienated as s uch in accordance with previous luis.ation. the determination has been made that this action would not chanee the use or the hiehway. In this regard, the decision is made that if US-89 through Logan Canyon is included in the National Highway System, this designation will not affect the selection, or subsequent design, of the modified Preferred Alternative identified in this ROD. e • US-89 Through Logan Canyon. ROD (Draft of October 13. 1994) Page 2 Section A: Decision �• B. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Eight project alternatives , ranging from preserving the existing roadway to a standard AASHTO design , were considered in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). These include: • • • • • • • • • Standard Arterial Alternative Rich County North Alignment Alternative Rich County South Alignment Alternative Modified Standard Alternative Composite Alternative Spot Improvements Alternative Conservationists' Alternative No Action Alternative Alternate corridors were evaluated and included redesignation of Idaho State Highway 36 from Preston to Ovid , Idaho , and construction of a new highway through Blacksmith Fork Canyon. Because the distance between Logan and Wasatch Front communities and the Bear Lake area is shorter thrQugh Logan Canyon than through these other routes , most traffic would still tend to use US-89. The need to correct existing safety hazards/deficiencies , replace deteriorated bridges and pavement, and increase traffic carrying capacity would still be necessary . Environmental impacts and construction costs to improve the existing highway would be considerably less than for a new route . Furthermore, traffic volume on such a route would not justify a new road . Therefore, alternate corridors were not advanced into the EIS . The FEIS presented four project alternatives . These include: • • • • Preferred Alternative No Action Alternative Standard Arterial Alternative Conservationists' Alternative The Preferred Alternative as modified in this ROD is the environmentally preferred alternative that causes the least damage to the biological and physical environment while meeting the purpose and need . The modified Preferred Alternative was se lected because it offered the best balance berween the transportation needs of the corridor with the sensitive environmental restraints of the canyon. The other alternatives do not achieve this balance: The Standard Arterial Alternative is not sensitive to the environment; and , the Conservationists' and No Action Alternatives do not meet the purpose and need for the project. The Preferred Alternative, as modified, is supponed by federal and state agencies , and alllocaJ government entities. The Preferred Alternative, as presented in the FEIS , met opposition from much of the public. Several meetings and fie ld reviews with key individuals during development of this ROD has led to resolving many of the concerns and reaching a consensus on the modifications made . • The following is a detailed description of the four alternatives carried into the FEIS. The modifications to the Preferred Alternative identified in Section A, above, have been included in its US-89 Througb Logan Canyon, ROD (Draft of October (3, 1994) Considered Page 3 Section B: Alternatives �• description : Prererred Alternative (As Modified) The modified Preferred Alternative was developed to balance the transportation needs of the corridor with the impacts to the canyo n environment. The critical environmental restraints dictated that numerous compromises to AASHTO Design Standards were necessary . These compromises allowed environmental impacts to be minimized while controlling construction costs. Middle Canyon Due to the potential for impact to the threatened species, the Maguire Primrose and other substantial impacts on aquatic , wetland/riparian, and visual environment, the modified Preferred Alternative throughout this section proposes a substantial relaxation bf AASHTO Design Standards (which recommends a 4O-foot width throughout , plus several pasSing lanes) . Beginning at Right Fork (mp 383.47), the first four miles (lower Middle Canyon section) will maintain the existing roadway width of 26 feet. Present design speed and posted speed wi ll remain unchanged . Burnt Bridge (mp 385 .5) will be rep laced with a new structure 34-foot wide to allow for pedestrian use . Burnt Bridge will be constructed in stages, with widening occurring on the upstream side. The detour presented in the FEIS has been eliminated. The roadway wi ll be e levated at mp 386.2 (Logan Cave) and at mp 386.6 to eliminate a flooding potential, and a parking area will be constructed for Logan Cave visitors at mp 386.3. Curb and/or gutter through this section will be considered during design to help define the roadway and control debris rolling onto the highway . Curve 5 at mp 384.and curve 29 at mp 387 will be flattened if a 3-year accident analysis , at the time of construction, shows a concentration of accidents at either location in excess of the expected accident rate . In the year 2010, a Level of Service (LOS) "DIE" would be expected for this four mile section . In the remainder of the Middle Canyon section (from mp 387.57 to mp 391.6) the canyon begins to open up but is still somewhat restrictive. The roadway will be widened to a 34-foot width (two 12foot wide travel lanes and two 5-foot wide shoulders) through this section. Design and posted speeds will be 35 miles per hour (mph) . The 34 foot roadway width will serve as a transition between the 26 and 40 root roadway sections. Lower and Upper Twin Bridges (mp 387 .7 and 388.76, respectively) will be replaced with 38-foot wide structures on new alignment and the structure at Ricks Spring (mp 389.8) will be replaced on the same alignment. The previously proposed consolidation of parking for Section 4(f) Site 6, Ricks Spring, has been eliminated . Intersection improvements at Temple Fork (mp 389.2) include the 34' section on US-89 and an improved vertical grade approach of Temple Fork road . Other improvements , such as an uphill right turn lane and an improved horizontal angle of approach at Temple Fork Road are secondary improvements which will only be constructed if they do not impact the river or require a substantial retaining wall . The left turning lane previously proposed at Temple Fork has been eliminated. Six curves will be flattened through the Upper Middle Canyon. These include curve #33, 37, 39, 40, 43 , and 45. The roadway wi ll be raised about 2 feet from mp 390.2 to mp 391.1 to eliminate a flooding potential. In the year 2010, a LOS "0" would be expected for this section. US-89 Through Logan Canyon, ROD (Draft of Oclober 13, 1994) Considered Page 4 Seclion B: AJlemalives e • �• Upper Canyon The Upper Canyon begins at mp 391.6 and continues to the Bear Lake Summit. The first eight miles of this section begins at the cattleguard at mp 391.6 and ends at SR-243 (Beaver Mountain Road Intersection) . The previously proposed roadway width of 40 feet through this first eight miles has been reduced to 34 feel as a result of input received on the FEIS . This 34-foot width provides for two 12-foot wide travel lanes and two 5-fool wide shoulders}. Passing/climbing lanes will be provided from mp 391.6 to mp 393.3 and from mp 394.9 to mp 396.5. Where passing lanes are provided , the previously proposed roadway width of 47 feet has been reduced to 44 feet (two 12-fool wide travel lanes, one 12-foot wide passing lane, one 5-foot shoulder and one 3-foot shoulder on the • passing lane side). Intersection improvements will be made at Tony Grove (mp 393.7), Red Banks Campground (mp 394.5), and Franklin Basin Road (mp 397.01) . Bridges wi ll be replaced on original alignment. Red Banks Bridge will be 38 feet wide unless tapers for the turn lanes into the campground run onto the bridge. The first Beaver Creek: Structure at Franklin Basin Road (mp 396.9) will be at least 52 feet wide to accommodate the Franklin Basin Intersection, and the Beaver Creek Structure at mp 397.5 will be 38 feet wide. Intersection improvements will be made at Beaver Mountain Road (mp 399.75) . The culvert that serves the Amazon Hollow, Stump Hollow and surrounding drainage areas will be widened to accommodate the widened transitions for the Beaver Mountain intersection. A width of 22 feet from the shoulder line to headwall on each side is required to avoid the need for guardrail protection. The total width would be at least 68 feet unless guardrail protection is selected during the design phase. Retaining wall s will be constructed between Beaver Creek and the roadway at mp 398.1 , mp 398.3, mp 398.6, and mp 398.9 to reduce impacts on the creek and adjacent wetlands . "Lay_downK type fencing will be provided in open range areas from about mp 391.6 to mp 397.2 along both sides of the roadway . Beyond the first eight miles, from the intersection with SR-243 (mp 399.75) and continuing to the Bear Lake Summit, the roadway will be widened to 40 feet (two 12-foot wide travel lanes and two 8-foot wide shoulders) . Passing/climbing lanes will be provided from mp 399.8 to mp 403 .0 , and from mp 404.6 continuing throughout the next section and ending at mp 410.6 . Where these passing/climbing lanes are provided, a 47-foot width (two 12-foot wide travel lanes, one 12-foot wide passing lane , one 8-foot shoulder, and one 3 foot shoulder on the passing lane side) will be required . Intersection improvements will be made at UDOT Maintenance Station (mp 402.38), and Forest Service Access Road (mp 404.75). The Winter Access Parking at mp 402. 1 will be re-established at a lower elevation so access can be provided. The design speed will be 50 mph throughout the Upper Canyon. Curves 69 , 70, 71, 76, and 80 will be flattened . In the year 2010, a LOS "C/O" would be expected throughout the Upper Canyon. Rich County Section • From the Bear Lake Summit to Bridgerland Subdivision (mp 404.75 to mp 409.4) the highway will be widened to 47 feet in order to accommodate a passing lane. (This would allow two 12-foot wide travel lanes, a 12-foot wide passing lane , one 8-fool shoulder, and one 3-foot shoulder on the passing lane side). The design speed will be 40 mph . On the Limberpine trailhead side, improvements will be restricted to be within 23 feet of the edge of the existing roadway. A delineation between the rOadway and parking area will be provided wilhin this 23 foot strip. The previously proposed US-89 Through Loaan Canyon, ROD (Draft of October 13, 1994) Considered Page 5 Section B: Alternatives �relocation of the trailhead and parking area has been dropped. Curves 85 , 88, 89, 92 , 94, 95 , 98, 101, and 102 will be flattened and curves 103, 104. and 105 will be flattened into a single curve , dependent upon relocation of alignment from Curve 105 to Curve 109. e From Bridgerland Subdivision to Garden City the highway width will be 40 feet (47 feet in passing lane areas), and the design speed will be 50 mph. Curves 109- 112, and 116 will be flattened, and access at mp 410.6 will be relocated. The climbing lane from the previous section will end at mp 410.6. In the year 2010, a LOS "0 " would be expected for the entire Rich County section. Intersection improvements will be made at the Sunrise Campground (mp 405 ,5) whi ch will also provjde access for the Bear Lake View Area, The intersection with SR-30 will be redesjgned with left and right-turn lanes. cyrb. gutter and sidewalk on US-89 and SR-3Q in the vicinity of this intersection. Intersection improvements will also be made at the access to the Brjdgerlaod Subdivjsion Cmp 409.4), A new intersection providing access to the BridgerJaod Subdivision will be constructed . This access will provide safer ingress and egress to the subdjvision. Intersection improvements to other existing and proposed subdivision accesses will be considered based on use requirements, roadway widening possibilities. and other engineering factors, No Action Alternative This alternative does not include any action to alter the width or location of the existing highway , although considerable construction activity would be necessary to conduct normal road maintenance, Such construction would include pavement replacement, replacement of structural elements on bridges and eventual bridge replacement , and improved signage, The existing roadway width of 26 feet would be maintained . In the year 2010, a LOS "DIE" would be expected for the Middle Canyon, LOS ~ D ~ for the Upper Canyon, and LOS "E" for the Rich County section, • This alternative is not a feasible and prudent alternative and was not selected because it does not meet the purpose and need of the project, Traffic carrying capacity would not be increased to meet the projected traffic volume, Safety hazards and inadequate opportunities for passing slow moving vehicles would not be corrected. This alternative is opposed by local governments and most of the public, Standard Arterial Alternative This alternative would maximize traffic capacity and safety by widening and improving the existing alignment of the highway to current AASHTO standards for a minor anerial road. The roadway wou ld include two 12-foot wide lanes and two 8-foot wide shoulders for a paved width of 40 feet. A third 12-foot wide climbing lane would be constructed along approximately 7,7 miles of the route . The shoulder width would be reduced to 3 feet on the climbing lane side, resulting in a paved width of 47 feet. Recovery areas , sloping gradually from the roadway to the natural grade, would result in a typical improved area of 66-98 feet. Bridges and drainage structures would be replaced , several on new alignments to straighten existing curves. Intersection improvements would also occur. This alternative would provide the best Level of Service. In the year 2010, a LOS "0" wou ld be expected for the Middle Canyon, LOS "C/O" for the Upper Canyon, and LOS "D" for the Rich County section. US-89 Through Logan Canyon, ROD (Draft of October 13 , 1994) Considered Page 6 Section B: Alternatives • �• This alternative is not a feasible and prudent alternative and was not selected because of the potential impact to the threatened Maguire primrose , substantial impacts to aquatic , riparian , and visual environments, and cost. This alternative would also impact the most Section 4(f) resources. This alternative is opposed by several government agencies and much of the public. Conservationists' Alternative The Conservationists' Alternative provides for improvements at various locations where there would be minimal environmental impacts. This alternative includes improved signing, bridge replacement, slow vehicle turnouts, some climbing lanes, and provides for paving and winter snow plowing of several parking areas. The existing roadway width of 26 feet would be maintained and the pavement would be replaced. Where climbing lanes are provided, the roadway width would be 43 feet. New bridges would be constructed to a 28-foot width, with Lower and Upper Twin Bridges being rep laced on new alignment. Tony Grove Intersection would be improved. Travelers would be advised of safety deficiencies by increasing the number of signs at selected locations. • • This alternative is not a feasible and prudent alternative and was not selected because it does not meet the purpose and need or the project. This alternative rails to adequately address safety and capacity needs . It would be an incremental improvement over the No Action Alternative by providing limited roadway improvements at selected locations. However, this alternative would fail to increase traffic-carrying capacity to meet projected traffic volumes , and would not eliminate many safety hazards. Bridges proposed to be 28 feet wide would be below AASHTO standards , causing continued hazardous conditions for bicyclists and pedestrians as well as vehicles. Only one intersection would be improved, resulting in unresolved safety concerns at several intersections such as Temple Fork, Red Banks Campground, and others. Additional signs to advise of substandard curves and other safety deficiencies is not adequate to provide long-term benefits as traffic volumes increase and would represent a constant liability situation. Only three climbing lanes , each approximately a half-mile long, would be provided. Climbing lanes would not be provided in the Rich County Section of the road. In the year 2010, a LOS "DIE" would be expected for the Middle Canyon, LOS "0" for the Upper Canyon , and LOS ME" for the Rich County section. This alternative is opposed by local governments, but had strong support from much of the public. US-89 Through Logan Canyon, ROD (Draft of October 13, 1994) Considered Page 7 Section B: AJtematives �C. SECTION 4(F) Section 4(f) applies to publicly owned land of a public park, recreation area, wi ldl ife/waterfowl refuge, or land of a historic site of National , State, or local significance as determined by the officials having jurisdiction over the park, recreation area, refuge or site. The Forest Service has determined that 15 recreation areas qualify as Section 4(f) resources within the project area. In addition, the State Historic Preservation Office has identified two historic sites. These 17 Section 4(f) resources are described in the Section 4(f) Statement (included in the FEIS). Constructive use of a Section 4(0 resource results when there is a substantial impairment caused by secondary impacts. There w ill be no substantial impairment caused by secondary impacts , therefore, constructive use of Section 4(0 resources will not occur. Changes to the Section 4(t) Evaluation , as a result of comments received on the FEIS, are addressed be low. The modified Preferred Alternative will impact three Section 4(t) resources. Alternatives considered to avoid Section 4(f) resources include: the No Action Alternative , which does not impact any Section 4(f) resource ; and the Conservationists' Alternative, which impacts one Section 4(f) resource . The Standard Arterial Alternative has a greater impact to Section 4(f) resources, impacting eight sites. These alternatives are described in the FEIS and in Section B, above. In addition to these alternatives, a site specific minor alignment adjustment was considered for avoiding each site. This minor alignment adjustment was presented in the Section 4(f) Statement and is summarized below for each impacted site. Revised Table 6-4 Swnmary of Section 4(f) Properties Used for Each Alternative • Alternative S ite Features Prererred No Action Soandard Arterial Conservationists' (Modified) No. I Fisherman's Access Parking at Righi Fork No No y" No 2 Woodcamp Campground No No y" No 4 Parking for Logan Cave No No y" No 6 Ricks Spring and Parking y" No y" No 7 Dispersed Recreation Parking No No y" No 12 Winter Access Parking Area at Beaver Mountain y" No y" y" 13 Winter Access Parking y" No y", No '15 Limber Pine Trailhead No No No No 3 0 8 I Total Section 4(0 Resources Used @ Alternative US-89 Througb Logan Canyon, ROD (Draft of October lJ , 1994) 4(0 Page 8 Section C: Section • �• *The boundaries of this site have been corrected, because of this it will not be used by any alternative. The No Action , Conservationjsts', and Standard Arterial Alternatives are not feasible and prudent alternatives for reasons stated in Section B above . The site specific minor alignment adjustments are not feasible and prudent alternatives for reasons stated below under each impacted site. A combination of alternatives is not feasible and prudent because it would result in an inconsistent roadway, with unacceptable safety hazards and a reduced Level of Service. Based upon the above considerations , there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of Section 4(f) properties by the modified Preferred Alternative. The modified Preferred Alternative includes aJl possible planning to minimize harm . The basis for the above conclusions is explained below for each site. The three sites impacted by the modified Preferred Alternative include: Site 6 - Ricks Spring and Parking; Site 12 - Winter Access Parking Area at Beaver Mountain Road ; and Site 13 - Winter Access Parking. Each of these sites is used for parking. This use will continue after implementation of the modified Preferred Alternative. Since these sites are on USFS lands and managed by that agency , improvements will be completed consistent with USFS recommendations . Ricks Spring and Parking - Site 6 (mp 389.9) • In the FEISt the Preferred Alternative proposed that parking at this site be consolidated on one side to eliminate pedestrians crossing the roadway . This consolidation was dropped from the Preferred Alternative after a field review with the USFS on August 18. 1993 . At that time, it was determined that even if all parking was placed on one side, people would still park on both sides, and the remaining parking would not allow easy use of the site by recreational vehicles. In addition, the left turn lane to allow north-bound traffic access would require a retaining wall be placed adjacent to the river . A five foot strip on both sides of this site is required adjacent to the roadway to provide for the shoulder. Though the size of the site will be reduced , the modified Preferred Alternative would not reduce the amount of parking ability at this site. The use of this Section 4(0 property has been coordinated with and is supported by the USFS because the modified Preferred Alternative improves safety at this site as much as possible without requiring the retaining wall adjacent to the river. A shorter retaining wall, set back from the river's edge , may still be required just downstream from the site. Alternatives considered to avoid this site include the No Action and Conservationists' Alternative which do not address the safety concerns and are not feasible and prudent for reasons previously stated. Since the site is adjacent to Ricks Springs on one side and the Logan River on the other, there are no minor alignment adjustments that would avoid this site without direct impacts on Ricks Spring or the Logan River. • Measures to minimize harm at this site include consideration of pedestrian safety during design . The passing ability at this location will be eliminated and signing will be provided to warn motorists of pedestrian use at the Spring. Visibility at this location will be improved because of the 5-foot shoulders and replacement of the existing narrow bridge. Curbing of this site will also be considered US-89 Through Logan Canyon, ROD (Draft of October 13, 1994) 4(Q Page 9 Section C: Section �• during design to better identify parking limits. Winter Access Parking at Beaver Mountain Road· Site 12 (mp 399.8) A 20 foot strip is required from this site to accommodate improvements to the intersection of US-89 and Beaver Mountain Road (SR-243). The parking area will be expanded to the northeast so that there will be no loss of parking. The use of this Section 4(f) property has been coordinated with and is supported by the USFS because this alternative will improve vehicle safety at the intersection of US-89 and Beaver Mountain Road, which accesses Beaver Mountain Ski Area. Alternatives considered to avoid this site include the No Action Alternative and a minor alignment adjustment. The Conservationists' and Standard Arterial Alternatives would also impact this site. The No Action Alternative would not provide intersection improvements and is not a feasible or prudent alternative for other reasons stated in Section B. The minor alignment adjustment requires that the road be widened only on the south side of the existing US-89. This adjustment was not se lected because it would require a an approximate to-foot fill and impact the natural drainage for the Amazon Hollow area , Measures to minimize harm include extending the remaining parking area to include at least as much parking as presently ex ists and paving the entire parking area to enhance use. Winter Access Parking - Site 13 (mp 402.1) This site is adjacent to a curve proposed to have the vertical and horizontal alignment improved . There is a difference in elevation of about 12 feet which would eliminate access to this site. However , this site will be reestablished at a lower elevation so that access can be maintained and the site will continue to provide at least as much parking as currently exists. The use of this Section 4(f) property has been coordinated with and is supported by the USFS because the modified Preferred Alternative corrects the deficiencies of the adjacent curve. e Alternatives considered to avoid this site include the No Action and Conservationists' Alternative and a minor alignment adjustment. The Standard Arterial Alternative would also impact this site. The No Action and Conservationists' Alternatives would not improve the vertical and horizontal alignment of this curve and are not a feasible or prudent alternative for other reasons stated in Section B. The minor alignment adjustment would require that the road be moved further away from the site so that access at the current elevation could be maintained. This would require additional cutting into the hillside and was not selected because it would further impact visual resources to a greater extent. Measures to minimize harm include reestablishing the parking site at a lower elevation so that access will be maintained . The site sits on a mound and lowering the elevation will result in approximately 1000 cubic yds of excess material and a small amount of upland vegetation will be eliminated by reestablishing this site. Limber Pine Trailhead - Site IS (mp 404.81) US-89 Througb Logan Canyon. ROD (Draft of October 13 , 1994) 4(1) Page 10 Section C: Section • �• The FEIS Slated that the Preferred Alternative would impact this site. Because of a correction lO the boundaries of this site, the modified Preferred Alternative will not impact this site. The FEIS shows the parking area at this site to be 60 X 300 feet and adjacent to the roadway . It also states that a 24foot strip would be required for the modified Preferred and Standard Arterial Alternatives. During the August 18, 1993 field review held with the USFS , an approximate 23-foot strip prior to the parking area was identified. This 23 feet consists of a 15 foot shoulder and an 8 foot curbed/vegetated median. The parking area was measured to be approximately 75 X 200 feet (see revised map in the Appendix). The USFS stated that the boundary for the Section 4(0 resource includes only the 75 X 200 foot area beyond the median . However, delineation of the parking area from the roadway would need to be maintained in order to avoid impacts to this site. All improvements on the trailhead side will be accomplished within 23 feet of the edge of the roadway , and a delineation will be provided within this 23-foot area in accordance with USFS recommendations. Relocation of the trailhead and parking has been dropped from the Preferred Alternative. The same would apply for the Standard Arterial Alternative. Therefore, there would be no impact to Site 15 by any of the alternatives . • • US-89 Through Logan Canyon. ROD (Draft of October 13, 1994) 4(1) Page 11 Section C: Section �D. MEASURES TO MINIMIZE HARM Throughout development of the Preferred Alternative, and subsequent modifications , consideration has been given to avoiding and minimizing harm to sensitive resources . Protection of the river and surrounding wetland /riparian edge, avoidance of a threatened species , avoidance and minimizing harm to wetland/ riparian habitat, visual , and section 4(f) resources of the canyon played an important role in its development and selection. As a result, minimal construction will occur in the ecologically sensitive Middle Section of the canyon , bridges will c1ear·span the river . retaining walls will be used to limit encroachment into sensitive areas. and treatment of clearzones will be mod ified from AASHTO recommendations. Since the FEIS , the Preferred Alternative has been modified (see Section A of this ROD) to further reduce these impacts. All practicable measures to avoid impacts and minimize environmental harm have been incorporated into the decis ion made in this ROD based on the conceptual level of design utilized in the [IS process . Emphasis will continue to be made throughout detailed design and construction to further avoid impacts and minimize harm to environmental resources. Horizontal and vertical alignments will be manipulated to provide a M best fit M design . Interested government agencies , local governments , the environmental community and the community at large will continue to be involved as part of a Cooperating Advisory Team (CAT) . This team will participate in the development or all &Soecls of desien and in the resolution of unforeseen environmental problems that arise durine construction and post construction. This team will be developed as outlined in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the FHW A, UDOT and the USFS . Details regarding the fonnation and operation of this team can be found in the MOU (see Appendix) and is summarized in Section E of this ROD. In addition to the measures taken to avoid impacts and minimize harm, opportunities ror enhancement will be considered, as appropriate. Application ror runding or enhancement projects would be made as provided for in the 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (JSTEA). • • Clearzone Considerations Impacts will be minimized by the treatment of c1earzones. Clearzones will be handled by relaxing AASHTO Standards (which recommends removal of hazards within the clearzone area, or protection of those that cannot be removed). The design of clearzones will focus on preservation of aesthetic and ecological features to the extent possible while considering safety. Safety hazards within the c1earzone area will be considered for protection, removal , or no action. The prime directive will be to minimize impacts to wetlands and riparian habitat adjacent to the roadway without jeopardizing safety. Considerable emphasis will be given to protection or no action, and removal of hazards caused by natural conditions will be kept to a minimum . The clearzone area begins at the outside edge of the traffic lane and is 18 feet wide at 25, 35, or 40 mph and 22 feet wide at 50 mph . However, the intent is not to clear a swath 18-22 feet wide adjacent to the travel lane . No clearzone area will be provided in the first four miles or the middle canyon, however, substantial hazards within this area will be considered for protection. US-89 Througb Logan Canyon. ROD (Draft of October 13. 1994) Page 12 HanD Section D: Measures to Minimize • �e Design Considerations Through the various meetings and fi eld rev iews held during development of mis ROD , a limited number of site specific areas were identified where design considerations were of panicular interest. The following list is not intended to be all inclus ive, but representative of considerations which will be made during design . Aesthetic impacts at many of these locations was also of concern. These impacts will be minimized in accordance with the revegetation plan. This plan will include the use of native plant species; slope rounding and warping of land form impacts; aging rock faces which contrast with older cuts; removing abandoned roadways and restoring them to blend with surrounding contours. • • • Curves 5 & 29 - Accident studies will be handled by reviewing the current three year accident period at time of construction. The number, type, cause and severity of accidents will be reviewed to determine if correction of geometric deficiencies could alleviate accidents. The UDOT Dynamic Quicklisting and officer's individual accident reports will be the source of this information. Aesthetic impacts will be reduced by manipulating the horizontal andlor vertical alignment, and by moving away fro m the river . LoWer Twin Bridge - The total width of cut will be based on the roadway width requirement combined with the angle of repose of the existing material. • Dugway - Widening at this location will be on the cut side to avoid disturbance of the downhill slope. Only the minimum cut required for necessary widening will be constructed . The width of additional cut will be a maximum of 8 feet. • Upper Twin Bridge - The alignment shift will be based on the minimum amount necessary to allow a new bridge to be constructed while allowing traffic to utilize the existing structure . One or two way traffic control configurations for construction will be considered . • Temple Fork - Minimum roadway improvements at this site include a 34' section on US-89 and an improved vertical grade approach of Temple Fork road . Other improvements such as an uphill right tum lane and an improved horizontal angle of approach of Temple Fork road are secondary improvements which will not be constructed if they impact the river or require a substantial retaining wall. Environmental impacts and construction costs will be weighed against the benefits gained. • Passing Lanes in Lower Upper Canyon of Section 2 - The location of passing lanes in the first eight mi les of the Upper Canyon will be evaluated further during detailed design to assess additional measures to avoid or minimize harm to wetlands. The evaluation will address leaving the lanes in the location described herein , or combining and relocating into a single section. Passing lane(s) in this section are a necessary safety improvement and the decision will be based upon minimizing the impact to the environment (L e .• wetlands, visual) relative to the safety benefit of this improvement. Emphasis will be to shift the alignment away from the river. US-89 1brougb Logan Canyon, ROD (Draft of October 13, 1994) Hann Page 13 Section D: Measures to Minimize �• Beaver Creek, Franklin Basin Bridge - Horizontal and vertical alignments will be modified to obtain a H best fit alignment relative to the sensitive environmental features . The reduction in the proposed roadway width to 34' also minimizes riparian impacts. Retaining walls andlor guardrail sections are anticipated and will be utilized to reduce or avoid impact to sensitive areas. Specific locations for these treatments will be identified in the detailed H • roadway design process. • Culvert at Amazon Hollow, Stump Hollow and Surrounding Drainage Area - The impact to wetlands at the Amazon Hollow, Stump Hollow and surrounding drainage area as a result of roadway widening for the Beaver Mountain turning Janes will be further evaluated during detailed design. This may include shortening the turn lane storage bay lengths and/or utilization of guardrail to shorten the culvert. • Tony Grove, Beaver Mountain, Franklin Basin Intersections - Improvements at these intersections in the form of left and right turning lanes are a necessary safety improvement. Except for the Franklin Basin Intersection, sensitive environmental features will likely not be heavily impacted. The uses of retaining wall and guardrail will be considered in reducing or avoiding impacts. Again, a "best fit " design will be implemented. Remaining impacts will be minimized with mitigative efforts. • Passing Lane Above Beaver Mountain Turnoff - The alignment shift at curves 69, 70, and 71 will be subjected to a best fit design analysis including exceptions to design standards. Realignment around the mature forest will be the design objective. The degree of cut or fill in obtaining the necessary roadway width is not yet known , but will be determined in the detailed design process. * Curve 85, and the Mature Forest near Limber Pine - The footprint of the roadway is affected by design speed (curve flattening) , nominal roadway width, and climbing lane. The use of retaining walls and/or guardrails to limit the extent of fills will be considered . These activities could reduce the extent of the fill by 40-100 feet, whereas eliminating the climbing lane would only gain an additional 7 feet. The use of a structure has also been considered but will not likely be advanced due to potential icing problems at this location. Realignment options at this location may exist and will be evaluated during design . Ending the passing lane on an uphill section would not meet design standards and is not desirable because of the potential safety conflict. Slower moving vehicles would be required to merge into a faster stream of traffic. The abandoned road and existing fill would be removed and the ground restored to blend with the surrounding contours. * Old Road from the Limber Pine Summit to Garden City - Sections of the existing alignment abandoned due to realignments or curve flatlenings will be handled in accordance with the revegetation plan. Abandoned roadway sections will be removed and the ground restored to blend with surrounding contours. In some cases the old road would be necessary for local access and will remain in use. • Section Ib Crom Rick Springs to Section 2 - The alignment will be shifted away from the adjacent riparian habitat and the river. It will be adjusted to obtain a "best fit" design. US-89 Through Logan Canyon, ROD (Draft of October 13. 1994) Page 14 Hann Section D: Measures to Minimize • • �• Retaining walls will be considered where needed to avoid or reduce impacts. • Impacts from Mitigation - The first priority will be to reduce the amount of impact through design . Secondly . mitigative areas will be closely evaluated and selected based on potential for success, as well as consideration to impacts caused by construction of the mitigative areas. The Forest Service and the Corps of Engineers will be working with UDOT to ensure that a balance between visual concerns and the need for wetland mitigation in advance of highway construction is achieved. As design is advanced , possible locations where mitigation can be accomplished on site may be identified (i.e. possible strips of wetland adjacent to the roadway in the lower Upper Canyon). In some cases, mitigation areas may be selected that are not as visible from the road. Land Use The modified Preferred Alternative will improve accessibility to various land uses within the area . Forest Service Plan • • A revegetation plan will be developed by UDOT and approved by the USFS during design of individual projects to ensure that areas of high visual quality and critical habitat are avoided, where practicable, and that disturbed areas are appropriately revegetated . • A construction/post-construction monitoring plan will be developed and implemented by UOOT and approved by the USFS during design of individual projects in order to identify sensitive areas where monitoring is needed . These areas and types of monitoring required will be identified in the project plans and specifications for each project. • • Amendment of the Forest Plan for the Wasatch-Cache National Forest is required under the administrative procedures of the US FS for impacts to visual quality and reduction of the habitat condition index. Best Management Practices will be implemented to control erosion, thereby meeting the water and soils management directive of the Forest Plan. Detailed Best Management Practices will be developed during design for each project. Cache County Plan • UOOT's Best Management Practices will be used to minimize water quality degradation, minimize vegetative removal , and minimize cut and fill . This complies with requirements of the Cache County Plan which specifies that destruction of natural vegetation be minimized. cut and fill operations be minimized to reduce runoff and erosion , while providing for appropriate public roads. Rich County Plan • No measures to minimize harm are required . US-89 Through Logan Canyon. ROD (Draft of October 13. 1994) Hann Page IS Section D: Measures to Minimize �Social Impacts Measures to . minimize harm are required to address access concerns of the various users . • Access to Existing and Proposed Subdivisions .. A new intersection providing access to the Bridgerland Subdivision will be constructed . This access will provide safer ingress and egress to the subdivision. • Access at mp 410.6 in Garden City would be relocated by closing the present access and providing a new access from another public street, if possible. If the access cannot be closed, then it would be relocated to an improved location , providing the best design possible. A combination with access at mp 410.7 may be practicable. The access at mp 410.7 would be considered accord ing to the same criteria as the access at my 410.6. • Intersection improvements to other existing and proposed subdivision accesses will be considered based on use requirements, roadway widening possibilities, and other engineering factors. Garden City will be involved in identiCying these requirements. Access to Recreation Within the Canyon • Accessibility will be improved by providing intersection improvements , eliminating or mitigating hazards , and improving the Level of Service. • Present parking turnouts will be improved and new turnouts will be placed in recognition of any eliminated rumouts. Additional turnouts which attain at least two parking stalls with adequate sight distance will also be considered. Exact locations will be determined during design and in conjunction with USFS recommendations. • Relocation • The acquisition and relocation program will be conducted in accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended . • Acquisition of publicly-owned lands will be undertaken in accordance with the regulations of each land management agency . • Grazing activities regulated by the USFS and the State of Utah will not be affected . However. fencing along the highway from just below Tony Grove to Franklin Basin will be considered to reduce the number of cattle· vehicle accidents. EmploymentlEconomics • The canyon will remain open during construction to minimize employment/economic impacts related to road closure. A traffic control plan will be developed during design phase. Temporary short·term closures to through traffic are expected. Local access to US-89 Through Logan Canyon. ROD (DJ'ft of October 13. 1994) Page 16 Hann Section D: Measures to Minimize • �• recreation traffic is expected to be maintained. Joint Development • Coordination has been made and will continue to be made with the USFS to develop a highway which meets , to the extent possible, the goals of both UOOT and the USFS . Pedestrians and Bicyclists • • A wider roadway with shoulders is being provided through much of the project. Paving of parking areas will discourage the use of non·designated parking locations which are hazardous to vehicle-passengers who SlOP and leave their vehicle and to bicyclists who may encounter vehicles quickly turning onto or off of the roadway . Burnt Bridge will be constructed to a 34-foot width to allow safer pedestrian and bicyclist use. Water Quality Impacts • • Sedimentation and siltation control during the construction phase will include application of Best Management Practices. UDOT's Standard Temporary Erosion Control plans will be implemented during construction. • During construction, the surface area of erodible soils that are exposed at anyone time will be limited . • Temporary pollution/erosion control provisions will be coordinated with permanent soil erosion control measures to assure maximum attainable erosion control. The use of detailed erosion control plan sheets will be considered that include locations of erosion control facilities. These locations would then be subject to field evaluation. Permits UDOT will coordinate development of permit applications with the various agencies so that their recommendations can be integrated into roadway design. Construction of the project will require the following permits: Stream Alteration Permit • • A Stream Alteration Permit is required by the State Engineer's Office, Utah Division of Water Rights for bridge and culvert replacement. This does not involve channelization or relocation of the stream, but would involve riprap . Section 404 Permit US-89 Through Logan Canyon. ROD (Draft of October 13, 1994) Hann Page 17 Section 0: Measures to Minimize �• A Section 404 Permit to discharge dredge or fill materials into a water of the United States is required by the US Army Corps of Engineers (COE) where construction activities impact jurisdictional wetlands . • Utah Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit • Utah Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit will be required for any project which disturbs more than 5 acres of surface area during construction. The UPDES General Storm Water Discharge Permit issued to UDOT by the Utah Department of Environmental Quality will apply. As part of the requirements of this permit, Storm Water Pollution Prevention (SWPP) plan will be developed and incorporated in the final design plans. Also a Notice of Intent (NOI) form shall also be submitted to Utah Division of Water Quality prior to construction of the project. For any project disturbing less than 5 acres, the UPDES General Storm Water Discharge Permit will not apply . However, UOOT's standard plans for temporary erosion and sediment control will be implemented during construction to alleviate any potential erosion or sediment. Right-of-Way/Special Use Permit • The FEIS states that a Right-of-Way/Special Use Permit is required from the USFS , Wasatch-Cache National Forest. The USFS has recently advised UOOT that Forest Service policy requires issuance of a transportation easement, rather than a special use permit. This decision will be made in the USFS Record of Decision. Wetlands and Botanical Resources • A wetland mitigation plan will be developed during the design phase under the guidelines of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Executive Order 11990 as administered by the COE. Additional opportunities to avoid or minimize wetland impacts will be identified throughout design . Replacement of eliminated wetlands will be in-kind , based on functional value . The first priority will be to reduce the amount of impact through design. Secondly, mitigative areas will be closely evaluated and selected based on potential for success, as well as consideration of impacts caused by construction of the mitigative areas . • Advance mitigation will be developed with the first project and considered on future projects so that impacts can be mitigated prior to being impacted, where practicable. The acreage , sites , and design of the wetland mitigation sites, and advance mitigation, will continue to be coordinated with and agreed to by the COE and the USFS during design , so that visual and wetland concerns can be balanced. • Construction document specifications will limit encroachment into wetlands and riparian areas to that required for construction. On site inspections in accordance with the construction monitoring plan will ensure compliance with these provisions. • Construction work zones will be delineated through the use of fencing in sensitive areas to ensure contractor compliance with environmental limits of operations. • US-89 Through Logan Hann Canyo~, ROD (Draft of October 13 , 1994) Page 18 Section D: Measures to Minimize • �• The construction/post construction monitoring plan will require that qualified UDOT representative(s), acceptable [0 the COE, will be in charge of assisting designers and the project engineer in designing and constructing the wetland mitigation areas . Upon completion of the project, the representative(s) will also monitor the mitigation sites once a year for three years. This includes taking photographs and sending them with a brief progress report to the COE each year . At the end of the three years, if the wetland mitigation areas have not developed to the satisfaction of the CDE, then through consultation with the COE, appropriate steps will be taken by UDOT to fulfill Section 404 permit requirements for the project. • A revegetation plan will be developed and implemented to revegetate disturbed areas. The revegetation plan will be developed with the assistance of USFS and other CAT team members. • Burnt Bridge will be constructed in stages, with widening occurring on the upstream side , eliminating the detour presented in the FEIS. • In addition to the reduced width presented in the FEIS for the Middle Canyon , the previously proposed roadway width of 40' for the fir st eight miles of the Upper Canyon Section has been reduced to 34' to further minimize impacts on wetlands. • Location of passing lanes in the first eight miles of the Upper Canyon will be evaluated further during detailed design to assess additional measures to avoid or minimize harm to wetland s caused by these passing lanes . The evaluation will address leaving the lanes in the location described herein, or combining and relocating into a single section. Safety considerations will also play a role in the final placement. • Impact to wetlands at Amazon Hollow , Stump Hollow and surrounding drainage area as a result of roadway widening for the Beaver Mountain turning lanes will be further evaluated during detailed des ign . This may include shonening the turn lane storage bay lengths and/or utilizing guardrail to shorten the culvert. • • • Requirements identified in the Section 404 Permit will be complied with. Water Body Modifications and Wildlir. Impacts • • Clear span bridges will be used rather than in-river pier suppons to minimize water body modifications. • • Additional animal crossing signs will be provided in high conflict locations in consultation with Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (UDWR). The amount and necessity of riprap required for erosion control at bridges will be evaluated on a case by case basis during final design . Riprap will be used only where required to stabilize the streambank. Riprap will not exceed 100 feet along both banks up- and downstream from each new bridge. Since riprap will not be required at each of these locations, US-89 Through Logan Canyon, ROD (Draft of October 13, 1994) Page 19 H"m Seclion D: Measures to Minimize �the actual use of riprap will be minimal. • Construction activities in watercourses will be minimized to the extent possible. Construction work zones will be delineated to ensure contractor compliance. • Existing river and creek hydraulics will be maintained by avoiding the encroachment of any required riprap into channels. Impacts to wildlife will be minimized by limiting , to the extent practical , vegetative and riparian habitat clearing. • Highway bridges will be elevated with no part of the bridge suppan systems being placed in the river . Bridge spans will allow for animal runway in cases where this feature is currently provided. • • The following mitigation measures emphasize protection or replacement of vegetative cover for fisheries . These mitigation measures apply 10 the Logan River and Beaver Creek, and will also apply to their tributaries that are important to adult and juvenile fish , as determined by UDWR and USFS. Construction activities near the river will occur during the drier, low-flow month s of the year to the extent practicable . Clear-span bridges rather than in-river pier suppons will be constructed. Culvens will be designed to allow fish passage. Heavy equipment wil l be kept out of the channel during all construction phases to the extent practicable. Unavoidable in-channel activities will be scheduled in coordination with the USFS and UDWR to minimize impacts during critical fisheries periods. Such activities will be brief and local . • Temporary dikes and sediment basins will be constructed during bridge and structure replacement to prevent turbid runoff and any accidental spills of fuels , lubricants, chemicals, or sewage (from portable sanitary facilities) from entering the river , creek, or tributaries . Construction activities will be limited to areas within construction work zones, as delineated through the use of fencing , to minimize habitat losses. All work will be conducted from the inland side of the highway where possible to avoid in-channel activities and minimize riparian habitat and riverbank disturbance. Existing river and creek hydraulics will be maintained by avoiding the encroachment of required riprap into the channels. The free-nowing nature of the river will be maintained. Fill slopes will not be steeper than 2: I to promote bank stability and reclamation . US-89 Through Logan Canyoo, ROD (Draft of October 13, 1994) Hann Page 20 Section 0 : Measures to Minimize • �• Drainage ditches and sediment basins will be located in accordance with the detailed Best Management Practices to minimize erosion and to prevent eroded material from being washed toward the river. Runoff along the river-side of the curb and gutter in the Middle Canyon section will be directed toward the inland side of the highway. where practicable, to minimize the discharge to the river of materials that accumulate on the highway. A band of riparian habitat will be maintained along the river and creek wherever possible to provide overhanging cover for fish and to filter surface runoff. Larger mature trees and their root systems will be protected where it does not conflict with vehicles and passenger safe£}'o Prior to the start of the next wet season. disturbed areas , where possible, will be stabilized, reseeded , and revegetated. Riprap and debris generated during future highway and shoulder maintenance would not be indiscriminately placed along the river banks. • • Mitigation measures described above are intended to minimize impacts on water quality and fisheries . The following will also be accomplished to ensure success of mitigation measures: Fishery studies will be conducted for individual projects which have the potential tQ impact fisheries. Prior tQ construction. available UDWR fisheries studies will be assessed and if necessary updated to provide baseline data to determine project impacts to fisheries . Post construction fishery studies will be conducted . If study results show additional mitigation measures are warranted as a result of project activities. mitigation directed at wild fish stocks will be carried out under the direction of USES and UDWR biologists as exp lained in the FEIS on pg 5-6, Floodplain Impacts • Bridges will c1earspan watercourses in order to minimize floodplain encroachment. Excess fill material will not be placed in the floodway. • Bridge and culvert openings will be sized so that floodplain elevations will not be increased . • Construction activities will be in compliance with Executive Order 11988 to reduce the risk of flood Josses; to minimize the impact of floods on human health, safety and welfare; and to restore and preserve the national and beneficial values served by floodplains. Threatened and Endangered Species • The Middle Canyon contains habitat for the Primyla maguirei (threatened species). The USF&WS has stated that the Preferred Alternative will have no effect on this species. In order to minimize US·89 Through Logan Canyon, ROD (Draft of October 13, 1994) Harm Page 21 Section 0: Measures to Minimize �potential impacts , the recommendations of Welsh (1987) and the USF&WS will be followed . These recommendations include: • Construction activities from Wood Camp Intersection to mp 385.0 will be restricted to a corridor width of less than 40 feet. • Changes in the geomorphology of Logan Canyon will be limited to the extent practical. • Removal of canyon bottom tree groves will be limited . • Dust suppression measures will be used during construction activities. Construction in the area near populations will be undertaken no earlier than June to avoid potential dust impacts during the flowering period (April-May) , • e Blasting in the Middle Canyon will be avoided whenever possible. Barriers preventing scattering of blast debris on these populations will be provided if blasting is necessary . Visual Impacts • A revegetation plan will be developed during design and coordinated with the USFS to minimize harm to visual resources . This plan will be implemented in the project plans and specifications for each project. This plan will include use of native plant species. Mitigation of landform impacts will be accomplished by slope rounding and warping to make cuts, fills , and ditch edges appear more natural . Rock faces, contrasting with older cuts, will be aged with treatments. In places where the current alignment is abandoned, the roadway will be removed and the ground restored to blend with surrounding contours. The plan will identify seed mixes compatible with local plant communities. • Levels of visual quality adjacent to the roadway of 0, 1 and 2 will be raised to level 3, except when a more appropriate direction is determined by the USFS. • The acreage , sites and design of advance mitigation will be agreed to by the USFS during design so that visual and wetland concerns can be balanced . • • Steel beam guardrail will be the hazard protection device encouraged for use. The use of A588 rusting steel, natural finish material for the guardrail for aesthetic purposes will be considered . Construction Impacts Blasting • A Special Provisiol'} will be included in the project plans to ensure blasting will be controlled to inhibit rock materials from being projected away from the blast area, and removing only designated material . US-89 Through Logan Canyon . ROD (Draft of October 13,1994) Page 22 Hann Section 0 : Measures to Minimize • �• • • If any critical wildlife periods are identified by UDWR during des ign , these will be given consideration , and if appropriate , timing of blasting will be limited. Blasting in the Middle Canyon will be avo ided whenever possible. Barriers preventing blast debris onto Maguire primrose populations will be provided if blasting is necessary . Spoil • Environme ntal clearance will be obtained on the d isposal site, prior to disposal of excess material . • Excess materials that are not used in roadway construction or restoratio n of the borrow area near Bear Lake Summit, will be disposed of in locations determined on a case-by-case basis by the CAT team and approved by USFS . Excess materials may be utilized in the canyon, stock piled for future use, or transported out of the canyon. Air Quality • • Dust suppression measures will be implemented during construction . These measures will include water sprinkling, speed limits on haul road , and use of environmentally safe stabilization chemicals. Noise • The construction contractor will be required to comply with UDOT Specification No . 104. 16 (formerly 107.24) "Noise and Vibration Contro l". Traffic Congestion , Detours and Safety • A detailed traffic control plan will be developed during the design phase to minimize traffic congestion; provide for construction detours and short·term road closures; and address vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle safety. Toxic Material Control • A spill control plan for motor fuels, oil, grease and chemicals will be developed during the design phase. This plan will address measures to minimize accidental releases of toxic materials to the environment and measures to respond to and clean up spilled material. Historic and Archeological Preservation • UOOT Standard Specification No . 104. 15 (formerly 107 .23) , "Discovery Propenies" will be included in all contracts to protect unknown historic and archeological resources . • Hazardous Waste US·89 Through Logan CanYOD, ROD (DOlft of October 13, 1994) Page 23 H.m> SectioD 0 : Measures 10 Minimize �• If evidence of Hazardous Waste is found during construction the Department of Enviro nmental Quality will be consulted and appropriate mitigation measures will be implemented. • Staging Areas • Construction staging sites will be identified and coordinated through the CAT team during design . They will be kept out of aquatic, wetland, and riparian habitat and other sensitive visual areas. • Environmental clearance on construction staging sites will be obtained during design and the contractor will be limited to the use of staging areas identified in the project construction plans. • Staging sites will be approved by the USFS. Batch Plant Locations • The traffic, safety, reneation. and air quality impacts associated with hauling material rrom the city versus setting up a batch plant in the canyon will be identified on a project by project basis in design. The affect of these impacts on both the canyon environment and the city environment will be considered. The assessment will include impacts on the Lower Canyon and compatibility with future projects. The most suitable location will be identified in the prgject specifications. The contractor will be required to conduct his batch plant operations in accordance with these specifications and will comply wilh Utah Air Conservation Regulations identified in UDOr SDeciflcatio,. 10Z21. EnvirQnmenl4l Protection. • Limits of Operation • Construction work zones will be delineated through the use of fencing in sensitive areas to ensure contractor compliance with environmental limits of operations. Section 4(0 • All improvements to Section 4(f) resources will be done in accordance with USFS recommendations. • Site 6 (Ricks Spring and Parking , mp 389.9) - Pedestrian safety will be considered to the extent possible during design . This consideration includes the elimination of passing ability at this location and improved signing. Curbing of this site will also be considered. • Site 12 (Winter Access Parking Area at Beaver Mountain Road, mp 399.8) - Remaining parking area will be extended to include at least as much parking as presently exists, and the entire parking area will be paved to enhance use. US-89 Througb Logan Canyon, ROD (Draft of October 13, 1994) Page 24 Hann Section 0 : Measures to Minimize • �• • Site 13 (Winter Access Parking , mp 402. 1) - This site will be reestabli shed at a lower elevation to maintain access. .. Site 15 (Limber Pine Trailhead, mp 404.81) - All improvements on the trailhead side will be accomp lished with in 23 feet of the edge of the roadway , and a delineation will be provided within this 23 foot area. • • US-89 Through Logan Canyon, ROD (Draft of October 13, 1994) Hann Page 25 Section D: Measures to Minimize �E. MONITORING OR ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM Monitoring and enforcement of the above proposed measures to minimize harm will be accomplished • in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between UDOT. FHWA. and USFS . This MOU is included in the Appendix of this ROD . It identifies how the individual projects will be se lected , identified and managed , and how coordination will be accomplished. The MOU takes each project through design , construction, and post-construction periods. It commits to the development of a revegetation plan, wetland mitigation plan, and a construction/post-construction monitoring plan, and commits to the development of a Cooperating Advisory Team (CAD which consists of various agencies and individuals. This team will provide recommendations of regulatory and permit requirements , input on enhancement opportunities , mitigative treatments and overall content of the design of the project, with final decisions being UDOT's responsibility. The CAT team will be involved throughout the development of all aspects of design. including review of aljgnment oPtions and other design features. During construction and post construction. the CAT team will be coordinated with to reso lve ynforeseen environmental problems to ensure that mitigative efforts are successfu l. Mitigation measures listed in Section 0 above will be incorporated in the contract , plans , and specifications and will be monitored in accordance with the construction/post-construction monitoring plan. The monitoring plan will be developed during design of the individual projects and will include all monitoring commitments made within this ROD, as well as any monitoring required to comply with specific permits. Enforcement of the contract provisions and monitoring of the project is the responsibility of the se lected UDOT Project Manager and UDOT Environmental Engineer , as outlined in the MOU . An independent environmental consultant will be ytilized . The envirOnmental consultant will assisl the • froieer Manager co ensure CQ17Wliance with envirOnmental commitments and mitigation measures. Periodic meetings will be held with the contractor's workforce to advise of sensitive areas . The UDOT Design, Structures, Right-of-Way and Environmental Divisions are responsible to ensure that the measures to minimize harm , listed in Section D above , are incorporated into the plans and right-of-way acquisition activities. The Utah Division of FHW A is respons ible for administering the Federal-Aid Highway Program in Utah and makes period ic inspections of all phases of highway design and construction to assure compliance with federal requirements including NEPA . US-89 Through Logan Canyon, ROD (Draft October 13. 1994) Enforcement Page 26 SectioD E; Monitoring or • �• Logan Canyon Documents UDOT Documents US-89 Logan canyon Preferred Alternative (circa 1992-93). Brochure outlining Preferred Alternative as outlined in FEIS. March 4, 1994 Letter from Dave Berg to Jeff Appel. Conlinnation of compromise elements. July 13, 1994 Letter from Lorraine Richards to CPLC and other agencies. Brief summary of ROD, request for agency input Preliminary Record of Decision July 15, 1994. Cover letter Reoord of Decision Appendix A Traffic Data. agency oorrespondence, MOU. Appendix B Agency Comments, Government Comments, Public Comments. Curve 85 Maps, Cross Sections aod CutIFili Summary • CPLC Documents Logan Canyon: Summarizing Two "Alternatives" Map and brief summary of Consen'ationi st and UDOT Preferred Alternatives. Logan Canyon, Make it Safe, Keep is Beautiful Brochure from 1993 Cache County Fair. Response to Dave Berg letter (March 4, 1994), Jeff Appel. June 28, 1994 Memo from Pendery to Berg outlining hotspots and requesting additional information from UDOT. Response to Preliminary Record of Decision. Bruce Pendery. Steve Rint, Shawn Swaner, August 12, 1994. Memorandum: Time for Filing Lawsuit under NEPA, Appel & Mansson, • August 16, 1994. � 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 3363 Image Width Image Width in pixels 2636 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/393">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/393</a> Purchasing Information Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item. To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a> Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2013 Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner. Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 300 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Checksum 187114229 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 Record of decision, October 13, 1994 Description An account of the resource Record of decision for US Highway 89 stating that the Federal Highway Administration agrees with the Utah Department of Transportaion in its selection of the Preferred Alternative. Subject The topic of the resource Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon Roads--Design and construction Traffic engineering United States Highway 89 Logan Canyon (Utah) Environmental policy 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 10/13/94 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. 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 15 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 MSS314Bx1Fd15 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/6b29ddef4c01b5d8ada410443ab8ad8b.pdf 0cd42a645943d0bf9f845c53619cb026 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 3340 Image Width Image Width in pixels 2619 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/631">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/631</a> Purchasing Information Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item. To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a> Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2013 Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner. Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 300 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Checksum 2478930555 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 Preliminary Record of Decision, July 14, 1994 Description An account of the resource The preliminary record of decision for US Highway 89, Right Fork in Logan Canyon to Garden City and Final Environmental Impact Statement. The six sections include decision, alternatives considered, section 4(f), measures to minimize harm, monitoring or enforcement program, and comments on the FEIS. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Environmental policy Roads--Design and construction Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Utah. Department of Transportation Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 7/14/94 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Garden City (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Rich County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1990-1999 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon/Logan Canyon Coalition Papers, 1963-1999, COLL MSS 314 Box 1 Folder 14 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 MSS314Bx1Fd14 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/bbc336c4d786ce0afeeab578fa822d63.pdf d7d1fd3e2fee41b388b1906bbdcba57f PDF Text Text ..--- --------- -------- -- -- - - --- --- - -- -- -- -- -- ---- -- ----- --- --- --- ------ -- - -- -- - --- ------- - - - - -------- - - -- .-. - - - -____T __T -.7" . . .r .... __T....,. • ---- --- --- A NEWS BULLETIN FROM LOGAN CANYON COALITION Vol. 1 No.1 March 1, 1995 LCC IS FORMED If the Utah Depart"Until UDOT has lived up to the ment of Transportati on has its way, the na tural law of the land and provided beauty of Logan Canyon truthful analysis and documentaas we know it may soon be just a picture on a tion, we (LCC) will be persistent postcard. Instead of a in our demands for justice," serene mountain byway, - Kevin Kobe, LCC President U.S. Highway 89 will be a high-speed traffic corri dor Hned by scarred hill - spectacular scenery. and along the Dugway to We believe that the sides, reta ining walls, stem erosion problems. and c1earzones. UOOT recent compromise made • Vague wording about would like to begin work beh¥een Citizens for the how c1earzones will be as early as this summer. Protection of Logan treated , with c1earzone Canyon and UOOT is That's why we have a reas compri sing up to unacceptab le. It is merely 22 feet on either side of formed the Logan Canyon Coa lition. LCC is a slightly watered down the road, and the removal of "su bstantial version of the Preferred mad e up of "old timers" Alternative. haza rds" within the midwho have been involved The extent of the con- dle canyon. with the Logan Canyon/ UDOT issue almost from struction planned will • Revegetation of mature the beginning, as well as still necessitate 15-20 trees and shrubs that newcomers who advoyears of work, and will "could require 30 to 50 completely change the years or might never ca te a common sense ambiance of the canyon. occur aga in." approach to road Some of our priority • A potentially devastatimprovement-one that ing impact on cutthroat combines safety, efficien- concerns are: and brown trout popula . Eight curve cuts cy and environmental planned for the middle tions due to extensive sensitivity. LCC is dediriprap nea r the bridges, canyon, along with cated to keeping Logan retaining walls in some River a wild, free flowing UOOT's suggestion that locations, and permanent use of cement retaining river, preserving wildlife walls would be appropri- problems with sedimenhabitat, and protecting tation near ate in the middle canyon Logan Canyon's steep curve cuts. -Two-hundred year-old Douglas Fir at the summit replaced by a mini mum of 47 feet of pave. ment, a nd realignment that will necessitate filling a small side canyon with debris. • Extensive widening, with half of the middle canyon widened from 26 feet to 34 feet, and the remaining 24 miles widened to 40-47 feet to accomodate higher design speeds. • No specifics as far as mitigation plans, with a vague promise to use UOOT's "best management practices." LCC has pledged its resources towards pursuring every available legal op tion. If we pursue litigation, we will need your support. Volunteers are needed . Money will also be needed-litigati on is very costl y. Please plan on donating generously! This is our last opportunity for action. �LCC Prepares for Forest Appeal In its effort to per- suade UDOT to take another look at the Conservationist's Altema tive, the Logan Canyon Coalition is working hard in preparation for the Forest Appeal. After the recent approval of the Record of Decision (ROD) by both UOOT and the Federal Highway Administration, the last phase of the process currently rests with the Forest Service. This agency's approval is widely expected, followed by a 45-day comment period for public input. Lee plans to exercise its legal right by appea ling the Forest Service's decision. The Forest Service is required by the Wasatch-Cache Forest Plan to retain the aesthetic and environmental qualities of the canyon. The Plan will need to be revised due to excessive impacts which would result from the Preferred Alternative. A Forest Plan revision will require public input as manda ted by the NEPA process. Lee Logan Canyon Coalition plans to exercise its legal right by appealing the Forest Service's decision. will base its appea l on the expected Forest Service decision and key concerns not adequately addressed by the FEIS. as federally threatened or endangered species. Neither the Forest Service nor UDOT have s urveyed to identify the presence or absence of these species. These points include the following: 1) UOOT has never clearly demonstrated the purpose and need for the project, as required by NEPA. 4) UOOT's analysis of the safety data is admittedly flawed . 5) UOOT has more flexibility in AASHTO highway design recommendations than it acknowledges. 2) The Logan River is among the top 5% of all stream fisheries in the state, yet the FEIS seriously underestimates the impact to fisheries. 6) The canyon is the number one tourist attraction in the Bridgerland area, yet the FEIS fails to address long-term negative economic impacts resulting from 20 years of construction and loss of scenic values. 3) There are several species which may occur in the canyon. These species are either listed as sensitive by the Forest Service or are candi dates for classification 2 1) The Forest Service plan mandates retention of the canyon's visual and aesthetic qualities. Under the Preferred Alternative this mandate would be violated. These and other concerns represent a legitimate foundation on which to base our appeal. If you have any additional concerns which warrant consideration, please contact Lee ASAP. Thank you. �=-= = ------- _ _ _ _ '=-"'I'" - :-- Economic Benefits or Disaster? Utah's wide geographical diversity and expansive open spaces have filled a void in a time when many of o ur wild places are rap idly falling prey to u rban and economic sprawl. This is resulting in a boom in tourism. Tourism revenues for Cache and Rich Cou nties alone amounted to well over $64 million in 1993. This success can be pa rtly attributed to p romotional efforts by the Cache Chamber of Commerce, which recognizes Logan Canyon as the number one attraction in Bridgerland. The Chamber's 1994 Cache Valley Utah publica tio n mentions Logan Canyon no less than 20 times in the firs t nine pages. In addition, the Bridgerland Travel Region recently received a $436,000 federal grant to promote Logan Canyon and educate visitors about its characteristics. Clearly the canyon has a wide base of support and aCknowledgement in terms of value to the region. "We look at it as a real asset to the community," says Marty Spicer, real estate broker fo r Coldwell Banker. But will the canyon lose its d raw as it undergoes 15 to 20 years of construction, destructio n, and transformation of its natural character? How many moto rists will p refer the Idaho route to Yellowstone versus waiting in d usty traffic for heavy equipment to pass? Will pe0ple still want to d rive to Garden City to view Bear Lake and enjoy a raspberry shake? Mo re importantly, will the increase in con- gestion and traffic speeds after completion of construction have a d etri mental effect on the canyon's appeal? The stark reality may be yes! But still the FEIS provides no assessment of negative economic impacts resulting fro m the highway project. We need more proof, not vagueness and ambig ui- Volunteers Needed 1- Research for Forest Service Appeal 2- Networking 3- Fundraising 4- Education 5- Mailings 6- Letter writing 7- Events 8- Media relations 9- Passing the word 10- Lega l assistance 11- SLC contacts 12- HELP! ty. These are all legitimate concerns which need to be add ressed without prej udice and assumptions. Wha t may look like a road to economic boom may become a path to economic disaster. Equipment Needed 1- Offi ce space 2- Voice mail 3- FAX machine 4- Copier 5- Postage stamps 6- Copy paper 1- Envelopes 8- MONEY' r------------------------, YES! I THE WANT TO JOIN LOGAN CANYON COALITION and receive a subSCription to CANYON WIND $20.00 Annual Membership I would like to contribute an additional $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 Lots more I would like to volunteer. I'm broke! Here's five bucks. Name ______________________________ Street ______________________________ City _ _ _ _ State _ _ _ Zip_ _ Phone * _____________ _ Plnse make check payable and mail to: Logan Canyon Coalition USU Box 1674 L ________ ________ .J �,..----------,, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . -.. -=...... . ...... ., ..... _ . . . __ Iii. _ _ .... Iii. iiaiii . . . . . . _iii -------- c: «» .&. L :J: 'T :J: «» :N' , , , , L __________ ..I Wor k l n . f o r th . Pr o te " ti .n of Lo. a " C . " yo " USU Boxll1674 Logan, Utah 84322-0199 '=' Recycled Recycle �...-- ----.-.-- iiiii_iii_ iiiiiiiiiia. .,. __,. _.T____,. ....r ... __,...... .---- -- - - - --- -- - -- ---- -- - - --- -- - - --- -- -- - --- - - - - ---- - - ----- - ----- - - - -- -- --- -- - -- - -- -- - --- - - - -- ---A NEWS B ULLET I N FROM LO G AN CANYON COALITION Vol. 1 No.2 A ugust 1, 1995 USFS Abandons Logan Canyon LCC Appeal Denied The Loga n Canyon Coal itio n (LeC) recent ly appealed the Forest Service's decision to allow the Uta h Department of Transporta tion (UDOT) to construct its "modified" Prefer red "This unfortunat e decision by the Forest Seroice has left us with only one alternative . .. litigation" - Tom Lyotl , LCC A lternative in Logan Canyon. We were joined in our appeal by the Utah Rivers Co nservation Co uncil. OUT ex tensive ap pea l was 187 pages long, and cove red a ll aspects of UOOT's proposal. V\e arg ued that UDOT has not demonstrated the purpose and need fo r its construction p roject, and that they have not ade- quately disclosed the environmenta l impacts of their project. In June the Forest Service denied o ur ap peal. Comments agai nst our appeal, and in favor of UOOT's project, were submitted to the Forest Service by UDOT, the Cache Chamber o f Co mmerce, a nd Citizens for the Protection of Loga n Canyon. The letter from the chamber emphasized the value of Logan Canyon as a major trucking ro ute. It is remarkab le that, given the many poin ts we raise in ou r appeal, the Fo rest Service up held none of them. Their review of our appea l is brief and superficia l, with inad equate respo nses to critical issues. Without due consid eration, the Forest Service has ru bber-stamped implementaton of an unnecessa ri ly ex pensive and destruc tive h ighway p roject. The Forest Service is in fact responsi ble fo r ensuring tha t p urpose and need fo r construction have been demonstra ted. They are also responsib le fo r ens uring that enviro nmenta l impacts have been adequately assessed, incl uding d amge to scenery, fis heries, wildli fe, wet1 nds, and the potentia 1 a Wi ld a nd Scenic status of the river. This responsibility is cl ea rly stated in the Wasatch-Cache Forest Plan and in federal law. In shirking its responsibility for Logan Canyon, the Forest Service is v iolating its mand ate and acting iIIega ll): LCC is cu rrently ga thering fund s for our lega l d efense of Logan Canyon. All co ntributio ns are welco me a nd w ill be used for legal costs. All who are interested in helping in ou r effort to save Loga n Can yon are invited to contact us. A pp eal H igh lig h ts LCe's appen l is avni/able in the Lognn City Library nnd USU's Merrill Library. (1) UDOT's highway sa fety analysis utilizes arti ficially infla ted and manipulated traffi c volumes, inconsistent with UOOT's own traffic (continued nexl " age) �Appeal ("", Unu"') counts, in an attempt to make the previously widened portion of the road, the Lower Canyon, appear safer than the unwidened sections. UDOT's proposed construction will in fact make the highway less safe. (2) The difference in average travel time between UOOT's Preferred Alternative and the Conservationists' Alternative is, by UDOT's admi ssio n, less than 10 minutes! We question the much grea ter cost and enviro nmental impact of the Preferred Alternative given such a minimal difference in travel time. (3) In its highway design for the Upper Canyon, UDOT is not taking advantage of the fl exibility in road design allowed by AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials). Throughout the canyon, UDOT has designed the highway in an arbitrary and capricious fashi on, with little environmental sensitivity. (4) The Forest Service has agreed that the segment of the Logan River from Lower Twin Bridge to Beaver Creek might possess mo re "outstandingly remarkable values" than any other river in the Wasatch-Ca che Forest. The Forest Service has agreed that this segment should be reevaluated. for protected Wild and Scenic River status. We are concerned that construction of UOOr's Preferred Alternative will degrade this river segment enough that its classification will be lowered. It may no longer qualify for Wild and Scenic status. (5) There is no scientific justification whatsoever for UOOT's claims that trout pop ulations in Logan River will be reduced only 4 to 8%, and that the effects of increased sedimentation in the river will be "relatively minor and short term." UDOT's claims represen t uneducated "guesstimates" of fi sheries impacts because of the lack of adequate data . (6) The WasatchCache Forest Plan mandates that negative economic impacts of highway construction be eva luated. This has not been done. (7) The Forest Servi ce's assessments of impacts to sensi tive species often rest on inadequate surveys and bald assertions that are either patently false or in need of substantiation. (8) Vi sual quality in Logan Canyon will be impaired in a manner inconsistent with guid elines contained in the Fo rest Service's Logan Canyo n Scenic Byway Corrido r Management Plan. USFS management policy for Logan Canyon is inconsistent from document to document. (9) In its selectio n of specially-protected 4(f) properties, pursuant to the Department of Transportation Act, the Forest Service has acted in an arbitrary and capricious fashion. No rationale is provided for why some sites were selected while others of equal recreational value were not. We Request: Logan Canyon Coalition is not trying to stop all construction in Logan Canyon. (1) There must be honest and straightforward NEPA d ocumentation of the need for, and the environmental and economic impacts of, any proposed highway constructio n. UooT has not provided this. UDOT has in fact admitted that their safety data is "garbage" and that it "may be problematic." (2) The construction proposal should be scaled down so as to proteet the sensitive areas of the canyon and river, particularly throug h the upper Midd le Canyon, Beaver Creek, and the summit. (3) UDOT has never fairly eva luated the Conservationist's Alternative. This Alternative should be honestly and straightforwardly reconsidered . 2 The Conservationists' Alternative is far less expensive and environmentally destructive, while improving safety and level of service of the highway. (4) The Forest Service must reevaluate the eligible segment of the Logan River, from Lower Twin Bridge to Beaver Creek, for protected Wild and Scenic River status, befo re constructio n is allowed. Thi s request is in compliance with 5(d) planning requirements of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act . �August ] , ]995 Lee Fundraiser a Success By Kevin Kobe The Logan Can yon Coali tion would like to thank all those who were involved with our fund rai ser weekend with Rick Bass and Terry Tempest William s. \Ilk would specificall y like to thank The Grapevine Restaurant, Slanting Rain Graphic Design, A Book Store, the Utah Rivers Conservation Council and Director Zacha ry Frankel, Scott Smith Photography, mu sicians Nadene Steinhoff, Chris Carlson and Joe Farmer, and of course, nationally renown authors Rick Bass and Terry Tempest Williams. Rick was kind enough to travel from northern Montana. O ur thanks also goes to the many vo lunteers who spent countless hours working to make the weekend a success, espe- dally Don Hickman and Dan Miller. For those who couldn't make the weekend events, which were May 11-14, here is a rundown. Rick Bass spoke in Salt Lake City at the University of Utah Fine Arts Auditorium sponsored by the Utah Rivers Conservation Council. Rick spoke about the signifi cance of Logan Canyon and the absurdity of the current UOOT highway proposal. Following Rick, the audience clapped and sang to the music of Nadene Steinhoff, Chris Carlson and Joe Farmer. Despi te the rain and unseasonably cool weather, Rick Bass and Tom Lyon jo ined some LCC board members o n a field trip up Logan Canyon on Saturday where film makers were doing a documentary on the canyon. This documentary will be shown on the local cable channel. Rick also managed to squeeze in time to speak with local high school students and to do a radiO interview. But the night everyone was wa iting for was Sa turday night, May 13, when over 300 people packed the Eccles Conference Center. Longtime canyon advocate Tom Lyon emceed the event with inspiring introductions and words of wisdom. Rick Bass was humorous but eloquent as he talked about his years in Logan. Two Logan Canyon so ngs from Nadene Steinhoff and friends hit home, especially "U.S. 89 Blues" in which the crowd erupted with hand clapping, si ngi ng and shouting. Terry Tempest Williams brought the evening full circle with words to motivate people into action. She recognized Tom Lyon for hi s efforts, which range from teaching to advocating. She recalled conversations with environme nta l activists that continue to provide inspiration for her work. The night ended with a raffle, great homemade cooki es and refreshments, book signings, and a T-shirt and book sale. Sunday morning the Grapevine Restaurant lived up to its reputation for excellence at ou r fund raiser brunch. Chef Bill Oblock o utdid himself at the sold -out event, and LCC vol unteers worked hand in hand with the gracious staff of the restaurant to make the brunch successful. It was a "stay as long as you want" kind of morning . . 130 Nonh 100 East Logan UT 84321 753-9089 100% for Logan Canyon �The History of a Highway Editors note: This information was compiled by Nadene Steinhoff and Steve Flint. ---1959--- Chamber of Commerce. The State Department of Fish and Game launched a formal protest against the plan. Their protest was later modified. ject. The Forest Service insisted on additional modifications. UOOT abandoned the project for the time being, hoping the Chamber of Commerce and construction interests would continue the fight for public support. 1960--- The Utah Department Bulldozers began of Transportation work. The first section (UDOT) completed called for widening of "improvement" plans for the road, passing lanes the first section of the 39- and stream channelizamile highway from tion. Construction was Logan to Bear Lake. completed up to the Engineering standards of Malibu Campground. the time dictated that the 1961 route be as straight and Plans to reconstruct direct as possible. It was the section from Malibu also felt that it was too Campground to Right expensive to avoid the Hand Fork were Logan River. At that released. After seeing time, most highway the destruction in the departments didn't feel first phase, the public justified spending public was much more responmoney to protect aesthet- sive, writing a barrage of ic values or environmen- letters to the editor and tal resources. to UDOT. During the first The Forest Service phase, Logan residents and the Utah State were silent. Public hear- University (USU) College ings were poorly attendof Natural Resources ed" except by supporters issued position stateof the project such as the ments opposing the pro- calling for extensive straightening and eightfoot shoulders. An article in National Parks magazine condemned previous construction in the canyon and the new design proposal. 1970 - - - - - - - 1963 - - - - Twelve USU professors formed the zine advocated protecNorthern Utah tion of the canyon in an Environmental Advisory Committee. The group, article. ---1968--led by fisheries biologist UOOT decided to William Helm, was conaccept the Forest Service cerned about additional requirements, and came impacts. At their suggesback to finish the first tion, UOOT incorporated phase, but when the bull- an Environmental dozers moved in it Steering Committee, looked like the same "cut gave scenic consideraand fill" job. The intitions higher priority, and brought a landscape mate, gently winding road under arching trees . architect onto the project. became a fast, wide UOOT still lacked asphalt highway. permission from the 1969--Forest Service, but A public hearing was attempted to rush the held for road reconstruc- project through before they lost available fundtion from Right Hand ing. Fork to Ricks Spring, National Parks maga- Adventure 1 Sports 4 �August 1, 1995 Their assertions that the project was necessary for hig hway effici ency and safety were refu ted by the USU co mmittee, which claimed that the safety data was inadequate. - - - 1971 - - - The USU co mmittee succeeded in d elayi ng the project, ci ting the need for more information on traffic, tourism and fisheri es. There was discussion of the need fo r an Environme ntal Impact Statement (EIS) under the new Na tional Environmental Pol icy Act (NEPAl. UDOT presented a second proposal. This was also co nsid ered u nacceptable by the USU g roup. The plan called for extensive cu rve cutti ng through the middle canyon, elimination o f picnic and campground areas, and retaining walls al ong large sections of the river. The Forest Service 1987 The Interdisciplinary Team was dis solved by UDOT officials, who were uncomfortable with public input. issued an Enviro nmental Analysis Report on the project, outlining 20 requirements UDOT must comply with . In the face of strong public o ppositi on a nd new Forest Service req uirements, UDOT scrapped their plans. They shifted thei r focu s, and funds to Provo Canyon. - - - 1974 - - - UDOT set up a trai ler in Logan Canyon and Ga rden City to distribute informatio n about their eventual plans. 1976 - - - UOOT issued a Route Analysis Statement, indicating a need for reconstructio n. It included eight different alternatives. UDOT's recom- mended action included shoulders a nd passing lanes in the middle canyon, and correctio n of "substand ard" curves. Sharp publiC criticism was directed at UDOT, wi th Bridgerland Audubo n Society, Ci tizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon (CPLC), and the Cache Sierra Club questioning UOOT's stati stical analysis. UDOT pushed ahead. Analysi s was begun for an (E IS). - - - 1979 - -- UOOT presented their latest proposal for reconstruction of the road from Right Hand Fork to Ricks Spring. They claimed that the massive p roject would require minimal enviro n- mental ana lysis, saying that a less d etailed Environmental Analysis would be sufficient, rather than an EIS. CPLC, a group that had begun in opposition to development plans in Stump Hollow, revived to fight the road d evelopment. Gunn McKay, Rep . for Utah's Di strict 1, went to bat for preservation of the ca nyon. Tom Lyon and Dianne Siegfreid visited w ith regional Federal Highway Admini stration (FHWA) offi cials in Denver to press the argument that the project required more ex tensive analysis. The FHWA agreed and informed UDOT that it must prepare an EIS in accordance with new NEPA requirements. UDOT was not financially prepa red to take on a full-b lown environmental analYSiS, and retrea ted . Between 1980 (continued nat page) �History (,on lin,"') and 1986, UDOT made periodic visits to Logan offering modifi cations, but community activists still believed the plans were too excessive. - - - 1986 - - - Funding for an EIS was authorized . CH2M Hill was hired to do the analysis. An Interdiscip lina ry (10) Team began meeting. Env ironmental interests were re presented by Steve Fl int, Bill Helm, Rudy Lukez, Tom Lyon and Jack Spence. - - - 1981 - - - before UDOT dissolved the group. Action Force. - - - 1990 - - - Steve, Bruce and Shawn Swaner began meeting.. again, with UDOT to forge a compromise and avert lega l action. Steve and Bruce felt the need to move on. A new steering committee was appointed fo r CPLC. The new steeri ng committee held additional meetings with UODT. Audubon magazine gave coverage to the controversy in a feature article by nationall y re nown autho r Rick Bass. - - - 1994 - - - UOOT issued their Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). Letters in the OEIS ran 21 in favor of the Modified Standard, similar to the Preferred Alternative, as opposed to 309 in favo r of the Conservationists' Alternative. - - - 1991 - - - Steve a nd Bruce continued to amass technical experti se on the project. They hired enviro nm ental lawyer Jeff Appel. Jeff's co rrespondence with UDOT bro ught a more conciliatory stance. Negotiations began. A public relations effort was begun, with ten thousand brochures sent by local activists. - - - 1995 - - - UOOT released its Reco rd of Decision (ROD) favo ri ng the "mod ified" Preferred Alternative. CPLC and UOOT declared the ROD a compromise. A new highway design advisory team was formed, with CPLC rep resentation . Logan Canyon Scoping meetings held by UOOT drew 400 citizens, with many attendees leaving due to lack of room. Project planners received 200 let- - - 1992 - ters from an aroused Nadene Steinhoff and public. The 10 Team was dis- other volu nteers organized a Hands Across solved by UOOT offiThe Canyon rally. The cials, who were uncomevent, attended by over fo rtable with public 400 people, was covered input. by regional and state Area citizens submitmedia. ted the Conservatio nists' The following week, Alternative, a proposa l calling for wider bridges, UOOT approached Bridgerland Audubon reconstruction of cu lwith a proposal for verts, three passi ng lanes renewed negotiations. in the Upper Canyon, 1993 paved parking areas, UDOT released their road rea lignment at the Lower Twin Bridge, slow Final Enviro nme ntal Impact Statement (FEIS). vehicle turnouts, raised Hundreds of letters were road beds in nood areas, sent protesting the excesimproved intersectio ns sive plans. Petitions and increased signage. were sent by the - - - 1989 Audubon Society, Steve Flint and Bruce Business People for the Pendery were appointed Canyon, CPLC, the to a Citizen's Advi so ry Cache Sierra Club, and Team formed by UDOT. the Loga n Environmental Two meetings were held 6 Coalition (LCC), spearheaded by Kevin Kobe, was formed to seek further modifications through the Forest Service appeal process. The Forest Service released their ROD supporting UOOT. LCC and the Utah Rivers Conserva tion Council submitted a 187page appeal to the Forest Service. The appea 1 was researched and authored by a dozen people, and edited by Gordo n Steinhoff. Requested relief included adequate NEPA documentation, and further protection for the Middle Canyon, Beaver Creek and the s ummit. The Forest Service denied LCe's appea l, refUSing to add ress critical issues. Logan Canyon Coalition is curren tly making plans to take legal action. �Au g u s t 1 , 199 5 Westwater Canyon Run the Rapids with LCC It's true Logan Canyon CoaJition membershi p can be fun. We don' t believe in all work and no play. Frida y, August 18 th rough Sunday, Aug ust 20, we will r un the Westwater section of the Colorado River, locatednorth of Moab. O Uf fea rless Lee leader /p resident, Kevin Kobe, has said that Westwater has "some of the best w hite water in the state." Kevi n and his sister Bri dget are organizing the trip. Kevin feels that Lee shou ld be more than a group that works together, but can be a grou p that "has a fee li ng of commun ity and fri ends hi p." A WORLD Or: A RT A tJD Lee plans to fl oat willing to make the drive, please let us know when you register. On receipt of your registration fee, a confirmation will be sent which will incl ud e the date, time and location of the pretrip meeting. All participants will be asked to help in meal and camp preparation, and, of course, everyone needs to know how to swim! Westwater early Saturday morning, set up camp', and hike and exp lo re the side canyons around the campsite. Sunday the rapids should be rambunctio us. The cost is $30 for LCC members and $50 for non-members (making thi s a perfect time to join!). The trip will be limited to 20 individuals, and oars are being fill ed rapidly. The cost includes food o n the river, the permit and g roup equipment. It does not include transportation, food for the trip to and fro m the river or personal gear. Ca r pooling w ill be arranged during a planning meeting. If you are Registration: Please send you r registration money to Logan Canyo n Coa lition, USU Box #1674, Loga n, UT 84322-0199. ComcTlo tJ IUIAl: vcents 7SS·S497 11·6 7 Volunteers Needed 1- Networking 2- Fundraising 3- Education 4- Mailings 5- Letter writing 6- Events 7- Media relations 8- Passing the word 9- SLC contacts 10- HELP! Equipment Needed 1- Offi ce space 2- Voice mail 3- FAX machine 4- Copier 5- Postage stamps 6- MONEY! �r------------------------, YES! I THE WANT TO JOIN LOGAN CANYON COALITION and receive a subscription to CANYON WIND o $20.00 Annual Membership o I would like to contribute an additional $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 Lots more o I would like to voulnteer. o Here's $12.00 for a great T-Shirt. o I'm broke! Here's five bucks. Name,__________________________________ 5Ireel_______________________________ City _ _ __ _ _ _Zip _ _ __ Phone#'_ _ _ __ PlUM make check payable and mail to: Logan Canyon Coalition U5U Box *1674 L ________________________ J Logan, UT 84322-0199 LCC T-SHIRTS - 512.00 (three colod m.. Re;rcled BULK RATE u.s. POSTJlGe Paid COA.LJl:TJl:ON Workl", fo r Ih' of Lo,a" Ca n yo n USU Box #1674 Logan, Utah 84322-0199 """'" UT I'tnrril N'JJJ �- -- -- -- --- --------.- --- ----- -- - ------ - --- --- ----- - - - - - -- - -- ---- - --- - --.-. - - - - - - - .,. --.aT __ -.-.w--.aT • -- ----- ---------- --- ------- ___ ..- -.----.aT ____ - - -- - - ---- A NEWS BULLETIN FROM LOGAN CANYON COALITION August 1, 1996 Vol. 1 No.3 FEI S Violated UDOT Unveils Plans The Utah Depa rtment of Transportation (UOOT) has u nveiled its d esign plans for Bu rnt and Lower Twin Bridges in Logan Canyon. With these plans, UOOT is already in v iolation of its Final Envirorunental Impact Statement (PElS) and its Record of Decision. UOOT is now planning extensive w idening, cuts into the mountainsides, and retaining wa lls that were not disclosed in these environmenta l documents. The brid ges and app roaches to the bridges have not been d esigned in an environmentally-sensitive fashion. A strong response has been sent to UOOT by our attorney, Kate Zimmerman. UOOT is now applying for the construction permits it needs from the state Division of Water Rights and the Corps of Engineers. The Logan Canyon Coalitio n (LCq will submit comments to these agencies and to the Design changes at this late date, after opportunities for public input have closed, is a v iolation of the letter and the spirit of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) - Lee Altornty, Kau ZinrmernuHI Environmental Protection Agency. We are asking for a less d amaging construction proposal, one that allows for needed highway improvemen ts w hile p rotecting the canyon's scenic and environmenta l resou rces. We continue to raise funds for the lega l action we believe is inevitable. The Record of Decision sta tes that "design and posted speeds wiJI be 35 miles per hour" in the upper middle canyon (from Lower Twin Bridge to above Ricks Spring). Yet, at the bridge d esign workshop in February, Rod Terry, UDOT project manager, ind ica ted tha t the brid ges and approaches in this area have been designed for 40 miles per ho ur. Apparent ly, driv ing time throug h the canyon has been a major factor in the perceived need to reconstruct the high way, even thoug h estima ted savings in travel time are quite minimal. "Changing design speeds at this late date, after opportunities fo r p ublic input have closed, is a v iolation o f both the letter and spiri t of the National Environmenta l Policy Act," Zimmerman said. Des ig n plans show Burnt Bridge being w idened on the downstrea m side. Cuts into the mo unta inside up to 750 feet long are now planned both upstream and downstream from the bridge. Two retaining walls of 200 fee t long wiJI be anchored in riparian areas near the bridge. Three more retaining walls, one up to 400 feet long, are planned fo r the mountainside below the bridge. These cuts and retaining walls are for the sake of widening the highway on either side of the bridge fro m 26 feet to 34 feet. These d esign features and their impacts on the scenery and adjacent fishery were not disclosed in the FEIS. In that document, UDOT assured us that the highway in this part of the canyon would not be w idened . Visual impacts w iJI be significant. Burnt Bridge is s urrounded by riparian vegetation and u pland plant communities that have received a visual sensitivity ranking (contilwed /lext page) �Violates ("";.,,,,) of 6 and 7 by the Forest Service, indicating that the roadside in this a rea cannot absorb alte rations and still appear as na tur- allandscape. The affected maple-shrub community on the cut hillsides will take 10-15 years to re-establish, while a ffected juniper and Doug las fir communi ties will take more than 20 years to reestablish. Some wetlands and riparian vegeta tion will be permanently lost. UOOT has pledged to color and texture the extensive retaining walls, but retaining walls will still look like retaining walls, appearing unnatural. Exposed rock faces will still look like exposed rock faces, damaging the scenic beauty of this area. Lee believes these impacts are unnecessary. The bridge could be tapered into the existing highway in a shorter distance, eliminating the need for much of the wid ening and the accompanying cuts and retaining waUs. At Lower Twin Brid ge, mountainsides will be cut up to 600 fee t on either side of the bridge in order to widen the highway from 26 feet to 38 feet. A retaining wall of 200 feet long is planned above the bridge. This retaining wall and cuts above the bridge were no t disclosed in the FEIS. UOOT has yet to show a purpose and need for allY high way widening in this middle section of Logan Canyon. They have adm itted that their an accurate d escription of planned construction and a better idea of its impacts. Surely at this stage of the FEIS, UOOT cou ld have surveyed the relevant features of the can yon, such as the location of wetlands, and applied appropriate design standard s in to provide an accurate description of construction and assessment of impacts. Preliminary plans for Upper Twin Brid ge show a cut into the mountainside of approximately 15 to 24 feet deep and 760 feet long. This cu t and its impacts were not disclosed in the FEIS. We believe that with a fair assessment of the environmental impacts of the elltire highway project, considered as a w hole, a less damaging construction alternative would be more a ttractive. Such an integrated assessment should be given in a Supplemental Environmentallmpact Statement for the entire canyon highway project. There shouJd also be an honest demonstration of the purpose and need for any construction in Logan Canyon. " LCC has g rave concerns about both the need for UOOT's proposal and its impacts on the special values of the canyon. These concerns are only made worse by UOOT's violations of its FE IS and its failure to g ive the public full opportunity to participate in this decision and to comment on potential environmenta l consequences," Zimmennan stated. traffic and safety d ata is "garbage" and "problematic." lmmediately downstream of this bridge is crucial brown trout spawning habitat. LCC is concerned w ith the impact construction and the resulting erosion will have on this fishery. The Logan River fishery is currently ranked in the top 5% of stream fisheries in the sta te. UOOT has not supplied adequate information on sedimentation or on trout mortality. At both bridges, there will be increased erosion into the rive r during and after construction until ground cover can be re-established. Increased sediments can smother trout eggs, clog gills, and kill the aquatic insects upon w hich trout feed . UOOT admits, "Additional loss of fish habitat could potentially occur from riverbank disturbances and introduction of sediments into the Logan River as a result of heavy machinery and activities associated with bridge construction." LCC has suggested replacing Lower Twin Brid ge wi th a wider and sa fer bridge on a new alignment, while maintaining current highway wid th . This would eliminate much cutting into the mo untainsides and protect this va luab le fish ery. UOOT has refused. We are concerned with UOOT's method of segmenting its Logan Can yon Highway proposa l into smaller projects in w hich, well after the FE IS and Record of Decision, we fin al1y get 2 �1 , 19 96 Allglls t Logan River, Wild and Scenic by Drew Parkin The recent appeal of the Forest Service decision to allow highway expansion in Logan Canyon quesHoned, among other things, the resuJ ts of a Forest Service study regarding wild and scenic rivers. For many of you, the idea of a wild and scenic river evokes images of the Sa lmon River in Idaho or the Rogue River in Oregon . What d oes this have to do with the Logan River? A lot. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act requires federal land management agendes to include w ild and scenic river evaluations as part of their normal decision-making processes. In the case of the Forest Service, this means that forest plans must specifically consider wild and scenic river eligibil ity. It also means that any Environmental Impact Statement that involves river resource must address this issue. Further - and this is the important part - once the Forest Service identifies a river as being eligible, it must, in adherence wi th its own ad ministrative directives, manage the river "in a manner consisten t with the purposes of the Act, and such that the outstand ing remarkable values which make it eHgible for inclusion are not dim inished to the poin t where eligibility is negated. In no event should the free-flowing characteristics of the river be modified." In response to a threatened lawsuit, the Forest Service some 10 years ago set out to identify potentially eligible wild and scenic rivers. Individual forests were entrusted with this and many responded admirably. Unfortunately, wild and scenic evaluations have never been high on the list for forest managers in Utah . That is, not until the controversy over the proposal to widen the roadway through Logan Canyon. Pressu red by citizens concerned about the highway proposal, the Wasa tch-Cache National Forest undertook a yearlong river study and, in November 1993, released its inventory. The inventory started by identifying 37 streams that forest planners deemed wor thy of being s tudied. Nex t, the larger s treams on that list, including the Logan River, were subdivided into "segments." In all, the Forest Service study considered 59 stream segments. Of these, 18 segments were rejected out-of-hand as being insignificant. Beaver Creek was one of these. An ad d itional 11 segments were rejected for not being free-flowing. These included s treams tha t had been s ubjected to water w ithdrawals, channeHzation or other degradation . All of the Logan downs tream of Temple Fork was rejected for this reason. This left 30 segments that were actually included in the study. The inventory considered nine separate resource fea tures. The idea was to determine the significance of each stream with regard to each resource feature. A stream could be ra ted as ei ther (1) typical, (2) Significant a t a statewide level, or (3) significant at what the Forest Service termed a "provincial" level (an area comprising all of the Rocky Mountains). A rating of 3 for any given resource feature would q ualify a stream segmen t for wild and scenic river (conthwed next page) DID YOU KNOW? A b ridge o r a city street must h ave 12 lanes to accommod ate 40,000 automobiles per hour. 1 lane is necessary to 40,000 bicycles per hou r. To elimin ate the need for Midd le East oil, U.S. commuters w ould need to b icycle to w ork only 1.25 times each week. Equating calories to gasoline, the number of miles per gallon that could be tra veled b y the ave rage cyclist is 3,000. ook 130 Nort h 100 EaSI Logan UT 8432 I 753-9089 PL EASE RI DE YOUR B I KE. SU NR:ISE C VC LE R:V 138 NORTH 100 EAST LOGAN, UTAH 84321 801 -753-3294 M ONOAY - SATURDAY 10:00 A.M. - 6:00 100% fo r L ogan Canyo n P.M. 3 �Wild (COlltinlled) designation. The result? Of the original 59 s tream segments, only one - the Stillwater Fork of the Bear River - was found eligible based on the rating for its scenic features. No other stream received a 3, and all were therefore rejected, including the Logan River. I was stunned when I heard the findings. Based on severa l years of professional experience with wild,and scenic rivers, and having detailed knowledge of the Logan River, it was my judgment that the Logan River not only met but exceeded eligibility requirements. After pouring over the report, I concluded that the study team's basic assumptions were wrong and applying these assumptions greatly skewed the findin gs. The decision to use "p rovi ncial" significance as the cu t-off for eligibility was the most pervasive error. The Forest Serv ice Manual itself d irects that "statewide" significance is an appropriate measure for judging wild and scenic status. Several national forests have used it as the basis of their decisions, and it is accepted practice for National Park Service and BLM planners as well. Had the WasatchCache used "statewide" significance as the threshold, the Logan River would have been included easily. If anything, I believe the ratings for the Logan River are low. I question the ratin gs for wildlife, water recreation and, especially, scenery. Even if the Forest Service ratings are correct, it is obvious the Logan River is an extremely important resource with "statewide" significance. [n five of the nine categories, the river received a s tatewide Significance rating. No other stream had more than two. The Logan River was rated as the most significant stream in the Wasatch-Cache National Forest for five of the nine resource categories. Again, no other stream could claim more than two. The conclusion is inescapable. The Forest Service report absolutely confirms that, when compared to other streams on the forest, the Logan River is the crown jewel and is most certainly eligible for national wild and scenic river status. (Drew Parkin is a river policy conslilfant in Cambridge, Mass., alld serves Off the board of dirf"Ctors of till" Pacific RivtrS COlllleil. HI" prf"Violls/y mallaged wild and scenic riuer programs for tire Na tiollal Park Service. He is a Ilative of Utah and Sptllt severa/ seaSOIIS workillgJor tire Forest Service ill Logan Canyon.) USFS data on the Logan River between Temple Fork and White Pine Creek. Logan River rating St.ltewide s ignifiu nce Highest rating in forut Typical reso urces Wildlife Rating compared to other Wasatch..cache streams Rated in top 5 Rated in top 5 Geology/Hydrology Statewide significance Highest rating in forest Rated in to p 10 Scenery Water Typical Highest rating in forest Statewide significance Rated in top 10 Fisheries Statewide Significance Tied for highest rating in forest Ecology St.ltewide sig nifican ce Tied for high est rating in forest This information was taken directly from tile report. Adventure, Sports _. . W l ft ....... tho -_ """".ft,..r.._' ...... in4<.o"" h . .... - ......, • _ _ ;u.. "';. •• ... ....'-ft.. " ... ... •. . . ...... 1".4 t • 4 �- -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - ---- -- ---------- - ------- ------ww Augllst 1, 1996 Canyon News Briefs by Tim Wagner Utah citizens lost a serious battle recently when U.s. District Judge Tena Campbell ruled in favor of the Utah Deparhnent of Transportation's (UDOT) plans for further widening of U.s. 189 through Provo Canyon. The Provo River Coalition filed suit February 29 seeking a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction to prevent further environmental destruction. Because UDOT had made significant design changes since the origina l plans were drafted in 1989, the group argued that NEPA required a supplemental environmental impact statement. Judge CampbeiJ saw things differently. "Plaintiffs have so far failed to come forward with any evidence for significant environmental effects arising out of the project as currently planned," Campbell wrote. The judge said an agency is not required to supplement an environmental-impact statement every time new information is found. At the same time she acknowledged the design changes included a new road alignment, additional concrete retaining waiJs, and the creation of a dirt haul road. Inside sources say that Campbell's concern for the environment was a cover-up for more important matters: the economy and jobs. With a $34 million price tag for two miles of highway, is it any wonder? A bit of irony is that UDOT's plans for the next phase of the project have been scrapped due to lack of funding. Alan Meecham, director of UDOT's Region Three said, "I've got about five years left (before retirement) and I'd like to see some work completed in the canyon before I'm gone." In the past there was much talk about UDOT becoming more trustworthy and willing to compromise. Facts behind the case give the true p icture of UDOT. This is not an agency as concerned about public transportation, the environment, and highway safety as they are about funding massive, unnecessary highways. . LCC now has a great public education and awareness tool for Logan Canyon. With some tremendous pholos by photographer Scott Smith, LCC has created a fantastic slide show presentation. It debuted at a well attended potluck in February on the USU campus and has since been shown to several groups. The presentation lasts twenty minutes and is easy to fit into a variety of public gatherings. If you know a group that would like to see the show, contact one of the officers. • LCC would like to thank the outpouring of support we have re«!ived from our fundraising letter. The money ($3,155) will help us proceed with our upcoming UDOT battle. The majority of our support comes from Cache Valley, but there are many canyon lovers across the country. Enthusiasm, support and love for the canyon is evident by the following: - "Please accept my donation of $25 to help save Logan Canyon . I'm not sure how you traced me down here in Maine, but I'm sure glad you did. Thanks." - "As I will soon be moving and wish to keep up with these canyon issues, please add my permanent address to your mailing list." - "Thanks again and keep up the good work. See you in the canyon." - "Long live Logan Canyon." - "GOOD LUCK! Just wanted you to know I was impressed with the professional presentation of the latest brochure and letter. You articulated your objections to the project in a straightforward, no nonsense manner and 1 appreciated the compromises tha t you see are necessary. Take Care. "Coffee with a Cause" Logan Blend • regular· organic · decaffeinated · Night and Day ra i n@intele.nel 801 .75 J . 05'J $1.00 is donaled 10 Lee for OV8lYpoond sokJ. 5 �SLOWDOWN WE MOVE TOO FAST by Kevin 1. Kobe On December 3,1995, members of the Logan Canyon Coalition drove from Logan to Garden City. OUf objective was to assess the quality and uniformity of advisory and regulatory signs. We documen ted our assessments and addressed our concerns to Dyke leFevre, Region One Director, Utah Deparbnent of Transportation (UIXJ1). Our fi rst question to Mr. leFevre addressed the inconsistent u se of advisory speed signs on curves. We expected to see an advisory speed sign on any curve which has a design speed below the posted speed. This was the case only from the summit of Logan Canyon to Garden City. There is a 40 mph posted speed limit. There are also in both th e uphill and downhill lanes signs indica ting an approaching cu rve and an advisory speed. Most of these curves have arrows ("chevrons") around them. The Middle p art of Logan Canyon has not one curve with a posted advisory speed. According to the 1987 Technical Memorandum, this part of the canyon has many more curves than Rich County that are below the posted speed. LCe's question was quite simple: Why hasn ' t UOOT posted advisory speed signs on these curves? Mr. leFevre explained how each curve is "unique in its capability of sustaining a reasonable speed through the curve section. Because of the construction, maintenance, and natural ground settlement through each curve, each one will drive differently than originally anticipated or designed. Some curves, as much as 10 MPH below the posted speed, are s till able to reasonably allow travel through the curves at the pos ted speed." "We have been anticipating a project through this canyon fo r a considerable length of time and may have neglected reviewing each o f the curves below the posted s peed limit.;; " I have talked to our Region Traffic Engineer and he has indicated that since we have a completed environmental report and we know what is going to happen, especially through the middle canyon, that he will review the curve signing and advisory speeds and make recommendations to better inform the traveling public." To date, UOOT has fai led to install any advisory speed signs in the Middle and Upper canyon. A related LCC ques tion asked how accident surveys can be done in the midd le LCC T-SHIRTS - 512.00 4th"" colorl canyon if the curves in question are n ot signed properly? We did not get a response. Perhaps UOOT can't come up with good accident and traffic da ta. (So there is no reason for the project.) We also documented the lack of signs warning o f wildlife crossings. The only wildlife sign in the entire project area is located within the Garden City limits. UOOT documented in the FEIS that moto rists collide with animals at least twice as often in the Midd le and Upper parts of Logan Canyon as on the Rich County side. Mr. LeFevre's answer: '' In talking with the Fores t Service, there does not appear to be any location that has a prominence o f animal collisions and that placing the signs at the beginning of the canyon is probably just as effective as having signs throughout the canyon . The wildlife warning signs h ave little effect on driver behavior and would be more of a visual impact in the canyon than it would provide for motoris ts behavior." (And massive construction won't have a visua l impact?) To further make our po int, there was not a concern over vehicle/snowmobile collisions anywhere in the FEIS, and yet there is a sign pos ted in the Upper canyon that reads, "Snowmobile Crossing: Next 9 Miles". Why worry about snowmobiles, and ignore w ild life? LCC also asked why there aren't " Pedestrian Crossing" signs where many people are crossing the road, such as Logan Cave, Blind Ho llow, Ricks Spring (which is s till a planned passing zone) and Bunchgrass C reek? Mr. LeFevre indica ted that " A lot of these socalled pull-outs were created by individuals using them with disregard for safety to themselves and the traveling motorists and have not been an official designated turn-out." With the lack of signs warning motoris ts of pedestrians, animals, and curves one begins to worry about UOOTs mission. Is UOOT really concerned about our safety? �Augllst ] , ]9 96 Lee adds ,fun to activism '96 SUMMER FUNDRAISERS The summer heat and good 01' fashioned ice cream combined to pro· duce a fin ancial bonanza for the Coali tion at KRCL's Day In The Park in Salt Lake City on June 8. Through the efforts of dedicated LCC member Dan Miller and a few other volunteers, over $600 was raised in a sin· gle afternoon as festival geers lined up to pay $2.00 for a Ben & Jerry's ice cream bar. Thanks to Dan and some good connections, the hot weather treats were entirely donated by the socially·conscious ice cream manufacturer. "For awhile we were the most pop ular booth there," said Dan. It shou ld also be noted that many people stopped by A WORLD O. all members and staff of bo th band s who d onated their time and talents, THANK YOU! THANK YOU l Please get out and support these guys . They' re worth it. This event was special for two reasons. One, the amphitheater was per· fect. This venue is beauti· fut yet unused and in need of some repairs. Maybe we could do a fund raiser for the theater itself. Secondly, Jerry Joseph, lead singer and guitarist for the Jack Mormons, spent a good deal of time livi ng in Cache Valley. Thus, it was like returning home for him. They want to come back as soon as possible, so what do you say? just to receive some free information and sign up on our roster list. Way to go Dan! •••••••••••• •••••• The Coalition would like to thank all who attended our fundraiser concert with Euphio Project and the Jack Mormons on June 6. Capping the last day of finals and a beautiful summer evening,. over 200 people came out to enjoy live music on USU's amphitheater on Old Main Hill. The event raised nearly $800 towards protecting Logan Canyon. We would especially like to thank the Baugh Motel for co·sponsoring the event. Of course, to EJ)GINGWE$T 2"1'1 SW Sl'lll'!. (; \11111' S I P OIIIl \'11, OJ{ 'Ii21<l Logan Canyon Your Destination? T ComCTIOtJ CLOnmJG & - Backpacking - Skiing · Climbing · H iking . Snowshoeing - Sightseeing "Ccents 117 North Mai n 5t • Logan, Utah, 84321 • 801 -753-1541 7 �r-----------------------, YES ! I WANT TO J OIN THE LOGAN CANYON COALITION and receive a subscription to CANYON WIND o $20.00 Annual Membership o I wo uld like to contribute an additional $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 Lots m ore o I wo uld like to voluntee r. o Here's $12.00 for a grea t T-Shirt. p/lIs SJ shippillg o I'm broke! Here's five bu cks. o Please add my nam e to your mailing li st. H PRINTING CO. D Name ____________________________ 5treet____________________________ City__________5tate_ Phone# _ _.Zip _______ Em ail ____________ Plene rn,lk, check p,lyablt MI d mai l to: 43 LOGA N , 100 W EST UT A H 8 4321 TEL .80 1 .752, 0 3 1 1 FAX Logan Canyon Coalition SOU TH 80 1 .753.3 1 61 USU Box N1674 Logan, UT 84322-0199 L _______________________ We ask for your continued support at this time, as we prepare for the legal challenge we believe is inevitable. Our ability to mount a legal battle depends upon the moral and financial support of canyon lovers such as yourself. PLEASE consider a generous donation to save Logan Canyon and Logan River. • - ._-=.. .. .. __ __ ... _iii ... _ . . .iii ___ iii na . . . . . __ . . . . . . . . . - --- - - -- -- - - C:O.A.L:J:T:J:ON' , AI'rR.() . yl- ' bE J'f',() 'W BULK RATE U.S. POSTAGE PAID &, ' < A fv1. I USU Box #1674 Logan, Utah 84322-0199 Tom &Jan Lyon 655 canyon Road Logan ur 8432 1 I I , LOGAN. UT PERMIT 50 - tI' Please relfew your membership today �- ---_ -- -------- -....... -- --- - -..... --- -------.. ---- -- - -- ---- - -- - - - - ----- - - - -- -- - - - -- ---- ---- -- -- --- - - ----------- --- ---- - - - - -- - --- - ------__T • • _ _ _ _T _ • • _____T • _ ---- A NEWS BULLETIN FROM LOGAN CANYON COALITION Vol. 2 No. 4 Summer 1997 Stop Wo rk Order Lifted LCC Files Suit On Ma rch 19 the Logan Canyon Coalltion (Lee) filed a complaint in U.s. District Court against the Utah Department of Transpo rtation (UOOT) and the Forest Service. We requested the cou rt to order a halt to construction at Lower Twin Bridge in Logan Canyon until our concerns over the bridge could be resolved. The judge s uggested UOOT s top construction. UOOT complied . We reached an agreement w ith UOOT that has aUowed us to w ithdraw our request for a halt to cons truction. Lee recognizes the need to replace the bridges, and work is now proceeding. UDOT has conceded some important points: -They ha ve agreed that in the future they will not argue for the need to widen the highway above Lower Twin Bridge simply because they have w idened the "An improvement to the road and consequent increase in operating speed would expectedly increase the accident occurrences." - from a 1974 interna l UOOT memo highway at the bridge. Lee was concerned that widening at the bridge sets an engineering precedent to widen the highway aU the way up the canyon. - UDOT has also agreed to remove the old Lower Twin Bridge in the most environmentally sensitive fashion. They ha ve agreed to present a written plan for removing the old bridge, with a djscussion of the environmental safeguards they will employ, and to consider LCe's comments on their plan. Finally, UOOT has agreed to consider Lee's comments on their water quality monitoring plan and mitigation efforts for the project. Lee is s uggesting more frequent moni to ring during construction. We are recommending that for any future construction better baseline da ta is ga thered prior to constructio n. Unfortunately, for the present project base line da ta goes back only to September, making impossible adequate comparison with past parameter va lues. We are recommending as well that for future construction more complete monitoring be done of sedimentation due to construction. Our lawsuit has already enabled LCC to help make highway construction less environmentally destructive. Lee is grateful to our attorney, Ray mond Scott Berry, for his excellent work on behalf of Logan Canyon. Scott has put many hours into lea rning the details of our case. His advice has been invaluable. We are in good legal hands. Expertise and ad vice has been donated from professionals and environmental organizations across the country. We are especially g rateful to Drew Parkin, Jack Griffith, Steve Flint, Bob Morris, and Pete Frost for their expertise and dedica tion. Lawsuit Highlights Our lawsuit still stands and will be heard by the court in a few months. We will explore the following issues in court: -In an internal 1974 memo conceming the Logan Canyon highway, (COl/Jill/nod Il!!xl page) �Wild and Scenic Rivers system. The Forest Service has not followed UOOT stated, "an these procedures in the improvement to the road case of Logan River. and consequent increase in operating speed would ThE:Y should not be allowing losses to the expected ly increase the scenery, the fishery, the accident occurrences." water quality and other Here UOOT is admitting canyon resources that what we should know by will come with UOOT's common sense. Widening and straighten- proposal until the evaluation procedure is propering this ca nyon highway, wi th an increase in traffic ly ca rried out. We have documented the fai lures speed, wi ll lead to a less of the Forest Service to safe highway. There will abide by its own regulastill be curves in the road, limited sight distance and tions. - The Forest Service is steep inclines. Especially mandated by federal law in the ice and snow of to generate a list of recrewinter we should not ation areas in Logan have traffic hurtling Canyon that are to through the canyon at receive special protection speeds that are not safe. from construction By 1993 UDOT changed impacts. The Forest its mind and presented a Service presented 17 sites, safety argument for its most of which are small proposa l. They promote parking lots. This meathe myth that thei r proger list was generated posed construction w ill with absolutely no ratiolead to a safer highway. nale for why they chose Their traffic and accident data ha ve obviously been these sites and why they manipulated to make the have ignored other important recreation case they wish to make. a reas. For aU we know, -In their 1974 memo the Forest Service threw UDOT admitted, "The darts at a map to generonly conclusion w hich ate its list. LCC has doccan be drawn, therefore, umented 63 addjtiona l is that even the most recreation areas that the minima l improvemen t to Forest Service should the existing highway have included in its list, would have severe areas that are used for adverse impact on the picnicking, fishin g, kaycanyon water resources." acking, rock climbing, Yet, now UOOT c.I aims either no impact or mini- etc. The Forest Service's Management Plan for mal impact to the fishery Logan Canyon lists recreand to water quality. ation as the primary use They must be thinking of the canyon. We will tha t a mirac.le will occur. explore in court the arbiTheir estimations are trary and capricious manbased on fantasy, not ner in which the Forest good science, which is a Service has behaved in its violation of federal law. evaluation of recreation. - The Forest Service - The Forest Service is has la id out a proced ure a lso mandated by fed era l fo r eva luating rivers for law to account for inclusion in the national Lawsui t impacts of construction upon its sensitive species, including Bonneville Cutthroa t Trout. The Forest Service's conclusion of no impacts is based upon no surveys at all or upon surveys that are inadequate. The Forest Serv ice makes bald assertions that are totally mysterious, such as "flora l species have been mitigated for." No explanation of this claim is provided. Other assertions are pa tently false, Stich as "no fauna l sensitive species were found withthe proposed project dIsturbance area,"" a claim contradicted by information known to the F(1rest Service about Bonneville Cutthroa t Trout. UDOT's highway proposal will result in a highway that is less sa fe. It is far more expensive than is needed, and it is far too damaging to the fishery, the scenery, water quality and other resources. It threa tens recreation, the primary use of the canyon. UDOT's hi.hwav PI"OPO'Sal is also porkbarrel project for the sake of bringing taxpayer dol lars through the UOOT burea ucracy. Our own Conservationists' Alternative fea tures sensible highway improvements such as bridge replacement, some passing and turning lanes, while it protects valuable canyon resources. Our lawsuit is essential if we are to save Logan Canyon from UOOT's appetite for asphalt. Our stand has already made a difference. (,0,,1i,,""') ""'g'''" 2 �Summer 1997 The Ultimate Impact Roads Facilitate People By Tim Wagner Over the course of the last eighteen months, I've had the opportunity to speak on behalf of LCC to several groups. After presenting some history and current facts surrounding the Logan Canyon issue, I usually find myself drifting towards what I see as the biggest threat. That is, people. While we are aU rightfully concemed about the many various fonns of environmental dcgradation resulting from fifteen to twenty years of construction, I honestly believe that a new and "improved" U.S. Highway 89 through Logan Canyon will facilitate a tremendous amount of development, and the result, the "ultimate impact." Try to project your thoughts to the fall of 2017. It's a beautiful afternoon and you and your granddaughter have decided to go fishing in Logan Canyon. UOOT contractors are putting the finishing touches on shoulders and drainage facilities. A new widened stretch of asphalt lays before you, extending aU the way to the summit and down to Garden City. Semi-trucks careen by at 60 miles per hour, making deliveries to a convenience store that has been located at FrankUn Basin for the last ten years. Up the road, adjacent to the Beaver Mountain tumoff, lies a brand new restaurant and hotel complex. The facility occupies over 40 acres with a giant parking lot, sending roadg'rime into Beaver Creek. Farther up, a new snowmobile/ ATV dealershjp has located along with a fast-food franchise. Because of the increase in tuming traffic, UOOT has now started construction on another widened intersection, forcing massive cuts into the slope. Throughout the upper section of the canyon, residential construction is booming, along with severa! higher density developments. At times, traffic is so congested that it continues to back up, with increasing accidents. Your fishing trip tums into a nightmare because every place you try to stop is packed with anglers. Many are out-ofstaters staying at the new hotel reading about the wonderful fishing and sight-seeing opporhmities in Logan Canyon, courtesy of Chamber-sponsored national advertising. Frus trated, you decide to take a short hike to view the fall colors. That too is aborted when you realize that every trailhead is jammed with vehicles. So much for quality outdoor recreation. Sound surreal? It shouldn't. If you've spent anytime at aLi in Logan DID YOU KNOW? A bridge OC" cily stTftt must 12 10 40.000 aulomobilal pet' hou,. Only 1 U n«eIINl)' to KIC01I\mOd.;ole 40)100 bicydes pet' hour. To the need fo, Middle oil, US. commuleT\l wou ld nHd lu b iqde 10 work only t.2S times eKh week. Eql1.Jling 10 guoli ,"" the n"moo of milal pe' pilon thOIIt rould boP: lnIveled by the Ivenoge cyclist ;53)100. PLEASE RI DE YOUR BIKE. 138 NoRTH 100 EAST loG.t.N, UIAH 84321 80 1-753-3294 MoN.- SAl. 10:00 A.M.- 6 :00I!M. •---.-.--.--- GRAPEVINE I tiTa,.aIT . 3 Canyon in the past years, you know we are already seeing the first inklings of such a scenario. This is a real situation that can and will occur, if allowed . This is why we are seeing some of the major environmental groups starting to tackle the issue of uncontrolled development. Just this past spring the Sierra Club initiated a national campaign entitJed "ChaUenge to SprawL" According to the club, " ... nothing threatens our air, water, and wild places more than sprawl." Right up front, the club proclaims the campaign starts with stopping inappropriate roads and d evelopments. Sound familiar? One point they take issue with is the myth that development results in increased tax revenues. The cost of infrastructure alone needed to meet the demands of such develop(cont inued /lext page) �PEOPLE (con/itwed) men!, including highways, sewers, water, electricity, and communications, often exceed the long term revenue. These are a ll items subsid ized by you, the taxpaye r. And who reaps the most benefits? The developer and the summer h ome owner who are enabled to build in the canyon beca use they do not pay the true expense. Add in the future costs of decreased air and water quality, traffic congestion, and an overall decline in the quality of life for residents and the price tag goes through the roof. Another way to look at it comes from the n atio na l organization, The Trust for Public Land. It recently cited research showing how zoning and other government regulations actually encourage development into many of our open spaces. There again, government investment (by the taxpayer) into infrastructu re serves to boost land va lues, making them much more attractive for development. Is there anyone who bel ieves that private and state owned land values in Logan Canyon will decrease once the new " modified preferred alter· native" is in place? It all comes back to one central point. Build it and they w ill come. This is an a rgument that can' t be disputed, even by LCe's staunchest opponents. Yet it is this, what I refer to as the "ultimate impacl," that has not been addressed in the Environmenta l Impact Statemen t nor in a ny other serious d iscussions. This is the very issue that helped the Illinois chapter of the Sierra Club successfully stop a m ajor interstate highway expansion. In the ruling the judge stated, "Highways create demand for travel and expansion by their very existence." Because the final EIS d id not include the "necessary studies," the court felt the public and other government agencies were not informed of all the consequences. Roads precede developmenl. It is a simple idea and one you will hear more of n o matter w here you live. Not that highway expansion and development is necessarily bad. -_ _-_. _ '- ..... . ' -' .. , • •• " But there are right ways and wrong ways and right places and wrong places. Logan Canyon is the wrong place. And this is why I firmIy believe we need to elevate the discuss ion of this project beyond the hjghway itself. Whenever we have the opportunity to talk with the general public about LCe's position, we must include the issues of people and development. For many, the topics of bridge w idths, fishery impacts, endangered plants, and wild and scenic rivers are too abstract. But ask that person Log"" Canyon Postcards GmT'a y"f Stu d io 404 l'hOlograph y. Alan Hu u li s ... i ...g.. 3-xS- $,SO f usu 16701 Utah 1W322"()I9'.I Adventure, Sports o f ••• . ...... ... ......,,, ...... - 4 how they will feel w hen their favorite fishing hole or ski or s nowmobile trail is too crowded, forcing them to go elsewhere, and you may find a n ew ally. Preventing the " ultimate impact" in Logan Canyon is a lifelong commitment. Achieving reasonable highway sa fety improvements in lieu of a massive pork-barrel project is just one incremental step, but the first step. If you would like to help or would like more information about this issue, please feel free to call me at 755-0286. Get involved now. .:. EDWARD AUEY , ...,ItA;, 0' II I'NII 111.10 ANII 1 ••_ IIII"'N; TO. LCC POSTCARDS USU 101C_ I,"," LO;AN. UTAN "111- 01" �Slimmer 1997 Canyon News Briefs (Tlte follawillg is reprillled from a letter to tlte editor of tlte Utall Slate University All/11m; Magazine.) the shot-crete is for added stabili ty and is falling off in sheets as we stand looking ... Shotcrete on this type of canyon First Provo Canyon, now material is like putting a band- Provo Callyoll Coalilion Logan. Soon there will be nothaid on a gushing artery ... The ing left, only p eople racing recent slide triggered the from one spot to another trying County political and business lead- Coalition's worst fears, fears to find a happiness which can ers are begitmiug to question the that a four-lane road just won' t only be found in slowly savorenviront1lel1tal alld finallcial costs work through a narrow area ing the bea uti es God created. wi th unstable rock. of the Provo Cal1yon fiasco, and are protestil1g tile priority given to Gilda Sims, class oj 1940, the cal/yon road at the expense of Looking at this raw, powerful, currently residing ill Eval1ston, more Jzeavily traveled roads.) exposed scar, boulders tumble Wyomitlg down as we speak. They " ... I can hardly stand to be here appear out of nowhere, crash... I am prone to letting out a ing down, hitting the barrier of primal scream of anger as I concrete and wire fencing (Tlte followillg was sent fr01l1 pass daily the monster dump UDOT has constructed in an friends in Provo WilD are watching trucks hauling away the attempt to protect motorists tlte last of tlteir cat/yol/ behlg innards of the can yon. once the canyon is opened. It devoured by dynamite, bulldozers seems as if someone is up there, and asphalt. Almost-vertical culs We are all looking at the same hurling down the rocks in in file cal/yoll walls Itave caused thing. A massive cut in the anger. It is driving the engimassive slides, flattellil1g a twocanyon wall--70 feet high and neers crazy ... Further up the tOil pickup and closing tlte 300 feet long--that wi ll eventuroad, a waterfall of black mud highway. Tlte fOllr-laue highway, ally make room for two more flo ws from an area scraped by a costing $20 million per mile, is in lanes of de-curved roadway. bulldozer. its Jilwl phase. U DOT begal/ tile The first length of the canyon rec0115tructioll ill the lIIid-1980s face has been drilled with We are frustrated, worried and with a promise to tile enviro1JlIlell- twenty foot spikes and covered sick at heart over what they tal community tltat tlte road wou ld with shot-crete. The drilling is have done to our canyon." be limited to two lmies. Utah an attempt to stabilize the face; " Coffee with a Cause" • regular· organic · decaffelnaled • Night and Day 11.00;' to LCC Ior..-ery pound sold. "We are sick at heart over w hat they h ave done to our canyon." �Recreation Threatened By Kevin f. Kobe nificance, or enjoyment of Commerce). During my recent s ki trip from Logan Canyon to Teton Pass, Wyoming, I saw only two canyons throughout the entire 300 mile stretch that did not have s nowmobile tracks. It made me realize how current highway plans fo r Logan Canyon will further threaten human-powered recreation. How? Most of the recreation resources in Logan Canyon were le ft out of the highway documents (the FEIS, DElS, and ROD). This opinion is s upported by the fac t that only 17 sites were lis ted as recrea tion si tes under Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1996. The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) states that, " Recreation has been designated as the primary use in Logan Canyon according to the Wasa tch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Developed and undeveloped recreation lands occur along the hig hway within the National Forest. .. " The entire stretch of Logan Canyon IS USED FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION and is promoted as s uch (note the many brochures pro- duced by the C hamber o f an UIban park where Recently, Logan Canyon Coalition (LCq inventoried an additiona l 63 sites a long the project area that were not listed in any of the documents. Most of these sites provide access for picnicking, fishing, climbing, kayaking, bird watching, sig ht-seeing and parking for winter activities. Many of the sites will be adversely affected by the proposed highway project. These include direct impacts to the recrea tion resource, such as elintina ting access parking lots, and indirect impacts such as noise and safety. According to the FEIS (p. 6-4), " indirect impacts include exceeding ambient noise criteria, reduction in access, visual impacts, vibratio n, and ecological intrusion. Substantial impairment occurs only when the protected activities, features, or attributes of the resource are substantially diminished." The FEIS d efin es protected activities and features as, " ... performances at an outdoor amphitheater, sleeping in the sleeping area of a ca mpground, enjoyment o f a historic site where a quie t setting is a generalIy recognized fea ture o r a ttribute of the site's sig- serenity and quiet are significant Based on the above criteria, all 63 sites, as well as the entire stretch of Logan Canyon, will s uffer "substantially diminished " recreational resou rces due to the current hig hway project. Many o f the activities in Logan Canyon occur in areas "where a quiet setting is a generally recognized feature o r attribute of the site's sig nificance ... " These areas will be affected by an in crease in traffic no ise levels as a result of: faster speeds, additional passing lanes (d ue to vehicle acceleration), and braking noises. Another indirect impact concerns safety for recreationists; vehid es entering and exiting recreation sites along a faster highway w ill be more dangerous. Additionally, different trends in recreation have occur red in Logan Canyon since the FEIS was written. Activities that have grown in popularity and have not been considered in any documents include backcountry snowboarding, boating, fly fishing, climbing alo ng the rock cliffs adjacent to the highway, and recrea tional and professional cycling. In conclusion, the list of 4(f) sites in the FEIS lacks professional and scientific integrity. It falls short of recognizing the recreation resource in Logan Canyon a nd new recrea tio n trends. It also does not provide enough information conceming all of the recreational pursuits occurring within any onc of the 17 4(f) sites in Logan Canyon. ----. 28 Fed!llIIItft. Lopn. lit 84321 (101) 7Ss-olS7 F Ine & rw-k l I f _ ..............,........" I.CC T-SHiIl:TS - 51 2.00 (3 rob) 6 7Ss.8657 Moo......., · s,."....t "'"' �-- - -- 'iE -- - i --"Ei Slimmer 199 7 Speak Now, Speak Often Make Your Voice Heard G overnment Officials Letters to the Editor What to Do Governor Mike Leavitt The Herald Journal State Capitol Building Salt Lake Ci ty, UT 84114 Ph# 801-538-1000 Fax: 801-538- 1528 75 West 300 North Logan, UT 8432 1 Phil 801-752-2121 Fax: 801·753-6642 Please write and urge ou r government officials and the public to re-evaluate UOOT's plans and to consider the more fi sca lly prudent "Conserva tionis ts' Alternative" that s till addresses the need s o f highway safety and Logan Canyon . It is not a "do nothing" proposal. Be s ure to include your full name, address, s ignature (except e-mail) and daytime phone number. Keep your letter short and to the point. Write about your personal experiences in the canyon and use facts to s upport your a rguments. e-mail: govemori?Jemail .state.u Lus e-mail: hjleUeri?Jhjnews.com The SaIt Lake Tribune Rep. Jim Hansen U.S. House of Representati\'cs Washington D.C. 205 15 Phil \-202-225-0453 Fax: 1-202-225-5857 Rodney Terry Project Manager, UOOT Ave. PO Box 12580 Ogden, UT 844 12 Phil 801-399-592 1, ext30S 169 North Wan Fax: 801-399-5926 liz Schuppert District Ranger USFS, Logan District 1500 East Highway 89 Logan, UT 84321 Phil 801 -755-3620 Fax: 80 1-755-3639 Public Forum PO Box 867 Salt La ke City, UT 84110 Fax: 801·237·2022 Deseret News Readers' Forum PO Box 1257 Salt Lake City, UT 84110 Fax: 801·237-2121 e-mail: Letters@d esnews.com The Standard-Examiner PO Box 951 Ogden, UT 84402-{)951 Phlf 800-234-5505 Phil 801-625-4222 Fax: 801-6254508 e-mail : Letters@standard.ne t Thank you for your h e lp ! L()(H, Hilt Oil! 'E\\ \\EII I'\(a. \I: AW ORLD (!omCTION CLOTHING & Logan Canyon Your Destination? - Silckpil cking - Skiing -Climbing -Hi king - Snowshoeing - Sightseeing Accents 57 SOOT\I lWw • locwI UT 1?4g21 753·3497 htll': I/\"'\\o/l11"rinl'rol'nl11 / ilo o l !JON·SAT 11·6 117 North Meln 81 7 �r-----------------------, YES! I THE WANT TO JOIN LOGAN CANYON COALITION and receive a subscription to CANYON WI ND o $20.00 Annual Membership o I would like to contribute an additional $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 Lois more o I would like to volunteer. o Here's 512.00 for a g reat T-shirt. o I' m broke! Here's five bucks. o Please add my name to your mailing list. pl"JSJ51!ippi"g Name____________________________ PRINTING (0. 5 Ireel____________________________ Cily _ _ _ _ _ _Slale_ _ _. ip _____ Z Email_ __ _ ___ P h one# 43 SOUT H 100 LOGAN , UTAH WEST 84321 TEL . 801.752.031 1 make ch«k payable ilnd m ol;1 to: Logan Canyon Coalition USU Box #1674 L _______________________ Logan, UT 84322·0199 FA X 80 1 . 753 . 316 1 Please consider a donation to LCe. All donations will be used for the protection of Logan Canyon. LCC wants to thank the hundreds of individuals, businesses and foundations who have contributed time, money and expertise towards the legal defense of Logan Canyon. Your generous support is appreciated. .. .. Wi !!!! ...... - ............ __ __ .iii . . __ ... .iii _.:;;;;; ___ • --=- -=-= ==--= = - -== = = -=-=- - - COA.L:J:T:J:ON BULK RATE U.s. POSTAGE Paid lDgall, IJT Pe.",;t N"SO Wor k i n s f or t h e P ro t ec t ion o f USU Box #1674 Logan, Utah 84322-0199 ." Please Rellew YOllr Membersllip Today �----...-.. -- -------...- -------- -----_..... --- -- --- -- - ----- ---.-------.- . - ------ - - --- ----- - ---- - - - - ---- - - -- ---- - - ------- - - - -- -- -- - - --- ----- --- - --- -- - - -- -__-.- __ T _ _ _ _-.- - --- - - -- A --- -- -------- - ------- N E W S B U L LE TI N FR OM L OGAN CAN YO N COALI T IO N Vol. 2 No.5 Spril1g 1998 Bass and Parkin to Headline Logan River Summit Have you ever seen an o fficia l Wil d and Scenic rive r? Have you ever wonde red i f the Logan Rive r possesses such qua lities? And ha ve you ever wondered why Utah currently has no rivers that a re being studied fo r possible incl usion in the Wild and Scenic system, let alone a river with the officia l designation? Answers to these questions and more will be presented at the " Logan Ri ve r SummitA Confluence of Ideas/' Saturday May 16, 1998, from 8:30 to 4:30 at the Beaver Mountain Ski Lodge in Logan Can yon. Fea tured guest speakers addreSSing the w ild and scenic issue w ilJ be nationalJy known river policy ex pe rt Drew Par kin and Utah Rivers Council director Zach Frankel. Have you ever wondered w hy Utah currently has no rivers that are being studied for possible inclusion in the Wild and Scenic system? Parkin's expe rtise includes directing wild and scen ic rivers programs for the National Park Service. Currently he consul ts with many river orga niza tions, add ressin g a variety of rive r issues. Parki n also serves on the board of di rectors for the Pacific Rivers Council A native o f Utah, he now lives in Cambrid ge, Massachusetts. Zach Frankel sta rted the Utah Rivers Cou ncil approxim a te ly five yea rs ago a nd has become well known around the state for his knowledge of Utah rivers and the man y threa ts to their wa tershed s. A lso speaking on beha lf of ri ver ecosystems will be na ti ona lly known author Rick Bass, who w ill bring his own style of passion for our na tura l world. He is widely loved by Am erican readers. As a forme r res ident of Logan, Utah a nd a USU alumni , Bass often spea ks of his intimate relationship with Logan Canyon and the Logan Ri ver. "Sustainable Watersheds" w ill be the theme of an afternoon panel di sc ussion , CO I11p lete w ith a ques tion and answer period. Partic ipants include John Ca rter with Willow Creek Ecology who will address riparian and wa tershed issues, Wendy Fisher with U tah Ope n Land s who will educa te attendees on such th ings as conservation easemen ts, Wes Johnson, president of Utah's Trout Unlimited who will talk of the importance of aquatic protections, and Mike Timmons, USU landscape arch itectural professor, who will discuss visual aesthetic issues. Acting as panel moderator will be Logan 's own KUSU program director Lee Aus tin. It should be noted that this conference is (col1lill!u'd 01/ pagt' 4) �Bridge Fight Averted On September 8, 1997 potentia l impacts by ceas- bridge up after it has col· ing construction during the Logan Canyon lapsed into the river? Coalition sent II letter to the spa\vning season. .15 there an envi ronmenTom Twedt of BioWest UDOT's Sto rm Water tally less damaging with questions concernPollution Prevention Plan method of bridge ing the Utah Department clearly stated, removal? Since UDOT of Transportation's "Cons truction activities plans to crane the new wi ll be scheduled to (UDOT) constructi on bridge into place, it avoid period s of aquatic plans for the fall. seems that they could BioWes t is the env ironlife cycles (spawning, crane pieces of the old men ta l consultant on the etc.)." Suddenly UDOr bridge Qu t w i thout droptwo brid ges project in annou nced that it was ping it into the ri verbed. Logan Canyon. Surpris ingly, the Our main conidea of demolishing After LCC's threa t of alt illj uctioll, the old brid ge durcern was over the pOSSibility that UDOY {l l mOItIlCe ri there would be ing spawning seaUDOTwould son, just upstream of 11 0 bridge demolitioll dur;lIg the demolis h the o ld a documented Brow n Trout fall spawning seaso". brown trout spawnLower Twin Bridge in the fall. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ing area, was su pd uri ng brown ported by the Utah trout spawning season. considering construction Division of Wildlife UDOT's Reevaluation of and bridge demolition Resources. the llucc Bridges Project during the spaw ing seaOur attorney, son. for Logan Canyon conRaymond Scott Berry, tains a good discuss io n of We were concerned faxed a memo to UDOT's the brown trout spawnthat UDOT wou ld use attorneys, stating our ing area immedia tely explosives to blast ou t in tention to file for an the brid ge su pports, downstrea m of Lower injunction on all b ridge Tw in Bridge and the a llow ing the bridge to construction and demolipotenti al im pacts of fall into the riverbed. tion during the spawn ing increased sediments They wou ld then drag season. At the CAT u pon the eggs a nd fr y of the b ridge out o f the (Cooperating Adv isory riverbed wi th tractors. spawning trout. Team) meeting of According to U There would be massive ,e Sep tember 24, UDOT a mounts o f sediment Reeva luation, "The announced there wou ld be no bridge demolition Logan River dmvnstrea m introduced in to the ri ver during the fa ll. They of Lower Twin Bridge has as the bridge sank into agreed that all constructhe riverbanks and was been used as a spaw ning tion activity in the fall site by brown trout. ... dragged out. The loss to would be li mited to work riparian areas wou ld be sedi ments released into considerable. on the deck of the bridge, the Logan Rive r by conh igh above the ri ver. s truction activities in la te Our There would be no work su mmer, fa ll , and winter questions included: in the river or o n the could suffocate eggs and - Precisely how much riverbanks. We believe fry, which are expected to sed imen t will be in trothis decision by UDOT be present in this spaw n- duced into the river? - Exactly how wi ll the old helped to protec t spawning area from about ing b rO\'vn trou t in Logan October through March." bridge be removed? Rive r. UDOT had previously - Wha t w ill be the agreed to minimize impacts of cu tting th e 2 �-- - -------- =- - - -= - - = - '= - :-=..:: '::' -- -- = :-=.: - --=-= = =:: = :':.: == ..=..-=..=..=-.= Sprillg 199 8 An Expert Speaks O u t UDOT's Confused Data By LCC Stnff mates or on how accurate their estimates are. more than o ne accid ent per ye<lr, " there is only one site in the entire canyon with more than 2 The Logan Ca nyon Coalition asked Dr. Everett C. Carte r, of the Transportation Studies Cen ter of the University o f Maryland, to exam ine the Utah Department of Transportation's (UOOT) traffic and accident data . In his report, Dr. Carter states, "There is d efiniteIy some confusion concerning acciden ts and traffic volumes in Loga n Canyon." Dr. Carter no tes that the method UDOT used to estimate traffic fl ows in Logan Ca nyon " resu.lted in errors." UDOT used only one counter at o ne location in the ca nyon to count vehicles, and they then used these counts to estim ate traffic volumes in nil sections of the cn nyon. No information is provid ed on how they calculated their esti- Here is one exa mple of error. In the hig her accidents pe r yea r." He states. "One o r two acci- section of the middle dents/year is not ca nyon, and in the uppe r ca nyon, the estimated traffic vo lumes that UDOT used to calculate acciden t rates declined in the years 1986 - 1990 compared to 1980 - 1985. Yet the estimated tra ffi c volumes in the lower ca nyon, and in the lower sectio n of the middle canyon, show a 7% increase in 1986 - 1990 VS. 1980 -1985. Why would traffic volumes increase in the lower secHons of the canyon in 1986 - 1990 and yet d ec line in the upper sections? There is no expla nation of this discrepan- unu sually hi gh"! In o the r words, the Logan Ca nyon hig hway is not an especially dangerous hig hway. Special Report 214 from the na tional Trans portation Resea rch Boa rd (1987) indicates tha t the benefit of w idening beyond 34 feet is "q uite lim ited." Dr. Ca rter states, "Thus a 34 ft. paved section, especiall y in lig ht of the env iro nmen ta l impact, should be the upper limi t in Logn n Cn nyon .... " UooT is planning a 40 foot hi ghway width above Beaver MOu.ntnLn, in s pite of the greater expense and environmental impact o f this cy. Dr. Carter observes that w hil e there are 9 si tes in the canyon \v ith DID YOU KNOW? A bridgt' or .. cit y J tTfl't mu st h .. "c 12 Joint'S to .. 4lJ,000 .. utomobil cs pCt hour. Only I I.. nt' iJ nc.:cssuy to 40,000 bieyclcs pcr hour. To thl' nccd for Middl c Eas t oi l, U.S. commuters would nced to biercit' to work o nl y l.25 tim cs wl't'k. u lo riH to thc numbcr of milt'S could bf tr'''flcd by th f aYf ragc (yelisl i, 3.000. . 'IY • :;- ' 1W..1 PLEASE RIDE YOUR BIKE. 138 NOI»H 100 EASl lOGAN. UrN! 84321 801 -753-3294 MQN.- SAl. 10:00 A.M. - 6:00 P.M. G ,, -_.- ... --_-- PEVJNE ... 3 : ....... width, and in spite of this Specia l Report. Another report UDOT apparently ignored, " Low Cost Methods for Improving Traffic Operations on Two-Lane Roads," wa s published by the Federal Highwa y Administra tion in 1987. This report discusses low-cost but effecti ve highway improvements s uch as slow-vehicle turnouts and better signing. These improvements have been part of LCe's propo5<'11 for many years. Dr. Carter concludes, '' In summary, I a m convinced that there is reasonable doubt that a fu ll scnle/mnjor improvement of the entire Ca nyon is justified." .:. �RIVER (,,,,lim,"') be ing underwritte n th roug h the generos ity of the ational Ri vers Coa liti on, w hich is mad e up of the America n Ca noe Assoc., Ameri ca n Rivers, A meri ca n Whitewate r Affili a tion, Na tio nal Wildli fe Fede ration, Ri ver Management Society, Rive r Ne two rk, Sie rra C lub, and The Wilde rness Soci ety. Loca l co-spo nso rs includ e the Citi zens for the Protection o f Loga n Ca nyon and Brid ge rl and Audubo n. The ir support is commend able! Cost for the enti re day, incl uding a conti ne nta l breakfast and lu nch, includes $10 for adu lts and $7.50 for students. Early reg istra tion is encou raged as seating is limited to 150 people. See the enclosed insert (Uta h mailing o nly) for m o re info rmatio n. Or call at 435 / 755-0286. Why Are Wetlands Important? Wetlands are important for ma ny reasons: Wetlands prevent nooding by hold ing wa ter much like a sponge. By doing so, wetlands help keep river levels norma l and filter and pu rify the s urface wa ter. Wetlands accept wa ter d uring sto rms and w henever water levels arc high. When wa ter levels are low, wetland s slowly release water. Wetlands also release vegetative matter into rivers, which helps feed fis h in the rivers. Wetlands help to counter balance the human effect on rivers by rej uvenating them and surrounding ecosystems. Ma ny anima ls that live in other habitats use wetlands for migra tion or reprod uction. Fo r example. herons nest in la rge old trees, bu t need sha llow areas in order to wad e for fi sh and aquatic life. Am ph ibians often for<lgc in upland areas but return to the water to mate and reproduce. Wetlands must not be thoug ht o f as a unique and independent habitat. They arc vital to the survival of many ecosystems and ...... ---... ,., , wild life in genera l. Unl ike most oth er habita ts, wetlands directly improve other ceo-systems. Becausc of its many clea nsing bmefits. wetlands have been compnred to kid neys. The analogy is correct, wetlands and kid neys help con tro l water flow and cleanse the flow o f liquids within a system. Eros ion Contro l Looking at pictures o f delt"s, o ne cn n tell that rivers d eposit" lo t o f mud . Mud is top soil that has eroded and w"shed away. Emergents (plan ts firmly rooted in the muddy bottom bu t with stalks tha t rise high above the wa te r su rface) a re able to radica lly slow the flow o f water. As a result, they counter the erosive fo rces o f mov ing wa ter along la kes and ri vers. and in rolli ng agricultura l landscapes. Erosion control effo rts in "qua tic areas often incl ude the planting of wetlands plants. Wate r Purifica tion Wetlands also clean thc watcr by filtering o ut sedimentation and d ecomposing vegetable ma tter. Wetlands pla nts help Adventure, Sports -"'- _. , _ "_ _ n ..... ......,. ....... , 4 convert nitrates and other life-givi ng chemica ls. Soil thai is inundated with water is largely oxygen free, and the microbes and bacteria in upla nd soils depend on oxygen to su rvive. TIle activ ity of such bacteria is centra l to the breakdown of n utrients into fo rms usable by the rest of the bio tic comm unity. Some wetland s plants actua lly pi pe oxygen dow n into their roots, to provide to special bacteria. Others, as in peat moss, build up huge, "a rtificial" g round areas on wh ich bacteria can work. Still others, such as many noating leaf plan ts, have d ispensed with the use o f bacteria altogether and ex tract needed nutrients from the water itsel f. The ability o f wetlands to recycle n utrients ma kes them critical in the overa ll fun ctioning of the ea rth . No other ecosystem is as prod uctive nor as un ique in this conversion process. In some p laces, in fa ct. artificial wetlands were d eveloped solely fo r the pu rpose o f water purification. �_ ---------- --------- .. - ------- - - -= - -== = = === = "": = :-=..:: '::" =:-::.: :-=..:: S p r ill g 19 98 Canyon News Briefs LCC LAWSUIT UPDATE Logan Canyon Coa li tion's lawsuit against UDOT and the Forest Service is still in place. We are now compiling a list of docu ments we will req uest from these ngencies during the d iscove ry phase of the lawsuit. We are inte rested in obtai ning copies of UDOT's calcula tions of tra ffic flow in Logan Canyon, for examp le. Based on traffic counts a t a si ngle loca tion, UDOT has esti ma ted traffic flow in a ll sections of the ca nyon highway. Yet there are serious d iscrepa ncies in UOOT's estimations. We wi ll request copies of the surveys the Forest Service has condu cted on sensitive species in Logan Canyon. The Forest Service has cl aimed there will be "no impact" of constructi on upon et these species. Y it appea rs tha t for severa l of these species the surveys have been inadequa te, if they exist at aU . The documents we obtain through d iscovery will help LCC sa ve Logan Canyon from ulU1ecessarily expensive and destructi ve highway construction. Deb Eshelman a CPA and her daughter Amy Casa massa come on boa rd as LCe's new Co-Treasurers. Amy's work w ill apply towards an adva nce placemen t science cred it fo m Jac k Green's Logan High class. Welcome on boa rd. Canyon Wind Ed itor Dan Miller w ill be returning to Cache Va lley to become more active in LCC projects. He has been living in Ogden, Utah and Oregon as his wife pursued her ca reer. Welcome back Dan . • Uuknowu impact 0 11 trollt popllia tiolls. UDOT's estimate is all IIlIeducated guess based 011 il/adeqllate data. COllstrllctiol/ ill the lower cal/yoH reduced tlw trOll t populations ill sOllie areas by 80%. "Coffee with a Cause" • regular ' $1 .00 is dona rBd ro LCC Nigh1and Oay ro.-"""'Y pound sold. Logan Canyon Coalition is up and running on the World Wide Web. Check out our homepage at: http://www.logancanyon.org �Home Canyon by To m LyO l1 Comi ng back from a long trip east, we'd just dri ven a few hundred treeless mi les on a hot and sunny da y. Most of the last hours had been in the mined and p um meled landscape of south west Wyom ing, a scene tha t hurts to look a t. We climbed up fro m Bea r Llke in third gear- getting close now, thirty-odd miles to Logan- a nd then, over the summ it, started to s lip d own into the fold s o f the hills, steeper a nd closer on the sides as we wen t, a nd the trees aga in, the co mpan ionab le river soon to be alongsid e. We g limpsed a good-sized bull moose moving o ff through the w illows along Bea ver Cree k. A certa in sce nt came in on the window-wind , a secret fragrance mad e up of w illow a nd sage, toba cco bush, fir a nd cottonwood, river water, lime rock in the sun, Loga n Canyon dirt ". we were ho me now. When we fi rst s tarted tryin g to p rotec t th e ca nyon from hi ghway d rea ms, we had the id ea that public-works po li cy was p retty much a rational process. You sat d ow n w ith the highway d epartm ent a nd the Fo rest Service, and you entered the canyon 's beauty a nd re la tive intactness in to the mi x, and the peop le's love for it, the fishing, the skiing, the hiking, the peace a nd quiet and s lowness of it, th e way it stood for a w hole diffe ren t life. You always men tioned w ha t w as sadly true, that Loga n Ca nyon was the last of its kind of pl ace in Uta h. It was disappointing that none of this ever go t across to the highway department. Not in all these yea rs. It was as if you were talking a n en tirely d ifferent language. But w hat was rea lly stunning was that the Forest Service did n' t ca re ei the r. The Forest Serv ice b lew off its own Forest Plan, a documen t supposedly having the force of law, in orde r to support the h ighway d rea m. The Forest Service should have been the natural a ll y of the ca nyon. Instead, in the end, they a nswered a d eta iled , 187-page a ppea l (wh ich a mo unted to the Env ironme nta l Impa ct Statement tha t should have been d one by those h ired to d o it) w ith a page and a half of bureaucratic dismissa l. So w ha t we have lea rned is tha t we are on o ur ow n, and we have to be tough a nd pe rsistent if we wa nt to be heard- if we wa nt the canyon to be hea rd . We can' t just expect people to be rationa l, and we can ' t assume tha t everyone loves the canyon more than they love the h ighway drea m. (Probably a lot o f people think we can have the o ld, good ca nyon and a big hig hway through it.) This w ho le time has been a kind of edu ca tion in realism. That's the politica l part. In the hea rt part, it's mad e us th ink about w hat we rea ll y va lue, firmed us down to the home things. POSSESSfONS 28 FaSuai A l.ogan.lJI'. 84321 vt. ....... '7:'. (IIOU 755-0851 FIne l ob .. « o , Logall Ca lly o ll Post cards Co u'!t'Syof S tud io 404 rh o tog r.- phy, Alan Hu es ti s , ...,,, J-. 5· s.5O I 4· , 6- S.75 USU nod log.1n. Ulah 84322.{l L 99 a M .. t dphy , ,, .. L N e rd , ' d l 011, a H('f b , Pon(A1U>:I 0# EDWARD Aaa EV 1[ NO t l t .50 IINO $l .oo lee USU 8 0l( . L OCOIIN. U TilI! Lee T·StliRfli· 512.00 (3 mlor) '011.-0,,, 6 755-8657 �------== = == = S p ri n g 1 9 9 8 Speak Now, Speak Oftell Make Your Voice Heard G overnment Officials Letters to the Editor What to Do Governor Mike Leav itt State Capitol Building 5.111 La ke City, UT 84114 Th e Herald Journa l 75 West 300 North Logan, UT84321 Ph# 801-538-1000 Fax: 801-538-1528 e-mail: governor@email.sta le.u t. us Ph# 801-752-2121 Fax: 801-753-6642 Please w rite and urge our government officials and the public to re-evalua te UOOT's plans and to consider the more fisca lly prudent "Conservationists' Alternative" that s ti ll add resses the needs of h ighway safety and Logan Canyon. It is not a "do nothi ng" proposa l. Be su re to include your fuJI name, address, signature (except e-mail) and d ay time phone number. Keep your letter short and to the point. Write about you r personal experiences in the canyon and usc fac ts to s upport your argumen ts. Rep. Jim Hansen U.S. House of Representatives Washington D.C. 20515 Ph# 1-202-225-0453 Fax: 1-202-225-5857 Rod ney Terry Project Manager, UOOT 169 North Wall Ave. PO Box 12580 Ogden, UT 84412 Ph# 801-399-5921, ext3Q5 Fax: 801-399-5926 Brian Ferebee District Ranger USFS, Logan District 1500 East H ighway 89 Logan, UT 84321 Ph# 801-755-3620 Fax: 801-755-3639 e-mail: hjletter@hjncws.com The Salt Lake Tribu ne Public Forum PO Box 867 $.1[t L.1ke City, UT 84110 Fax: 801-237-2022 Deseret News Readers' Forum PO Box 1257 Salt Lake Ci ty, UT 84110 Fax: 801-237-212 1 e-mail: Letters@desnews.com The Standard-Exam iner PO Box 951 Ogden, UT 84402-095 1 Ph# 800-234-5505 Ph# 801-6254222 Fax: 801-625-4508 ('-mai[: Letters®Standard.net LOOK FOR O[' R :>IE\\ AW ORLD Or Tha n k you for yo u r h e l p! "Ell PA(a: AT: Logan Ca nyon You r Destin ation? & - Backpa ckin g . S kii ng -Climbing -Hiking - Snows hoein g . S ig htseei ng Accent5 57 IANN • loGANUT l?4 g21 117 North Main SI 7 �r-----------------------, YES! I WANT TO JDIN THE LOGAN CANYON COALITION and rece ive a s ubscription to CANYON W1ND o $20.00 Annual Membership o I would like to contribute an additional $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 Lots more o I would like to volunteer. o Here's $12.00 for a great T-s hirt. o I' m broke! Here's five bucks. o Please add m y name to your mailing list. p/IIs SJ shippillK Name _______________________________ H RA PRINTING LD (0. 5Ireel._____________________________ Cily_ _ _ _ _ _ Slale'____ Zip, _____ Email _____________ Phone# Please check p" Y.l ble and mail to: Logan Canyon Coalition USU Box #1674 L _______________________ Logan, UT 84322-0199 43 SOUTH LOGAN , 10 0 UTAH WEST 84321 TEL .43 5 .752. 0311 FA X 435 .753.3 161 Please consider a donation to LCC. All donations will be used for the protection of Logan Can yon. LCC wants to tha nk the hW1dred s of individuals, businesses a nd fOW1dations who have contributed tin1e, money and expertise towa rds the lega l d efense of Logan Canyon. Your generous support is appreciated. BU LK RATE U.S. I'OSTAGE Paid COAL:l:T:l:O:N' Work ing for th .. P rotection of L og.n Canyon Logtl1r. UT N"SO USU Box #1674 Logan, Utah 84322-0199 II' Plea se Renew YOllr Melllbership Today �A NEWS B ULLETIN FR OM L OGAN C ANYON C OALITION Vol. 3 No.1 Sum mer 1999 Logan River is Eligible for Wild & Scenic Designation In January the Wasatch-Cache National al value of this river segment. Concerning recreForest released its draft Rivers Eligibility Study. ation, "highly scenic pristine rivers/ corridors are This study reports that Beaver Creek and a twen- of higher value" (draft Eligibility Study). The ty mile-long segment of the Logan River are eligi- Forest Service is mandated to protect the scenery, ble for Wild and Scenic Rivers designation. The recreation, and other outstandingly remarkable Logan River segment has been found to have five, values of rivers eligible for Wild and Scenic desmore than any other river in the forest, outstand- ignation. ingly remarkable values including scenery, fishUDOT is planning cuts into the mountaineries, recreation, ecology, and geology I hydrolo- side at Upper Twin Bridge that will be vertical or gy. The Logan River is truly the jewel of the "as vertical as possible." This was not evaluated Wasatch-Cache National - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - in the FE IS or In Forest. UDOT's Record of We believe that the Decision. We still do of not know how extenUtah Depa rtment the Logan as Utah's first Transportation's (UDOT's) sive these cuts will be. Wild and Scenic River nex t phase of highway Vertical rock cu ts will construction w ill harm ___...._______________ not revegetate and will these values. We are asking that a Supplemental harm the natural appearance and hence the Environmental Impact Statement be required for scenery and recreational value of this river corrithis highway project. dar. Recent design p lans show tha t UooT is We a re concerned that construction planning to build approximately 2,275 feet of impacts on Wild and Scenic values are not being retaining wa lls adjacent to the Logan River seg- evaluated properly. There was no detailed evalument eligible for designation. These wa lls were ation of impacts in either the Final Environmental not evaluated in the FEIS for this project or in Impact Statement or in the Record of Decision. UooT's Record of Decision. Seventy-five percent UooT intends to evaluate the impacts of the next of these walls will be "basket walls," which are phase of construction in a Reevalua tion document. wire baskets filled with rocks. These walls are not This entirely ignores the impacts of the remaining attractive in a na tu ral setting. They will not highway project. appear natura l and will harm the scenery of this UDOT and the Forest Service are segmentriver segment. They will also harm the recreation- ing this project in their evaluation of impacts Leave a True Legacy �Wild & Scenic ("...".."d) which is a violation of Forest Service policy and the National Environm en tal Policy Act (NEPA). From recent design plans, the next phase of construction covers on ly about three and a half miles of highway. UOOT is planning an additional approximate ly thirteen and a half miles of highway const ruction that will potentially impact Wild and Scenic values, from the Dugway to the canyon summit. The danger of segmenting this project is that once the next phase of construction is underway, UOOT will be committed to its larger highway project with uneva luated and potentially damaging impacts to the Wild and Scenic va lues of these rivers. Issues that should be addressed include: what will be the ex tent of the required retaining wa lls and vertical cuts as construction is extended into th e remaining upper Midd le Canyon? Will we see a miniDugway a long Uppe r Twin Bridge and Temp le Fork? In short, how ugly is this going to get? According to Forest Service policy, "Groups of actions, when added together, may have collective or cumulative impacts which are Significant. Consideration must be given to the incremental effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable related future actions of the Forest Service, as well as those of other agencies and individuals." We have requested that a supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SE IS) be required for this highway project in which the entire project is evaluated with respect to the Wild and Scenic va lues of these rivers. Forest Service policy requires that there be an SEIS whenever there are "significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns .... " Surely the fact that the Logan River segment and Beaver Creek ha ve been found eligib le for Wild and Scenic designation is significant new information. in an SEIS the purpose and need for a ll planned construction should be clearly demonstrated . While we agree that some highway r'OSSESS'ONS 28 Federal Ave. Logan, Uf. 84321 Home Accessories, CoUectibles, Jewelry, Gifts 755-0857 2 improvements are needed, such as replacing the worn bridges, UOOT has never demonstrated the purpose and need for their extensive proposal. We agree with this statement by Drew Parkin, an expert on Wild and Scenic Rivers policy, " . . . designation as a wild and scenic river will not preclude improvement to the highway. It would, however, require that UDOT take special precautions, both in design and construction, to ensure that the road does not alter flow regimes, that important natural and scenic resources are preserved, and that short-term disruptions to the river are minimized. Even if this costs a little more, it would result in a superior project that multiple meets long-term needs." & A«t'ssones M f'taphyslcdl N t'ed .. E.. Oil s & HNbs 11 755-8657 Toys thaL capt.ure a child's ima8inaLion! 14bN l OO[ I. ". ... A ....,nu.,O lo9 .. n UT • · Moon Toys * * 75 HlO'5 5 �- -- -- Summer 19 99 Dear Logan City Council: CANYON LOVERS My wife and I lived in Logan from 1955, when we came as college stud ents, until just last yea r. We raised three sons in Logan, and Logan will always be our heart's country. We absorbed Cache Valley. The silhouette of the mountains, east up the canyon and west across the valley, is still the horizon line of O UT life. I wou ldn't mention this background if I didn't think a great many people share such feelings. Few things go as deep as the sense of home. Unfortunately, sometimes the deepest values get taken for granted. We're all very busy. We can even forget to think about the abso lute beauty and purity of Logan River, coming down the canyon and through the town. Su rely there can't be many towns anywhere in the world that can say: a wild, clean river comes down ou t of the mountains to us; there is no one, no town, upstream. I think about Logan River a lot these days. Our irrigation and drinking wa ter here in coastal California is sparse; it comes a long way, and it has been used several times. There is no way, with all the engineering capability in the world, we could create the kind of situation Logan has. So, speaking from deep care for Logan and from the knowledge of how easy it is to lose natura l resources, and how hard it is to get them back, I respect- fully urge the Council to endorse Logan River as a Wild and Scenic River. Logan is lifeblood. Please protect it. Sincerely, Thomas J. Lyon _ , eo-.-. soo ..... PLEASE RIDE YOUR BIKE W EB SITE D eSIGN, D eVELOPMENT, H OSTING, AND P ROMOTION SERVICES http://zmorlner.com Info@zmoriner.com 435-755-6595 138 Norm'i 100 EAsT lOGAN. UtAH 84321 4351753-3294 MoN. - SM. 10:00 .... 1.4 . - 6:00 P.M. G PEVINE II 3 -_ --- ,t l *" U__l_ ' • ll ... .... ...., we Dan Miller Jaynan Chancellor Deb Eshelman Gordon Steinhoff Derek Staab Graham Hunter Kevin Kobe Tim Wagner John Carter Amanda Th immes Mark Lunt Bridgett Kobe Creed Clayton Carolyn StOnge Brooke Bigelow Jim Vandygriff Coalition Supporters -R ick Bass -Terry Tempest Williams oRobert Redford -C.L. Rawlins -Sierra Club -Utah Rive rs Council -Tom Lyon -National Rive rs Coalition -Maki Foundation �Canyon News Briefs Sincere Gratitude Members of the Logan Canyon Coalition wou ld like to wholehea rtedly thank Dan Miller for all he has done for the orgaruza tion . Dan has lead Lee during his year as president with tremendous energy and insight. Under his leadership several important adva nces have been made for Lee including a commitment to getting the Logan River designated as Utah 's first Wild and Scenic river. Dan continues to be active in Lee, and we are always grateful for his common sense and unwavering support. Tha nks Dan, and we wish you the best w ith your ex tra ti me! Lee Board of Directors LOOKING AH E AD Fall Fundraiser Lee is proud to announce its fall fundraiser: Jerry Joseph and the Jack Mormons. They will be playing in the Amphitheatre on Old Main Hill, USU campus on September 3rd at 7:00 PM . Tickets will be $7 for nonstudents and $5 fo r students. Giardia Run Thursday, September 9th at 5:49 PM. Meet at the HPER on the USU camp us and run to the White Owl. $15 includes a T-shirt; $10 without. This year 's theme: Y2K!! Get Inspired! Announcing the first annua l " Art from the River" celebration. Send your artistic entries inspired by Logan River (painting, d rawing, pottery, writing, textiles, or music) to Brooke Bigelow, 1371 E. 900 N., Loga n, Utah 84321. All entries will be honored at the River Festiva l on September 18th and special recognition will be given to outstanding entires in each of three categories: children 3 to 5 years old; children 6 to 12 years old; and children 13 and over. Be sure to include your name, phone number, and age with your ent ry. Christmas Auction With the completion of Dan's term as preSident, managing and governing responsibilities for LCC are being handled through a temporary board of directors. A permanent board will be installed by vote at the next Lee general meeting in January. Any LCC member interested in being on the board of directors should attend bimonthly meetings, the fi rst and third Tuesday of the month at 7:30 at Merlin Olsen Central Park (100 South 200 East). Logan River Festival The second annual Logan River Festival will be at First Dam from noon to 3 PM on Saturday, September 18th. Bring your kids, neighbors. and friends and come enjoy the Logan River. There w ill be games, canoe rides, art activities and displays, and vendors. (For more informa ti on or to get in volved, contact Jaynan Chancellor at 7532553.) Adventure Sports 4 It's not too early to be thinking about the LCC Christmas auction. Watch fo r fur ther details. In the meanwhile, gather those donations or services suitable for auction, and continue the gift by donating your "classy junque" to be treasured by someone else for a recycled Christmas. For more information or to store donations, contact Jaynan Chancellor at 753-2553 or Brooke Bigelow at 753-5682. Thanks for your generous contribution! �Summer 1999 Memo To: Brian Dixon, Bridgerland Audubon, Chris Wilson, Cache Anglers, Kathy Gilbert, Citizens For Protection of Logan Canyon, Dick Carter, High Uintahs Preservation Council, Jon Marvel. Idaho Watersheds Project, Dan Miller, Logan Canyon Coalition, Ron Younger, Utah Chapter Sierra Club, Barrie Gilbert, Utah Wildlands Heritage From: John Carter, Willow Creek Ecology Re: Logan Canyon/Logan River Protection Zone I am writing this as a result of the many issues and activities involving Logan Canyon/Logan River, includ ing the recent land swap, ongoing highway construction, increasing recreational use, second home development, logging and continued livestock grazing all affecting wildlife, habitat, water quality and aesthetics. Those of us who love Logan Canyon and all it symbolizes, and the reluctance of the Fores t Service to effec t progressive change as evidenced by the recent rejection of our appeal of the Bear Hodges project show us we ca nnot depend on science or logic alone. It also shows us that we need community support and unity among ourselves with SOfl)e common goals and objectives. To this e nd , I am s uggesting the Logan Canyon/Logan River Protection Zone that recognizes the high quality of the scenic and wildli fe attributes of the Logan River Watershed, and urges protection. Because of the many sensitive species or habitats recogni zed by the Forest Service as exis ting in the Logan Canyon area and are threatened, as a group we should demand protection of these watersheds, elimination of livestock grazing and other destructive forest practices and that a p roper value be placed on the natural attributes of the Canyon. Because of the Bonneville Cutthroa t Trout a nd its potential listing as endangered, Willow Creek Ecology expanded its monitoring of the Logan River and its tributaries at the end of 1998. We are collecting samples at up to 20 locations, docume nting s ilt loadings, fecal coliform pollution and other general water quality parameters. We are also assembling a data base of Logan River stud ies of water quality, fisheries, invertebrates, habitat and hydrology. Our initia l purpose is to comment to the Fish and Wildlife Service in support of listing since a large portion of Bonneville Cu tthroat Trout populations in Utah exists in the Logan River. Many factors threaten its continued existence including habitat alteration and whirling disease. I think it is important that we discuss how to combine our efforts and concerns into an effective strategy, gai n public support and pressure the Forest Service and other public entities toward our chosen goals. We saw how iIIinformed the City of Logan was on Wild and Scenic River Status. I think we should use quality of life, economics and watershed health as driving factors in gaining public support for protection. After all, the watersheds above Sa lt Lake City are worthy of protection for a variety of reasons, why not here? �Leave A True Legacy The Logan as Utah's First Wild and Scenic River We the undersigned hereby declare oui' support for segments of the Logan River to be designated as Utah 's first Wild and Scenic River under the federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, as long as that designation doesn't interlere with traditional uses now enjoyed by the public. Signature Print name Street City Siale Zip -------------------------+-------------------------+------------------------+---------------------+----t------------ ; • z • .; • • " • , -------------------------f-------------------------+------------------------+----------------------f----t------------ " i -------------------------t-------------------------t------------------------+---------------------1----1------------ 2 • • RETURN CO M P l ET E O P ETITIO N S TO THE LOG A N CA N YON COALITION. USU BOX. fl6H . LOGAN. U TAH U 322·01 99 �NOT LATER WRITE NOW! Wild and Scenic Bernie We ingardt The Wild and Scen ic Rivers Act of 1968 is unique among environmental Jaws in the world because of its p oten tial to protect free-nowing rivers and riversections. Yet less than one percent o f the nation 's total river m iles is included in the National Wild and Scen ic Rivers System, and NOT ONE o f Utah 's beautiful rivers has th is outstanding d is tinction. In 1998 the 30th anniversary of the Wild an d Scenic Act was celebrated across the nation. Lee is hoping to extend thai celebration to Utah before another 30 yea rs passes with the designation o f the Logan River as Wild and Scenic. Pub lic support is crucial to m a king th is happen. Show your su pport by encouraging policy-m a kers to leave a true legacy in Uta h and recomme nd th e Logan Ri ver as the firs t Uta h river inducted into the N a tio na l Wild a nd Scenic Rivers Syste m . T h a nk yo u for your h e l p! T he Salt l ak e Tri bune Wasatch-Cache Nationa l Forest 8230 Federal Building 125 South State Street Salt Lake City. Utah 84138 Public Forum PO Box 867 Salt Lake City, UT 841 10 Fax: Bria n Fe re bee District Ranger U5FS, Logan District 1500 East Highway 89 Logan, UT 84321 Ph# 435-755-3620 Fax: 435-755-3639 Desere t New s Readers' Forum PO Box 1257 Salt Lake City, UT 84110 Fax: 801-237-2121 e-mail: Letters@desnews.com Logan City Counci l 255 North Main, Logan UT,84321 The S ta ndard-Examiner PO Box 951 Ogden, UT 84402-0951 Phil 800-234-5505 Ph# 801--6254222 Alan D. Allred Karen S. Borg John L. Harder e-mail: Lelters@standard.net Ja nice Pearce Stephen C. Thompson Mayor Douglas E. Thompson Lette rs t o the Edit or The H e rald Journ al 75 West 300 North Logan, UT 84321 Ph# 435-752-2121 Fax: 435-753-6642 e-mai l: hjletter@hjnews.com A WORLD Logan Canyon Your Destination? & -BlCkpildc.in g oS ki ing - C lim b ing oHiking oSno ws hotin g oSightstt in g Accents 57 Sourn MAIN • locAII Uni'49 21 753·3497 7 �r--------------------, J WANT TO JOIN THE LOGAN CANYON COALITION LOGAN RIVER and receive a subscription to CANYON WIND SCENIC RIVER YES! """" UTAH'S Uri. WILD aad o $20.00 Annual Membership o I would like to contribute an additional $10 $20 $JO $40 $50 Lots more o I would like to volunteer. o Here's $12.00 for a great T-shirt. o I' m broke! Here's five bucks. o Please add my name to your mailing list. ,llUllu.;,.,;", LEAVE A LEGACY n •• LOG"_ AI UrAl" 'Ian WItD "_D IC'_IC a",. Name ________________________________ Streetl ________________________________ City, ______:State Phone' Zip, _______ E-mail _____________ Plun ..... ke check Support the Logan River and null to, include shipping Logan Canyon Coalition USU Box'1614 L _____ Order these new Wild and Scenic bumper stickers for the Logan River. A $2.00 donation for each sticker will _____ Please consider a donation to Lee. All donations will be used for the protection of Logan Canyon. Lee wants to thank the hundreds of individuals, businesses, and founda tions who have contributed time, money, and expertise towards the legal defense of Logan Canyon. Your generous support is appreciated. .... ................... Wi !! =-=-- . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . _ • •;:.... _ . - - --- !!' --= = - BULK RATE US POSTAGE - - Paid CO.4.L:J:T:J:ON Loga", UT Pnm,' N° 39 WorkIng f o r Ih e Prolullo n of l oga n Canyon USU Box #1674 Logan, Utah 84322-0199 .,t Please Renew Your Membership Today � 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 3335 Image Width Image Width in pixels 2607 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/716">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/716</a> Purchasing Information Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item. To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a> Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2013 Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner. Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 300 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Checksum 2464155604 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 LCC newletter, "Canyon Wind" Description An account of the resource Newsletters updating the events of Logan Canyon Coalition including but not limited to the formation of LCC, denial of appeal, violations of FEIS, lifting of the stop work order, and the eligibility of Logan River for wild and scenic designation. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kobe, Kevin Lyon, Tom Wagner, Tim Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Wilderness areas Public lands--Utah--Logan Canyon Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Newsletters Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Logan Canyon Coalition Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1990-1999 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon/Logan Canyon Coalition Papers, 1963-1999, COLL MSS 314 Box 1 Folder 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/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 MSS314Bx1Fd8 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/0746706bd695ce1dd044373d75b5445a.pdf 0d11dbad9ec78f6c11949d7f6d774ba9 PDF Text Text giyH- . . . OF THE PERFECT HOST This colorful WELCOME sign displayed in hundreds of business establishments from Edmonton, Alberta to Mexico City greets travelers along this famous Three-Nation BOULEVARD OF NATIONAL PARKS. It is the proud emblem of membership in a rapidly growing International Association founded in 1955 to foster friendship and good will between the three great Nations or North America and to encourage more of you to visit and enjoy the amazing variety of recreational areas, National Parks and Monuments served by t his, the most beautiful Highway in all the World. Establishments displaying this emblem rep resent the substantia l civic leadership in each area listed. The man behind the sign is proud of his community and of his own personal standing and reputation. It is truly "The Sign of the Perfect Hos!." 140 WEST SECOND SOUTH SALT LAKE CITY UTAH �MONTANA BABB, Monl. 12 ... lIe .cenle d.lve .Ion g L a k. Sherburne to Many GI.· cier, Hote' Auort Thorn ... n·, Gener.1 SIO.e CO NNEC TING CANADA AND ( B ) 5 . ROMANTIC OLD MEX ICO NOT a co mple le lis t of . U cilies Your Nor l h 10 Soulh GUIDE Ihru Ihe fa bulous gra nde ur of the on US 89. A Roster of Assoc:iatioD. live s ta te "Eighty-Niner !lest." Me mbers as of July 1. 1957. 89 S T. CHARLES. Ida. • !'I orth end of Bear L.k. M onlOn Clle BROWNING, Mon t. Jct. us 2-Glle w .y to GI.eler MARYSVALE. Utah M lry,val, Motel "8" Mote l N", l ion.1 Plrk. M ultu ... 01 the PI.in. Ind l. n, Ch .... ber 01 Co ...... e.c. Wlllern Motel Sherbu.ne Mercantll. Co . Fir" N .tion a l B.nk Scrive. Ta"lde.my .A.t Studio GI.cier Aeporter CAMERON. Ads. Jet. State At . 64 t o t h. louth R im 0 1 t he Gr",n d Ca n yo n vii t he Ea.t Drive. E.c,lI.nl el •• vate d vl.w 0 1 P aI n te d D ....t . Cameron Tr.dlng P oat • GRAY MOUNTAIN. Aris. J ult .outh o f St", t e At . 64 J unct ion. 51 ... lIea I rom the G r. n d C.n)'on . N ew GrlY Mount.ln Motel a n d Tradlno Pall TOWNSEND. Ariz. F ore.t Aecrea t ion Area C .... p T O... nMnd R uort and Service S t .Uo n • • DUPUYER. Mo nt. F LAGSTAFF. Aria. us H i n d us It Alt . Fab· Sulli v an Mer.t.ntlle Co . Chadwick &. Son Se.vl . . G.r.ge " nd Cl l e Jel u lou . F II g ,ta ll i. t h t m e tro· po lita n c enter 0 1 the "'1" No •• t h er n Arl z o n . . .e n lc. ,por ti ng , an d reern t lo n . ' ... a. Air con di t io n ed by N at ur • • t h . F la g . l tall a r ea il I.vore d by coo l , u ... m e n. a nd mild wl nt e ... w hic h per ... lt com l or t .ble . n d .afe y car '. o und .cen, 10 th t m any near b y loCe n lc a lt rac· li o n l. t h e G r an d Ca n yo n •• n d n umero u . n .tlona l monume n ts. C h am ber 01 Co ...... "'" W eltern H ili M ot el "SS" Motel H I. L.and Motel Kno" Mo t or Co u.1 Arizo n ian M otor I..od g e L Motel T w in P eak, M ot el B ra n ding Iron Mote! I.. a n e Mo te l &. Te"aco B urt·, Skylight T r .il" Pa.k Sh.dy N ook Court C o ... merclal H otel W e.ther l o.d H o te l Wette.ne. Hotel M onte Vi, l . Hotel • GREAT FALLS, Monl. Jcl . us 17·"-Monuna·, Ilr O' H ome 01 l imOI'I n t cltl" N or th M ontana F . lr .nd R o · deo: "Old Tow n " e"hibl l io n It lalrgroundl: An ~ con d l co p per planl: orlol n .1 , t ud io .nd gal lery 0 1 lamo .. . co w boy ar l lll , Ch ar le .. M. "' .... ell; Ol.nt Spri n g. o f t he M lnou r l A lver. Chamber o f Com ... erce Ferou, Motel Shuta N Oltl SunJe t Mottl Tribune· Lnde~ • NEIHART. Monl. 7.3'~ n . 51' ...... 11 of beau EI . t if .. , K inll ', H ill Pan Neihart General Store • WHI TE S ULPHUR SPRINGS. Mo nt. ~:oP:t~';k··~e B;.nding Pop .. lar ...... mer "'lOrt ; c .... · tive minerai health . oring, ; .acellent hunting .nd fI.hing . R OUry Club Berg Chev~olet. Inc . R e ~(I M ot or , Wa',h', Te".co Servi ce Sker~ill &. Aader 011 Co . S ... ith Lumber and Hdwe . Co. Compton C.bl n , Tr .. ck Stop Cale Ed ... ard. O.oce.y Firat N ational B , nk Gamb l ~ Store R.y·, F eed 4. G.al n Meagh e . Co .. nty N ew, ' r .... ~ining AOO'" Sport'''' e n', S i nk H oult J oe Welch Super Unio n "7'" Serv ice Ed . Babbitt Mota. Co. Morrow Moto,.. Deck'" U n ion Service F lag.I,1f Auto Supply Ari zo n a Surply Co. H u t chl .. n Moto .. Boice, B a k er Fire.tone StD •• O . B M otor_ C h eahire M ot otl Wrbber 8 .oa. "luff' , P.ck.ge S t ore Bab b i!! B . OI. Oeot . Store J . C . Pennel' Co, Vln S ick lp oS. S h oc k Fron.ke S t Udio W igwam CUr:OI T he Indian Shan 5 .... Aoebuek Co, V"lIev N.tlo n .1 B.nk Brandin' I.on W nlern Store Har~~r F u~nltu.e Co . F"od l own Market "' 1"n_taU R ~ . lIy B~nk 01 Ar' zo .. ~ "~;zonl D~lIy Sun Coconino Sun - WILSALL. Mont. Pau l', Store LI VI NGS TON, Mo nl. Jct . us 10--0 n the "Great Bend " a t t h e Vello w "one R lv, er AI Ihe he.d 0 ' p •• adlse Valley. Ve . .. ·.ound reaort: hun t lna. lilhl n g .eertUlon .nd Dude Ranch area ; ,cenlc and I ho.te. t Vellowllon. to GI. · cier route. Ch.mber 01 Commerce 1.land R uor l Motel Parkway Mo tel Del Mar Motet Reeder Courl AainbO ... Motel 5 Ba r ' S M otel &. Tralter Cou.t M.rl in ·.. tnc. RUlau • .!nl T .. il Aite .ln C"e Bla '" MOlor Co. Gatewar MotOr Co . Living. on Oil Co, l..ivinOston O~ .. g Store Card inal Dlltribu l intl Co. M c Laughlin Con.t. Co . John J . Wigglnl. Oi.I . F.rk COUnl7 New. Liv lng.ton Enterpri.e I".om FI.g f tall . US It and US 56 run loaether d\Oe W .. , thru William.. o"ew,,~ to th. Grand Canyon. At A'h fork US ~9 turn, !Iou'" to PrClcolI . AI ternate US 89 mlk. ~ '" South w~~1 too" out 0 1 FI.o." " v,. Oak Creek Canyon Joining reg "I,,· US It .o.in at O."n,,, Dell. jutl North of P ,"cott. WI LLIAMS , Ariz. • P RA Y, MonJ. Chico H OI S~r l ng , Lodge W an , G~n St or ~ &. Cablnl I D A H 0 • EMIGRANT, Mom. E m ig ""," S i or e • G ARD INER. Monl. Turn r igh l a l Ge n e" .. J unCl lon 10 folcw US 89 or. North e" lru.ee to Vallowste,,,e MONTPELIER. Ida . Par k ; V"R r 'round l ourlll and recrt.tio n al area: FI," ln\!, big game. o"e 0 ' America's Dr,.t . ut elk t>u n tln ll II round.. A, motlern ci l y in the Soulh ea,1 corner 01 Icen ' e Id aho 10 cated a t the Junclion 0 1 t h e hl. l or;c old Orego n T rail ( US Chamber 0 1 Commerce 30N) an d Amer ic a ' ! Bou tevard 01 Nulo"a, Park. ( US 88) SIO O ovrr Ilol nt lor .... !townt a"( nor l h'loulh travel. Center 01 Bear L. "k" ea ,in; W or ld', I"'QU I ", h olphate depo,itt . Chamber 01 Commerc~ V I• • Day M otel J e ... el! Motet 1Ch;el M ot e I Motel Three Sitter. Sw ' u Motel BurO t'yne C ", le 1 Je ... ell Colin Shop Fro ... Gardin ..•• M onl ., 'et n ;c Sliver Gr ill Cale US.9 continuu due .outh th.u E.rI', Cale the een l er 0 1 Y.llow"one .nd Bud', Bar Gr", nd Telon Na l iona' P"'r k , 10 A leh Th.", •• th' J",cklon Ha l, Cou n t.)', H anun Che v ,ole t Co. Gr.nd C.nyon of the Sn.ke Eddie', Lounge Aiv ... SUr V.lley, cull Ih.u Jenl,n', AG Market • •cenle COrne. 01 Id.ho .Iong Bu_co Produce Co. the .horn 01 Be",. I.. . k , and IGA Food Ce n ter on to S",II I.. .ke Cit), vi", Ihe Gr ime. Barber Shoo O• • ulilul L ooan C.nyon . MO<lern D rug Co. • AO),.I B . k ery MORAN, Wyo. ~:~~e ~a"':ce ':.teo;-'~c~~' C o. Jet. us 26·217 R ul E. t a l e E"ch a n ge F ia g o R.nch Te"aeo Pr oduc t . Ar t Sore n ,on', P hl ll lo, "66 " JACKSON. Wyo. Thie l .nd D',on B.D •. S t ore Mo n toeller L.undry an d A co lo rf u, W eatl.n town, Sou 0.1' Cl e . n er, thern g ate w ay t o t he lab u lou. Buroo),ne P h • • maey J.cklO n H o le Coun lr y li n d T e· ton V ello w llo n e P .... k • . T ou ';'1 Ma llh e w ~ Mor tu ary • n d D u d e Allnc h center. yea r T he Allin ger Co • ' rou n d p rogr.m 0 1 IPor ll •• n . Sunrla.d a ll Co. tert ainment. hun t in o . , I, h lnll. Fr.,nk W SOrOall· S n o ... Ki n g MounUl n Ski Li ft. The N e ..... E"" ... iner ni Oht cl .. b" Ch .... ber ot Co ... merce P ARIS , Ida. The F I. me Mote l B ear L ike C ounty Sea t .nd Rich mond HO l e l M otel area , h op p in g c en t e r . Buu t; Warm Sorin g , R a nch lUi M in neton k a Cav~ o p en to Ragen Point RelOr t tour ltt. . IponlO . ,hip P ari. An v il Motel I..ion. Club , A" , M otel Pari, Lion, Club Silver Spu. C . le M ark'n Chevron Service Old Wyo ... lnll Chuck Wagon ~nd Grocerin Log C.bln C lub Oertech Market and Fred', Super M.rket T o u.itt Su .. oliu Pau l H an.o n Co . Lowe Drug Co. Donald O. M.cLeod . M. D . P~ .r Lake County Abltt.cl Co Oeorge H ul .... i1h Aoenc)' Wanenburg Conll. Co . ""I.v ... an·" COO". Aun .. I"c . !'''e''herd Bro •. Merchandi" JacklOn H ole H .rdware J.cklOn HoI, Mota. C'a.lsen "6fi" Service Gr l ... mett Lumber and Hdwe . Th. Aoundup W W Elmo .... M. D. ''''ar Lake Coun l y Com ... ill io n The P ari, Pall Frank Ho ... er Te.lCO Serv ice Jim Brld l " Court Tow n C ... a n d Mot el Mo ,,"uln Vie ... Mo l el W il.o" Mo t el Gate w ay H ot e ' Yan k n Jim Trading Pelt C. II I... n Drug Co. P •• k', Fly Shop .L"," ,.,S",.,o"""'""'-'C'·'"'·'·"C.___ ,_,' W Y 0 M I NG -,:::::--;;,,::c,,:--,"'::-- ,,::;: • • I Gatew.)' 10 the Orand Canyon, JCI. St.te At . 64 to C.nyo .. VII ' age on the South R I .... Nulled a t the 1001 01 Bill WII . liam" Mounllin high In Ih, ,un k illed cool of Kllb.b N •• t lo n al Forni, Willi ..... il poo· " Iar al .n . 11 l,e . r tOurilt center be.,,,u,, 01 II COOl tum ... e. nigh I,. and ... lId win t er cl l ... ate. F i,hlnll. hu n tlnq. win ttt ,po r ll: H om. 0 1 th e fa ou. B ill W IIII , m, M ount.ln Me n . Ollte w ay to "Arl z cna H 1" .. way," trave led by nine millirn Wllliam,. G r,nd Canyo n Ch"mber 0 1 Com ... er~e belu l y Ice king t ourl." a n K alb a b MO"1 n u ll·y. T hun d erbi r d In n W ea l erner Motel N or r i, MOiel FREDONIA. Ariz. Th e CO ll ee P ot P lpI S"l n g, Nationa l Mo"u Lee'. Ca l e mIni Weat 01 l ow n . Old Smoky Bubeque Wulward Motel Vaughn'. I ndian S t ore B' k e r Service a n d Motel B.oo k aby', Conoco SU l ion ~!~'··OfC U;:r.'on. M lln Mo t or Co . "6fi" Auto Supp ly Shie ld ', , n lurance Agency General Petrol,u'" Co .. p. JACOB LAKE. Ar b . Spr OUII. Ael lz Co. H igh In tha plnea 0 1 the w ... t End Grocery ... illh l y Kaib.b F ornI . Only The William, !'lew, en t rance 10 Ihe N o.th A im o f the Grind Canyo n : H o ... e Of world', only whi l e_tailed Kal STATE RI. U (To So. Rim) bab Squirre l •• Aed L .ke L od ge Auort J.co b L.ke Inn R uort G.a n d Ca nyon Steak H ouse . _ ARIZONA I ... _______________ • • - Fro ... J acob L ak e . US It de_ Kend, the Kaibab P latea u cut t h r u t he V EAM ILL ION C L IFF S. M A ABLE C AN VO N. to I he u"'ou' N AV AJO BRIDGE, a 616 l oot a pa n aero .. Ih e C Olorado Aiver 417 lee l abo ve I he balli ng w ate ... H e re U.. h ig h way tu r n, So u t h • nd h e .d, to r F la g s taft acro .. the co lor f u ' PA INTED DES . ERT a n d N a v ajo I n dia n AU· ervUion . S everal d ue r ! lod g e, I nd l ra d lng 0011, ,,"er e " .. I· len t foo d a nd m o de rn aceo m · mo du lo n ,. an d w h ile n o , t r eel a dd .n, .. are a v ~i l ab le a e ro u the reltr v ltlon. e ac h r tlorl c" n b. rea dily loca t e d , nd Id en tl i led b y w ell DOlled .ign ,. • GRAND CANYON (S ouih Rim ) OP E N A LL Y E AA F re d H arvey H otel' O.and C a ny on I,.,n K o lb B rOl. S tu dio V cr ka ... p ·, Au t h entic I n dl.n H a nd lcra lt a nd So u venl .. • SEDONA (89AI M a gn ificen t "enle retort . . . . 0 1 bea u ll f \J 1 O.k Cree k C. n y on Ch . mber 0 1 Commerce Pu r !)'''' u n ', A d ve nlu re Mot.1 R . ln bo w ·, En d B ar.Ca f. , COTTONWOOD (89AI T .. adlno ce nte r of le fl ll , Y.rd. MARBLE CANYON V. ll ey. TU llo oo t .nd M on tuu · m. Catt le nllio n a l monum.ntl Art Greene" Cli ff Dweller '. L odge V ... de Villey Chlmber Ma r ble C.n y on L od ll e of Co ... merce Vermillio n Cli ff. A. n ch L odge COllon w ood P roO ..... lv . A .. n. The Gap Tradi ng P Oll Eden Cou r t R icha.d, Men', Shop Verde Indepe nden' RAIN B OW BA ID GE NAT ION A L MO N U MENT CLARKS DALE (89A) T hl, Uri n il ' phenomenon m.y be r.ach ed by a hlgh' y ICe n le Clark,dale L .undry drive ac. o .. t he co lo.ful P ai n l. Se ln a Suplr M arket e d O ... r t v ia Tub. Ci t y. Ari z . P ack t.i p. 10 t h e B ridoe ar . nn oed by writin g ARIZONA Coni. N,v'Jo M ountain T radin O Pall OVER T ona le., Arl l . • • �JEROME (B9A ) L.~rgut "ghost city" in Amer · ica--once a roarlnp mining camp. now a crumbling ci'ty of romantic ruin. c linging a mile hillh to the rugged terrain of Mlngu. Mtn. Jerome Mine Mu seum open dally, Jerome Historical Sociely • MESA, A riz. ~ ® In AMERICA PRESCOTT (US a9) Geographical center 01 Arl A R I Z 0 N A zona, county seat and metro . pO litan center 01 Yavapai (Con.linued) County, Prescott ginal capital 01 wa s the ori the stale. Scene of the l int rodeo. Pr es· WIC KENBURG, Ariz. cott i. known .. Ihe "Cowboy Capilal of the World," AUrae. Jct. US 60·70. "Dude Ranch tion, include nnrby mineral Capita l " in the Hassayampa spring resorts, SI>ar ' ot Hall River Valley; lamous pioneer Museum, Bucky O'Neill Manu gold mining camo nOw a popu ment. Smoki Mu s eum, mild lar winler resort, "Gold Rusl> year 'round climate, fishing Days" late in January. Dude and big game, Ranch Rodeo s, and nightly il Chamber of Commerce lustra ted lectures at tl>e new Apache Lodge La Siesta Patio Auditorium Sierra Court are highlights of each .eason. Aula Rest Motel TI>e RoundUP Club Lakeside Motel Brillol Motel Hauayamna Courl Motel Rancho Grande Ca.cade Motel We sterner Court Dan Dee Court La Siesta Motel Mile Hi Motel Restauranl Susan', H i. Acre Motel Ouert Cypress Trailer Ranch Ma nor Motel Crestview Motel Head Hote l Valle Vllta Motel Pine Cone Inn Sun Valley Motel Maxine's R~ s laura"t Circle JR Motel Ricl>lield Oil Co, Motel Mecca Am e rican Laund." BrUtons Bar.7 Rancho a nd Linen Supply Frontier Inn ROltrer.Btoom Dr ug Co, Kelly'. Ca l e Prescott Cigar Store Santa Fe Cafe Harriett S, Banister, R e a ltor Ted's Cale Cline Motor Co , Te~as Cafe ~ :i~~.::,~a ~~:li~Se~!~ ce Valley Nat io nal Bank The Food Ba. ket Petersen', Mens Wear Witaker Oit Co, Circle·S L. a undry Pauley &. Rodgen. Realto rs Ray'. Saddlery Valley Nalional Bank Ward CleanerS B an k of Arizona Ryan. Evan. Oruq Store., In c, Allen', M~rket Fo~worth.Galbraith L.br . Co, Harry Marshall. Rullor C. W Paige. Realty &. In., Union "76" 0; ' CBernard J, Poll rna", Real Prescott Even ing Courier Eltate and , nlurance Yavapai County Mene nge r Sea .. &. H ill Motor Co. • Many Feathers Trading Post . Dr. Jam .. O. Woodson YARNELL , A rIZ. MaISon Plumbing &. Heating Shrine 01 St. J~sepl> of the S Mountains, life.like sUlues 01 Rudy 's hell Service Mall ico at and Craig great beauty in a natu."t se t . Union "76" Producll ling 01 massive boulders, oak Shell Serv ice Station and holly PONray the pass io n Safeway SIOr n, Inc. and deatl> 0 1 Christ, Harry 0 , Cooke, Jr . Yarnell K iawani . Club Ari ' ona Public Service Co . Ranel> House Cafe TI> e Wickenburg Sun Betty'S Gold Nuggett • 1 _-::::::::::::::::::::::-:-::--:__ In C AN A D A CANAOAI Friendly Neighbor a nd Magni,icen t Playground 0 1 the Grtat Northwest, US 89 connecll with ALBERTA Rt, 2 at the border EAST 01 Montana'. Glacier N ational Park, l_FORT MACLEOO In lor. matlon Bure au Reoer. vatlon Headqu ar ters 2-MOUNT REVELSTOKE National Park l-GLACIER National Park 4--VOHO Nation ~ 1 Park 5--KOOTENAV Natl, Park 6--JASPER National Park 1-LAKE LOU ISE &-BANFF Nalion~ 1 Park 9--CROWSNEST PASS lD-WATERTON L.AKES Nalional Park II-ELK ISLANO Nail, Park 12-WOOD BU F FALO National Park 13-0AWSON CREEK Alaska Highway 14--RED DEER VALL.EV Badlandl 89'er • Auoclatlon Members EDMONTO N. Alberta Alberta Travel Bureau Legl alative Building North Star Aula Court 10126 King.way Avenue • CALGARY, Alberta Hepburn Motor Cour t , Ltd , 5809 Macleod Tra;I • CONG RESS JCT. Aru. Je t . State Rt, 91 Congresl Grocery an d Tavern T HI R D MARINETTE, Ariz. Max M. Clayton Clayton and Son. ANNUAL Winter rnort and tr ai ning quarte .. lor the CI> lc ago Cubs. Mel a w,," lounded by Mar· man settle .. in 1877, i. a fer· tile agriculture and fr"it "row. ing area. and i. the s,t e 01 a bea"tlful Mormon T emp le. Na t ural hal mineral springl east 01 Meaa allnct many healtl> leekeu. Chamber 01 Comme.ee Maricopa Inn Buckhorn MineraI Ball>. Motel and Hearth Resort The Mesa Tribune , TUCSON, Ariz. "TI>e Sun s hine City." Ari z . ana's oldest tOwn was once a walled village near severa ' old mi .. ions. Modern T uc.on in addition to being one 01 Ihe major economic centeTi 01 the Southwest, II lamou l lor many fine accommOdalion s . male Is. and guest ranches tl>at abound in tl>i . popular winter reaort. Side trip. into O:d Me xico, an hour' . drive away, add variety 10' Tucson'l w in ter gUUII, T ucson Chamber at Commerce South Tucson C, of C , EI Camino Mot e l Rio Molel Oracle Motel Downtown Motor Hotel Riviera Malar L.odge Sun Tan Motor Court Saddle and Sirloin George Hall'. Travel Me~ ico T ourists Ser~lce Bureau Aritona Daily Star Tucson Daily Citizen • - US 80 turn s eall at Tucson. US 89 continues louth. TUM AC A CORI. Ar iz. N a lional Monument L.oy '. Texaco Service • NO G ALES, Ariz. Port 01 entry InlO Old Me xico. The ' nternational Boundary consist. a t a chain link fence which spliu th e city into two nation_Nogales, Arizona and Noqalu. Sonora, Junction wilh MEXICO RT, 15, Me~ico's newly paved West Coast High. way , SOUlhern t er mlnu . of US 89, 1700 beautiful miles aoull> 01 Monlana's Glacie. National Park. CI>amb er a t Commerce Coronado Motet New U"town Motel Arroyo Mote' Arrowl>ead Motel Bowman H Olel Noga les Daily H erald Nogareo International CONVENTION B9'ers International Highway A8s'n., Inc. JACKSON HOLE, Wyo. OCT. 7 and 8, 1957 In MEXI C O FUN and FIESTA abound lou tl> of the Border along the e n lir e 1500 miles of MEX . ICO'S newly paved West Cout F ed era l RT 15 wl>ich connect. with US ag at NO. GALES, Arizona and Sonora. • 89'e. """Ioeiat ion Members NOGALES. So no ra F i." talte of Mexican hOlpi tality, COlorful c urio sl>ops. The Cavern Cafe American Trave l Bureau Mosaico. Mexicanos S de RL • GUAYMAS, Sonora Modern Mexican Port. sandy beaches, fi.herman', para. dise. Ho t el Playa de Cortez • ALAMOS, Son or a Inlrigu~ng .Ide trip 35 mil .. ea s t Irom NavoJoa . Casa de loa Tesoro. • MAZATLAN, S in a loa " Pearl o f the Pacific". 14 mllu ~IOw the Trop.c of Cancer Palm doUed beacl> e s, eKcellent . deep lea li.hing , Hote l Freem.n H Olel La Siuta • GUADALAJARA. Sinaloa Mexico'• • econd lar9est city, ideal year 'round climate. Californi a Courts �HIGHWAY TO GRANDEUR N alional Parks a nd Monumenll adjacent 10 US 89 ••• the mOil I cenie rout. in aU the World. MONTANA 1. Chas. M. Russell Museum 2. Big Hole Battlefield, N.M. 3. F ish in g, Big Game Area WYOMING 4. GrandCanyonSnake River S. Star Va lley, Fishing,Game IDAHO 6. Minnetonka Cave, Bear Lake Resort Area, World's Larges t Phosphate Deposits. UTAH 7. Sce n ic Logan Canyon 8. Timpanogos Cave N.M. 9. Manti Mormon Temple 10. Ca pitol Reef NaH. Mon. II . 13. 14. 15. C edar Breaks Nat!. Mon. Natural Bridges N .M. Ra inbow Bridge N.M. Monume nt Valley ARIZONA 12. IS. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 2•. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. P ipe Springs Natl. Mon. Nava jo Natl. Mon. Canyo n De Chelly N.M. Wupatki Natl. Mon. Sunset Crater Natl. Mon. P e trifie d Forest N.M. Walnut Canyon Nat!. Mon . Tuzigool Natl. Mon. Montezuma Nat!. Mon. Tonto Nail. Mon. Casa Grande NatL Mon. Sag uaro Nat!. Mon. Chirica hua NaIl. Mon. Tumacacori Nall. Mon. Organ Pipe Cactus N.M . � 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 2764 Image Width Image Width in pixels 1274 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/792">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/792</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 1265306893 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 Welcome to the Scenic Route of Three Nations brochure Description An account of the resource Welcome to the Scenic Route of Three Nations brochure for businesses from Edmonton, Alberta, Canada to Mexico highlighting places to visit and towns along the route. Subject The topic of the resource Tourism United States Highway 89 Alberta Route 2 Mexico Route 15 Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Brochures Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available 89'ers International Highway Association, Inc. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Alberta (Canada) Arizona Canada Idaho Mexico Montana Utah United States Wyoming Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1950-1959 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, Edgar Bentley Mitchell Papers, 1950-1959, COLL MSS 322 Box 2 Folder 2 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/xv06356">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv06356</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 MSS322Bx2Fd2 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/fb7aee0f995a02b83f72c8cf4c06db71.pdf 805ee78f3831c96cbd6e49ec7666515b PDF Text Text , ��... tIZONA. OffICE , 1021 f.. COIII.I1:oo(k td . AOMINISTRATION OffiCE .40 WEST SECOND SOUTH Sf '''_"i.," · 7708 Dial Cit SALT LAKE CIT Y 1, UTAH DIAL El9. 9J22 A. i ~o .. o 89eu OffiCE O f omellS, .... V .... Iy STEW."" d,,,, W..II'"'' ",,,,,I Willi ...... A,It" .. S. O . MOIlOW Yln . , ••• lel."t "'or,o.. 104010" f l.",.If, ArllOIII .UHUT Io4ITCHUL v i... , ... Mllchl n Mol'! ,d,,,, lo,"". U•• h W 6 . .... SS SUfl'"'Y'T, "" ~,,, h SI• •,. 1040111 Wlck,,,bIO'9, A.I,o,," OIIiCTOU, GUllLUt.tQ SEDANO HoI,1 104 •• ( ... d. 1'.11 •• 1'.10,.1•• , O"orl , I<oI .. I<.. f.,! IU.HETT A. HENOIYX C.....,,,,, M" N ' ud Tow .. 'U'IUIICh, U,.h flANIC W. SO _lOAn ' 1.. , Sou '; ly a... ~ of 101,110 Id,1Io Mo"'~U .., DALLAS .... CLINGER "rl"~ idoll, Lod,. A pl." Wfoml" 9 IICHAID C. FERGUS Fit,., looI ot<o l &, .. , F.U•. 1-4".h,," IXiCUTlVI 5(CU'AU': ",,,UIH H. CA NTWEu.. 140 W Secoad South s..It llh CI.... U,.h SCENIC ROUTE OF THE AMERICAS � 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 1331 Image Width Image Width in pixels 2913 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/796">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/796</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 4127675602 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 89'ers International Highway Association, Inc. blank letterhead and envelopes Description An account of the resource 89'ers International Highway Association, Inc. blank letterhead and envelopes. Subject The topic of the resource Tourism United States Highway 89 Alberta Route 2 Mexico Route 15 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 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Salt Lake City (Utah) Salt Lake County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1950-1959 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, Edgar Bentley Mitchell Papers, 1950-1959, COLL MSS 322 Box 2 Folder 3 Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv06356">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv06356</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 MSS322Bx2Fd3 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/0e3779ac2fffa29a2305955fd0d6cf9c.pdf cacfc2bf44510752c2a418d4e0b9257b PDF Text Text , o TOTAl. MI01J:\,T T ill S CHECK II" I.A~CF.: 03 MIOUST THIS ~IIECK BA I.ASCE �IlJ\ L . IIItO"T volfn TOTA l. MJOUNT T ill S c m~C K 105 > , --------------------------------1i , 00 TOTAL }\ ~ I O UNT TIll S GII ECK TOTAL A~IOUNT TIllS CIlECK nAL,\ ~CE ~ "'-;1- - CO ~'A . .D t>D �II,\L , IJHO' T t'OU' I) TOTAL A~IOUNT nus CIII::CK IlALASCE 108 , , --------------~1 , o ,,,,J~"'----_I, TOTAl. S-fJ:a.: ---------------,-,-~--,-- ··-'- S-C-- C-~--~ ,l~ \ 'O m ,- r lI~ II E- K IJA LASCE TOTA L M IOUNT TIll S CUECK HAI.ASCE �, --------------------------~ , : o I ,, ~, TOTAL I A~IOUNT q _- ~ 10 b . JMIO UNT TillS Cm :CK I '/) , -=I £" .. f' ! ~ TOTAL Till S CIIE CK :l..h.3 -V I 112 ~RDE" OF 195!L ~ ..o::u.~~-----j _~ : . ~v ~'OR j ,4 " 10 , : ------------------------~: ~ 1 T01i\ l. I ,\ HOUN T T ill S CIIECK l U; oC �'- , IIAt . HItO'T t"Ol(1) 113 ~ gf.~ MY I ~ :oJi)Enl~· 'j'1'I/// ,-P;;, , 41J ~ 195 . --;{};-. AIJ '7 'I , , • Jo'O~ 8tl144#MJ ~- tr ( ~ , , 0 0 - , TOT,\L I M IOUNT T ill S c m :CK J", "C IJALANC~: l.. t ;~:Ep,OF (q: 114 4"~ ; Fon • DJ. , U ), J , - I 195!:L -;Jj' , , , ~-, 'J , , 0 0 I A~IOUNT I 1'01'''1. 1/ 1,;- 1';'" TillS CHECK 8AI.,\N C.: ... 115 ~hMb< l~'~'W F a Po 'A ) 195;t- ~ Q• . Do A<' /1. .JJ uv v ,.;fllO At?-,C& R /'> v rJ J ~ ~ I TOli\L I Al'lOUN T T ill S c m ;CK BALANCE ( q ." I, �r 116 12-.. &:i ,' "i IJ.\L. II RO'T fQ I!'J) ..£. -4 ~ ~:tJ)E~'j)~ ~, AIiJ W 5..':L , • YOR ~~.: 1:, , ..-\ - - "_'1 " <i ! • , • 0 0 I TOTAL ?l..'J&. pY ANOUNT TillS CIIECK I1ALANCE • j~ 117 b Qltl)lm OF JL. ,9 -<J' <L o 195'1- ,:p- ) .fr/'_ .1 , -d~ i FO,[! , , • 0 , • 0 I T01,\L IM IOUNT Ti ll S CIIECK h ~ IIALMi CE "~ .,~#L, , ,..J i B _~ . ORUEn , 4t- ,' J f ;j . J~o : L L L195~ "~,JI - -Ii O"~-: • , • ~ .~'\'1~~Lio, 0 , • 0 I I ANO UNT TOTAL T ill S c m :CK BALANCE 0 .:3 ,.''1 I .!:L I �Jr' JUL . HRO"T . \ r 'l 'J .' V .•. J ,J C d , FOR ,t. U 1952- OIWE It OF d) {J. ~ • 0 ...... 'iCc:} ft--' I ~ / d ~ FOII' U 119 , • 0 1 T01,\L I MIOUNT TillS CIIECK IJ D - 0 UALASCE 0 1.- 120 ~~[J-J~ .Fon ) . ------ (/. (/ • 1-_., ' , • _ 0 0 ( I TOTAl. I MIOIJNT Till SCHECK '-'76 l.zg BALA;\:CE '1 121 17, . .M J{ d <:;:1---, ;;oRium 01' d . , n G J95 ~ _ ) , , , , • FOR ;? 0 0 1 I A~10U~'T TOTAL THI S CIU;CK IJAlASCt: I ,~' DD I �, ;;t',;;j i ,"p , ?) $ -.G.-" n .. -:p-, . . 122 ([ i:.:: 19?_ 1;L .A . ..., drr P -p. '[r ••. 1... tiEH . ) 9_1 17 V ~Oll ::'it:::!l.r , • , , , 0 """ r;, } IL\L . Il HO'T n)I!' 11 ..:r "" I 0 liLr ,,0 I TOTAl. I M IOUNT THI S CIl t:CK UK' ,, 0 [lAL\NCE "- rr . eli . ~ 123 •..)- :-'> I OIU)EIl Of' .W . .ff.19 5!:;Z... ~, . 7 2Ji!-~ Uf ..P ; '" v , t , 0 , , 0 ' ''J I I ANO UNT I --+> TOTAl. T ill S CUECIi 1 ",,' ,,~ IlALA!\'CE 124 , ' ,,;: :.s:J1 19 '<h 7> /d", %' ) O;EI(r: + ~i / ....' , t , ,"'OR li',1', .J J aJ.' J p, , , / 0 0 I I T OTAL MIO UNT T ill S CIIE CK BALAN CI-: in 1 7 1 �~ IlA I. . 'It BKO'T FQ ll'n 125 &- '7 195..:z- OlHn:n a t' J ~ , f -lnJl&':'!il44~~'- ~4t'il4 • v= roR . > • 0 , • 0 I T01,\ L I }\~IOUN'r T HI S CH ECK 3 11 1 ijAlA!<OCE ,',Lrf9 ./ ' 126 ,'/ .f.· . #; .~r ~ .j,- r: 2J' oJlOJm OF Jt ' .u.><' < 4 t<·d: ~~~ ,, FOR 0 , • 0 I TOTAL I A~IOIJNT T ill S CIU:CK I,/' ijALA NCE 127 • <,g t Lt. } / ' onmmOF ',,0 if'. :j ,.1:',. . 1?-+ 9 I'CL. ,± ' , 'II :2 "''' f ' {4 , .... , > , FOR (/ 0 , • 0 . I I A N OUN T TOTAl• TIll S c m :CK 8AL \ SCE I-U{ liD �IJAL. HKO'T 12 8 fUlfil •.., ' ~~~~~~~~~~=---~~ 'on r • o ---------------------------i', o TOTAl. M IOUNT TIll S c m :CK II,\LAXCt; ,I..C", " 129 TOTA L A:-IOUNT TillS CIIECK • >. 130 TOT,\I. M IOU!'lT T ill S e m :CK KA1.AXC !:: Sf) , �tl.\t . HItQ'T FQ lfI) I TOTAL I M IOUNT 'l'III S c m :CIi IIA1.A!o:CE ,. ItA 132 CJ-: -.,,'. ell' " I - , , ,< 195-Z-, ' OlluEH 0.- J. 7'/_ ) , j r- , J t. . f.,c,,1 • 'OH J f. ~ • > f • , , 0 0 ,- I I MIOUNT TillS TOTAL c m :CIi IJA1.A!o:CE I I A!'IOUNT T ill S TOTA L c m :cli IJAI.A);,CE �II. \ L. " !l O'T FO R' I) , FOR __________________________ • ~1 , o TOTAl. A~IOUNT TI ll S CII ':<.;1i llAL \NCE T OTAl. I\ NO U:-O'T 'rlil S CII':CIi II ALANCE ----------------,F O .--L -----------~ : ~"R c -'C2A4~a/4Ina~N~~~~~~L ~a~,~/~_____)1 , o TOTAL , M IOUXT T ill S CIiECIi IIALANCE �111 . \t HRO'T FOWIl TOTAL MIOUNT TillS c m : Cn a 13 8 LA~ ________ -.~ ____________ ~' > , A:>IOUNT TillS ClIl::: Cn BAI.AXCE 139 TOTAL MIOUNT TillS CII ECK �11.\1 •. HIIO·T fOlf ll , , o ! l/\~10UNT T 01;\I. T HIS CHE CK j _COl ~ ! TOTAL ! MIOUNT TillS Cm ;CK IA~lOml/T ! TOTAL T ill S CIIEt;K 8ALANCE J fJf 0" �""'·1 Il HO'T 143 ~'OIfl) TOTA L Al'lOUNT T HIS CIIECK U"I.Axe..: r 14;~Wct,~~",~~ FOR ~ ...l..£ • ------------------------------~ o ! TO,);\ L A~IO m.' T T ill S CIIECK .0 BALANCE TOTAL Al'lO UNT T ill S c m ;CK , 0 �~ L146 -C' ~' IL-\L. IJHO·T fOJfI) :)JJI ~i r~;: t:J() J Y. "") c Sk;;-~ ~ , > - ;~ -C .l 19~"; t~ • 0 , • 0 <.. I A~IOUNT I TOl i\L ?)" ~ TillS CII ECK • UALASCe ,;, 147 'rfr ""_ "--- onlHm OF f!: -[(~ "-40:; ~-t-. J 195. L 1? , > , 0 , • 0 I TOTAL I M10 tJN T H il S CIlt:CK - g< ;" ~ ... UALA'SCE ~ ;::) 14 8 ':2 onn En OF " /.:) 195_L A1 .J ;x:r~~/l' jf: , > , , • 0 0 I MlOU~T I TOTAL Hil S CIlt;CK BALA'SCE a 00<' I �~~"" (f3.. ;1"/ ;; IMI •. HII:O"T FOIl" 1J 149 ~"EI:;~ ... 195 £ ../ / 13- > -),0" 1 • , , , , .! A~IOUNT T OnI. ~ Till S c m ;CR BALA!\C.: 150 fueL £ ~ f(>,b ' rmRO~ -< n. 1951C ~ rfo-{(/-'~Fu. .~ ~ '.h' :.-, , , , '.J > , I I M IOUN T T OTAL T illS CHECK fA!) I '"" / '7. +-3- j:. IIAw\ XC t; . .§Zd<-- ';Z (-0,.., 151 J!J5. L OI IOEIl 0p ) /13~ Ai L liJ J ..... ./I.-~ .Aj7'~J/14 , > • , , , , I TOTAL A NOUNT THIS c m ;CK HALt\l\Ct; �IL\I. . ---' V ~'" lJI«tT b 152 OIW!-: 1 t"OI(1) o{fif- - W5 TOTAL ANOUNT TillS e ll EeK IJAL\ XCt: k ~ " '-f'j . 153 /1/Oll IHo:J(OF-- I!)~ "1---1 r -~ &-~Ji-(j-~'f------t " --------~"'--~~---{~ . ·OM .. _____________ • ~ 1 , o TOTAL ,\~ IOUNT Ti ll S CHE CK BAi.AS"CE ___________________________ TOTAl. ANOUNT TillS c m ;GK 1 • ~ 1 BALASCE , o � 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 2735 Image Width Image Width in pixels 1404 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/815">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/815</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 2308497229 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 Highway 89 International Promotional Account book Description An account of the resource Highway 89 International Promotional Account book from March 1957 to February 1959. Subject The topic of the resource Accounts 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 1957 1958 1959 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Salt Lake City (Utah) Salt Lake County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1950-1959 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, Edgar Bentley Mitchell Papers, 1950-1959, COLL MSS 322 Box 1 Folder 17 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/xv06356">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv06356</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 MSS322Bx1Fd17 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/98cdf74948f0b46fedca345bf88d72dd.pdf 43644091afccada83e989acfc5f3c4b1 PDF Text Text uo WE3T SfCOr-.:O SOU TH SALT LAKE CITY . UTAH THIRD ANNUAL MEMBERSH IP MEETIN G - AND - • ~"Wd'l ' St..4t<ge~ · CONVENTION OCTOBER 6-7-8, 1957 B. P. O . E. LODGE 1713 i IN JACKSON JACK~ON'S HOLE, WYOMI NG I �..e. ~ tk 7'~ SU NDAY , OCT. 6-{8 PM.)- Gel Acquointed " Howdy. Strong", ,, Pony Food ?11 ••.. Fun .... and f,, ' erloinmenl . MONDAY , OC T. 7 -(I O A M.)_ Oll i. ;ol Opening S. ..ion. 1957 Con ."nlion. MC NDAl' AFTERNOON -(3 P.M.l- YOllR CHOiCE ..•• Rid. :h. Cho', l ift , " 'o fe, but thrilling 15 minul. oU t nl to th. roof of Ih . world atop Iofly Snow King MounTa in _ OR _ a G~ jded ""'0' To ur th':>\llIh Jocklon Hole to Grand T. tonl, Je nny Loke and Jac hon Lak e. MONDAY NIGHT -( 7 P.M.)_ CHUCK WAGON . :y le Buffel Supper. All you WAN T cnd mOre Ih on you ~ H OU LD e ol. R, fr ashm , nll. Enle, ' o ,nme n ' ond moU anylhing , I. e we can Ihin k of in Ihe me anlime. ,h. bring your FAMILY and your FRIENDS Enioy ,hi, ,II, iIl:"" Au'umn hoiidoy in Wyoming' . lobvioul " Jackson Hole (,un . uy" wh.r. , h. m :Slt.tl' T.,on. ri .. inlo Ih. cloud. from ,h. 'po,kling wol ... of Mauli'u' Je nny ond Jochon Lak ••. You 'll lov. JACKSON , II.. " Howdy, St, onger" lawn gate way 10 Grand Te ton ond 1'. lIowJlo" . National Parh. TUESDAY, OCT. B -( 10 A.M.)_ fa, a louch of .. o,iely , I, ,' , ge l in a bi l of wo, • . MAIN BUSINESS SESSION . Elec' ion, Comm:II" R,p::>,h, Inle' e"ing Gue . I Spe ak, ... TUE SDAY NIG HT -C8 P.M.)- Annuol BANQUET and G rand INTUN ATlONA l BALl. E.tceUe n, menu f,ol c, ing Choic, Ptime Rib. DiUingui,hed G ue . I•. Populo, Dance Bond. ALL THIS f . . JUST TEN BUCKS . SPEC IAL Ba nq uet Tickeh Inc1ud :ng R_gi. I,clion fe , Tu e. doy Bu,in", Mae:in g o .. oileble e l S~.!'O p er plole . ------------------------------------------------------------- ---------ADVANCE REGISTRATIONS URGENTlY REQUESTED - USE THIS FORM 89'e,s Conve ntion CommiHee CHAMBER OF COMM.ERCE, JACKSON , WYO. DETACH MAIL TO: ALL EVENTS - SUNDAY , MONDAY, TUESDAY Check e nclo ..d fo' $ ~ _ _ ._._.. in poymenl of NO DEPOSIT REQUI RED _",_ RfQI 5lRA1'IQN fu. for ,h . following p. "en. 01 $\0.00 , och. (All EVENTS) NAME TOWN " 'erv, occ:>mmodo'ion. wilh b e d . c. checked: NAME TOWN DOUBLE ... _ .. _ NAME TOWN Ot: NAME TOWN TUESDAY ONLY - MEETING AND BANQUET TWIN _ .... __ • ,:. :,. Chl,k en,losed fc: r S .... ____ ._... _ .... in pcym,nt for _ _ _ Bonq ue' T,c;;e" 0 1 S~.SO each . HOLD f OR: NAME ... _ ........... __ ._........................ __ ._ ... _._. TOWN ........................ _ ..•.. _ .. (All Jochon 89'e, Mote" or. GOOD ond role. 0" compo ,obll. PlIO" leI committee piau you .) �RAY V. STEWART President Willioms, Arizona The Officers and Directors of the 89'ers Internationa l Highwoy Associotion, Inc., join in extend ing a personal invitation lo each and everyone of you to ottend this Third Annuol Convention, and pa rticipate in the constructiv~ octivities of your Association. Your friends will olso be welcome. OFfiCERS AND DIRECTORS RAY V. STEWART, President, Williams, Arizona BENTlEY MITC HELL, Vice-Pres., l ogon, Utah ERNEST R. SARAN, V.-P., Calgary, Alte ., Canada W. G. BASS, Sec. & Treas., Wickenbv~g, Arizona Sr. GUillERMO FREEMAN, Mozallon, Sin., Mex. BURNETT A. HE NDRYX, Panguitch, Utah FRANK W. SORGATZ, Montpelier, Idaho PAUL J. STEVIG, Afton, Wyoming CHARLIE B. MARTIN, Jr. , livingston, Montana INTERNATIONAL HEADQUARTERS 140 W. Second S. St. Salt lake City , Utah MARTI N H. CAN TWEll, Executive Secretary � 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 2002 Image Width Image Width in pixels 1208 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/1194">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/1194</a> Purchasing Information Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item. To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a> Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2013 Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner. Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 300 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Checksum 3280684449 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 Third Annual 89'ers Membership Meeting announcements Description An account of the resource Third Annual 89'ers International Highway Assocation Inc. Membership Meeting and "Howdy, Stranger" convention announcements Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Stewart, Ray V. Subject The topic of the resource Tourism United States Highway 89 Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Pamphlets Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1957-10-06 1957-10-07 1957-10-08 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Jackson (Wyoming) Teton County (Wyoming) Wyoming United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1950-1959 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, Edgar Bentley Mitchell Papers, 1950-1959, COLL 322 Box 1 Folder 11 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/xv06356">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv06356</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 MSS322Bx1Fd11 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/a16d56999aaf64073f1cd89b4d1266dc.pdf 259770c9c3bc224f0acdf4263abb9faa PDF Text Text ofr NG11mHJJ~ �I I r- I �MEXICO \J MI1l<"q, ci-ry J£A~"" �.'"· . / - - ---_----.. ---------------- �- » \I • ~.... Ii , ~--~\ ,I __= = = = I i , - --- , --==.-;.;. 1- I Ii , (I I --- \ \ ==, _--.__ \ I :::::::0=:::::::::::::'= ::~=..= =.=. I I __ .--'L \ �• , <) \ I ~ r@ j----o-J .--------.0--\- I i ----r-o-- [ I ! . \ j ! I I ... ,. - ,---- -----------,----------------,I -! �·wE1..'CME~ S&wicfJ 'I~~ )11.ACCC11WdrZMui : - - - -..:....:..-...;..-=.-1 .j..:::::':'-=''::':'::::'-j , '-'$< d J - FF' --- -- -- ---- --- :::::::::::::::::::;-:::::c::::__ .. -- -- -- - ~ -------.~ . fie - r,* -- �" --- -, \ I • �" ~, - =::=:::-.-.:..:::::.=- --- ,, �"J'rn/b[b®\'0J2uO~ @l ~IDr? JJ~@,~8Q[?(l fF[lC /bl:§ I IJlv I - .~- e- "~ , ) ....-.- _J t - ~ --~ • SpollSG!' Listings �------~ '\ ~---­ --.-.-- --. -".\ / -" , /- ), l I I -- --------,-"'- - . -"'- ------ - . ---,._- ... _ - . - - - - ..-- ..._ --- - .. - --.-- .---- ... - --- ----- -~ -- ---.- - -- , I �- - -\ \ ,--- .. \ �• - • -. .... -~ toO . - -- - .... - ... r ' .,'-' --- .. - • • • - . = --- - �'7cm~@~I~ , -1 - __ _ L- .' , I N I;... -\- "" • . Sponsor Listings .. �f , • II -If • �I L - ��_ I lira I POIISOR ;I'.I5'1'II1GS � 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 2592 Image Width Image Width in pixels 2449 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/1272">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/1272</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 3662890257 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 89'ers proof for "Highway to Grandeur" brochure Description An account of the resource Draft brochure highlighting Highway 89 and the locations along the way with slogan of "Scenic Route through three Nations." Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Tourism Alberta Route 2 Mexico Route 15 Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Brochures Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available 89'ers International Highway Association, Inc. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Arizona Canada Mexico Montana Idaho Utah Wyoming United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1950-1959 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, Edgar Bentley Mitchell Papers, 1950-1959, COLL MSS 322 Box 2 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/xv06356">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv06356</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 MSS322Bx2Fd1 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/2c1cec7063eae4f39326b270702406ef.pdf 37584bca4286ab0f31898078a2b106f2 PDF Text Text ( ( BY-LAWS of l\9'ERS INT,;RNATIONI.L lIIGHl'IAY AS50CIATI~, INC. ARTICLE 1 NAUE The name of t his c orp o,.ation i8 and shall be 59'ERS I NTERNATI ONAL lIIGHliAY ASSOClAn ON, INC., and its prtncipal place of business shall be in Wickenburg, M aricopa County, Arizona. ARTICLE 11 li~~'f B8RSHIP SECTIO!I 1 . lIEIIF£RS. liambership in thQ 89'ars Iwt'ERllATIONAL HIGHWAY ASSOCIATION, INC. ehall conaist of those persona, over 2l years of age, partnershi ps or cOlJlorations who shall apply tor m6T.1berebip in wri tlng on a form preecr1bed by the Board of D 1rectore and who shall thereupon be electod. to membership by a majority vote of the Board of Dlrector8 preeent at 8J:G' annual. or special meeting, AND the Board of Director. may at their discretion, authorize the President to deeignate an indIvidual or c on:mlttee who shall be etnpO\"mred to approve or rej ect nsw applications for membership. Membership shall consiBt of tlfO classification.! which shall. be "ACTIVE l.!E.'iBim" and "ASSOCIATE MEMBER" and shall not be trmlste rable, and every member of this corporation sllall be deemed Q. s tockholder thereof, and entitled. to all rights and priVileges as suah. SECTION 2. ANNUAL DIJl:S. The annual dues for each ACl'IVE !tEMBER shall be iO..5.00, payable in a dvance. am. the annuol dues for each ASSOCIATE .Y&I.(BZR shall. be any BUIll to be detern1ned by a.n:i at the discretion of each such member. assessment shall. be made on t:i.31r.ber~. in excess of il5.00, No special �( ( PAGE 2 SECTION 3. CLASSES OF MEMSERS. The Board of Directors shall 018881.1)' all members on a basis of tbe volume of bUfline s5 done by t:tac,', "nombt'" -." hts O",n ' 1nz~:t. l S ,~ . Arry ill,: lher wishi..'lg his class- ification changed shall a pply in writing to the Board of Directore for a re-clael!tif1cation am such member shall be entit led to a hearing hefore the Board of Directors to p:::-esent his grol.mde for re-clas.!lificatlon.. SECTION J.,. 'lllRi!S OF IlEJISERSHIP. Any member mD\Y be a1 ther suspended or eJIPelled from membership f or cause by • majority vote of t he Board of Directors attar first being served with • writ ten notice of the chu,;es against him and given en opport\mity for a hearing t her eof at the meet ing at which any such vote eha1l be ta!ren. Any member in default of payment of dues for s. period of more thCUl &J da;yo shall be fo rtlnr1th susp ended without hearing frot!! all privileges of romber8hip~ ARTICLE III WlETINGS SECTI ON 1 . ANNUAL IAEBTINGS. The 2Mual meeting of tho members of thie corporati on Bhall be held during the pe riod betlteen September 15 and November 15, inclusive, each year at s uch place , dq and hour as may be prescribed by the Board of Directors, for the purpose of el ecting directors, and f or tho traneaction of any other business tha t ma;y properly" ccma before them. seCTI ON 2. SPeCIAL IlEETIIIGS. Special meetings of the member s of this corporation shall be hel d at such place, day and time as ~ be prescribed by said Board. �( ( PAG<: SECTIOn}. 3 NOTICE. Not ice in m-iting ot th\3 t1M9 , dq and pl aca of 8l\V annual or Epedal. meeting shall be sent to all memberG in good standing at least 10 days before arr:/ s uch • caeting, unless said notice 1s waived in wr1 ting by the member. SECTIOII 4. Q!XRIII. Those members present at arry duly not iced annual or speci al meeting ot the membership of this corporation shall canst! tute a quortID f or the t r ansact i on ot Bl'I3 and all busine 68. SECTI ON 5. VOTING. Each member pre:;ent in person at any annual. or ep8Cial meet.ing or the member. of this corporat1 on shall be entitled to one (1 ) vote t or hi e individual. membel'- ship or for the partnership or corporation membership he in person represents. Voting for Director.l, and upon demand of any member, upon arrr questi on at 8l't3 meeting, ~ be by ballot, but said mothod may not be mandatory. ARTICLE IV OOARD OF DIRECTCRS SECTI ON 1 . NllIIBER. The affairs of this corporation shall be conducted by a Board at not l es8 than six (6) Directors MO shall be members of the c orporation. SECT! ON 2. TERlI. Said Directors 3hall consist of the incorporators at the commencement the cozporation, and thorea1'ter thall. be elected by the plurali~ ot vote of the members p re sent in person a t t he annual meetings, one-third (1/3) of which Board shall be elected each year to Derve a three-year term, or until their BUCC9S8ors are elected and qualified. terms in otfice. No Director may be elected to more than two consecutive �( ( PAGE SECTION 3. 4 VACANCIES. If at any time a vacancy in the Board of D1rectore: shall occur, said vacancy ~ 80 be tilled by a majority vote of the remaining Directors, and each Director el e c t ed sh all hol d office until a successor for the un9p1red term is ele cted and qualified a t an Annual lIaetlng ot the corporatlon. A vacancy in the of f ice ot the Board of Directors ah3J.l. be deemed to have aut..o!ir!.at lcaUy occurred by the failure of any D irector to personally attend three (3) succe ssive regularly called epactal m i ng or the Annua Meeti ng of the Board 01 Directors, unle s s such eet l absence shall have been brought about SECTION 4. ~ J reason ot the illness of BUch Direotor . IlEETIIlOS. The Board ot Direct or s m21' meet at any time f or the purpose of or ganization, the e l ecti on of officer s, rux1 t he t r ansacti on ot any SECTION 5. b US in8 3 S . REGULAR lIEETIWS. Regular mee t ings of the Board of Director . ohall be hel d inlnediatel;y f ollowing the Annual. Meeting at th~ members ot the corporation, at the s ame place and dq, with no notice t o bs requir ed to be g1 ven ot tho r e gular Annual. Meeting of the Board of Directors . SECTION 6. SPECIAL ItEETUlGS. Special meetings of the Board ot Directors shall be held at the place noticed whenever called. SECTI ON 7. NOTICE. Notice in wr1 ting of' the t1me, dq and place of any spe cial meeting of t he: 8:tard of Director s shall be sent to each Director at l east three days p rior to s uch mee ting, unless 8uch notico is lfa1ved. in writing by the Director . �( ( PAGE 5 SECTI ON S. QUORlII. A majority of the Boarel. of Directors, at the time in office, shall. constitute a quorum for the t ransacti on of any and all buBinefts, but a roajority ot those present at the time and place of any regular or special meeting, although lees than a quorum, mq recess t'rom time to t ime, without notice, until a quorum be had. SECTI ON 9. CCilPENSATION. The Director s and Off1 ce~ 8 of th ~ corpor ation thatl serve without compensation, but they shall be re1mburssd their expenses actually incurred in attending m ings and on behalf of tha corporationc. eet SECTION 10. ACTION I!i RESCLl1l'ION. The Board of Directors Stall have the power to act in the following manner! A resolution in writing, signed in such a canner as to indicate apprO'f'8l, by not less than a tlro-thirds majority of aJ.l Directors at the time in office, shall be deemed to be action by such Board to the affect therein 8"Pr8SSed with the same .corce an:i ef'f'ect as i f the same had been duly pa8s&d by the same vote at a duly oonvened meeting, PROVIDED AL-r/AYS, that no negative vote has been registered. in opposition to the proposal, and all Directors ,mo fail to respond to any such roll call vote by mall wi thin ten days from the date of mailing shall be deemed as not voting on the pro90sal. All such resolutions shall be recorded in t he Minute Book of the corporation under proper date. �( ( PAGE 6 ARTICLE V. OFFICERS SECTION 1. OFFIC~RS. The officers of this corporation Bhall be a President, one or more VicePresidents, Secret.ary, and Treasurer, wo shall be elected from and by the Board of D1rectors. SECTI ON 2. 1\:-0 or more officee mB3 be held by the s ame person . TERlI. Officers a~all hold officA tor the period of O)~e year mUess sooner re signed. or removed. b,r the Board of Di rGctore. SECTION 3. PRESIDErrr. The President shall preside at all meetings ot the Members and Directors, and shall eee that all orders and resolutions of the Board of Directors are carried into effect. 1'.8 shall glvo, or causa to be given, not1ce of all meet ings ot the Uembers or of t.he Board ot Directors 1Ihen raquired by these By-Laws. He shall execute all instruments requiring a s eal, Wider t he seal of the corporation, which have been first requires SECTIUN Tile .:1. C;l3al 4. ~proved by the Doard of Direot ors. it shnli be cttosted by the signature When any instrument ot the Secretary. "'HE VICF_PRESID2NTS. Vlcc-Pre8ident~, in the order designated by the PreSident, shall, in the absence or disaDil1ty cf tho President, perform 'tJ-.re duties and exercise the powers of the Pr'l.s1d'Slnt) and shall perform such other duties a e the Board of Directors shall. prescribe" �( ( PAGE SECTION 5. The 7 SECRETARY. ~eC l~tar.r shall atte~d all meetings of the Board of Director8 and all meet ings of the members of the corporation, end record all notes in the J.(1nutes of all proceedings, in a book to be kept f or that purpoee. He shall keep the cOIporate s eal. of the corporation, and he shall affix the same to all papers requiring a seal.. He shall givG or cause to be given when instructed by the President, notice of all meetl~es of the Members and of the Board of Directors when such notice Is required bJ law or by these By- Laws to be given , and shal.1 perform such other duties as may be prescribed by the Board of Directors or President, under whose supol"n.Bion he shall be. SECTION 6 . TREASlRER. The treasurer shell have thO custody of the corporate f"unds and s ecuritie s s and keep f'ull and accurate accounts of re ceipts and disbursements in books belonging to the corporation, and shall deposit all monies and other valuabl e effects in the name of and to the crel}! t of the corporation, be desi~ated by the Board of Directors. :L~ such deposi tor1es as mq He shall disburse the funds of the corporation as mq be ordered by the Board, taking prop",r vou::hers for such disbursements, and s.'1al.l render to the Presi dent and Directors, at t he Regular Meetings of the Board, or whenever they may require it, an account of all hie transactions as Trea.surer, and of t.he financial condition of the corporation. ARTICLE VI LIIIIT OF INDEBTEDNESS The highest amount of the indebtedness or liability, direct or contingent , to which this corporation is at c.ny time to subject i t self, shal1 be the sum of TWENTY-FIVE HUl/DRED ond no/loo (;;2.500.00) DOLLARS. �( ( PAGE g I.RTICr-R VII SEAL The BoE.rd of Directors shall provide a sui t.!'ble seaJ. containing the name of the corporat ion, .'/hieh seal. shall be in charge of the Se cretary, and mcq be affixed to p~ certificates of m ember ship, and other documents, contracts and instrumenta, as the Board of D rectors i ~ prescribe. ARTICLE VIII AJlEND!!ENTS These By- laws may be amer.doo, rescinded, repe aled, or altered, or new ByLaws Ir'. ay be adopted, other then By- La'.'1s and amendments t t,ereot changing the authori zed rumbar of Directors, by a majority vote of the Board of Directors at any Regular or Speci al Meeting. �BY- LAVIS ot 89 ' EHS I N TERNATICM L HIGH~iAY ASSuCI!.TI uN, I l>C . ARTICLE 1 N!\lI!E The name ot this oorporat ion is and shall be 89 'ERS HIGIf~AY I ~T~rut\T IuN AL ASSOCBTICN. !liC . , and its principal place ot busi ness shall be in W ickenburg , Maricopa County . Arizona . AR'rICLE 11 MElIBEHSHIP SECTI~t. 1. IlEMBERS • lIembership in the 89 ' ers ThTEIUlATIC N HIGH ,YAY AL shall consist ot those persons , over 21 years ot A.3S0CL\TI~ti . nge ~ ThC . partnerships or corporations who shall apply tor mllJllbership in writing on a torm prescribed by t he Board ot Directors and who shall thereupon be elected to membership by a ma j o rity vote ot the Boaxd or Directors present at any annual or s pecial meeting, AED t he Board ot Directors may at their disor etion , aut hori ze the Pr esident to desig nate an iJ" dlvldual or committee who shall be empowered to approve or reJeot Dew applioations tor membershi p . M ember- shi p shall consist ot two olassifioations which shall be "ACTIVE MEMBER" a nd "ASSOCI. TE blliMDER" a nd shall not be transterable , a Dd every member ot this corporati on sball be deemed a stockholder thereot , and entitled to all rights and SECTICN 2 privilege . a. such . AhNUAL DUES . The annual dues tor each ACTIVE ~ BER shall be advance , a nd tbe annual dues tor each ASSOCIATE i n excess ot such member . ~ 15 . 00 . ~ZMB ER ~15 . 00 . pa ya ble in .hall be any sum to be determined by and at the discretion ot eaoh No special a s sessment shall be made on members . • I �• PAGB 2 SECTION J . CLASSES CF MEMBERS . The Board of Direotors s hall olassify a l l members on a basis of the volume ot business done by each member in his oVin business ", Any member wishing his classif ioation chauged shall apply in writing to the Board of Direotors tor a re- olassification and suoh member shall be e ntitled ' to a hea ring before the Board of Direotors to present his sr ounds tor re ~ olass - 1ricatioh . SECTION 4 . TERMS OF biafBERSHIP . Any membe r may be ei tiler s uspended or expelled from mem bership for cause by a majority vote of the Board of Directors after first being served with a written notice ot the ch~ r ge8 against him and g iven an opportunity for a hearing thereof at the meeting at which any suoh vote shell be taken . Any member in default of payment of dues tor a period of more t h&1 60 days s hall be forthwith suspended without hearing from all privileges ot membershlp o ARTI CLE 111 J,WTlI;CS SECTlON 1 . ANNUAl I4EETII' CS . The annual meeting of the membsrs of thie oorp o r~ti on shall be held the l as t week ot September each year at suoh place, day and hour 8S may be prescribed by the Board of Direotors , tor the purpoee of electing direotors , and tor the transaotion ot any other business t hat may properly oome before them ", SECTILN 2 . SPECIAL MEE1'lJ,GS . Special meetings of the member. of this oorpora tion shall be held at suoh plaoe , day and time as may be prescribed by said Board . SECTION J. ~o tloe N0TICE . in writi ng ot the time, day and place ot any annual or speCial meeting shall be sent to all members in good standing at least 10 days , I �• PACK 3 before any suoh Qeeting , unless said notioe is waived in writing by the member 0 SECTION 4 . ~UORUM . Those members present at an y duly no t I oed annual or s pecial meeting ot the :!'",e mbershlp of this corporat i on shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of auy SECTION 5. al~ all business . VOTING . Eaoh member present in person at any SlJnual or s pec i a l me e .11l8 ot the members of this oorporation shall be entitled to one (1) vote for his individual membership or for the partnership or oorporation membership be in person represents. Voting for Direotors , and upon demand ot any member, upon any question at any meeting , may be by ballo t , but saId method may not be mandatory . ARTICLK lV BOARD CF DIRECTORS SECTION 1 . NUMBER . The affairs of this oorporation shall be oonduot ed by a Board of not less thsn six (6) Direotors who shall be members of the oorporation . SECTION 2 . TERM . Said Directors 8h~11 oonsist of the incorporators at the commenoe- ment ot the corporatIon, and thereafter shall be elected by the pluralIty vote of the members present in person at the annual meetings , one- third (1/3) of whioh Board shall be eleoted eaoh year to serve a three- year term , or until their suocessors are elected and qualltled D No Direotor may be elected to more than two conseoutive terms in offlo8 o SECTION 3 . VACANCIES: Va oanoie s on the Board ot Direotors shall be filled by a majority vote ot the remaining direotors , and each director 80 elected hall serve until his suooessor is eleoted and qualified at the next Anllusl :"eeting •• I �• • !-AGl! 4 of the membership , or st a Speoi al Mee t ing of the member~hip called for the purpose of eleoting a new director for the unexpired term of that direotorship . SEC1'IeN 4 . lJn:TINGS . The Board of Directors may meet at any time for the purpos e of organizatIon , the election ot off1cers , and the transaotion ot any bualne s8 0 SECrION 5 . RXGULAf! MEETlkGS . Regular Meetings of the Board of Direotors shall be held the last week in Saptember each year at the same plaoe and ~QY , following the annual meeting of the member. of the corp alld 1Jnmediately ltion . No notioe shsll be required to be given of the regular annual meeting of the Board of Direotors . SECTION 6 . SPECIAL IWlTIIoGS . Special meetings of the Board of Director s shall be held at the place notioed whenever 0811ed . SECTION 7. l><OTICE. Notioe in writing or '. he time , day and plaoe of any speoial ceeting or the Board of Direotors ahall be sent to eaoh Direotor at leaat thrae days prior to suoh ma~t ing . unless suoh notioe is waived in writing by the Direotor . SECTION 8 . ~UORUY. A meJority of the Board of Directors , at the time in office , shell constitute a quorum for the transaction or any and all business , but a majority of those present ot the time and plaoe or any regular or speoial meetIng , although 1888 than a quorum , may ~eoe •• tram time to t1m8 ~ without notice , unt1l a quorum be bad o SECTIC,II 9 . GOI!PENSATI~N . The Direotors and Crficers ot the oorporation shell serve without compensation , but thsy shall be reimbursed their expenses aotually inourred . ,... �, • PAGE 5 1n atteDdi ng meet ing. and 011 behalf of the corporat10n SECTI ON 10 ACTI ON BY Rl!SCJLUTn.N . The board of D1reotors shall nave power t o aot tn the follow1 ng manner : A resol ution 1n writ1ng, signed by all of the membera of th ;" ard of D1rector5 , ahall be deemed to be a ot ion by suoh Board to the affeot t herin expressed , with the same fo r oe and effeot . s if the same had been duly passed by the same vote a t a duly convened meet ing ; a nd s uoh r s s olutions shal l be r eoorded in the Minute Dook of t he corpor a tion unde r proper date . SECTIO ll . N SPECIAL PERSONNEL . The Board of Direotor a may appoint suoh Agsnt. Or Subordinate Offioe rs fram time to tlma as the businesa of the oorporation.., require , f1x their tenure of off10e , aDd allow tham suitable ooapansation for their s ervioes . ARTICLE V. OFl!'ICEIIS SECTION 1 . OFFICERS. The off1cere of this oorporation ahall be a President , one or more Vioe- Presidenta , Seoretary, aDd Treaaurer , who shall be elacted t r om and by the Board of Directo1a . Two or more offioe. may be held by t he same persoo Q SECTION 2 . TERM. Officera ahall hold office for the period ot one year unless 800ner reSigned or removed by the Board ot Direotors . SECTION J . PRESIDENT . The President .hall preaide at all meeting. of the Mambers aDd Direotors , aDd shall see that all order. and resolutions of the Board of Direotors are carried into effeot . He shall gl ve ~ or oause to be g l ve n p notice of all meetings of the Mambers or of the Board of Direotors when required by these By-Laws . He shall exeoute all instruments requiri ng 8 �• F GI -6 seal under the seal of the corporation by the Board ot Directors 0 which hive heen tirst approved ,{hen any instrument r:equ res a seal it shall be attested by the sigl1ature of the Secret/jry . SECTIC,N 4 THE VICE· ·PRESIDEI,TS . The Vice ~residents , in the order designated by the President, shall, in the absence or disability of the President, pertorm the duties and exercise the powers ot the President , and shall perform such other duties 8S SECTION 5 the Board ot Direotors ahall preBcrlbe ~ SECRETARY The Secretary shall attend all meetings of the Board of Direotors and all meetings ot the members ot the corporation, and r~oord all notos in the IIinutes of all proceedings , in a be.ok to be kept tor that purpose. He shall keep the corporate seal ot the corporation , and he shall affix the same to all papers requiring a seal. given wh a iustructed by the President He shall give or cause to be notice of all meetings ot the Members and ot the Board ot Direotors when such notioe 1s required by law or by these By ~ Laws to be given, and sh 11 pertorm such other duties 8S may be presoribed by the Board ot Direotors or Pre s ident , under whoee supervi sion be shall be. SECTION 6 . ASURER . The treasurer shall ha ve the oustody ot the oorporate funds and sdcurltlsa and keep full 8.Ld acourate acoounts or l"eceipts and disburse· ments in books belonging to the corporation , and s hall deposit all monies and other valuable etfeots in the name ot aud to the oredi t ot the corporation, in such dspositories as may be designated by the Board ot Directors He shall di sburse the funds of the oorporation as may be ordered by the Board 8 taking proper vouchers tor suoh disbursements p nd shall render to the President and Directors , at the Regular Meetings . the Board p or whenever they may require itD an account or all his • �, PAGE 7 transactions as Treasurer p and ot the financial condition of the cor poratl oD o ARTICLE Vl LIMIT ~F ThDEBTEDNESS The h1ghest, arno'lOt of the 1ndebtedness or Hab111ty. d1r eo t or contlngnnt, to which ttls corporation Is at any time to subject ltself . Rhall be tve sum of T;:ENTY- l'lVE HUNDRED an ~ no/100 (~2 , 500 . 00 ) DOLLARS . ARTICLE Vll SEAL The Board ot Directors shall provide a suitable seal containing the name or the corporations which sea l shal l be in oha r ge of the Seoretary , and may be affixed to all certificates o t membership , and other do cuments , contract s end instruments , as the Board ot D ~ rectors may prescribe o ARTI~LE Vlll A.I4l!r.D1i.I!:t<TS Th",se By- Laws lB. !' be amended . rescinded . re peal ed I or a ... d , or new By- Laws may be adop;;ed . other than By- LaWS auu amendmelJ ts ther eof chauglng the "luthorlzed number ot Dir ec tors , .JV a major1 ty vote ot the Board ot Directors at any RegulHr or Special Meetlng o � 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 3282 Image Width Image Width in pixels 2558 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/1341">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/1341</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 833555506 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 Bylaws of 89'ers International Highway Association, Inc. Description An account of the resource Eight articles of the bylaws of 89'ers International Highway Association, Inc. Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Tourism 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 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1950-1959 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, Edgar Bentley Mitchell Papers, 1950-1959, COLL MSS 322 Box 1 Folder 13 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/xv06356">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv06356</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 MSS322Bx1Fd13 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/2188932bbb3ebb83f8175f1584a72cf3.pdf 71f886d106d8a310f5fd0a315f0b9f18 PDF Text Text - • , I ~ • �DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK Logan, Utah, tn 195~ Right io r"o" .vcd n"d t he b ,mk io .. uthorlzed to for ward itemo lor collection or p" ymen t d ire<;t to th e d ra w,,", or varo r b<. nk o r th", ulth ~ny otber b a nk at Ito d, oeretio" and \ 0 ,e<;e Ve pn)'lt,e" t in d raft. dra wn by t he dt .. wee o r o tber ba nk o. a nd exeepl lor nelitli lit"nee thi. ban k . h.ll no l be liable lor di ohonor o f Ibe d r.ft. 0 0 received in "")'ment no r fo r IDOl". t he reon. Oulolde item. credited oublec t to fina l paymen t . 1/ onr ilem drawn on lhi. bank overdra wo <on .. ceount. we re..,rve the " 11M 10 c har Me 10 )'Our accounl an d r"lU rn. TO THE CREDIT OF "'q ~ .:/ ". n -P ._,.-1". ~, <Ii. ~£~~ ~~ '-P. ' .. C£NT~S CURRENCY SILVER _ _ _ _ _+_~tL) e,. 11: t--- _____---iI---+-L l_I_+ _ I I -II t • ::.n D NOT NECOTIABLE U, U CATE DEPOSIT TICKET R ec e i v e d b y,-'-"-_"i. _______________________________________ ...." .• ".. .. • .., ... ,. , .. ,,< .. �DEPOSITED IN T H E FIRST NATIONAL BAN K Logan, Utah, ~. U I f £L 19SL Riu:hl i. ruc.ved an d lhe bank i. aUlhor ized 10 fo rw~rd ilem. for coll.:<: t ;o., 0. paymen t direcl 10 the draw",", o. p aro , bank or Ihro u u: h any o t her bank AI its dio.<:rellon and to . " Ce,v" ""YInenl in draft. d r awn by lh~ d rawee or other bank • . and e,,"e pl fo . ne u: ' IIlIen"" t his bank . han nol be tiabl~ for d i. honor of the d.aft . 0 0 received in ptoyment n Or fo r 1o ...,. t he . eo n. Out . ide item . " . e d ited s ubJe" t to fina l paymen t. 1/ "em dr.wn o n thl. bank o verd r a w. an ",,,<::ount. w e ",serve the n gh l to charu:" to yOUr " ccount a n d return. ""r B, DOLLARS CENTS CURRENCY SILVER Y . CHECKS a .D . ),f,.-;P ,01 l& ;;;if.~ , L III qu , 1 1 1 1 I 1 I J 1 1 ~ I 1 1 1 I 2 NOT NEGOTI ABLE DU PLICATE DEPOSIT ~K.ET :,.)L-\, _____ " .,,,.•,..... ..." .. I.' ....CI. Receiv ed by _ __ _-'-_ _ _ _ _ _ __ , �, DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NA TIONAL BANK ,, , ,. ~~,:~; ~:~dt.~,"~,,, ,o~~~,~ , '0 for collection o r payment d ir ec t \ 0 t he d<a w~ o r pnro r bnnk o r th ro UKh .. n)l o ther b .. "k .. t h. diK r etion and to r" CCI Ve .... ymen t in d rar,. dra wn b y the d.awee 0. o t her b a n h. and u cept lor nCR " 11 _ thra bank . h ..11 nol l,.. liablc fo r di ahonor of Ihe d r" lt. ao received In paymen t nor lor 10.... the.eon , O u t. lde item . c.edited .Ubjecl \ 0 final paymen t . H an)l i'em d.awn on Ih i" bank ovcrd , aw. a" accounl, we r u e r ve the .. iahl '0 cha r lie 10 you. accou"t a nd ,e l urn , T O THE CREDIT OF Ji., .0 X<i ' J:-..'i ,,/[11, I ./ CURRENCY .~/~ -} ~~,,~. ..;?~ U/ (/ DO~ CENTS SILVER CHECKS I·" ;)1),-"',.> U . (.A~"#o . ~ ) I I I I -- >\ f'-.. , I I I I I 3 R ecei v ed NOT NEGOTIABLE CATE DEPOSIT T ICKET u7-----------f------------------------________ �DEPOSITED IN TH E FIRST NATIONAL BANK Log~n. Utah, .1{.Yl J I t t:.. Ill llhi i. ru erved .. "d I he nk J. ""thoriud 1o fo r wa rd he,,, e ' o r coilee tion o r ""yment direc l 10 I he d . " wee o r p" ror b ank o r Ihro .. ~ h .. ny olhe r b .. nk .. t i10 d io<: ret ion and 1o reCe , ve payment in d r .. tt . drawn by the dra_ o r o ther b " n k., and ex ce pt for " eil: ' li~,,"'" th i. b .. nk . hall n ol be lI " bl " for di . hon o r o f Ihe d r a ft . 0.0 rece iye d in ""yme nl nOr fo r 1o...... th e reon. . Out.l de II~ . crediled ... blec i 10 final paymenl. If any ilern draw n em thi. bank overdraw . ;on acc o .. n l . We r ...","e the r ill hl 10 c ha ' lIe 10 yOu r aCcount and , e lurn ., TO ni E CREDIT OF tl, J , l)//.Ju ./l . l -f-i, V CURRENCY I SILVER CENTS DOL1.ARS I ..L CH ECKS egO ..11 ' U; ' I-'" /, d -J If,.1 1 fr c;.cn C&-f" p L ..,,,-i-f l' IJd <!- I T, t ,,,. Ji",.,) J~Tfr,.,,.., )(~ 1, 'b" " 'ffl , 0 c~ lfe .sKu q q.c, ,c:; 1/ r .u a, i" c: I ' f£<I G I I , k'> I" I" 0 ~. I I" I,~ I e I I ", .r.1 , 0 0 I 1 3 I D d <1 1\ U' I~ l"- f" I I I 4 NOT NEGOTI ABLE DUPLICATE DEPOSIT T ICKET R ...ed b7,_-,---"J-\:-::-:-_--,--,-,-,-_______ ecei ... .. , . ~ <o < • .. , .. , , .. .... ". . �I. DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK 195--'2- Logan, Utah, Rilrhl b reaerved and I he "k i. authorized 10 lorw~rd ilem. lor collection or paymen t di r.... t '0 Ihe drawee Or paror bnnk or IhTOu~h any o.her bank .1 III dll,,'el ion ""d 10 , """,ve paym"n t in d rafu drawn by Ihe drawee 0' olher bank •• and ,,"~epl 10' n"sli,en" e Ihi. bank . 1...11 nol be liahle lor di . honor 01 Ih" d ... fu 10 r.,...,;""d In p a yment no. fo r 10lleo Ihueon. Oul,ide it"", " "redited lubJe"t to final paymen t . If an)' item drawn on Ihi l bank ove,drawl .. n .~counl, we , e...,no" Ihe "; liIh . to "h.'liIe 10 your accounl and ,eturn . TO THE CREDIT OF If'jb~~}: ~ Jlf"'; B, CENTS DOLLARS CURRENCY SILVER CHECKS / A . 'f, ( •II!., I- .l,....,.-± , ,·).. 1 I , / ..J:V<J ~r/ - {l l _ I t~ J _.."i ( U1 ~ j # ' .• ",,! ~ ;/J-.v .. > I .. V •. • >U{....v , I" IJ k '-' t£ D 0 .3 10 - I'" I (k .~ ,;..-.' 'N"/.I. " Ii,•. 4 ,m.,,,, I 1 r 1<' .:1 I, I .,< I 1 , I" I , • 1° 1 ., I l, b ,'" I '3 b J 0 'b" 0 5 Re ceived . I - NOT~~q,TlABLE DUPLICAHr .!p OSIT TICKET bY'--;;;;;;:;;;;i~=~;:;;;;;:==:-----. . . . . , •• " " , ." • • lO . . . �DEPOSITED IN T HE FIRST NATIONAL BANK Logan, Utah, "de,'1 D RllIhl b r e...,rvcd .nd 'he bank i tho rized 10 forward it""'. lor colleelion or PAy",ent direc t t o h dr.w,,", or PArOr bank o r throulIh .. ny other bank " I it. diter and to reet"Ve p&)'JT1enl in dufll d r a wn by the drawee Or o l her bank., an d ex cep t for neg' li g.nce Ihi . b ank .h .. 11 not be li able fo r d •• honor of I h. dr .. 't. 00 r eceived In p .. yment no r fo r louco Ih e r eon. O .. tolde ile", . c r ed ited . "bjc c! to f ln ul p aymenl. If any i.e ..... dr/lwn on .hi . bnnk ove r draw ... n acco .."t, we r ... er ve I I." rl lth! 'u ch arlie \0 your .. cGO ",,1 a nd relurn. TO THE CREDIT OF -J.I • 'Ff_..i-/."A",_ -.,,;t;,,J. .j" B, $~ ~t'Lf/( [.,. .) DOlLARS CENTS CURRENCY SILVER CHECKS J.i.b1,. ~ .f_ - 1/(1' 13.p,. f#d, f/ dVdo iif CU'" ~" , V.Pi- J Cc.J ~ ":ft,.,l<;.,.,e. 1ii '4 (/ .,I"., ,,~ .. O? I I ,'i .12 IY I - Pj9I I I) V T 0-, I 1->: i. I I I I I 6 Re ceived hy__ NOT NECOTI ABLE DUPLI L-L-,,~ TE DEPOSIT TICKET __________________________________ �DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK TO THE :R WIT OF ~ !ttt;ZlijJ~:==:: • DOlLARS CENTS I CURRENCY SILVER CHECKS I,. IV I ",) NOT NEGOTI ABLE - 7 ); ~ '++-___+___________ b7'-rf t". ...".. . DU; LICATE Dt:POSIT TICKET P Receive d " ' '''' • • ,,, <1 ,~, �DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK Logan, Utah, e \9 1955:/- \"1-1 Hi~". '0 0. i • • e ... rved and ." e b ank i . a u'''o. ized forw.rd ;,ern. for coll...::,ion or p .ymen . direct .h e drawee pa ro , b>onk t"TOuah an 7 o,"e r bank a . in diocr". lon a nd '0 rece,ve payment in d . alt. d . awn by .he d •• w .... or othe. bflnb. a nd ,,~cepl 10 . neg li gene" ,hi. bank .... n no. be Ii.. bl" 10 ' d i." ""o. of ,"e draft. . 0 . .. celv .. d In p"ymen' nor for lo •• e . ..... . ...",. OuUlde item . credited . ubj ec. 10 Iino l p .. ymen •. II anr i'em drawn 011 b a nk ovcrd . 8wa an nCCOU II'. w ...... erve ... " TllI'h' ." "h" 'K" to YOD. acco,,", .. nd re'D'n . '0 t,,, ,"i. TO THE CREDIT OF \ It '''~ Y'1" , B, ~ A C,,_ (,\~O .. :L , ... I" '" '" " \ ".,1 , 1. 01\ , ,"\ , " CENTS OOlLARS CURR ENCY SILVER CHECKS ~."' ''', \.." "~ -h. I, v.~\-M{ t " J.c \\, Ha ••1/1 I c.. "" .. '}.I<" ,-r J" II. , ", <l1.k ''it \.toR ,\ A, \S I': ~ 4_ 8 II t , - f-I JI~ () I I I I I I I I I I 'I (/ I· iJ 3 I~ - -- I j ( 0 NOT NEGOT IABLE DUPLICATE DEPOSIT TICKET Rec.ei~ed by,_-:::-:-:::-:-::-::-:--:--,---,,-,--_ __ __ L .... " .< ... <0 .m .. ........... �DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK Logan, Utah, / / I. / :r 195............L HiRhl I. ,nerved and ttl bHnWi . .. uthorizc d to forwbrd i(em a lor coll~~tion or payment di re"t to th e dra wee or p "ror ['""k or through any other bank a t Ito d.ocretion and to reCe "c p"y", .. nt In d ral t o drewn by the drawee or other bank ., .. nd ucept for ne8· ligence I hlo b .. nk .hen nol be liable fo r d, .hono r of the dr.i .. 0 0 received ;n paymen t nor lor lou... thereon. Outolde ltftn. c r edited .uble,,' 10 final p aymen l . Ii a ny item drawn on Ihl. hank overd ra w . . .n account. we , e ...",e Ihe r ;It~ 1 10 eh .. go to your account and retu,n. TO THE CREDIT OF B, t J ff'l 1/ 1/ j/ CENTS DOLLARS CURRENCY SILVER CHECKSI / 'II ~/;'(,! ,. ( , ,, ( 0 J r,'-,--:-'"-'.i-"J'---cc7 / ' ~1L....---jf---+-,I.::tI/1 "-'--7 (;', " ,6,.; ,01/ I , ' r, (/ (> ;Jlli ''/v'/ _,f', ( I I< 1 l;;tll, ->'( I ( ( I 0 ( 1(' ) If (;' -. ,,' (i d' 1 5 /) { {2 NOT NEGOTI ABLE PLICATE DEPOSIT TICKET ] Reee i;cd 1"/,'--+_______________ /1 ...., ' ''" '" ..."...., ....... �l DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK 1 95~ .5 Ri llhl i. ' .. ..., . v .. d .nd • au lhorized 10 fo.w ... d ilem. for collec lion 0 . paym .. nl the dr ....... or paror blink 0. th,m.gh any 011.00. bank .. I it. d' . cretlon .. nd to r .. ce'v .. paym .. nt ;n d . .. r.. d.Awn by Ihe d.a .... o or 011.... bank .... nd excep t ro r neg· lillenee Ihi . bank . 1. ,,)1 " o t be li " bl .. for di .honor 01 I I. .. d,ar t • •0 recei"ed in P'lymenl nOr lo r 10 ..... Ihe.eon. Oul.ide item. ,,.edited . .. bJec t to final p a yment. If a n r lI .. m d.awn on Ihi. bank ove.draw. >In .. ccount. we reoerve tho n ilh t 10 d''' ' lIe 10 your .c.:aun t a nd r eturn. , TO THE CREDIT OF 1.1" J •, / I 1/ DOU-ARS CENTS CURRENCY SILVER CHECKS ;:: ;> , . , , r ~,Ir{ p, . • /'J ;(, ~I c to r(! I , I - /, ·1 (- I I~ /;"11/ I), ",.1, '( X I ( " , I . F I I I I I I I I / , -- \ 0 U 10 b-.I-____________________________________ NOT NECOTIABLE t l P) tlCATE DEPOSIT TICKET Received ~Y ____ .. 4 ."n <0 ."'• • • '0' ... .... �DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK Logan, Utah, ~,. I. ) <J 1954':- R I¥ht i. reoerved And tho tkn:;~~uthori:t"d to forwa rd ilem. fo r collection or ""yment di;e:ci· I e d r...."" or payor b<onk or Ihr o u ~h .. ny other b on k a t ito di ,,, lion and to .eceive ""ym"n t in d r Af .. drawn by I he dra wee or othe r b<>nk o. and u cepl for negli gence I hio bank .han not be li"ble lor di . honor of the draft • • 0 received in "" )'me ... nor fo r 10...... the reon. Oul oide it"m. crediled . ubjee l 10 fi n a l paymen t . II any item dr .. wn 0<1 I hi. bank ove r d r..... a n ,ccoun t . we . e.e rve the r 'IIM to ch ar \<e to yo ur "CCoun t .m d retu rn . TO THE CRED ~T ? F ,,9 1.,7 , CENTS CURRENCY SILVER 1 ~ 1 ( I ' NOT NEGOTlABO: /.)F;) :J --........... IVDu~ TE DEPOSIT TI; V Recei .. e'! b7·_ _=~~·c.._ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ ' . . . . . . ~ . . . . <0 L • •" ... . .. . . . . .. . �DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK Logan. Utah !'ll, 1 95~' 7b I RI~ht.l • • ue . ved and - Ihe bank( jo .. utho.iud 10 forwa rd itemo for collec,ion o . paymen t d irec t to lhe d.awee o . p .. yo . b<onk 0 . th.o u,,:h .. ny o lhe. b"nk at it'. di.creHon and 10 r"" e ive ""Y',.,,,n l In d,,,ft . d . awn by Ihe d."wee or o,he r bbn ka, "nd exc"pt fo. ne~­ iI llence thi . baok oh" n nol be Ih.ble for dl .honor o f the d r ~ lt . 00 receiv"d in pa ymen l nOr fo r lo..e. the reon . Oul.id" il""" c . "dited oubJec ! to finel p.ftymenl. If any it"m drawn On Ih i. bank overd . owa M account, w" . "OC rve the rillh, to n cha.roe 10 your '''count and return. ~ THE CREDIT OF / v' . ,~(IV\-/ ( B, CENTS DO LLARS 0 "'1 C! /.1 CURRENCY SILVER CHECKS I L/fi( • 1,(. i ,6/ , I I/', /. I ." i/. /,. ".':i." I ~ ( (! CI " . t, 0 I ) .~r,,- .,I / I /JI.'r71' • I ./ c..,./' I V IV ) I I Lt Ib .1/ NOT NEGOTlABL~ DUPLICATE DEPOSIi ' T (Q Recllivcd by . . . .. t . • • • " . . • .. co • • 0 I I' , • I I ~ (,1' I I ( , , I I :) f1 • V 12 (I , . . .... .. A - I 7J �DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK ... Logan, Utah, 19L~_ Ri ~h t 1. re.~rved al>d . h. b"nk ' " " . t.o riud to forward item8 fo r coll uclion or paym~nl direct to he d r a wee or I''' fo r bank o r Ihrou"h nny othe r bank a l ilo dl oc re l ion Rnd to recc ve paymen l in d r.f l . drown b y th e draw_ n . othe r bank . , .. nd ucep l fo r n eg _ li Ken« I hi. b.nk oh ..n nol be n a ble for d; . hono r of the dr.fto 00 . eceived In ~)'TDent no r fo r 10 ..... the . eon, O .. tside Item . c redit ed .ubj"c t 10 fin .. l p aymen l , If a n ), Item dro wn On Ih i. ban k overdraws a n accou nt, we r" aerve Ihe ';Kht to cha rK'" 10 you r aceoun l an d relurn, TO THE CREDIT OF 77~~ <1/, 1:. B, ;P tfr ,- 71.. P V ;Sj-~j ) -~ d/ CENTS DOUARS CURRENCY SILVER CHECKS 'i d ",- I:, -' J . , ( '" D(J ( 'It l>l'f' u ,:-'/C':' II"'" ,jf.t d {e-,., ". /1 () U , I .V , " I t , I 4 " " . I I s . ,. '-' fl.;. I " ,. ," .J { ~ t"~ (} I I I (I ,(,/;147' ttJln'", ,(:f..,7nfUI1'1(/ {;;6",-, &/( v7i.?, '/1;t7 1/ tJ < I~ J j )- h u , (/0 a ~ IJJ II 1-: I "' I 13 NOT NECOTIABLE DUPLlCA'rE DEPOSIT TlCK£T Receiv e :! b Y' _ _ _ __ _ __ _ "z;: ""'--________ _ ..... r·." " •••" ... " ... ..... .. �DEPOSITED IN T HE FIRST NATIONAL BAN K Logan, Utah, .... J I ,t .J, k" 19S..!2t Right I. ,e.e.""d nnd the ban!?i . "u t hor i:r..,d to fo.", ... d itema fo' o::oll...::.lon 0 . payment diu", \0 Iho:: drawe .. or poyor bank or .h'OYlih a ny o.her b."k aI it. dlKrcllon and 10 ,cc"iv~ payment In dr.lt. drawn by Ihe d.awoe or olher bank •. a nd ex cep ' fo r n"g' li llence , hi. bank . h.n not be liable for di .honor of Ih" drar , . 00 received In paymenl nOr 10. I.,...,. the r eon. Quaid .. item . c r edited . .. bj...::! to fina l paym ent. If any item dra wn on thl . ban k. overd raw . 8ccoUnt. "'0 reoer"e the TI"ht 10 charge 10 )'our "CCOlll'\ an d relu'n . a" TO THE CREDIT OF , B, - / . C£NTS. DOUARS I ~ 12 l a CURRENCY C/ SILVER CHECKS . . ., • .1 J,. , .' t: I , .1,".. // /1 I" f 1/ ' ~ . j,( ii.- -"L I, f .- -- ··n)1_, . 1,- -- 14 , j . -'. .f,[ . 'Itr i' $~tf / ·7j I U I lr I ~ ~ , • :.<'- I I 0 - 1 1 , 1 , I ~ Il , " , <.J (.) . . ...oJ-""- ." I~.L -"- :s 5- NOT NECOTIABLE DUPLICATE DEPOSIT TICKET Receiv e d bY'_-~'r'lT-----------------'<"~T • • • 11 . . . .. , ... co .....«. �Ri llh, I. t e. erve d ~nd t he bAnk l. Authorize d to fo r w .. . d item. for collec tion or paymen t d ir e c t \ 0 the d .., w "e o r " ,, ( ot bank or Ihrouwh a n y other b Dllk at ib dl .c r ellon a n d to reu "" p ay",en t in d r. ft . d ra wn by II. " dr ~we<t o. o lhe' h a nk., a nd n eep l f" r nell_ li llen " e 11.1. b a n k . h"n nol be lI Bbl" fo r d i.hono r of II, . draf t. . 0 received In paymen t n OT fo r I....... the.eon. O ut.l d e item . c . edited . .. bje<:: t to f in a l p'ymen t . [f a n y item d r awn on lhi. bank o v erdra w . a n a ccount. w e , ,,..,,v. t b" . i,",h l \ 0 ch a rlie to you. ",,<".Oun \ and r. h>Tn . TO THE CREDIT OF '~d"7JP~·-"~-<~t-~,~<7-LI__=~~/~~ i~'.~"=~,~~+~~<c-~19 ~ CC ~ ,~ B, if ,J . 1J~4iP'<T~ , ~ DeLLA" CENn CURRENCY SILV ER CH ECKS , , , , . , c;t , a • I- . - '" I" ,~ I I I I I I 15 R"C"iV"~ b7' r--- NOT NECOTIABLE DUPLlCA'rE DEPOSIT TICKET _______' ______________________________ " C~-+ . . .... .. . . " <0 • •" " . , . . . .. " . . , �DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK ~4t-:? e=" I Logan, Utah, 9' 195~ Hi .:h t i. rn~rved And t ho b .. nk i. Autho nzed to lorwa r d ile<n l fo r collection o r paymenl di . ect to th e drawu o r pa yo . bank or , h,ou il h .. ny other b .. nk .1 it. di lcr e!lon .. nd 10 .eeeive payme nl in dull. d . awn by the draw ee 0 . othe r b .. nk . , a nd ex cept fOT n"il· lill'en"e th i. ban k .h .. n nol be liabltt fOT dilhooor 01 the d ... /" 10 . eceived in payment n o . fur \ ..... .. lhereon. Out.i de it"", . crediled .ubjeel 10 fin .. 1 p .. yment. If I ny i lem dn."", on thl l b .. nk ove r dnoWI An account, we . e .... ve the right 10 charile 10 )"Our aeeoun t a nd retU'rn. TO THE CREDIT OF , "'J!'''''' ;J " !:':.. 22 8, , t!..J4. C he CENT' DOLLARS CURRENCY SILVER CHECKS ( -I... If r. C ~j( ~ f l ~, " is !I ( ,{- ' j , < - I' I IV l ~ r; Ii I I I ~ iJ u a ,,, . i'.... ~ I I 16 , NOT NEGOTIABLE ~ LlCATE DEPOSIT TICKET ......,".... ,..".. '.0....... f Re"eiv e .J by- - ---1'r-- - -- - - - - - -- -- - - - - �DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK Logan, Utah, Lj -v- 195-2- Righ i h .... erved a nd I he benk I. "ulho<i~~d 10 forwa rd ilem. lor collect;"n o r payme n t d irecl 10 I he dr . ....... o r p .. yo r bank o r t hroUllh any other b ank at in di." re lion and to rec",ve ""yme n l in d r a ft . drawn by I h., draw« Or o ther b a n k.. and u c"pl for neg · li gence I hi. bank . h .. n nol be liable for dl.hono. of I h., d r;oft .... r.,c"jv~ in p ayment n o . 10' I" ..... Ihereon. Out.id.. Item. c r.. dit .. d . ubl .. ,,1 10 final p aym ent. If any item drawn on Ihl. bank overd r a w. IOn .. ccoun l . we .ue. ve the r illht to ch . ' lle ID )'Our . "COunt .. nd re t urn. , B, ,y - / - I, CENTS DOUARS CURRENCY SILV ER CHECKS )J II C . .,,/ - j, ~ ] , I I I - "- <> f . -' ">, ,-, -, ~ / 1 '- ij' 17 I I I NOT NECq! ABU DUPLICATE 0t OSIT TICKET Re"eive d b y . .... , oc.re I• • , ..~ . . . . . . . . . - I ---' �DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK Logan. Utah. J.%<.k 'i ? HI &h l i. r"'''Ned .nd Ih .. bank I. Aulhor ized 10 fo rward item . 10 . c:ollech"" Or payment direcl 10 Ih. d rawee o r pa ro r bbnk or any other bank at 110 dl K relion a nd ' 0 rece ' ''e paymenl In d r.fts drawn by the dr.. wee or olhe r b .. nk o. and . """1'1 lo r neg li gen " . , h i. bbnk oha U not be l i. bi. lo r di .hono. of the d . ,, (ta . 0 received in p aym.n l nOr lor lou " . I h" r eon. Out . ide ilem . c redited . ub;"" . to linll! p aymen t. 1/ lIn), item dr"wn on Ih i. ban k .,"erd mwo an a ccoun t. we r e. e r"" Ihe r illhl to ChMrlle 10 ),our aec:out\t ~nd return Ihrou~h TO THE CREDIT OF 'f< -/ .~ ~ J..>--:i( , '7'., ~ ,- J,. . ;, , ;; ~ ./ I,'\~:L .7/;/1 ) k / , ~1J,1.:t# II r' r/ CURRENCY " ) CENTS DOLLARS I SILVER CHEC KS '/,j.ir /:.;; ;t;>f~ Til /../ff - - /I ' II , / '1 ~ 4., f-'L - --• ~ I- I I , - l I"- )...j 10 It:. ~-; I' -i I I- - I I I 18 Re ce iv c:> :! NOT NEGOJ IABLE DUPLICATE DJ!'OSIT TICKET by--::c===~J2 ... ....". .I",,-,--::--=-::-_--____ 0 "" " .... , . . .. " co �r- . DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK ,, Logan, Utah, I 1'/ 19sL .n ~h' II . ue rved and t he J:i'k i . . . uthoTizcd 10 forw .. . d item. for c oUecl ion o r I.aym.", ' di. 10 t he drawee Or I"':(U' b~"k o . throUllh 'InY olhe r bank al It. di..: , etion and to r eCeIve p~ym ent In draft, d rawn by th e draw"," or o l ke. ba ... ko, Ilnd exce pt for nell" Iillence Ihi . b ank ,h"n nol be lI " bl e for di ohon o r of I h~ d rafto ... received In p a yment nOT fo r lo. . u thereon. Ou t.ide item . c r edi t ed lubjc-c l 10 final p aym ent, If any item dra wn on ,hi. b a nk overd r awl lin .. ccoun t . we r~erVe the r i~h t 10 .. h •• K" t o you. a ccoun l and . ,,'urn. TO THE CREDIT OF / ,)/ . C<.ry.~.<,_ ., . _ 7' rfi lj/'t·, CURRENCY , SILVER . -. :1- , ~ .e- , ..:. .-~ 1/// -1.; 'u--l / ..... CENTS DOLLARS r/ '0 t; CHE~~ I, I ,I- •,.ft /1 I 1 011/ 1 / I' 'I . (5 f.:j " ,. . I I I", IC. I I I I 19 NOT NEGOTIABLE DUPL\~-rE DEPOSIT TICKET Re e.civc d by •• •• " d . "".. . . ".. . . L. . . . . . . . . ( - ( - '--! t- r- �DEPOSITED IN T HE FIRST NA TIONAL BAN K %":- r.-195 Logan, Utah, ' liltht 10 , u" ,v"d <tnd Ih" bank Hulhoriud 10 forw .. rd items for collection 0, I'Hyrnenl d lree l I he d r awe., or " ,,(or bnnk o r throuwh "ny other b .. nk "I ih di dlon and 10 .ec., ve paymen t In d ... ft. drawn by Ihe duwee or 0 her banks, nn d ucept fo r neg· liwence th is bank . haLl not be . r..ble for dioho"or 01 t he drafl ' ' 0 re ceIved In p a yment n Or 10. lo ..e . tbe...,on. OutsIde Item. credlled . .. blee t to linal payment. If a ny hite", drawn on this bank overdraws IOn account. we .uerve the 7 . 1 ~ ch"lt. 10 yo .. r accounl and r elu.... 1ft, -:--) B, , '0 ~ , " :bi. , /,,:/ T- v:1,.fij , , ': -o?T )19!!i!?'\%i , (j CURRENCY , CENTS DOLl.ARS SILVER CHECKS , ; C. • • " ..// - , , I" , II I I. • , 20 ~ - , , , ~!...:. ..; J-:L r.. l"< • -I IM ! I'I!< f'-. ! 4 I1I' I I I I I NOT NEGOTIABLE DUPLICATE DEPOSIT T ICKET Received by ____________________' -______________________ ..... , . ~ " .. c. • .. " .. to. " 'IL" �DEPOSITE D IN T HE FIRST NATIONAL BANK <[; /.( , 5--e1Logan, Utah, R i"h t i • •e.e ,ved and t he b .. n kA. " "tho rl2.e d to fo rw .. d item . f o r coUection o r paymen t di r« t \0 t he d . owee o . p aro , bo nk 0 ' th,o u l1h any o the r b a nk ftt lI. d iocre tio n a nd 10 .ece lve ,>toyment In d , ar .. d . awn by I he d . " wee or o l he , bank o, a ad H cept /o r n eG · lillen ee I hi . bank ..." U 1>01 be H .. bl" for di . l>o"o , of the d ... fto 80 rece ive d in paym ent no . fo r lou ... t he reon . Ou t.i d" item . c redited . ubJec t to linal pa ymenl . If .. ny i'em d.own on ,hi . b .. nk o ver d.aw" a n accounl, we r"o" r ve the ' iah t e b . , " e t o your aCCO .. n t and ret ... n . '0 TO T HE CREDIT},OF / ·~ ,;-,'1 , I'(/j. : :' 'Jl B, I If T f' , " , •£ " DOlLA RS CENT' CURRENCY SILVER CH ECKS , r( I. , ;, 'It II I V ~v ;:::Or I I I I /' <---' / / / 21 NOT,~ DUPLICATE coli ~~LE I I I I ~ :IC~ R e ce ive :!. b 7 . . .... -. <... '. • .. , ... u ---- I t. .. ..... ~ - �DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK Logan, Utah, ~.( I ./- -T 95~ HI"ht i. reoe.ved And th e bankli . A"thori~ed to forwa rd i1~m. for co ll"" l;"" 0. pbyrnc nt di rec t '(0 th e d rawee Or payor boonk o r thro ullh .n y other b . n k a t ill di""rellon a nd to receive pbym~n t In d, .. ft l d r awn by t h e dra wee or o th er boonko, and eIcepl 10. nellh llenC" lhi, bank .1.... 11 not be liable fo r di . hono, of Ihe drallo so ,eceiv .. d in pa yrnent n Or for lou... thereon_ O u teide item . credited l ubjec i to fina l p ayment . If any ,Iem drawn on thi. boonk ovudrawl a n Hccount. we rcU rve the " lth t to ch .. r Me to your .. CeQ"n ... nd re turn . TO T HE CREDIT OF , ., 1 i f (It , J 0 / L. l' {/ CENTS DOLLARS CURRENCY SILVER CHECKS .- , .(- . ~ tl 0 , +.;, I II I I I I I I I I I I 22 NOT NEGOT IABLE DUPLI,\TE DEPOSIT T ICKET v 7 Recei ed b ' _--,.,.,C C .lr,.'',-. .'•• . .'.' :-------------------•• .,.,.". .':' l .. . C.C" ' C .,'. �DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK Logan, Utah, ~tc.. ,g5 19SE- , &, ---\( CURRENCY """ . \ SILVER CENTS It I>- I ( \ CHECKS DOllARS V l' \ \ \ \ j/ II I I I 1\ 1 \ I ~ I I I 1\ \1I q- 1 I 1I 23 ne~ e ived 1 \ NOT NECOTIA&LE ORIGINAL DEPOSIT TICKET by,______________________"-___________________ .. . . ....... . <0 . . .. u .. . .. .. . ,," �..DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK ".' ... Logan, Utah, [ ' --"/.c:: , .~ 19S-Z- RiJh.t i . , ue . vcd .. nd I h" bank i . . ."lho.l~ ed to forw.,d ; •.,ma 'or collec tion o. paymen . di rect to the drawee Or P"!'b' !wonk or ,h,,,ullh .. ,,)' olher b~nk AI ito di .c ret inn a nd to . " eeIVe .,..yme" t In dnft. drawn by the dra w ... o r othe r b"nk . , and ,,:."cpl fo r neglillence ,hi . b "nk . hall n o l be ti~b!" fo r di'honor of tho d r.. ft. ao recei v ed i n p a yment nor fo r 10 ..... I ke . eon. O ut. ide item . . .. edited . .. bjee l 10 fin,, 1 p aym.m, . II ,tern drawn on thi . bank o" ... d •• wI .. n account. we , eU,ve the " KM ch. ' Ke to YOU ...ceo .. n l a nd , eI UTn. ,or -#. B, , ,;; ~ ¥ , ,. -. TO THE CREDIT OF _ :d ,J J JI ,;; - I t C I ,':><, J) ;V' // ./1 I jF/ '" CENTS DOLURS CURRENCY SILVER CHECKS I I .7 ,,' I' 1 - I i"" , I I I I -h I I I 24 NOT NEGOTIABLE DUPLICATE DEPOSIT TICKET Received b j , . ...... " .. ' 0 , ..." ..", ....... , , I~ . ~c ,-, -, �DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK <±:.J ,t Logan, Utah, < .. ; ; - 195~ RI~ht II rue.ved .. "d l ho b ~nk i. a ULhorlud 10 lo.w. rd item. for coUecl ion D' payme", dlr<>et to Ihe dr~w .,., o . P" yo . bflnk or I h r o"ah Any other b A"k "I II I di .crelion And 10 rece iVe paymenl In d.llft. d rawn by th .. drnw.,., Or olher b~nk.. lind nccpt lor neg· fiaence Ih il bank .haU nol bo. lI"ble for di .hono. of the dr~H . 1 0 , cccived In payment nor fo r 1 0''''' Ihe.eon . O u tlide ite"... c . edited lub)ecl to li" ..1 payment. If any item dnwn on t hl. b .."k ove ,drawl .. " .. ccount. We r u erv. the ri ght to cha r p to accounl .... d relurn. )'0'" e '-" ~ ;:9.-- .... i~£ 1.·'< TO THE CREDIT OF #& ... B, ' / /)/ 7 II :/, f t ./ I " , { CENTS DOllARS CURRENCY SILV ER CH ECKS //k e ,X ', lt I " - r::==:, 1 / I I I , / ~.,,) -'- - [ I I [ I 25 NOT NECOTIABLE DUPLICATE DEPOSIT TICKET C"' ''-____________ Rece ;ve<l h y, _ _ _ _ _ _ . ... n ·. ...... . ....... , .. ....' u �L DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK Logan, Utah, 'iw . '!t !L 1952:!t i;h . I• • e ,~.v"d And t he b Ank i. bu.hodz .. d 10 fo . wA.d i ...",. for coli cc, ion or p .. y",en. d irec l ' 0 I h" d rawee o r I> byor bnn k or Ihro " lI h n,,:.' o.h e . bAnk .. I II . d i.., • ., Uon and t o recel v" p a ymen t in draft. d . a wn by the d.aw"" or ot her b""k., .. n d ... " e p l "ell' li;renee t h is b ank . h ..U no. be li "b le fo r di . hono r o f I he dr.lta receiv ed in pa yment n o . fo r 1" ..e. the reon . Q u t,ld e item s cred ited . "blect 10 final p aym ent. If any ""'" drawn o n I h l. bank ove . dr . ... a n aceo",,1, we rU e . ve the n i h t 10 " hulf" 10 you. account a nd re l u .n. '0 . J/, ,D TO T HE CREDIT OF I:.J ) 5'9A _ " ~, ".-dJ)."J .) -/1 J CURRENCY ' , B, '0 j lj'f" ,j kJI~ ~f DOLLARS CENT' SILVER CHECKS ~/If-; 1;.;;k7! J r N :'" ~. I I I I I I , I I I I 26 r- NQT NEGOTIABLE DUPLlC.t<I" DEPOSIT T ICKET ; Received b y - --c:c:c:c:c'o'\.c,rCC-CCCc:c:----------------' .... " .• « .. . o:::'i~ .. .......u. �DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK 195_?_ Logan, Utah. I• • .,I erved .t>d Ih ~ b .. nk II ~ u . horiz e 10 f o r",,~.d it em . 10 . c oll"" tlon 0 ' pa yn, ,,n, d ir ec t t o t he d.a " 0 . l>h(Or b,,,,k 0. ,h.ou ll h nny o t her b .. "k At II . d loc retlon d <> .eee Ve p"Y'n en' In d . a l .. d r .. wn by th e dr .. woe or o the r bank, .. nd e~ce p . fo r ne g , Ji llen" .. . 1.1. b "n k . 1. ,,11 n o . be li Able fo r di ohon o . o f dr. ft l 10 r eceived In pa ymen l no . lor loun . here on , Ou U ide it.om • •" edi .ed . ublee . 10 fina l p ayme n t . If a ny Ite m drawn o n .b il bank ove .dra ... a n .. ceount. we , e ... , v e I I. .. . iliih . '0 cha. po to yo,,, .. c .... un . a nd , ,,I um. IH ~ hl ,I." SILVER CHECKS jJk , ~ II I,,/, t " I __________~~~tH~~·­ I 27 NOT NECOTIABLE DEPOSIT TICKET DU~ ATE Recei• • d by- - -----1_-+________________ _ . . .. . . . . . . " <0 . . ... . . , • • , . . . .. . �DEPOSITED IN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK Logan, Utah, 9.¥ tlr I tj RIShl i. r ue.v"d "nd Ih. bank i. aulhor "'ed 10 fo .... a .d Item. lo r collection or paymenl dl.KI 10 I h. drawee or paro r ""nk or I h ' o Ulih ony olhe r bank a l il. dl ocrelion an d 10 receive p.lLymeM I" d r .. ft . d ..,wn by the drawee o r o,her b~nk • • find excepl lor ""II· Hlr<!nce ,hi . bank . haU 11 0 \ be li able 10. di . hono. 01 'he d ... fh . 0 rece ived in p")'I1,cnt n Or fo r louc. Ihue .. n. Ou h ide il""'. c redited . .. bJ ect to fina l p .. ymenl. If anr Ltem d.awn on Ihl . bank overd.a w. a n .. ccount, we .ese rve Ihe "ahl to cha r ae 10 your .. ceount and return. TO T H E CREDIT OF I/ ,;/?.-< 1:<; B, CURR ENCY ~ 7,'9~ ;J~-,~ ~ I_ F ~ DOLLARS SILVER CHECKS $' );,.. # V I L. ,k--dJi , CENTS ' r, ~ ,. U 1(J I I I I I I I I ...,,1 28 NOTNECOT~ DUPLICATE ~ IT TICKET Reee;vo d by . . . . . . . . 0. . . , . ... . . . . , . . . . . . . .. '- ;; ........ . �DEPOSITED IN TH£ FIRST NATIONAL BANK Logan, Utah, 195 Hl~ht i . r eserved ""d the bbnl< i s " u tho';zed to forwud Item s for collection or payment direct to the d r awee o. payor b"nl< or through any o t her banI< at its di s c r etio" and t o receive p"yment In draft. d rawn by the draw"", o. othe, b " " k • . and e:.upt fo, neg· II gence thi s ha"k . hall no. be Ii " ble 10. di.honor of the dTl.lu "0 r eceived in p s yment nor for ]os.u thereon. Out . ide i'em s c r e dited .ubjec t final paymen t. If .. ny Item drawn on t his bank overdraw. a n "ccount. we reS,,'ve t he r ighl 10 cha r Ge 10 your aceou,,' and re turn. .0 TO TH£ CREDIT OF n, DOLl..ARS CENT' CURRENCY SILVER CHECKS I I I I I II I I I 1W-· II I I I I~ 1 111 I 29 NOT NEGOTIABLE ORIGIN AL DEPOSIT TlCXET R e e e i vedhy ____________________________________________ " " "_M"," c. . ... , .. . ,., ""UI �• < ~- • ' • , • • � 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 2984 Image Width Image Width in pixels 1456 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/1405">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/1405</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 400 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example RGB Checksum 1383174937 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 Highway 89 promotion fund deposit book Description An account of the resource Highway 89 promotion fund deposit book from March 1959 to Januray 1959. Subject The topic of the resource Legal documents United States Highway 89 Alberta Route 2 Mexico Route 15 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 1957 1958 1959 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1950-1959 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, Edgar Bentley Mitchell Papers, 1950-1959, COLL MSS 322 Box 1 Folder 19 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/xv06356">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv06356</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 MSS322Bx1Fd19 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/dbd8c6e5ebb670813b905230c3883c53.pdf 2719ef6e63c310d9b34775574fd61cae PDF Text Text Proposed T EN POINT A comprehensive PROMOTIO NAL 'rI'IO YE.\R PROGRAM FOR 1957 an<! 1958 planned activity to be presented as a "package program" in the soli citation of financial support 111__ flHOllilt ?f/-tAU-v (1) _ PUBLICATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF A CQllPlllim;NSIVE GUIDE-TIPE IJ!OCHURE I N COlOR (Fall am W inter, 1957) Fund-ra.i3ing medium for the entire program. (2) _ ffiODUCTION OF 89' or COIDRED l(OVIE 'I r II a .,. eo?7 jJ r 'it/:>, /, l;,,_ f>f LoG<J. / a. 1'.e..a. ~ _ ' fDietribu'b'1on W inter of 1957 or sooner) Estimated costl (J) - RE~ENTATION AT llAJOR lRAVEL SHOIlS (r.i}ten brochure is ready) . 11 it 4PPcars impracti cal for financial reasons to send a special 89'er r epresentntive, distr i bution of the brochure and repres entation could be arranged through such agents as Art Peer s and 89' er state repr esentatives ,','ho covcr these shotlsf> (4) - )AI!lBF:RSIIIP ROSTm and Dffi])l;TORY OF ASSOC I ,\TE Im.!IlIlRS (First iaau,e Spr ing, 19~ To be issued twice a year with revisiol'l9f> "Spring and Swmner ll edition am,"' T. Fall and Wlnterll edition. 6 x 9 booklet, 12 }Xl8ea. CO~~ENTS : Reproduction of membership placque on front cover; map and list of l!njor ntLractlons on back COVel'; calendar of major commmity events tor season covered; list 01' act i va members by towns ; directory of associate msnbers ldth brief plug for products and eervices offered by eacho This roster l'tOuld b e revised every six nDnths to include ONLY paid--up members in good etandingo Members would be notified of publication ddad-line .. o.nd the conmltteo, therefore, suggests that this roster could become Q. pCJ\'Ierf'ul and effective moo.ium to s timulate collection of dues. (5) - 1m. COLORFUL I.!ElAlEllSHIP PLACo,= (lnJnediate diatribution) Placque to be publicized am reproduced in mlniture in all printed promotional pieces to make the public conscious of the Associn.tion and educated to patronize its members . (Needed SllY"a.Y) • .(6) _ NATIOl>.lrnJE DISTRIBUTION OF 89'er mORDING TO 2QOO STATIONS 'Ibis would probcbly be the best use of the r ecordings on hando A brier print ed messago explainine the background of the song am asking the disc jockiea to give it a play am a plug could be inclosed. This ia another of the projects which could be started at once. - 1- �(7) - I'LANlml RADIO PUBLICITY: Most of the stl'!tiona, on the route at l east, would donate time as a public service f eature . Fifteen minute s cripts in interview form and spot announcements would be prepared and key 89 1 er members in each area \'Iould work with t heir s tate Director in presenting the programs. The material used would serve to acquaint local folks with at tractions adjacent to the entire rout e. other 8cr:lpts and spots could be wor ded, and directed to the special attent ion of tourists listening en-route. Such items as an 1189'er Weather Report" lTould assist certain areas that are open all winter. 'This also could be started this Spring. (8) - PRESS l!ELEJ\Sl:S AND ILLUSTRATED TRAVEL F§\= Feature 5preads illustrated with maps and photos similar to the one which appeared in the Tucson paper would be prepared and sent to all papers on the rout e and also the national travel preas. Could be started this Spring. (9) - EI!PLOYEE TRJ.J;NING PROGRA!! lfa jor r ecreational areas would be invited to prepare (at their own expense) a mimeographed page containing important facts and infor.mation about t heir area o All such pages furnished. would be assembled into an "Information Guide ll for use by service station a ttendants, Tourists Information Centers , c'llld. other s o Employees could be encouraged to become farn:U1ar with the dat a and informationo (10) _ ADVERIIS ING IN NATIONAL 'lllAVEL i>:EDli Such a project would be pract ical after the brochure is printed, and the schedule could be adju s t ed to f i t the availabJ.. budget. Probably small display advertisements with coupon to be sent for "illustrated Folder ll 0 Sp ecial area literature could also be included in the packet and a small fee assessed to pay the rrailing costs o -2- �• � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Image Height 3282 Image Width Image Width in pixels 2558 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/1409">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/1409</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 3114220891 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 Proposed Ten Point Promotional Program Description An account of the resource A proposed ten point Promotional Program which is a comprehensive two year planned activity to be presented as a "package program" in the solicitation of financial support. Subject The topic of the resource Tourism United States Highway 89 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 1957 1958 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. United States Highway 89 Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1950-1959 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, Edgar Bentley Mitchell Papers, 1950-1959, COLL MSS 322 Box 1 Folder 12 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/xv06356">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv06356</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 MSS322Bx1Fd12 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/87f688e19c2c1dfa11b119880a7295a7.pdf 77c9eb5f7f1f9e8f76b15702771c9991 PDF Text Text • --------I AT. NT s.pt-.ber 26, 1955 I Ada_ l'I..ACE I P1~.taft, FllIBT AII'rY: as ' ERS % TEIl:lIA'rlOllAL GBWAY Jl8SlX'IATI<II. 0:0 . , .... Arlao... CGqIOl'atiOll \f1th principel placo of ~.... o at lokonburq, Aruona 1llAR'r1ll H. CAIITWW., Salt Lake Cit" Utah tclTALlh Fint pert, i . an iIltornaU_l 0I"9aai_U"" tOl'llOCl 1. and ubtill9 tOIl tho p..rpoeo of pr_ot11l9 ba"l on tI. S . High- ..., aa, bat. . .n OoMda, lJn1tOll stat. ., and Olel liaieo, 0<1 tor tho ....tlUll ba...f1t of ito re,...cU" .-.ben aNi their bI&oln. . . . . .1tuato &l0ll9 ..id Z. Soconcl 1I&1ntoln111Q' &Il hio~ . part, 10 a Pllbl1c lI.laU"". Connltut, otti... at Salt Lake City, Utah, with . .id city baillQ' ..... tr&ll' l_tOll with roepect to oaid h19hway. S. !be fir.t pert, r ....lro. tho . .1'.1.... of a publl01t, MMger, director of 'p ibUo rolatloaa aRd _ _Un _or.tary, od . .00ld part, 10 aporio-.l ill .\MIA work ana 1. wi1111l9 t o IUldertako to fvAlu nell ..ni .... to tho • •b .... uip .nd oro.n1uUoa k _ •• U ' ERe IliTEllIlA'1'IaIIAL HIGHWAY A.SI~IATI , nc. o OY£MUS 1. 9f W !!ECOI!R f4BTJ. Tho Unt pert, a;roa.. to retain tho ..n1ce. of Hcond part, under tho Utla of w.-.. 1" Booretuy ud Director of Publ1c IlelaUon.. to .ct for ud in tho _ of tho Aaeoe1a- Uon ill pr_oUIIQ' tho ;,1'.1110•• • , tho Ao_lation and. to wonarally do all ncIl rCRIU". aot. ucl thing. . . . ., 1>0 . .CO.AIl' and ' ' p rapor, La o&u,iDo illto .tt..,t tho intent ucl PUZ'pOM. 01 thle a gr_lIt, aDd. dID oU thiaq1l whtell or. not in OOIIfl1ot vith t 0 �cOMUtuHon, b1.av., and . .tabU. Uon, FlIrtllor, to d1~0•• polioi•• of tboo AII.....1&· of adiIL1niatnth. Mtt.n • ich M, ori .. h_ t1ao to time, 1n .aoordaaco with and 1n tha MJUlIIr pr.ocr1boc1. by aotion of tha Board of D 1notor., actinq thr_h tho dill, oonoUtutecl off1_n of tlto .u.oc1&H .... It ohall be tho dut, of tlto IIOCOIId part, to r_ho, 2. oo-erd1 nato , and dir.ot i .n to prcper ch......l . all oerro~lIde_ tt .... and to . . int. " • prcper Qaalh"l with eda1niatnU_ r.oord .nd fll. of tho dilpcoiU.., IIi&do of .11 nob onoo. oorro~­ It alla11 boo hi. flLl"thor dut, to . . intain 0 I"_tor of tho ..... 1&UOll .-berahip and • lec1Qor Ul0 of tho _ the .t&tlLl of . .ob a-.bar, . . to payaont of duoa, obow1nq .na to la_ to all a.I.... prcper DOHce of uplnUOII of .-benhip and blll tho _ . for ... _1, .itl..r d1rect or officer. 01 tha aoabar. Local •• To til"" .i·.... OY'" pr~tl, 1~. thr~ tho prcpe.. lf any. to tlLO AII_laU_ _r.r tho full aount of all . - , . r_iftd 1n p&J&Ont of clue. and any oth.r funda • lob .ro tho rlghtful p"oport, of tlLO AII.ocl.· tion .ith aaoh !r.......... to to_ a r_lpt thor.f'or. To pr.pan an &9OIlda 01 ufln10b0d l:Na1 . . . . to be b. d1~_d of by tho Boord of Director. at aaoh _t1!19/ and 1nAIofar .. poa.1blo, to inolado 111 aaoh a90ado a brlof GIltUM of _jOl" _ bul..... to _0 beforo tho lrooton for oction .a part of tho notice of any aaoh _UIl9. 'c . To .tt01l4 .11 r"C/1&lU aDd oped.l ",UII9. of tho BoiIlJ"4 of Dinot .... ' nOVlJ)1D ALlfAl'.s that fail ........ to do, •• a r ••ult 01 j uot1flablo and 81t1vaHnq oir..-tuoo. beyond tho control of ..oond part" ohall not conatlt'lt. hr.. contr.ct or to be o0l101c1orecl . . _ In tho _ paM of aaoh _Unq. of tlLO of ...lathol, lU11~ant -2- 01 thi. to t ....l ... t. tho _ . lrootoar. oallecl to •• probl_ of tlLO AII_l.tion and �rOlltlM utt.r., the h •• ideat of tlIa "-_l.Uon, 11>. the lat.l'.at of _ _7 • . . , • • t hie di.cnUon. nc... aaoond part7 11''.tt.n4iNl. bIlt In the ahM_ .f nltt." i .... hlleU.... to ..c0a4 puty not to .ttend. he ahall .tt." weh ...atlNl ••nd tboo fint puty allAH be l1abl. 101' lib .xpaaau . . h .... iMttu pl'o91cSecl. d. - s.cond putT . . . Elwcutin Sacrat.l'J'. ahall be an tiel0 _ t 4 r of .11 .tan4iNl COIIIlitt... of the ,,-_taU .. bIlt ahall not be nq1l1l'ad to .tteNi c..attt. . ."UJ\9•• Wll... .uz.ctad by tboo IIoa.rd of 1I'acrton.o to do; .Ni 1a nell _t, acpeD.... tlIa Aeaociatl_ aIlAll be liable for MOOnd puty' • • ._c:\aftoa •• il\ haJ'with. !lui _GIld party alwIll p1Il>l1c1.. the .eUriU. . of the "-_l.tio" aDd it. local cluba b l b.1ling ....... u l _ . to tlIa Pl'''. aIld .thal' ....,. ....u.. aIld by SItU. of c:l1ppiNl ...,,1e•• and other _thoda. ahall """'Pile and . . intUit • fH • •f the .eth1 ti •• of the "-_l.Uoa aIld pllbl.ic1ty ..curad. t. SaooNi party ahall fonuuat. ancl . Qaini.tar • pollc:r of publ1e ...l.U.... UYotad to kMpiNl all PlIbUc1ty aIld .d.... t1.1Nl .tfoet. of the ....ci.tio. c:onaiat.at and thaJ'ab7 uoidift\l' 001ll...1 .... and .WaadiNl . Dd caetl'adictiNl .tat_ate .Id 1lIlr.Uabl. illl_Hen which bot '" t t.Dd to foat.1' di ... ont ...t. _tio_l aNi iN11dcNall:r. u _ tlIa _beu hip and 1'!a81llt i. 1_ of ooIlfidft_ on the part of tlIa p1ll>lic aDd 1'1'''. of t • pupoea. aIld acthlU. . of the "-_i.Uol\. ",. .....ftd puty ahall oo-oJ'd1Aat. and -WI'OY. all plll>- lieU7 .114 adTltl'U.1Nl . .Uer pI''''''' •• '' to be r.l. .aect in the _ of the Aealoiatlo... to URI'. ooIlfocaity to the JNl;>l1e nuU .... polie1•• U adoptacl .Dd ~oTltd by the of Di- ract ••• h. - t pal't)' eball -..11 • • Dd aak• •.,.1labl. to _beuhip COIIIlitt. . . .11 local c:lllb' . . .1.. t.rW • •nd �other .....1 ..... &ida !dUch &ig t •••1at a-t-nhlp .cqIl1.1t1011 .ffort. and ahall co.pl1o and a _ di.tr~to by . .il iatoraet!o" boall.tb. to tho ontir. _aborahip at nell int.n81.• •• dincted bJ tho -.panditaro• •ut oard of Dincton, w1thi" t he li.it. of tlIe rl.ed tker.for bJ aGch r d. ....1Id party ahall in.... U'l.t. and t.to n_.....y i. .tep. to di .......'l0 tho .apport of .ny unautho.. iaod aolicitatioa. tho part of third ponon.. ln rep....... UIlg tho AHociaUoa Oil 10h .i;ht be oonatned . . beiDQ opo.....nd by tho " . .oci.- but tion. ad. party ahaU j. oxploitlDq tho _~tltua. ful17 Olq>lor• ....,.. IUId aMU of of .....lc .tt ... ctlollO on and .ajaCODt PaT ar.t_. and to to tho Int.rllatioll&l U populari. . and tho excell.nt t.dli tio. and. aCJqI>Alnt tlIe public wi .00 o- t t _ dfoNed tho tr....l1l1C1 p=l1c .1 0D\1 Kid. h.i.;h>nIT. COYgAI'llI 1. lftIqO •• 2l fIIOO Ma. Fi... put por_. l' .qr... to pay to _GAd pa .. ty. !lOt . . blat • • • t .. for prof ••• ional ....do•• ".A<Mred by hi. otflce and 111 tloo _ of OM od and lto/100 ~ :~~ :,.w; ~:=~ ="::r:o.t-.:~:o 1955. and COIItiAll1119 thrQll9hoolt tho addition to nch ot~ "co1'f• • bandll • W. GO.tract. t .... cf ...d with . .l In oc:i __thly foe, _orui party ahall t . . of 1.00 to t- pa~ . .t ot eMIl and ......,. ual paid _.berallip r.cohod bJ tho A. .oeiation!dUc lnclua. ...n..-l. of '3~1t tob... 0","_ _._ra!lip•.•. too to be dIIOI and payablo fr ahall _11 . . _ _ t-.... t~ to tiM, lIpOlI ..d ucl th.1r .ccoptance iAt tho Ao_i.t1o."'\. 2. ..con Firat party aqr_ to pay tlIe t ......l1l19 part, tor atton4i1l9 .ooUIIg• ., t . -4- 0lq>0.... 0....<1 cf Dbootoro, tho �.. _tin;. on tho f.llowinq baaa. ~.1tt h. collte (~) POI' ail. for ..ell. all. tra.,.lod. in I' trlp froa Galt Lake Clty. Utah. to tho .it. of _tin; and raturn. pllla 10. 0 pol' ~ tor 0&<:':11 day ill r_t. oDd WhU. 11> .tb,..,...... at nell _Unq. Thh >:at .. to ~ly 0 0 \y ."tlIoJ'laod. tra-.o1 • _ncl JlOr~ 1.. a _ a . - hNw1th .r IlIICSN cUr.etlan . f tM Iloard of Direct.n. •• A1IJ l~ .g ..... ebb do.1ri. tho po>:_l _"1 ... of ...,oncI party f ar tho P"rpeM of ...bUIIG 111 orgaJdaaUon aid pr ....U_l .tt~t • a ..tlIwiaod. 0 Gal.l be 1MI1cI nogotat. ....:a ebb for QPO..... .. l.n; •• tho _ 1;'1 ."ell. cllll> and _0D<i po>:ty '1.. n.lly aU.factory tozaa with b~l-.od and t • •aall attOl't doe .....t _t.dally bt.du. w1th tho ro..t1no ohl1"",Uona to tho pu"nt or9&JdaatlOA .1'. . . . .1'. co.t of all .taUOIIU)'. p . .~, at ...... 3. t_. eon1co. and all aiacoll&noou it... and .uppU•• relllU1rocl to 1..ator ot . .co he aftaira of t • AaaociAatiOll hor~r pjlrty alIa11 be p;a1 carry ....t tho chaU•• &A 1>1 tho A••eeI.&Uoo. .f 100.00 eM11 be _do a.ailabl. to _ncl party a ' ooCorullMlrty t:t.o to t:t.o. _ t t. tho troaaur.r tor For all. ~ ..h Ir_ thonfroa u4 0IP0ft proof of po,.....t of it... Ilod.o fr_ thia fuel 1" oc - a....t whioh av. •• ail>Od at R_ aCQOWItin; allwe tho _ • .Ui... of tho 15, or It Laka City, ili IMIrty and tho _ whl .catl.. <Un;. t . 11&. . boon dIopl.tocl, or.tary aball be uo we.t Seooad 10 tho off100 uilrl:al_ .&7 aball be kMwa .. ".s1 ... troth. of tho Int.national ioned by tho Aa ••daUolI wi root, by . . . . ~.n Aaaoc1.aU ..... Incr., to be eo ..... axcl...l . .l, ball prbted . .tter, t ....., la- .1.9- u4 nppU•• welt offioo fodUU .. and &q\l1p- . .nt thor.in to be ....11abl. to tho ..... &ad noe4a of tho AaaociaUon -5- �lnwrred in Clonaection with the inn_aU_ of AaaoolA- I'd of Dlr.ct~. of ape_. noc... Uy for...., ~ &1\ the I 1. Tho fint put, reqab. . a ...... ...,..11<1 put, in tho .1Ia t, boll4 II'. tho 1000.00, oonditioned 0 'IIpOIl . .cono:\ part, faithfull, aOOV&fttiog to flr.t part, tor all faude of the AaaooiaUon c:calQIJ l ..to 41a p .... aa1on and. eoc:oad put, 1!9J'''' to fundal> .\ICll boad to tho .r...ooiaUon withill a roaMMbl. t1ao aftor tho u..".U_ 1:>0 p&1d ~o 0 tlU. contraet , vith nell bond to POI' ooAt to oach party. AlIt•• of all _dQIJI of the Board of Direct.... 2. and tho A:u>1I&l oUng _11 1:>0 .kapt &lid ..""ad part, WIl 1:>0 turll1lhod • tr_r1pUOII of noh .1lUlt•• within tlor. . da,. ....tin;. following It ia ,. tull, lUIda ... tood and aqroocl thet udal' AO cirnutanoo. 11 ..COJI4 part, to 1:>0 _.ldared &I> ....10J00 of f ir.t port" t 11 utiQIJ 001.1, 1.. tho capaoit, .1 •• i.QcIe- pelldant COl1t ra"tor and hereof, ~.nt, 1&Ddartakll\1l to OUJ'7 Ollt tM <IilU.a • ""l\IIOOUon v1th other utblU. . earne4 on by . .~ part, . . . hi>110 ahall .......1' , a t an, 1.U_. t~ Oftftlunt; old t.be .r..•• ci.tion 1:>0 liabl. tor &1>7 _11 lit act 01 ..cono:\ partr .. agaiaat thlnS por _ _ no 01'\9&111'.0. 1a porfon.alloo of • obl1 ationa I' thil contract. It i. luther 1lIl:1....tood tM _ODd puty 1•• ngaqed in ot .1' publl0 r.latlona .ctiYltl•• and 1. lICIt ob1 to atoeS .be ...1&Ddar to dnot. full .bd aclual. . t t - • atfal... of the a..oci.Uon, bu.t i . only obl1;atocl to ful - fi ll a c.ny OIlt the rOlltiDe c~. . it....b -- by t hia ag..-..t �p:roY1<ie4. undentood. IUd d"iqNIted. t. It 1. aqreeci that tbl. oontr• .,t 1Iha.ll bee_ blJding ~. Sept_ber 211, 1955. thf! Soud of Di - and .fhcthe .. of rector. of • AIIaocl.tioft haY1nq .<;11""'" to and. IIppro...d t .. t.noe t-Areat. and. with the .... to becGa• • ft...tiY. 1q>OII ,,19 - _tun by the Preald.at .f the AII_aUo" ..... the MCONI/lparty, .ur. 01 the vi th the ,,1r;na cr.taQ' aid the ea.l ot the Corpora- tion to be addAId It• • to at hb ."....'I'tIIli."ce. oontl.n.e ..... r8b&in in . f fect wntll nul ~J.ng 3)..1" agn.nt .hall • final adjo"'~nt of tit. of the Iloar<i 01 Director. which '011_ tl!. umoal uabu'.hlp .,..U"'1 ciuJ'11\1J the lut week. of Septtlllber. 1956; ALWAYS. that W" &ir_lIt ahall be aoj • .,t to ter- PRO'iID "ination at any tiM d:\I.rll\1f Hid year as toU_: a. tIta the l\a....,laUon at any dilly IIOttced .,.aUnv at By card of Dl,&..,ton proYi.ding that the int.ntion to .ntertain in the a<h1s.r.ce agand.a of the actlon ta taI5i.,..1:. 1« lnol", ' ~ty 01: 1... than thr_ daya pdox to .uch b. lIeCond. . ... lid party. ~n ...tiAq. lib t .....r .1l1O hie realqlleUon .t any duly notieed ....t1l\lf of the 80ud of Directors, prO'ltdll1\J to teJld8r au that intent! n.iqna1:10ft be in.,11l4ec1 1n the lIi,..noe age..... ot til. ~iQQ" all 1... t1.." t lJ1V. xd ra <:q)J tlwtr..,1 ol.xeulated to Be clay. prior to INch _t- IlIt.ch rql\11111tiOft by the .....,11<1 part, au only b e _ .U..,th. 3 of llOt aDC1 a cIaya toliowi thoo date at • .,eeptanoe by 1:» Eoarcl lreotou. 5. All a qrowing or o1... Uo" .. ndex an.... ClOlltr ao1:. 1t i . agreed UAt dl Ntt.n . .y not and it 1. agr.ed, at .n,. t1aa that thi. ooJltract ahall th~~ t eo~.recl .e boHo .be "oj.ct to . the life hereo' by· ••tul pvU•• b.tato . It 1. flIJ'tlwr aqreed that he'<'ecf. t!Ia. _ ...y be .&ta~ of t • pa'&U. . . -7- lI.r.under, COI\_t at of the .t the upiration tr.. year to year by aqr_at �It 18 ."t .... Uy agreed tl1a t tht. contral't .hall be 6. binding upon any .ubllidiary group. and local 89 ' .r. clubs whic h be organised by tl.. Aaaociat1on and 40 by-lawB of IlUch clubs &hall be approvQ tL.rai n tll&t the by the Board of Direotors without proyi.ion ter~s of tbh contract .ball be h in<l1nq upon such local alub or group. 7. It i . \ a Rutual intent and de.ire of the part •• he r eto t o work in cOIIAOn for tho pr....UOIl and da" e1"P"'"nt u. • to carry out the objaot. and purpoaes of the iqhway 89 an As.ociaHon; an 0 to that end the P"rt ~o" erato al/r.. to "ork: &utua11y tOl/ethar for tho c.,..oo pupos". a nd to the III.t>l41 benefit of all parti•• aoncemed hereill. Iii ItUIIW8 WlIDtrnOF . t a partie. ereto ha" a hereunto ..t ak.j~ day of Septe&ber. 1955. t ell" hends and ...al. this ~.~We~ Ih-n:l!llATIOIIAL . I':m-aAI ASSOC •• me. na rpora ion - f'4 r"Ol ~- 1 o:~~ m~, County : -: : ; ; , day loef",. "., the undeui ad 0 pereG ai'POii Iii. IIELL, known to &e to be penon who~ 18 IJIIblOOri ed to the foreqoi no in.truael\t who acknowledged tll&t he .......t.d he ..... for the purpose.. con.1deratio th.rein express • car. WIn above written. .y hall and offi c al Gael the ciay a. ~n Elq>ire.: . f:I-&. nr - 8- Y8ar la.t �/ G j\ , MliR F" It1~".1T aada .. d Q~t..."ber, o l(;lI.A'I 1955', b;' au b et ..een tha 9 ' rs Iu n.L, of "alt!.8lte ~ L er l ••arter '" ai""atOl , tlr.t UT10 , 1 C, and M. 1'1 . ~arty , anter ed i n to thls 26tb "'sy lty, Utah, herol after 4 aicnate" , a co.,d party • ..:. ;!,. fiA'r _* , ttle parties her a Lo llau t lIEII Into an " POI ! _ L __ ! .1 ut , 8 eroby, tho • co d par y a ClIIployed b7 fi rst pIll"ty aa exec \ha soerotary, a,r.~.nt bav. a coepted a r el atlonahlp eac been y said Ail • o ther, aud to AS , 1 valuabl e cons d • co. Id8rat10 0 0 ~~. date .""ter sud a a.sua d oblleatl0 • .....""t and oth a to s aid . 'r e .... ~i.t aUo. a, th" part ". x ta"d t o S 00. d party, til. certain oed u tv eed to • d ha"e I' r 1 Ilta • • • I1IIr& 1,,""1'1, .... con tai ned • , b<> ita • A..oclatio" 1. .0<1 ... f ollo.,; .. n e b;' a .... to ant au exclll.aive hAJ b1 .. to 8 co party to • • tabUsh a d o perat e .. a ~ <.rpr18 hate bus1" aa 0 "m. oall t or profit, th op&ratl0 Offlc1al Tour i.ta.Lat 8 0 b" eau f or ttle ) ' ers r t er natl0. al lcllw"Y As oeiatio. , Inc . " 2. ub Tba purpo . .. and !'Wlctl o n ot the !lureau shall bot t o , obtalu, creste, Ill.. 0 erG 3. o 89 mall d1strlbut. 0 C for other llls. make available , "arl ou8 ac:iy.,rtlSitIC, lJQ"".nlX·, 0 and prClllotlonal i t . an .a~u!act~. , wlt bou~ ..rv1e es to!:\ r e.triet1 ~eaultl Auooiat1o I • A 11••1 . , alo "'., art ll ry natur a , bel''' of th , Crom the rk, d."lcss and pr !u~ct on or tbl. uct e~t. rpr1 8 r esain the sol . pro p rty or • 00. d part)' , may mako L1Y portion t he r 0 avall.blo to t h8 as.oclat o~ f or �s e, or a pr i vate i i t ._ to U a to sol prof i t, It or f or pro 1 . ~ba Q d th" bur a a war a. ~ 0~4 a said r e a~d r aQu. ata a ll Gt b. 1 .cl ded i •• ~ 7. s~ t • b .~ ~b. <lat . . allY 7. om busi ce l • • • tahl t ot 1.11. AalOclat o. a' a t • varlous ltG... , s r1l1e •• , 0 t bot 0 a agr f , at b to t ta.... th. otto t s at • tera bY ,r al . olter e or sal , or . .u and a clear at t.. .ent ot thi. t eet 1a a r ... » tual. co or 0 .1 0 1. of t h1a " aaoe atl l' d 1atr1butio •• by t • v co at . t bla d. aere t i on may par 1, or proaotlo' al d• • 10e . ot f er d or ao at actu • • abov e duor.lbe<l shall " . or u.. any ot s ccept, pure cb a at. .... • l' upo aa provide f or t e pur ... be r eferred e· a; !vldUala, p rt al n1nl to t • us 1 n .... 1n t or 1a to b. 8014 . lth .1.11 app11cat l ts 0 a 10e or th1 Ci¥ fin , in41vldual., or orcan.l.zat 0 co.•d partr, ~. permit the us lI11l' pub1i cat en , ad erti s! I or promt1o...s1 1', partr. t c lola. or or 1.1 cO l .cetI0 . 0 ,eo"" c shall pr1c e i a pl ac d or whic II l oh a pr1c8 1 _ p1 nc , 01' vbl c ant ed by scco-, a a bee Tho ASlOclst i o ot l ta l' I tt£n pormla.l o. and authori zat i on t il a SI and ~. .tioned a t actual producti o , coat, or tor e 1th t or sue u a liD lI11l' .. a.1n r 8pr04uo&4 or u,a d 1 product or t hin, upon a dlstr l~t .d por't I o!> of the abovo bar aII1 p, but WI . at " 1' uS .. 1 toru IL!IT 'ld o slOciatio , an4 produooC! by the to ~r a t1 . t i o. wI th proiIIIOtl oJU.1 lutter and i n CO(lll & Duro o • OSl . ... parti e s th v!'bel. aal es and prOlOlO1: onal ded a t e~ .to . xci slye l' cl" , ... tod to t • ant s11all be a p rlod of a t lllo 1 ma1 year 11' r "'." II 0 II' tual11 "61'ee a ble to both .,art185. e .a ' ~ch r .a. a1 • •ad th. t portl o 0 t �na .chi so will e · Ottlc &1" bur au til port 0, . her of "'hieh 1 b. co s1d.r d ~ ' .r. of t h.. co~ c Associatlon aud all. ts to 1.110 bur ...u r ant " exclu s1vo" 1'1 end r c1 n d, In of t e,rm1 .~·t .6 the pro du e tlo.1 and d1st:r1butl0 ar e e.au as of l1e" ar. • a. t1 0. al it ad • rne , but dl.trl b .. Uo., 0 all :l.t ''115, t 1'111$ "'ld s en xl.ted or b en co_t r ot <'I f or by 'he ca . , " hich bur . 8~ 8V. prI or to th date of tonal. atiOll sbal l I II .0 or pro ib1te , alw Y8, that I . co ,d O ro ide p~ ty obtal • o r 1 htl h r E ·Ider , 1. and to the off c l lll aon! 01 t 0 or L)lntlo . , "",ely" r e ... ur e TraU" , or a;;y royal U.. ah et au. c, r ecorda , or 10. e'.' • o1..rlate r . prodQe t1o~ • prhata b 51... 1. to b o .. ed a;,d o perat d by • co~ d t. 8 ~o olea upo .n tll. lr bL.ds til S ."t arpr . , f ol' pro!1 t J ' er ••• 1001.1. 0., t debt. or o b11 ·/lt l o• • or u!lt l l this statuI 18 chaneed or m1 a.u'" 11. or r l&llts to de t day o C ~.pt libel', , r s I.. . Lie:. n e IL;. ~~ port I o r 6l1.lHto ••t 1) 55. A~;~J.TI J" y L.y fr = roflt, r • • ~tl a; , the part! • hereto rt u th • I roas r c al pt. , or aet Int r r la provided f or ty. and P 18 1.•.10 'flY liable f ol' L ,y o r th 11.c.ar '4, a..c1 ha. th r 0 • r ea ola 10. om O. I c, n GB AY. ( M;;" iia l ' , c I u~. sa. OCO .... :;O I The a bove and f or8&oi Instr • 0 il t.5i .Del ore •• , y TI Y V. .;' this ..iit.O-day 0 opttlllb<lr , l ? 55. '! QlO > , t ...as II bscrH, ar.d H. • CA.•• IlLd LL, £<:~~- .. . o ~ary Ie �DATE: September 26, 1955 PLACE: Flagataff, Ar hona FIRST PARTY: 89'ERS DlTERNATIOHAL HIGHWAY ASSOCIATIOIi, INC. , an Arisona corporation with principal place of bu.ine •• at Wickenburg, Arisona SECOND PARTY: IURTDI H. CANTWELL, Salt Lake City, Utah RECITALS: 1. Fir.t party is an international organi.ation formed and exi.ting for the purpoae of promoting trayel on U. S. Highway 89 , between Canada, United state., and Old !lexico, and for the mutual benefit of ita reapectiy. member. and their buein. . . . . .ituate along said highway. 2. Second party i. a Public Relationa Con.ultant , maintaining an office at Salt Lake Cit" Utah, with said city being centrally located with reapect to ..id high.,.y. 3. The fir.t party require. the .eryiee. of a publicity manager, director of public relation. and executiye secretary, and .econd party is experienced i n .uch work end 18 willing to undertake to furnish &Uch euyicea to the membership end org&niution known as 89'ERS INTERNATIOIiAL HI GHWAY ASSOCIATION, I NC . COVElW!TS OF THE SECOND PARTY: 1. The fir.t party agree. to r.tain the .eryice. of .econd party under the title of Ex.cutiYe Secretary and Director of Public Relation., to act for and in the name of the As.ocia- tion i n promoting the bi.ine •• of the As.ociation and to generally do all auch routine act. and thing. as ...y be neceeaery and proper in carrying into effect the intent and purpo..a of thia agre_ent, and do all thing. which ue not in conflict with the �constitution, by-lawa, and establiahed policies of the Association . Further, to di~ose of adainiatrati.e matter. which may arise from til1e to time , in accordanc. with and in the manner prescribed by action of the Board of Director., acting through the duly con.tituted officer. of the Association. 2. It shall be the duty of the ..cond party to recei.. , co-ordinate , and direct into proper channels all oorrespondence dealing with administrati.e matters and to maintain a proper record and file of the dispo8ition made of all auch correspondence. It .hall be his furt her duty to .. intain a roster of the Asaociation JIleaberahip and a ledger file of the ."",e shoving the .tatus of each ",eaber . . . to payment of dues; a nd to haue to all .e»ber. proper notice of expiration of m8Jllbership and bill t he ...e for ren.wal , either diraot or through the proper officer. of the .eaber. Local 89'ers Club, i f any. a. To turn o.er pr ...ptly to the Anociation Tr...urer t he full "",ount of all m oney. recei.ed in paym.nt of dues and any other funda . hich are the rightful property of tha Association with such Treasurer to issue a receipt therefor. b. To prepare an agenda of unfinillhed busine .. to be diapoeed of by the Board of Director. at each meeting; a nd insofar as posaible, to include in .uch agenda a brief outline of major new busines. to come before the Directora for action as part of the notice of any such .eating. c. To attend all regular and _cial m eetings of t he Board of Directors; PROVIDED ALWAYS that failure .0 to do, aa a re.ult of justifiable and mitigating circumstancrs beyond the control of .econd party, ahall not conatitute breach of t his contract or to be considered aa cause to terminate the ...... In the ca.e of auch meetings of the Directors called to dia pose of relati •• ly unimportant problema of the Association a nd -2- �• routine matters, the Pr •• ia.nt of the A8.ociation, in the interest of econ_.,. I aay, at hi. discretion, excu. . . . cond ~rt,. frca attending, but in the absenee of written instructions to ..cond party not to attend, he ahall attend wch ..eeting, and the fir.t party &hall be liable for hi. expen.e. a. hereinafter prodded. d. Second par ty, a. E%eou ti n Secretary, ahall be an . E%-o£ficio .caber of all .tanding coamitte•• of the A8.ociation but .hall not be required to attend coaaitt .. . .. tinqs, unle •• directed by the Board of Directors .0 to do ; and in such ...ent, the A..ociation ahall be liable for .econd party's expenses , in accordance herewith. •• The .econd party .hall publici.e the acti.ities of the A..ociation and it. local club. by issuinq nev. releaaea to the press and other nev. media, and by seans of clipping serdce. and other • • thode, &hall coapile and maintain a file of the acti.itie. of the A..ociation and publicity ..cured. f. Second party ahall foraulat. and adminiBter a policy of public r.lation. de.oted to keepinq all publicity and ad.ertiainq effort. of the A..ociation conai.tent and thereby a.oiding confu.ion and .i.leading and contradictinq .tatement. and unreliable inforaation which miqht tend to fo.ter discontent, both eectional and indi.idually , among the member.hip and re.ult in 10•• of confidence on the part of the public and pre •• of the purpose. and acti.iti •• of the A8aociation. q. Second party .hall co-ordinate and appro.. all pub- licity and adnrti.inq matter prcpoeed to be ral.a.ed in the nea. of the A8.iciation, to a.aure conforaity to the public relation. policie. . . adopted and ~ro.ed by the Board of Di- rectors. h. Second party ahall oollpH. and aate a.aHable to membership c.,..itt ..s all local club' . rues material. and -3- �other yarioua aida which might assiat memberahip acquisition efforts and ahall compile and distribute by mail information and news bulletina to the entire .. aberahip at such interyala as directed by t he Board of Directors , within t he limita of the azpenditar.a authoriaed therefor by such Board. 1. Second party shall inYeatigat" and take n£.ceasary stepa to diacourage the aupport of any uu&uthorised solicitationa on the part of third persona, i n representing t he Aaeociation but which might be conatrued as being aponaored by the bsocia- tion . j . Second party &hall fully explore vays and m eans of exploi ting the multitude of acenic attractions on a nd adjacent to the InternationAl 89 Hi ghvay Syatem, and to pepularbe and acquaint t he public with t he excellent facilitiea and aCCamaDdationa afforded the t ray.ling public along said high.ay. COVENANTS OF FIRST PARTY: 1. First party agrees to pay to second party , not aa vagea , but aa a fee for profeaaional seryiee. rendered by hia office a nd in peraon, the sum of One H undred and no/100 onth , auch sua to be payable i (1100.00) Dollara per m ~ v~ on the 1st day of each m onth hereafter , com:uencing October Jo 1955, and continuing t hroughout the term of this contract . t In addition to such atipulated m onthly fee, aecond party shall ncei ye a handling fee of n .00 to be paid out of each and enry annual paid _8IIlbership received by the haociation which &hall include r enewala of current .eaber.hip., •• well .e new meabera , and with said fee to be due and payable fra tiae to tille, upon the approv~l of such m eabershipa by the Board and their acceptance into the baociati on . 2. Firat party agre.a to pay the trayeling expense of second party for attending meetinga of t he Board of Directors, t he -4- �annual memberahip meeting and to the ~r~ed meaberahip or coaaittee ••etings on the f ollowing basia: FiY cent. (Sf) per mile for each nil e trayeled in e round trip from Salt Lake City, Utah, to the aite of such meetinq and return, plua $10.00 par day for each day in route and while in attendance at nch meeting. Thia rate to apply on any authorised tray.l of Hcond party in accordance herewith or undar direction of the Board of Directors. a. Any local 89 'era Club desiring the personal serYicea of second party for the purpose of a .. isti.nq in orqaniaation and promotional effort ahall be paid by such club and aecond party ia authori.ed to negotiate mutually satiafactory teraa with such .:lub for expen... inyohed and may att.nd to such effort ao lonq .a the .... doe. not materially interfere with the routine obliqatione to the parent orqanization here'"Uler . 3. The coat of all stationery, post.,.e, atupe, forma, printing, atenoqraphic .eryicG, ro\plicatinq aerYicea, clipping .eryice. and all miecellaneous ite•• and euppliee required to adminiater the affaira of tha A.aociation and carry out the dutiea of aecond party hereunder ahall be paid by the A.aocia tion. For auch purpose, a per.anent petty cash fund of $100.00 shall be _ de ayaHabl. to ..cond party and aecond party shall, from time to time, acoount to the Treasurer for payments therefrom and upon proof of payaent o f item. JUade fr_ t his fund in accordance horewit h, the Treaaurer shall r eiaburae the fund to the u _ t which auch accounting shows t he sue to haYe been depleted, ~. The offices of the Executi Y8 Seoretary ahall be aain- tained at 11-. 15 , Cheerer Building, UO W t Second str..et, .. Salt Lake City , Utah , which is the office m aintainad by aecond party and the ...a ahall be known aa Adminiatratin Headquarten of the International Highway Association, Inc., to be 110 deaiq- nat-d excluaiyely in all printed . .ttar, forma, and aupplie. i ..ued by the Asaoc:iation with such office fa.c ilitiee and equipment therein to be ayailable to the ua.. and needs of the Aa.ociation -5- �without co.t; PROVIDED teleqr~ ~VAY3, that all long d istance calls and incurred in connection with the transaotion of ".ocia- tion bu.in.... charged again.t the telephone of ..econd party shall be paid by t he "sociation upon pre.entation of iteai.ad .tate- . ent .. therefor , and epproTal by the Board of Directors of the purpo.. and neces.ity for such expense. IIII£ELLIIi mus COVENANTS: 1. The fin t party requir... a surety bond fres the ..cond party in the sum of $1000.00, conditi oned upon ..coed party f aithfully accounting to first party for all funda of the Aasociation coming i nto hi" pos.eaaion and s.cond party aqrees to furni8h such bond to the Association wi thin a reasonable time after the exacution o f t ia contract , with such bond to be paid 50 per cent t o each party. 2. lIinutes of all ",eeting. of the Board of Director. and the Annual »eeting ahall be kept and second party shall be furnished a transcription of such ~nnte" within three day. f ollowing such .eoti ng. 3. It is mutually understood and agreed that under no c irc uma2..auct!8 1 s .seeond party to be considered an employ.. of first party, but i3 acting ~olely in the capacity of an i nde- pendent contractor and agent , undertaking to carry out the duti.s hereof , in connection with other actiTities carried on ~ .ecoad party .", a Public Relations COIlBultant; and tlw Anociation shall neTer, a t any time be liable for any eqliqent act of second party as against third person. while engaqed in perforsanoe of the obligat ions under this contract. It 18 further under.tood that second party i" engaqed in other public relation. actiTiti •• and is not obligated hereunder to deTot. full and exclusiTe time t o the affairs of the Association, but fi ll and carry out the routine i~ only obligated to ful- cO.llmi~ents ~ - 6- this agreement �prodded, under.tood, am desiqnat.d. ~. It 18 aqreed that this contract ehall become binding and effectiT. a. of Mon~, September %6, 1955 , the Board of Di- rectors of the Aasociation haTing aqreed to and apprOTed the tent. bereof , and with the ..... to become effect h e lIPan signature by the President of t he A..ocietion and the second, party, with t he signature of t he Secretary and the Seal of the Corporation to be add.d her.to at h18 connnience. This agr e_ent shall continue and reaain in .ff.ct until the final adjournment of t he Innual Meeti nq of the Board of Directors which follows t he annual meabership ••ating during the last week of September , 1956; PROVIDED ALWAYS, that this agre_ent shall be subject to termination at any tiae during Mid year as follows: a. By the Aasociation at any dnly notioed •• eting of the Board of Director. proTiding t hat the intention to entertain . action to tentinate i. included in the adTance agenda of the I m eeting and a copy t hereof circulated to Boerd Members and • • econd party not le.s than three day. prior to .uch meetinq . b. By eeoond party, apon his tenderinq hh r eaiqnati on at any dnly noticed meetinq of the Boerd of Directors , prOTiding that i ntention to tender such r esiqnmti on be included i n t he adTance aqanda of the ...tinq and a copy thereof circulated to ell Boerd M aaber s not l ess than t hree deYB prior to auch meeting . s..ch resiqnmtion by t he ..cond party can only became effectiTe 30 day. f ollowing the date of acceptance by the Boerd of Director •• 5. Aa a g rowing orqanbation under a new contract , it 18 agreed that all matters may not haTe been coTued hereunder . and it 18 agr eed that this contract shall be subject to amendment at any tie. throuqhout the life hereof by mutual consent of the parti.s hereto . It is further agr .ed that at the expiration hereof . t he SaRe may be extended fra. year to year by agreement of t he parti ••• -7- �6. It 18 mutually agreed that this contract shall be b inding upon any sub.idiary group. and 10041 89'er. clubs which may be organized by t he Association a nd no by-lavs of .uch club. shall be appro"ed by t he Board of Directors without proTision therein that the teras of this contract shall be binding upon such 10041 club or group . 7. It is the mutual intent and desire of the parties hereto to work i n comaon f or the and de".lopment of pr~otion U. S. Highway 89 and to carry out the objects and purposes of the Aaaociation; and to that and the parties hereto agree to work m utually toqether for the cOllllon purposes and to the mutual benefit of all parties concerned her ein. W f I N WITNESS WHEREOF , t he parties her eto ha". hereunto set t heir hands and s ..ls t his ~ September , 195 5. LrCf~~~EW~1 89 ' ERS INTERNATIONAL HI GHWAY ASSOC., I NC. an Arizo corporati on t/4~ By ~~~:"o~f ~:i .! aa . ~ Of~~~ ' On t his day 1955 , before m , a the undaraiqned ~ car, penonaappeiii TIN H. CANTWELL, known to lie to be t he person whose name is subscribed to t he foregoing instrWllent who acknowledged that he executed t he same for the purpose s a nd consideration therein expressed . WITNESS my hand and offi cial seal t he day a nd ye ar last abo"e written. -8- �STATE OF ,~~,.a ... COUNTY OF ~ . . .. Be f ore ",e , ) ) SS . ) ~~ ~ . , a Notary Publi~~nd ,tp~!~,!!,iI\~ii'~y personally appeared, En~~40~ii8Oll8Who8e name. are .Uhscribed to the fore- going instrument a. President and Secretary resp8ctiTely of the said 59 ' ERS INTERNATIOIAL HI GHWAY AllSOCIATI Oll , I N ., a n Arizona corporation, and acknowledged to lIl. that they executed the HIl. f or said Corporation f or the p Urp080 and cons ideration t here i n expreased, a8 its free act and deed, and by each of t hem Toluntarily exe cuted. fiVlOJi-:=",de:-"-Y hand and s eal of office t h is of .,..~ ~_ ~=--=~~~;o£oo!:iE!:""~-="-' 1955 . M Commi • • ion Expir e s : y ;> ~, r~,a..re I ( NOTARY SEAL) - 9- day �~ . ,A G R E E M EN T THIS AGREEMENT made and entere d into this 26th day of September , 1 955 , by and behreen the 89 ' ers IliTERNATIONilL HIGHWAY ASSOC I ATION, INC , herei naf ter desi gnat ed , fi rst party , and M. H. CAN TI'IELL , of Salt Lake City , Utah , her ein- aft er designated , second par ty . Ii 1 T li ! 2 S ! 1: !!: THAT WHEREAS, the partie s hereto have t hi s date enter ed into an agr eement . whereby : the sccop.d party has been employed b!-' fir st par ty as executive secretary : and by said a greement have accepted a rel ati onship and assumed obli gation s each to the other , and WHEREAS, in considerat ion of said agreement and other valuabl e conSi deration s , the par ties to said agr eement have agreed to ext end to s e cond par ty , the certain exclusiv e ri ghts and f r anchises hereinafter contained o N~ , 10 THEREFORE, be it agreed as f ollows : The Asso cia tion her eby agrees to gr ant an exclu s ive f r anchise to s econd party to establi sh and operate as a private business enterprise f or profit , the operation t o be called " The Offi c ial Tou r i sts Relation s Bur eau f or the 89 t er s Internat i onal Hi ghway Association , Inc o II 2. The purpose and functi on of the Bureau shall be to publish , obtaill , creat e , manufacture , distribute offer for sale or o ther wise make available , var i ous advertising , souvenir , and promotio ~ al items and services to members of the Association and others without r e s t r i ction o 3 0 All de Si gns , slogan s, artwork , devi ces and products of every naturo , r esulting from the function of t his enter prise shall be and remal ~ the sol e pro per t of s e cond part , who may make any portion thereo f availabl e to t he association for �its private use , or in connec tion with promotional matter and items to be produced by the AssocIation, and distributed gratis to its member ship , but no portion of the above mentioned materials o~ a~d items may be reproduc ed or used i n any manner any produc t or thing upon whi ch a pr i c e is pl ac e , or whi ch is to be sold either at actual production , cost , or for profit, unless and until written permission and author ization for such use has becll br anted by second par t Yo 40 The Association shall not cause or permit the of its name on or in c o ~e c ti on with a~y U$e publ i cation , advertising item , souvenir, or promotional devi c e or thing upon whi ch a price is pl aced or whi ch is t o be sold either at actuel cost or for profit , to any firm , individual , or organi zation other than second party , and the bureau as provided herein o 5. All applications and requests fro~ business establish- ments or individual s , per taining to the use of the Assoc iations 1 name in the manner and for the purpose above described shall be referr ed to second party , who at his descr etion may gr ant or deny said request o 6. N member of this Association shall be obligated to o ac cept , purcha se , or use ~~y of the variou s items, s er vices , or promotional devic es offer ed or to be offered for sal e , or distribution by the Bureau and a clear statement of this fact must be included in the written and ver bal sales and promotional activiti es and efforts of the Bureau. 70 This agr oement c an be ammended at any time by the mutual consent of both parties hereto . 8. The term of the exclu sive f r anchise gr& t ed ~ to the bureau by this agreement shall be a period of one year fr om the date her eof, at which time it may be r enewed in such f orm as may be mutually agr eeabl e to both par ties . 9. Unless such r enewal is made that porti on of the - 2- �franchise whi ch permits the designation of the Bureau as the "Offi cial" bur eau of the 89 ' ers Asso ciation and all portions hereof which grant "exclu sive " r ights t o the bur eau shall be con sider ed terminated ~~d r e c l nded , insofar , as the production and distribution of new are co~cerned , ~~d additional items but the continued production , sale and distribution of all items , thi ng s and servi c es , whi ch have existed or been contrac ted f or by the bureau pr ior to the date of termination shall i n no manner be affect ed , alter ed , or pr ohibited , pr ovided always , that second par ty obtai ns no r ights hereunder, in and to the official song of the organi zation , namely "Tr easure Trail II , or any royalti es f rom sheet music , r e cords , or r eproduc tion ther eo f o 10. The ~ourlsts Rel ation Bureau provided f or i n this agreement is to be a pr i vate business enter pr i s e , f or pr ofit owned a~d operat ed by s econd party , a ~d the 89 ' er s Associ ation is iil no way liable f or any of the debts or obligation s i ncurred , and has no claim upon or rights t o any por tion o f the gro ss r ec eipt s , or net pr ofi t , r esulti ng f rom said i nterpr ise unless and until this statu s is changed or might be c hanged by futur e negotiat ion s and agr eemento IN "WITNESS WHEREOF , the parties her eto hav e her eunt o set their hands this J6 day of September , 1955. 89 ' ers IlTrERN ATIO:;-AL HIGHWAY ASSOCIA I ON, Inc, V By ATTEST : ~""":'4_ stewart , Pr e sident Secretary STATE OF ARIZON A · : SS G COUNTY OF OOCONIIIO • • The above and for egoing instr ument was subscribed and swor n to befor e me by RAY V. STEWART and M H. CANTWELL , . this ~9 6 day of eptember , 1955. > My commission "expires : .??Z&, "'.~/eS6 ~~" . Not ar y bl O c - � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Image Height 3873 Image Width Image Width in pixels 2527 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/1440">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/1440</a> Purchasing Information Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item. To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a> Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2013 Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner. Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 300 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Checksum 1581303999 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 Employment Legal Agreements Description An account of the resource Various Legal Agreements verifying the employment of Martin Cantwell of Salt Lake City, Utah as the Executive Secretary. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Stewart, Ray V. Cantwell, Martin H. Subject The topic of the resource Legal documents 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 9/26/55 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Flagstaff (Arizona) Coconino County (Arizona) Arizona United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1950-1959 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, Edgar Bentley Mitchell Papers, 1950-1959, COLL MSS 322 Box 1 Folder 14 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/xv06356">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv06356</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 MSS322Bx1Fd14 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/952de6fe541590519267ec45674c7b47.pdf 0568c929806eb838a74d1bffc06f6923 PDF Text Text v 1 51 HIGH W A Y 89'ERS INTERNATIONAL PROMOTIONAL FUND LOGAN. Il n1q~l!1-~ _Q:"'v-; AY 'l'OTHE O HDERQ}' ,,",~,,,,• .<;' 1'>." ~ j , I:: • .::JIIW' ¥' :, .• ,"IR • Y. ~ UTAH ~f"U~ 41-' d 195 r ~ S 12F 1c\-ii DOLlAHs H ICJ ' IWAY 89'I:RII INTItANATIONAL P "'0Io40TIDNAL F'UND FIRST NATIONAL E;/\NK, LOGAN , UTAH - -.- - .d:--J3_C~,~<; r;g~9 ~~ �i '.::.... a;.=- sf :: .~;lt "' ~' ; ..,~ • .. '~~ , tH~{UkRIUG. ROllE ~ j.j!nT:itui?i('tt\' ,~~ , fI ~~ 1,_ ~r ~".-,,-,, ~ .,-:f_"...:... I .1 ~Y , o.J::: / -+ v __ · '1 _ .. 1 __ " ..." o ~. ~ • • ~\ �r HIGHWAY 89'ERS INTERNATIONA( r c (( ( PR'l("'<t OTi':I N t .L .,frUND c 152 !) AY 1"OTl l r: O U DE H OJ<' D O Ll,,\US H ICJHWAY 6g 'ERil IN TER N AT I ONAL P AOMOT I ONAL F' UNO FIRST NATIONAL BANK LOGAN, UTAH - ~ ... �TO TliC O R O~ FI Q ': -!HE-CUIIiIII£M l Ui,:;! & THUST CO!I/ANY ---" --- - -Ft ... " S, lt l," Cl ly, Ulah F OR Dep O SIT ON LY PARAGON PRESS, INC. 245 Sout h 1st VVest ~I .. I1 -~ 2 S , iF ~a c. I ry; -'" .>L ~ ~ ~ ~ " -, l" ~ §i{ "- -- ~. :i! ~ ,~ .. ...;:? • ~ I �1 53 HIG HWA Y 89 ' ERS INTE'R N A T I P NAl PRC M 'JTI''']f''I Al F U ND FIRST NATIONAL BANK LOGA N , UTAH •• ~~ d!-a::5~f!L~~[p ��= , HIGHWAY 89'ERS INTERNATIO K A:_ PRC7MOTIONA lJ, rUND 154 E AY '1'0 TilE OHllEHOF DOLLARS H 1DH WAY 8 9 '£R8 IN T[ RN A nON AI.. P RO M OTIO N AL. F' U N D �• I , ��Wherever you go, travel the safe, secure way ... with American Express Travelers Cheques, protecting your travel cash. If your Travelers Cheques are lost or stolen, you will get a prompt refund. So for a carefree vacation-buy American Express Travelers Cheques. • l00 % Safe • Spendable Everywhere • Convenient as Cash • Good until used R efund if lost or Stolen ;"::;;:::;f,! Char/les . .. onlya penny a dollar �HERE'S HOW THEY WORK: You lign here when you buy them You sign here when you spend th em. THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK Logan, Utah IN OUR 61th YEAI: ' ,;" ,ed ;ft U.$ .... . No. 2071 �148 HIGH WAY 89 ' ERS I N TE'R NATI O NAL PROMOTIONA L FUND ! '-C' LOGAN, OTAH Ch "", '~ _ _ 195 ~ ~= • B AY TOT H "':: onlJEHOF '6' :, ' l.L.""""""~>-HL-._,",'o.;~' 97.22 1243 ~ S34'D... :<~~-I . /-,It!! , --~--------­ DOI.I.AHS H.DHWA Y 89'£"5 INTERNAT I ONAL PROMOT IO NAL FUND • FIRST NATIONAL BANK LOG A N, UTAH ~ .. -- ~ 1 �~­ --- ~ % ~ - = ~ _ :J #~ -" ;) 1/1 r+ 1T1~ ~ ...,..,. l. ~ PI -_ .... a _":0 ..... 0 ~~ :\ i\ ;~ �==-".. ,.. 14 9 HIGHWAY 89 ' ERS INTE'RNATIONAL PROMOTIONAL FUND . LOGA N , AY B 1'0 T I- E I OI~))ER OF UTAH ~ C : ; ~~ ~d' =:'-'''D'<:~1''' 9 7 - 22 W5 ~ "T243 S~ ~- 4{- D O LLARS HI IlHWA Y 89 ' ERB IN T ERNAT I O N AL P R O MO T I ONA L F' U N D FIRST NATIONAL- BANK = ~ _~~ GA~~~ _"_-=._ d~~?P~ LO~ N' UTA. H �,"'IITErl') fl..~~~;~VI~W,!\T . J. �~= ~ , " , HIGHWAY 89 ' ERS INTERNATIONAL PROMOTIONAL FUND 0 , , < , 9 " 0 • , • " • 147 t 0 0 , ~ ~ ~ AY B 'rOTH E onOI<; n:OF DOLLARS FI RST N ATI [lN, ~L 'BAN ,( LOG A N , UTAH �· , �II HIGHWAY 89'ERS INTERNATIONAL PROMOTIONAL rUND 137 97 . 22 ""T243 �-. , "I r ..... j. r ~ II '( 't,I \,:1 '''! ~ 11'1' 't '1'1,1, -.:.' .~!I " 1 I, �HIGH WAY 89 ' ERS INTERNATIONAL PROMOTIONAL FUND AY on l)t·; n Of' B 1'0 T il E , H I IJH ~Y 89 'r lls IN T En · ... Tl r FIRST NATIONAL BANK LOG A N , UTAH I' .. .... , --..: .. ~_ D O LlJ\I" ~ ' ·... L PR O MOTI O NAL f"UN D �, , -' �-. ~L , , 0, 0, <0 _0 -< '0 HIGH WAY 89'ERS INTERNATIONAL PROMOTIONAL FUND ,. "' <0 0" EAY ~ i~ TOTHE <0 0< ORDER l" 0" .' '" .. "' .. "< 0 < ~::l 8' 0" • • , , 142 �, I~ �143 \ 89'ERS INTERNATIONAL PROMOTIONAL FUND I "'-- 195 S! ,. rHESUH ~:r /fl - l NT I:R N ... TIO ....... L PR O M O T I ON ... L F UND FIRST NATICJN-A i:-'RANI( - - 1243 ~ £..::; DOLl"AIlS HI O HW... y 89 ItR . r r nr LOGAN , UTAH r 97-22 '" / - {; T; b'~ ~ .~::::::::::_~:.:: ee. i~~~~~ ��130 97 - 22 """i243 FIRST NATIONAL LOGAN , UTAH �·. , �= H,GH WAY 89'ERS I PROMOTIONAL FUND 1 133 97 - 22 195 7: 1"2"43 S l~ , ,. " !' .... DO'LI.A I ;' : ~- H IIJ !.\I"Y 89·,, ~ ..1 I NT l R"I"TIONAl. PR OMOTIONAl.. F' UND FIRST NATIONAL BAtIK LOG A N , UTAH -.... - ._-~ J ��1.5 0 HIGH W A Y 89'ERS INTERNATIDNAL UTAH ~~ _195~ 1'J --. ' ' ,0 · , / 4~c.:,;,· vi; ---L--M~-:2) L OGAN, AY B T OT H E onOF; n O F • 'C $ 'F/(1 ~l\:! '~" - - . . . • '" - _ FIRST NATIONAL BANK _ .. 'i' I _ _ -0 DOLLA I> S H I G HWA Y 89 ' [ J;ts IN T[J;tNATI O NA L P J;tO M O TICN A L F U N D / �. ' Ul l au 31 ,"[ "jlj Zl ~ , I ,. " j �II = I, 134 HIGHWAY 89'ERS INTERNATIONAL PROMOTlO ~AL rUNo 97 . 22 ! )AY TilE TO OH))E I~OF ",-~;>"",,-; J95£ , ~,k.-",~:; .At: _ • j~ 1 ~.,"ll ' 1243 , S /6" .~ D OL LAHS ,",'J GH"AY B9'ERB INTERNATIONAL P ROMOT I ONAL f'UND FIRST NATIONAL B/\ NK LOGAN , UTAH ��HIGHWAY 89 ' ERS INTE'R NATIONAL PROMOTIONAL FUNO I C"IRS r ! NAllCNAL BANK LOGAN , UTAH = 135 J ��................ tor ..... --------- - �..._ Fer: • ~ tMlIlDOIDieeJ vaeatioll _ . . . . -.bQy ....... .... _A~_ �HERE' S HOW THEY WORK , Yo.. .;g" he,. you buy",," "'. wt.." nRSr NAnONAL BANK Of LOGAN ......... Utah ~,in.o<I i" U.$.A . �') HIGHWAY 1 29 89'ERS INTERNATIONAL PROMOTI ONAL FUND 97 - 22 1243 _ LOG A N , UTAH $ ,J.. 4.. ,'5 " ":1- ��LOGAN, UTAH = �• �12 8 HIGHWAY 89 ' ERS INTE'R NATIONAL PROMOTIONAL ~UND /j UTAH ~L7'_ 195~ 1 E OF~_~~~ OI~I)ER ~ TO T il E AY .;.,) ,d FIRST NATIONAl! LOGAN, UTAH • " ! ' (/. ., P'''-'!:l'''r .."lllu.:..c'.:...... . . . _'-~"""" · 97 . 22 ""T243 .'"' _ S. .::--3.:26 - ·. "-~ �I.~~ I. .· · I �HIGH WAY 89 ' ERS l 'ioXERNA..TICNAL PRDMDTI 1~AL -t oa I 127 FUND , 97 _22 '1 ;;;; r ~'~-_S WoOf? LOGAN, u:"AH ' - y Ie AY B TO T i n:: onDI' RQF : ~:""'~'.;$i~~1f'-.!f4--~ ' " I " 111 ' ~. ., I.,. ~i -- " J I 'I 195 J - ___ Do Ll.Ans H IGHWAV 89 ' 1 1:11111 INT I:R N ... T .C N ... "t:::fR O .... OII D N ... L FUND FIRST NI\TIU I~ A LOGA N , UTAH ~ ~ ~ -- --,"- --=--=- "" =' , - ~:,J.:J~:f4l~ ��We haw this day CHARGED your account as follows: ('L A . ! " rl/ THE FIRS'!' NATIONAL BANK Logan, Utah""" " " /P' :,s'9,,,,19S 7 - J ,2:::' LI A / & •. ~ " h-:-I ,I' , .,/ J' L / II / , .c t . ~ / . I/ HOLD )\~, WE CHARm:: YOUR ACCOUNT AND RETURN UNPAID THE FOLLo\ NG ITEMS RECEIVED FRO!'>f YOU !)H AWN NON_PAYMENT DRAWN 01\ TO REASON RE Aoos " 6, N, A~' L Not Sufficiellt Fundi Dated Al,ead Endorsemen t M isdng 3, Endorsement Irregular 8, Paymen t Stopped 9, Signature Nol Correcl <, AmOURbI Differ ,", Nol Signed Account C..... '" " n" , To m. " AMOUNT 'E -- A!'>fOUNT " Z?'tf; ,' 7 ~f.'l """""""""" ,?f." , '" "' ~~ •• j. AMOUNT OF L HARGE TO YOUB ~0 UNT APPROVED BY : , ...... -.... -.- - -... "" ""'~"""""""""""""""""""""", �'! , ( , • , L I , , ,- " �1.'HE FIRS'!' N ATION AL B~K Logan, UIah.....................:.i..i? ...... 19s1 . .A '/1 (1 _ ~ ~ A .:z:l .'- y~, . • /. .I ~ 1/_ ../A ,# ,,~ ~ , , 7f7 .<L:/' I rLb .A / rl' "t. -"-- We have this day CHARGED your acoount as follows: I H OLD ! WE CH ARG E YOUR ACCOUNT AND RETURN UNPAJI) THE KEY TO REA SON FOR !I.'ON_PAYMENT lI l..... . ON 1. 2. 3. 4. S. n. To l\'ot Sufliclent Funds 6. Endorsement Mu, ing 7. Endorsement IrrelJUlar 8. 9. Amounlll D iffer 10. Aocount ClOl<!d No ActX:" t Dated Aht,~ Payment S·op~-4. Signaturt rOot C treet l' Not Sign~ - ?oJ OLLOW1NG TTF.MS RP.;C EI\'F:D FROM YOU DR AWN BY D R AWN Ol\' .. , - - --. " . I .. ¥fJf 1. f'!~ . ~"OVED.Y l t1 <-5-, ........................................................ d.~d~ . AMOU1I.'T OF CH ARG E T O YOUR ACCOU/I.'T . ....... ..........~ . . ...... . AMOUNT ~ AMOUNT - �~-----=:-:- ' PAY T ""TJl(O ROERO·t" O • AlIY' SfN K,' BMIK ER O TPUS T CO. R r~! 9 ~ ~" gQmM i Mll Isip ~ ps'~ rTHE m fl \Nlm 0 97 ~ I I ; ~il;i ~; T~bNA~ BAM~ I: 1 M-'ll .lohi!. um 97-27 \ S ---~ .., " ) I - 'r , �r 0 • ,~ •• ", 's -. ,. "0 00 ~t ." ," '1 <. ", l~ . "0 • ., .. ., , ~ ~i ~, =j .• i. " , '-= r • H ,G H WAY B 9jERS 1 i'li"E. RflATIONA~ f'ROM .... , ONAL F UND .' AY B T O TJlE O I ~DEI~ o. ~ • " U TAH -, .:.1. 132 97 - 22 "'T2'43 �• �~ fi. " ". ~, '0 .0 -, -C>_ 0 0 0 " "0 ,0 ... '1 " § 0 0 0 00 r' '0 '. ,. ~, ,. ·1 0" .0 ... " .., " " g i:l g< ." • ~ > ~ i .oj 0 :0< 0 LOG~N. 0 0 '" '" ,. " .., " H 'M 14 1 HIGH WAY 89 ' ERS INTERNATION AL PROMOTIO N AL FU N D !ii B AY T O TJ-IE OUDEROF_ U TA ~~95-;;-,9172:i ~~""L.oiJ~~~ ~ . _ $ :~E S1JJ1C ~;~~' , ' ~. , " ,':~\, ' _ :: t , .... , FIRST NAT I ONAL BANK LOGA N , UTAH .7"" DO I. LAIlS H I IJ I-I WAY 89 '£ R II I .... T[R N ... T I ON AL PR O M O TI O N AL ~ UND 1 �---" C:--- J ~ ;::;:: ~ f~ ~ " (r', .~ ~-:4. • d- ~E �= HIGHWAY 89'ERS INTERNATIONAL PROMOTIONAL FUND AY B TO T il E ~ ~ <-D~ O lmEnOF f di • 139 97-22 ~---L.b.-195 , , 0 r :: '::'~';l~'I: "~ 1:: ·--S-O- 4 · ~ ~t ,,'-'O:'-...4. ~ .. '';' ' J-ti.t · ~I Y -r,j - ! - _ _ _ _ UOL LA H S I ""T24'3 dLOGAN. UTAH , {I. H IGHWAY B9 ' Ii:RS INT£RN .... TIO I'>I " ... P"' OMO T I ON 41. F' U NO LOGAN, �;~E~ O~~EP i PAY TO OfAtV· BANK, BANKl aJl~ T,U ~\ CO . All PtuO_ l N Of)R ~ ' un$ ·&It..,aU;Ek,ll. I !·JU', ,~ :;6 r. " 7;;j : , 1 ... -- . I, . '. • :· tjH:iL" ~sltt~:j'o~k~m~~~~~....,"-' ./iY , '%'~ 'J/:~ ( r:;:: ,-<- �- =-= HIGHWAY 89'ERS INTE'R NATIONAL PROMOTIONAL FUND ==-= 140 ~ 95 &'~ AY B '1'0 TI-fE OHI)EHOF LOGAN, I UT~j H 1243 �.K .... J ) ~ "'"'" I-- , ~ ~' ~ 11 » ~> :'1 ~ ~ • " ~ 00 ""1 -= oO C:-~ c Z 't' ._ .... ..... ~ ~ ;j I ""?- ~ ::c ..:. " " '' '''' OJ'~ C , ~ & 1:z , " ::r"'tJ 0 ~ r:.. UJ ~ Q-' (J) r;~'" " .<\ : ;. ... ~ p ~i �iI HIGH W A Y 89 ' ERS INTERNATIONAL PROMOTIONAL FUND .~ t ." 13 8 H l f'HWAV Bf'f ll:IUli INTERNiIoTIO N AL PROMOTIONA L F'UNO FIRST NATIONAL BANK LOGA N , UTAH --- -:-,;,- j �... .. ; �- 1 ~= HIGH WAY 89 ' ERS I NTER N"ATICNAL PROMOTIONAL rU N D -• AY B TO T il E OHDF; nOF FIRST NATIONAL BANK L OG AN, UTAH == = 145l II �PAY TO THE ORDEN 6' III' ClIIlI NU TAl BANK& mST C OMPANY SIlt ltl, Cill . U l b l FOR OEPO S lt ON !. V PA RAGON PRESS, I NC. 245 South 1st West ~ · n ", .' -'" '-', ", '" ~ �146 HIGH WAY 89 ' ER S INTERNATIO NAL PROMOTIO N AL FUND AY E T O 'ril E ORDEn o ..~ "r I. :r- DOLLAHS HIGHWA Y 89 ' £1'151 I N TE RN AT I :J N I'L (OR C~"O T IO NA L F U N D FIRST NATIONAL BANK LOG A N , UTAH �----------------HE 1I /10C. O F • ~~ ER OR r r. U I CO S r.rs ' #. ... l fU ;: "'" C, ~ ..., .. 1i:,;.~~,r ,~:/~l 'I~"'.i -';'V': ' }rIC) ~·a IOWI. OrA. , ~L?.2.. �YOU MUST KNOW ABOUT NEW TAX REGULATIONS ON SAVINGS --J �U nder recent congressiona l acts, a ll ba n ks, .savi ngs and loan a ssocia tions a nd o th e r pa yers of int eres t a nd / or di vid e nd s of S IO.OO o r m ore i n the aggrega te to a nyo ne pe rso n d uring eac h c al e nd a r yea r are req uired to re po n these pay ment s to the Interna l Reve nue Service. W e furth e r are req uired to use an " ide ntifying numbe r" whe n ma king these repo rts. Thi s n umber is your Social Sec urit y number. As a necessa ry result, you (our savings customer) are required to provid e us with your id entifyin g numbe r, which is your Soc ial Sec urit y number if yo u ha ve one. The officers and employees of this ba n k offe r thei r assistance to you. And so you m ay understa nd exactl y what is no w re quired a nd ho w you a rc to provide the needed in fo rm a tion, this folder outl ines pertin ent points of th e new la w. Q A of an adult and a mmor, the adult's number M ust I provide an ide ntiryi ng number eve n tho ugh I d o not fil e a tax re turn? must he f umished. r ou must undnfine Ihe name of the person whose number is reported. res Q Q If I a m not covcred by Socia l Sec urit y and , the re rore, d o not h ave or need a Socia l Securit y number, must I nevert he· less get an identi rying number to comply with the new law? A r es Q A Q I a m a wido w and am recei ving Social Sec uri t y be nefi ts. Mu st I ge t a Social Sec uri ty nu m ber? Ifyou (lrt 62 or over lind received these ben, · jits bifort J anuary I, 1963, and havt no I11l1n· ber rif )'01" own, you 11!O)' use the btnifit numbt r. M y husband a nd I have a j oint savings accou nt. Musl we rurnish the ba nk both or our Socia l Secu rity nu mbers? A No. all all joint aaowlls, on{)' 011' lIumber lIu d be uu d. III your lOse, the lIumber oj the husband must be fumish ed. all j oillt aaotmts H ow does th is regulat io n affect g ua rdia ns, c ust odia ns, com mitt ees, c redi t u nions, etc.? A Compliance is required. We ask )·ou to consult our N ew Accounts department or an officer of th e hankJo r counst! in )"our specific case. Q Docs this law al so a ffect t rusts, estates, pe nsion trusts, corporations, pa r merships, e tc.? A r es. Again Wi retommend ) 'OU conSilii OUT N ew A aounts departmm t or an o fficer of th e bank. Q I do nOt have a Social Sec urity number a nd must sec ure a n ide nti rying number to comply with the law. How do I go about this? A Our N ew Accoullts departmenl has all necessary for ms and will assist yo u ill jillillg th em 011.1 . �Q I am 14 years of age and have a savings account in my own name. Must I get a n identifying number? A Yes. Arry individual with an account in his name only - including minors - is required to have an identifying number. Q When must I fu rnish my ide ntifying number? A We are requiTed by the la w to T eport interest payments aggregating 110 O mOTe mo.de to our T savings accounts customers this year. Therefore, we recommend that you make this information available immediately to aooid lateT problems. Q How do I furnish my identifying number to you? A FOTm s aTe available at the Savings depart- Thank you for understan d ing the requirements of these rece nt laws which req uire us-a nd yo u - to provid e the information needed fo r this new interest reporting procedure. If yo u ha ve any ques tions no t covered by thi s informat iona l fo lder, pl ease ask fo r the help you need at our New Acco u nts depanment . Or fro m any o ffi cer . Ou r Bank is pleased to join with all olher Banks in Utah in providing you with needed information on this Tax Law. ment und the N ew Accounts deportmenl. /f)'ou have any qurslion as 10 properly Jilling out Ihe form, empfo)·tls at eilher of these departments will be happy 10 assisl you. Q \Vhen a re banks required to report inter- est or dividend payments aggregating SID or more? A B eginning with the 1963 caiendaT)'ear. Prepared by MEMBER BANKS OF THE UTAH BANKERS ASSOCIATION � 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 905 Image Width Image Width in pixels 2459 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/1508">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/1508</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 979880558 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 Highway 89 International Promotional Fund checks and charges and pamphlets Description An account of the resource Highway 89 International Promotional Fund checks and charges from September 1957 to February 1959, and Pamphlets advertising for American Express travelers cheques, automobile loans, and facts on new regulations on savings. Subject The topic of the resource Legal documents Nonprofit organizations Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Pamphlets Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1957 1958 1959 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Salt Lake City (Utah) Salt Lake County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1950-1959 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, Edgar Bentley Mitchell Papers, 1950-1959, COLL MSS 322 Box 1 Folder 18 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/xv06356">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv06356</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 MSS322Bx1Fd18 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/a75a86c93838ca7c23983b393685790c.pdf 8a2380902dbee739f99cfd1be551609c PDF Text Text STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT IN ACCOUNT WITH HIGHWAY 89 I NTERNATIONAL PROHOT INAL FUND 1301 Eas t Highway 89 Logan , Ut an LOGAl'l, UTAli 97 -22 L ",[AS, ..... ' N. A' 0 .. 0. , ... 0 DATE 'OOO~ ,. ".'00'[0 , ...... 0 . . . , ~, ' 'CCOUN ' 10' ...... CO"SlC' • • D CQ"".C1 DEPOSITS AND OTHER CREDITS CHECKS IN DETAIL DATE NEW BALANCE BALO\NCE FORWARD I7' MAR 4'57 i~ flR 8'57 ',AR 1 S'S7 " .> .1/":' 400.00- 4 .5 2 - .;;/I.rv - :; , ~" 1~.00 - ~ 150 ",>n~ · MAR 4'57 JIc.. S'S7 47.48* I'IA!\ 12 '57 4 90 .0 0 52.00* MAn ~ ..e-~ 20 0.0 0 -'" ,-' 537.48* g'57 l'II\K 1 SI 7 3 0 .0 0 r,M ! 1 " 7.4 8 * 21 7.4 a .;} , t. YOUR PASS BOO~ IS fOR RECOROINO OEPOSITS ONLY AND SHOULD BE PRESENTED WITH U.CH DEPOSIT. STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED ON THE FIRST Of ",CH MONTH . PLEASE CALL FOR YOUR STATEMENT OEFORE THE TEItTH OF U.CH MO tQl:!., ,'wE ACKN OWL. EDGE BY LETTER OEPOSI TS RECEIVED 8'1' MA IL VOUCHERS RETURNED AS LISTED ABOVE . All IT EMS ARE CREDITED SU8JECT TO FINAL PAYMENT. NOTI FY US IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT LAST AMOU NT IN THIS .4.. COLUMN IS YOUR BALANCE ~ KEY SC-SERYICE CHARGES E!C-E!CCHANOE RET - RETURHED ITE M ~O -OVERDRAFT IN - INTEREST CC-CERTlfIE O CHECK OM - DEBIT MEMO CM- CREDIl MEMO ) �STATEMENT OF ACCOUN T HIGHWAY 89 1301 EAS T lOIO:AN , INTERNAT I ON AL HI'HW AY IN ACCOUNT WITH PRO MO TI ONAL 89 .LOGAN. UTAH UTAH 97-22 L DEPDSITS AND OTHER CREDITS CHECKS IN DETAIL DATE DATE N EW BALANCE SALANCE FORWARD 17" !PR40'S7 A rR 5'57 200.00- ~.A &/7. G4 'j7 620 .7 7 - IIn, 25'j, 47 .4 8* 17.48* .;rn 16'57 hr,, 22 '57 262.48 * 8 7 2 ,4 8 * c4'J', 30.00245.00 6 1 0.00 2~ 1.71~ f\ cS '5', 220.60 * tJl;f ;;:£::vv .... 3 1.11 - til .... YT APK 40'57 At'K 5'57 "'-" 30.0 0 /11 , TOUA PASS BOOI( IS fOA AE COAOINQ OEPOSITS ONLT ANO SHOULD liE PAESE/fTEO STATEIo'ENT WILL BE ' SSU[O ON THE fiRST Of EACH "'ONTH . WITH EAC~ OEI'OSIT. PLEASE CA~1. fOR TOU R STATE"'ENT BEfORE THE TENTH Of EACH "'ONTH . W[ ACMNOWLEDGE BY LETTER OEPOSI TS RECEIVED BY "' AI L VOUCHERS RETURNED AS U$T[D A!lOVE. ALL IT E"' S AR[ CREDITED SUBJECT TO fiNAL PAYMENT . NOnFY US IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT LAST AMOUNT IN THIS ... COLUMN IS YOUR BALANCE~ KE Y SC-SItRVICE CHARCES EX-EXCHANGE R£T - RETURNEO ITE" DD -OVERORAFT IN - INTEREST CC-CERTlflEO CHECM O"' - O[8IT ,.E,.O C,.-C RE DIT "'E"'O ) �STATE MENT OF ACCOUNT I" l ... r. .. , ~;J J IN ACCOU IU WITH 9 [·,t . . !'II<!lioJ1a L , Fu n d -------------. -.. 130 1 Ea st Hi ghwa y 89 LOG.""". llTAIl LogDn, Utah 97-22 L OATE DEPOSITS AND OTHER CREDITS CHECKS IN DETAIL BAL~NCE 2'5'1 4.33 - NEW BALANCE FORWARD I7" .2 1 ,,' 3 .00 - 135.00 128 '57 DATE 300 .00 - YOUR P"SS 800~ IS FOR RECOROIHO DEPOSITS OHLY "HO SIIOULO BE PRESEHTEO WITII EIICII DEPOSIT. ST"TEIIEIIT WILL BE ISSUED ON TilE FIRST Of EIICII 1I0H TII . PLEIISE C"LL fOR TOUR ST"TEIIENT BEFORE TilE TENTII OF EIICII 1I0NTII . WE A.CKNOWL.EDGE BY LETlER DEPOSITS RECEIVED BY IIAll. VOUCIIERS RETURNED A.S li STED "HOVE. ALL ITEIiS ARE CREDITED SUBJECT TO FINAL P"YMENT. NOTIFY US IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT 1-\11 114 '57 I I I ~ d ' j7 48 .2 1'" LAST AMOU NT IN THIS .4.. CO LUMN IS YOUR BALANCE ~ KEY SC-SERV1CE CIIARGES EX-EXCIIA NGE RET-RETURNED ITEII DO-OVERDRAFT IN -INTEREST CC-CERlIFIEO CIIECK Oil -DEBIT MEMO CM-CREOI T MEMO / �STATEMEN T OF ACCOUNT IN ACCOUNT WITH Highway 89 !nter na ti o"'1 a l .... ru";'. ot! ,H. l i'uad 1301 East LOGAN. UTAH Highway 89 Loglan. Utah .,~[ . " HINL A OMe •• " MO ..."" ... . "O" " "-' ~ ..'" ".n "'" ' CeOliN' W " CON " " .. ro eou rc, T I" OATE DEPOSITS AND OTHER CREDITS CHECKS IN DETAil DATE NEW BALANCE BAL.t,NCE FORWARD D" SI P . .:2 / 265.0 0 JUN 19'57 15.48- JUN2S'S7 130.00- 99.59- YOUR PASS BOOII IS FOR RE COROINO DEPOSITS ONLY MOO SHOULD BE PRESENTED STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED ON THE FIRST OF EACH MONTH . WITH EACH DEPOSIT. PLEASE CA.LL FOR YOUR STATEMENT BEFORE THE TENTH OF EACH MONTH . WE AC KNOW L_ EooE BY LETTER DEPOSITS RECEIVED BY MAIL. VOUCHERS RETURNED AS LISTED ABOYE. ALL ITEMS ARE CREDITEO SUBJECT TO FINAL PAYMENT. NOTIFY US IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT JUN 17"57 31321 * 390.00 JUN 19'57 392.07* ,JuN25 157 292.48* LAST AMOU NT IN THIS .4r. COLUMN IS YOUR BALANCE ~ KEY SC-SERVICE CHARGES DC - DCCHANGE RET- RETURNED ITE M OD - OYERDRAFT IN - INTEREST CC-CERT IFIEO CHECK DM - IlEBIT MEMO CM-CREDIT ME MO J �STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT r H1!?:hw,,- y Fund 9 n t c:''''') ~' '''-~ l IN ACCOU NT WITH .. 130 1 Eas t l OGAN. UTAH Hignw ay 89 .. Logan. Utah " PA"' ~ , AT ON cr. ,• 0 I """ "" " .. " .. tt 0 97-22 I T~I I OCCOU MT.,U U CONSlOI_U co "UCT DEPOSITS AND OTH ER CREDITS CHEC KS IN DETAi l DATE BALO\N CE fORWA RD ~ DATE NEW BALANCE .:::? 9~_ </ y l o j .V.) 075 .00 l:i'JI ... 7 )1 - 71 -.. 7 -.' 3 I ",1 ,,'--.1,;;> '..: I ~ 2.4 b ,t 7 ....... l. l,!)':)', J.~ 1 ... •• ... ... 1 .J f ~ ;Jv:; .OO .1, ") wvo.. , ;I'JI 4 7.4 . .~ .. ' I \". r '" . . I. I -- YO U ~ ~ASS BOOK IS 'OR ~ECO R OI N O OEl'Osr" ONLY AND SNOULO BE PR ESENTE D STATE MENT WILL BE ISSUED ON THE FIRST OF EACH MONTH . WITH EACH OEI'OSIT. PLEASE CALL FOR YOU R STATEMENT BEFORE TH E TENTH OF EACH MONTH . WE ACK I'I OWL· [oof BY LETTER OEI'OSITS RECEIVED BY MAIL. VOUC HER! RETURNE D AS LISTE D ABOVE. ALL IT E" S AU CREOlllO SUBJECT TO FI NAL PAY" EHT. NOTIFY US IF ADD RESS IS INCORRECT LA ST AMOU NT IN THI S .c.. CO LUMN IS YOUR BALANCE ~ KEY 9C - SERVICE CHAROES Ell-EllCHANOE RET - RETUR NED ITEM OO-OVERORA n I N - I NTE REST CC -CERTI FIEO CHECK OM - OE81T 1'1[" 0 CM-C REDIT ME MO ) �ST.... TEMENT OF .... CCOU NT Hi~~''''!lY e 9 I ?'l " -:- Fund .. ! - - ,. IN .... CCOUNT WITH ! 130 1 E:a s t IpG AN. UTAff Hi g hway 89 L Logan . Utah ., .... lD""U At ONcr .... 0 ' . . . . . . . . . .,,1"0 1M 1[" OAY. T"" , CCOUN' . " , • • co .... "UtO COUlet .. DATE .- .. CHECKS IN DETAIL DEPOSITS AND OTHER CREDITS D• ..,. NEW BALANCE BAUNCE fORWARD l:P' /c:> y 615.00 AUG10 '51 I\UB 1 2 '57 60.00 200.00- , -/ 4 6 ~.O 0 31 '5-, ':;-- , 2,2;; 2.4 8 1 \' I' .- I ( 2,162.48* 2,027.48* 1,827.48* AUt) 6'57 AUb lO'S1 A 12'51 Ub 75.00 - c .. , ~! .-' \ - YOUR 'ASS 8001( IS FOR RECOROINO DEPOSITS ONLY AND SNOULO BE PRESENTED ,TAT(NENT WILL BE ISSUED ON THE FIRST OF EACH MONTH . WITH EACH DEPOSIT. PLEASE CALL FOR YOUR STATE"'ENT DHORE THE TENTH OF EACH "' ONTH . WE ACKNOWL. EDGE BY LETTER OEI'OS ifS RECElVEO BY MAIL. VOUCHERS RETURNED AS LISTED ABOVE. AU IT EMS ARE CREDI TED SUBJECT TO FINAL PAYM ENT. NOTIFY US IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT LAST AMOU NT IN THIS COLUMN IS YOUR BALANCE .4. I-i KEY IC-SERYICE CHAR GES RIET- RIETURNED If EM OD-OYERDRAf,. IN-INTEREST CC-CERTIFIED CHECK O"'-OEBIT "'EIoID C"'-CREOll "'EMO / �STATEMENT OF ACCOU NT IN ACCOUNT WITH ~ 1t1ghway -89 Intern a tiona l Pro.:llo ti na l i'W><I 1301 East ~ LU." LOGAN. DTAH Highway 89 lLogan, Utah UA"' HC >. ONce. "NO DATE 'UO~,. 97-22 OCOOR.CI> ' N UN D>" , .. ,. ' ''''''V''' ..,LL U OO""OOID eo.".e. DEPOSITS AND OTHER CREDITS CHECKS IN OETAIL DATE BAL""'CE FORWARD 1:7" J.1.. h SEP 5'57 SEr 7'57 SEP ll '57 ~<r 17 '57 42 II SEP 7'57 SEP ll '57 SEP 17'57 >tr 25 '57 34~.67- ~65 .0 0- 105.00- NEW BALANCE 10.1715.0 0 - >tr 25 '57 6 0 .0 0 - ' ~Lr 520 .0 0 300 .00 YOUR PMS (lOOK IS fOR RECORDIND DEI'OSITS ONLY ANO SHOULD 8E PRUENT£D WITH EACH DEPOSIT. STATENUIT WI LL IE ISSUED ON f I RST Of {ACH NONTH. PLEAS[ t.lLL FOR YOUR STATEMENT 8EfORE THE lENTH OF EACH NONTN . WE ACKNOWLEOOE IV LETTE R DEPOSITS RECEIYED I V NAIL VOUCHERS RETURNED AS LISTED AIIDYE . ALL IfEMS ARE CREDITED SU 8JECl TO fINAL PAYMENT. nn NOTIfY US IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT ~t.1 26 '57 :10 ,:)/ . - 1"1' 2,25>'.7'· 1,5>55.0 5> * 1,775>.5>2* ~.6 5 5>.5>2 ~ . 5 99.9 2* 2, 1 1 9 .9 2 ;, .::A 19 .9 ~ ,J LAST AMOU NT IN THI S &. COLUMN IS YOUR BALA N CE ~ KEY SC-SERVICE CHARGES EX-EXCHANDE RET- RETURNED ITEM ~O-OVERDRAfT IN - INT[RE,9T CC-CERTlfIED CHECK D N -OE8IT NENO CM-CREDIT 101[10'0 * . ., �.. STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT r H1g h ,.,S y 89 I n ~ -'~'" '' -A I IN ACCOUNT WITH Fun d 130 1 Ea st Hi ghway d9 Logan. Utah LOGAN. UTAH 97-22 L ~l£A " .... ~IH. AT CHCO I. NC '" "C ~ os o,"c ou<> I H UH CAY, ' ""' ACCCUH ' WIll . . CCN .. CU'C CCOO'CT DATE DEPOSITS AND OTHER CREDITS CHECKS IN DETAIL DATE NEW BALANCE 'J-y /1', 7'1- BALANCE FOR WA RD t:1" ilGl 1 ')1 j~J ~'j( uG I 1'57 2.00 45 .00 - ~" I I 4 ') I OCT 14'5? O CTlS 'S? Oc T30'57 300 .00 - vel 3 ') '/ v" 4 .U j (! ,,'I 4 ')', OCT 14'S? DC IlS'S? IJLf 30 '5'1 263.8075.00- 5 3 .00 - ." 2,4 1 7.92 * ~, 3 7 2 .::1 2~ '2,376 .9 I -' ~ , ,076 .97 ,· * 1, 738.17 * 1,813 .1 7 1,735 .1 7* ;, , I' ~. l~ - YOUR PASS 8 00M. IS FOR RECORDING DEPOSITS ONLY AND SHOULD 8E PRESENTED STATE MENT Will BE ISSUED ON THt FIRST OF EACH J"IONTH . WITH EAC H DEPOSIT. PLEASE CALL FOR YOUR SlATEJ"I EMT 8EFORt THE TEMiH OF EACH J"IONTH . WE ACKMOWL. EDGE 8'1' LETTER DEPOSITS RECEIYED 8'1' NAIL. VOUC HERS RETURNED AS LISTED A80YE. ALL ITEMS ARE CREDITE D SUBJECT TO FIMAL PAY MEMT. NOTI FY US IF ADD RESS IS INCORRECT ) ~ LAST AMOUNT IN THIS .4.. COLU MN IS YOUR BALANCE~ KEY SC-SERYICE CHARGES EX-EXCHANGE RET- RETUR NED ITEN OD-OVERDRAFT IM - IMTEREST CC-CERTI FltD CHECK DJ"I -OE8IT MEMO CN -CREDIT MEND J �STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT Hi~h -.~"'Y P<) .. r ., ~ IN ACCOU NT WITH - _-- - -_ .. ~'und 130 1 E:ast Hi gtrollay S9 .. .. L OGAN, UTAH Logan . Utah L " "" ' ''HI ~ DATE AlD " ,I ~ IS . 'PD"flD 1M fI" ,,"YS T~ " .CCOull' "'H.l •• CO."DOUD co . . . e, DEPOSITS AND OTHER CREDITS CHECKS IN DETAI L OATE Il.:ss, eAL"NCE FORW"RD I7' NOV 8'57 N EW BALANCE 500.00- I 600.00 1 0.5 0 2 1 3 .35 NOV 8'57 N 19'S7 D, t'lU ~ 23 '57 ~ uv 26'57 /7 1,235.17* 1,835.1 7* 1,845 .67* 2,059 .02* 1 / I~ , I' 1 -1" YOUR PASS 800K IS FOR RECOR DI NG OEPOSITS ONLY AND SHOULD BE PRESENTEO WITH EACII OEP{lSIT. STATE"'ENT WILL BE ISSUED ON TilE FIRST OF EACH MONTH . PLEAS E CALL FOR YOUR STATENENT BEFORE THE TENTH OF EACH "'ONTH . WE ACKNOWLEDGE BY LEllER DEPOSITS RECEIVED BY MAil. VOUCHERS RETURNED AS LI STED ABOVE. ALL IT EMS AR E CREOITEO SUBJECT TO FIN AL PAY"' ENT. NOTI FY US IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT LAST AMOU NT IN THIS !.. COLUMN IS YOUR BALANCE ~ KEY SC-SERVICE CHARGES EX-EXCHANGE RET- RETURNED ITEN OD-OVERDRAfT I N - I NTEREST ce-CERTIFIED CHECK ON -DE BIT N [ "' O CN-CREDIT "'END J �STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT IN ACCOUNT WITH !i1 g!1..a y 89 Fund 130 1 East 97 -2 2 Hlgh,!a, 89 ~LU.1t ~nli~ Ut.aho. .. _.OO ...D '" DATE 'U DO,.. , .... ""COU '" " ' LL.' CO"""'UD CO"UC, DEPOSITS AND OTH ER CREDITS CH ECKS IN DETAI L BALAN CE FORWARD D" UlL 28'57 DATE NEW BALANCE c1, (}rq. ul:.l" 28 151 141.66 O~ 1,9 17.3 6* 1 < • I - YOUR P"'SS BOOK' S FOR II[CO~DING DEPOSITS ONLY ... ND SliDULD BE PRESE NTED ST"'TE MENT WI LL BE ISSUED ON THE FI~ST OF EACH "'ONTH . WITH EACH DEPOSIT. PLEASE CoIoLL FOR YOUR ST ... n"' ENT lEFOR[ THE TENTH OF EACH "'OHTH. WE AC KNOWL· EDGE BY LETTER DEpoSITS RECEIVED BY MAIL. VOUCH ERS R[TURMEO AS LISTED ABOH. ... LL ,Y EMS ... RE CREDITED SU BJ ECT TO FIN ... L PAYM ENT. NOTIFY US IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT LAST AMOUNT IN THIS ... COLUMN IS YOUR BALANCE ~ KEY SC-SERVICE CN ... RIlE5 EX -EXCNANIlE RET- RETURNED ITEM Oil_OVERDRAFT IN - INTEREST CC-CERT IFIED CNEC M OM -DE BIT MEMO CM-C REDIT MEMO �STATEMENT OF ACCOU NT IN ACCOU NT WITH HI GHWAY 39 INTERNATI ONAL PROMOTINAL fund 1301 EAST LOGAN. UTAIi HIGHWAY 39 "u.s. CC." ,N< . ' L OMC<, " logan , utah ~ o IUO. I. ........ " 1M .... DATE on. '", • • C<:OUN' . , ll •• CO .... " . . . O CO._'CT DEPOSITS AND OTHER CREOITS CHECKS IN DETAIL BAl"NCE FORWARD :D"' JAr' 2 ':>8 4 a 0 .0 0 DATE NEW BALANCE Ci / J I\ ,~ I h 2 'j8 1,5 17 .3 6 * , ... . ) .. ~ YOU R P"-SS BOOK IS rOil R(CORDIND DEPOSITS ONLY AND SHOULD BE PRtS(NTED WITH EACH OtPOSIT, srATOIENT WILL BE ISSUED ON THE FIIIST Of EACH MD"TH , PLEASE CALL fOR YOUR STA'EME"T 6EfORE THE TE NTH OF EACH MO"TH , WE ACKNOWL· [OG( BY LUTER DtPOSITS RECEIVED BY "AIL VOUCHERS RETU""EO AS LISTED ABOVE. ALL ITEMS ARE C~EDITED SUBJECT TO FI"Al PAYMENT, NOTIFY US I f ADDRESS IS INCORRECT I!. LAST AMOU NT IN THIS .4.. COLUMN IS YOUR BALANCE ~ KEY SC-SERVICE CH"'~OES £X-£XCHA/iO( RET-RETURNED ITE M OO-OYERDRA" IN-INTEREST CC-CERTlFIEO CHECK OM-DEBIT MEM O CM- CREDIT MEMO J �STATEMEN T OF ACCOUNT ,Hi ghway 89 Internat io ~a l Fund 1301 Ea s t H1 gh•• y 89 Logan. U tah IN ACCOU NT WITH P ro~ o t1na l LOGAN, UTAH 97-22 L OATE DEPOSITS AND OTHER CREDITS CHECKS IN DETAIL BALANCE fORWARD t7" tto S',S 6',S 56 .00 - /,SJ 7. ~(" , to 5 ' )1) 1 50 ,00 - "0 NEW BALANCE DATE '1 , cD J 6) 0 1,367 .36" J., 3 11.3 6 ~' , .~ 't'. , \;V II, YOUR PASS 0001( IS FOR ~ECO~OINO DEPOSITS ONLY AND SMOutD OE PRESENTED WI1M EACM DEPOSIT. STATEMENT WilL BE ISSUED ON TME FIRST OF EACM MONTM. PlEASE CALL FOR YOUR STATEMENT BEfOIlE TME TENTM OF EACM 1oI0NTM. WE ACKNOWL· EDGE BY LETTER DEPOSITS RECEIVED IIY IoIA!L. VOUCMERS R£TURNED AS LISTED AIIOH. ALL ITEIoIS ARE CIIEDIT ED SU8JECT TO FIN AL PAYMENT. NOTIfY US If ADDRESS IS INCORRECT LAST AMOU NT IN THIS .4.. COLUMN IS YOUR BALANCE ~ KEY SC-SERVICE CMAIIGES EX-EXCMANOE IIET- RETURNEO ITEM OD-OVERDRAI'T I N - INTEREST CC-CEIITIFlED CMECK OM - DEBIT MEMO CM-CRE DI T MEMO �STAT EMENT OF ACCOUNT I N ACCOU NT WITH Hi g h way 6 n I nter!l3.ti o:'l 3 1 P r-O'l'lot'l na l .,. Fund LOG AN, UTAH 130 1 Ea s t H i g~•• y ~L(./I" 0.0. .. l.A<;AA. S9 " \\\iI>\\ 9 1-22 '" • • ~ O . UD , N U N DUI ''' .. DATE ~CCOUNT " On U CONSlon.o co . . . e, DEPOSITS AND OTHER CRED ITS CHECKS IN DETAIL 6AL-'.NCE FORWARD D" 1'1/1(1 18 '58 1 00 .00 - M AR27'5I DATE NEW BALANCE / 311.36 \ 200.oa- lo/tUl l S ':>8 "80.0 2 HAR27 '51 1,2 1 1.36* 1," 91.38* .~ ~ I ;, , I~ . 1 / YOUR PASS BOOK IS FOR R~CORDINQ DEPOSITS ONlY AND SfiOUlD BE PRESENT~D WITfi EACH DEPOSIT. STATEMENT Will BE ISSUE D ON THE FIRST OF EACH MONTH . PlEASE CAoll FOR YOUR STATEHENT BEFORE f fiE fENfH OF EACfi HONTfi . WE ACKN OWl. EDGE BY lETTER DEPOSITS RECEIVED BY HAIL VOUCHERS RETURNED AS l iSTED ABOVE . All I1E,",S ARE CREDITED SUBJECT '0 FI NAl PAYMENT. NOTIFY us IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT 1. LAST AMOU NT IN THIS COLUMN IS YOUR BALANCE ~ K EY SC-SERVICE CfiARGES E!C-E!CCHANGE RET - R[1'UR NE D ITEM DO-OVERDRAFT IN- INTER EST CC -CE RTIFIED CHECK OM-DEBIT MEMO CM-CREDIT MEMO J �STATE MEN T OF ACCOUN T IN ACCO U NT WITH Hig h ,la y 8 9 In te c n3tiono. l r' r"o'tlotina l FUnd 130 1 East L OGh'!, UTAH Highway 89 Loga TL U h ta DATE 97 - 22 DEPOSITS AND OTHER CREDITS CHECKS IN DETAI L BAL4.N CE FORWARD I7' NEW BALANCE DATE I. 820,84 (\1 </'1/ .Jtf 2,312 ,22 * 1, 1 7 ':)8 ~'3""; . j - 'l, 3 '-I::: " ~ ;~V.:-' ~ tj5;S'b 7:,{;.,0.r,'/ I (p - - eD ~ 0 ,':'- CO ~ I' ~ -"- 1'/ '" 1 \ [IV, , :/ -:: 1 YOUR PASS BOOK IS FOR RECORD1NG OEPOSITS ONLY AND SHOULD BE PRESE NTED WITH EACN DEPOSIT. STATEM ENT WILL BE ISSUED ON THE fiRST Of EACH MDNTN. PLEASE CALL fOR YOUR STATENENT BEFORE THE TENTH OF EACH MONTH . WE ACKNOWL.EDGE BY LETTER DEPOSITS RECEIVED BY MAIL VOUCHERS RETURNEO AS LISTEO ABOH . ALL Il EN S ARE CREDITED SUBJECT TO fINAL PolVN ENT. NOTIFY US IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT LAST AMOU NT IN THI S "COLUMN IS YOUR BALANCE l-l KEY SC - SERYICE CHolRGES U - UCHANGE RET - RETURNED llEN OO- OYERORAFT IN- INTEREST CHECK OM - DEB IT NENO CN-CREDIT MENO CC ~ CER T lfI [D / �STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT IN ACCOUNT WITH Hi sn\lay 6 ) r n L<= (' '' ;~! :; :-::l l !'J ~o ":': ~ ~!~:l Fund L OGAN. UTAEI 1301 East Hi gh,... y 89 n [ . .. .,J",Gg.,tP<p Ult:ah>o~ I. DATE 97-22 """U EO IN '[N OUI 'HIS .CCO u NT ... ,... . . co ," c.o.o eoO"eT " DEPOSITS AND OTHER CRED ITS CHEC KS IN DETAIL 1 00 .00 - NEW BALANCE c?3/"?' . ;);;>- BAL4.NCE FORWARD I7" M 114 !::I8 /\ DATE ~I I\ \ r1 4 'J8 2,2 1 222* rr,. I( ~ I -~ • , YOUR p.-.ss BOOK IS FOR RECORDING DEPOSITS ONLY AND SHOULD BE PRESENTED WIlH EACH DEPOSI1. STATE MENT Will BE ISSUED ON THE FIRST OF EACH 1oI0NTH . PLEASE CAll FOR YOUR SlATEIoI [ NT 8EFORE THE TENTH OF EACH MONTH . WE ACK NOWl· rDGE 8V LElTER DEPOSITS R[CEIYEO BY IoIAIl. VOUCHE RS RET URNED .-.s LISTED AIIOVE. All InlolS ARE CREDITED SUBJECT TO fiNAL PAVMEIIT. NOTIFY US IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT J LAST AMOU NT IN THIS .4.. COLU MN IS YOUR BALANC E ~ KEY SC-S[RYICE CHARGES EX -EXCHAN GE R ET~ R ETURN[O ITE IoI OO-OHRORAF"T IN - INT EREST CC - CERfiFIED CIlECK 0 1ol -OE81T IoIEMO CIoI -CREOIl "'E Ioi O J �STATE MENT OF ACCOUN T I N ACCOU Nl WITH .------------- .. lH!.J .I.;ay s·) FUnd r .... .... n:l 'I o ~a 1 Pco .. t i '.3 1 ·.. •• w . L OGAN. UTAH 130 1 Eas t ~ CP" DATE 97-22 Hi -i.h;'!uy 89 "AM I OJ'~ • N!!lUtNh '•• f~."D ' N TEN DAYS T~," 'OODV~T "IC~ I f COH StCf"fO cC"fCT " ""H._ ._ DEPOSITS AN D OT HER CREDI TS CHECKS IN DETAIL 500 .00 - .JU!~ 1 8 :)8 1 00 .00 - '"''''1. 20.)8 N EW BALANCE d..J./.P ,;7;}- BALA. NCE FORWARD :D'" ..IUh 18 1.)8 DATE 1 ,000 .00 - 1l.i1~ 20·:)8 ~ 2,11 2.22* 612 .22 " , I• YOUR PASS BOOK IS FOR RECORDING DEPOSITS ONLY AND SHOULD BE PRESENTED STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED ON THE FIRST OF EACH MONTH . WITH EACH OEPOSIT . PLEASE CALL FOR YOUR STATE MENT BEFORE THE TENTH OF EACfi MONTfl. WE ACKN OWl. EDGE BY LETTER DEPOSITS RECEIVEO BY MAIL. VOUCfl ERS RETURNED AS LISTED ABOVE. ALL IT EMS UE CREDITED SUBJECT TO FINAL PAY MENT. NOTIFY US IF ADORESS IS INCORRECT LAST AMOU Nl I N THIS "CO LU MN IS YOUR BA LANCE ~ KEY SC-SERVICE CfiARGES EX-EXCHANGE RET- RETURNED ITEM OO-OVERDRAFT IN - I NTEREST CC-CERTlriED CHECK OM-DEBIT MEMO CM-CREDIT MEMO �STATE M ENT OF ACCOUNT h i~:._ ~ y ~9 Intecn3t !O~3 1 IN ACCOUNT WIT H Fco~~tinl l Fu n d 130 1 ~as t Hi ghwa y 8 9 L~an . • ,. DATE ~o Ut:J.h .".00 II OO.OOTOD LOGAN. UTAH t~ TON CHECKS IN DETAIL DATE BAUNCE FORWARD JUL 9 '58 t7'" JU 9'56 l 1 0 0.00 - 15 8 .3 3 - NEW BALANCE ~ YOUR PASS BOOK IS fOR RECORDI NQ DEPOSITS ONLY AND S",OULO 8E PRESENTED STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED ON THE FIRST Of EAC", 1040NTH. WIT"' EAC", DEPOSIT. PLEASE CALL fOR YOUR STATEIo4ENT BEfORE THE TENTH Of EACH MONTH . WE ACKNOWl.EDGE BY L£TTER DEPOSITS RECEIVED BY Io4AI L. VOUCHERS RETURNED AS LISTED A80YE: ALL ITEMS ARE CREDITED SUBJECT TO fiNAL PAYMENT. NOTIFY US I F ADDRESS IS INCORRECT 5 1222* 15 1;)8 3 5 3 .8 9." uUl~ LAST AMOU N T IN THIS Ar.. COLUMN IS YOUR BALANCE ~ KEY SC-SERYICE CHARIlES EX-[J(CHANIlE RET- RETURNED ITEIo4 0 0 -OYEIIORAFT IN - INTEREST CC-CERTlfIEO CHECK OM-DE8IT MEMO CM-CREDIT 104 [ 1040 / �STATE MENT OF ACCOUN T Hj._ .• ~ ..l.i _) II . . i _ •• IN ACCOUNT WITH . , l Fund 130 1 Eas t Hi ghwa. y 89 97-22 LoJ,.n . Utah ., .... [ .. ~I~[ AT' ONCl .. ~o '."0. IS ••• 0"Ho I. UN 0 . . . ,,"s .ceOuM. WILL et CO NSloUto CO...eT DATE DEPOSITS AND OTHER CREDITS CHECKS IN DETAIL 400.00 ~ 1:J' 1 6 ' 5 8 SEP 22'51 1,7 1 6.69 ~ .~ S£P1O'58 SEPl3 '58 ~ t.t' 16 ' )8 753.89* 45 3.8 9 * 170 .5 8 ·'" 2 50 .0 0 3 00 .00 2,000.00 2 4 .0 0- NEW BALANCE ..3) ; . ,%1 BAL"NCE FORWARD 17- SEPl3 '58 DATE SEP22 'SI 3 98.511* I, ~ I';' , ~; YOUR PASS BOO~ IS fOR RECORDING DEPOSITS ONLY AND SHOULO BE PRESENHD ... 1111 EACH DEPOS IT. STATEM ENT ...ILl BE ISSU ED ON THE FIRST Of EACH MONTI1 . PlEASE CALL FOR YDUR STATE loi ENT BEFORE TloiE TENTH OF EACI1 MONTI1. "'E AC~NO"'L. EDGE BY LETTER DEPOSITS RECEIVED BY MAIL. VOUCI1ERS RETUR NE D .o.s LISTED ABOVE. ALL ITEMS ARE CREDITED SUBJECT TO FINAL PAYME NT. NOTI FY US IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT , I) ' A.. LAST AMOU NT IN THIS CO LUMN IS YOUR BALANCE ~ KEY SC-SERVICE CI1ARGES [)(-[)(CIlM<GE RET - RETVRIlED ITEM aD-OVERDRAFT IN - IMTEREST CC-CEIITIFIED CI1ECK DM - OEBIT MENO CM-CRE DIT ME MO J �STATE MENT OF ACCOUNT Hi ! l) .)Y ~? [!'t-;·, 1 1 IN ACCOU NT WITH .. _----_. FU!'ld 138 1 East Hi 6h wa y eq Logan . Utah L ~ l EA • P.",' ~'.' , 97-22 ON t. " NO ' •• 0 . . . . '1'0.'00 IN 'U DATE o.'a ,kOS ACCO" '" ""Ll . . CON, 'C,.,c co.uc, DEPOSITS AND OTHER CREDITS CHECKS IN DETAIL BAL~NCE DCl I'51 3 O-O.U u - OATE NEW BALANCE .19{' . FORWARD I7" U L'. ", \ n" ';:16 .58* . , ,;r , . YOUR PASS BOO~ IS FOR RECORDIND DEPOSITS ONLY AND SHOULO BE PRESENTED WITH E~CH DEPOSIT. STATEMENT WI LL BE ISSUED ON THE FIRST Of EACH MONTH . PLEASE CALL FOR YOUR STATEMENT BEFORE THE TENTH OF EACH MONTH . WE AC~NOWL­ EOOE BY LETTER O~POS"S RECEIVED BY MAIL. VOUCHERS RETURNED AS LISTEO A8QVE . ALL ITEMS ARE CREDITED SUBJECT TO FINAL PAYM~NT . NOTIFY US IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT .., LAST AMOUNT IN THIS " CO LUMN IS YOUR BALANCE ~ KEY SC-SERVICE CHARGES EJ(-EXCHANGE REJ - REJURloiE D ITE M DO-OVERDRAfT IIoI - l loiTEREST CC-CERT1FIED CHEC K OM-DEBIT 101[1010 CM- CREOIT MEMO J �IN A.CCO UNT WITH STAT EMENT OF ACCOUNT ,- , Hi _: .. J. y - '1 . 1 1 -._---_. Fun d 153 1 East LO GAN, UTAH: Hi 6,n \Hl.Y ~q Logan . Utah L .... . $1 "",MINE AT OM O<, ,. NO t • • 97-22 • 0 IS . " "OnD ' N "H 0'" TMI, <c eDU N' "'Ie, •• C" " "" -~. ~ . - " " co" .eT DEPOSITS AND OTHER CREDITS CHECKS IN DETAIL DATE DATE Cle,;;.? BALANCE FORWARD ~ ~ UtL: ~EC 10 '5' 300 .00 20 • .00 - .) J """ 0 .:>0 UtL 5 ':18 1 50 .00 UtL 6 ':>8 NEW BALANCE 546.58* 6 ')8 246.5 8 ~ U!:,. t.,; t 4 • OEC 19 '5' OtC 22'58 1 50.00 196 .5 8* , ) . TOUR PASS BOOK IS FOR RECORDIHG D£POSITS ONLY AND SHOULD BE PRESENTED WIT" EAC " OEPOSIT. STATE MENT Will BE ISSUED ON THE fiRST OF EACH PLEASE CALL FOR TOUR STATEMENT eEFORE THE 1EN111 OF EACH MOIITH . EOOE BY lETTER DEPOSITS RECEIVED BY ",,\IL LAST AMOU NT IN THIS .4.. COLUM N IS YOUR BA LAN CE ~ MONTH. WE ACK NOWL· KEY VOUCHE RS RfllJRNED AS LISTED AeOVE. ALL ITtHS ARE CREDITED SUBJECT TO fiNA L P"YH EH1. NOTIFY US IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT .5 ." SC- SERVIC~ C ~ "'RGES EX-EXCHANGE RET-R ETUR NED ITEM OO-OV~RO RAFT IN-INTEREST e<:-CERTIFIEP CHEC ~ OM-OE81T HEMO CM-CREOI T ME MO �IN ACCOU NT WITH STATE MENT Of ACCOUN T 1 11 ~h~ ay E9 f nternati ona l Pro 'TIo tina l Fund L OGAN, UTAli 130 1 East L Hi g hway 89 >LEA$[ . ... M'~. AT o~C~&a&' R r i l t e n DATE 91-22 <D' N H" OU. 1M,. ACCO"~ I "" Le" CON ' ,D . . . O CO~Rtc' DEPOSITS AND OTHER CREDITS CHECKS IN DETAil DATE NEW 8ALANCE 8ALANCE FORWARD 'f:7" DEC 3 '51 150.00- , / C; '" ut e , '58 \ 150.00 JAN2 6'5 ~ ,!,- ~ <n,5 19~.58* , ,\ .. YOUR ""SS 800K IS FOR RECORDING DEPQSITS ONLY AND SHOULD 8E "RESENTED STATEHE NT WILt 8E ISSUED ON THE FIRST OF E.ACH 1oI0N TH. WITH E.ACH DEPOSIT. PLE.ASE CALL fOR YOUR STATEIoIENT BEFORE THE TENTH OF EACH 1oI0NTH. WE ACKNOWl· EDGE 8Y LEnER DEPQS ITS RECEIVED BY IoIAIL. VOUCHERS RETURNED AS LISTED ABOVE . " LL ITEIoI S ARE CREDI TE D SU8JECT TO FINAL "AYME NT. NOTIFY US IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT .' U.ST AMOUNT IN THIS 1. CO LUMN IS YOUR 8AU.NCE ~ KEY SC-S( RVICE CHARGES Ell-ElCCHANGE RET-RETURNED IlEM OD-OVERD RAFT IN-INTEREST CC-CERTIFIED CHECK OM -DEBIT IoIEMO CM-CREOIT MEMO ) �IN ACCOUNT WITH STAT EMENT OF ACCOUN T Hi ghway 89 Internationa l Pro mo tlnaL , THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK ~ Fund 1301 East Highway 89 t!-ogen . Utah DATE · o ..... oo .. " · LOGk~·UTAH 97-22 DEPOSITS AND OTHER CREOITS CHECKS IN DETAIL DATE NEW BALANCE BALANCE FORWARD D" I- t b 6'59 6 '59 21.5 8 * to 14 '59 227 .40" rL D 175.00 3 2 5 .U 0 t fld 19'59 f Eti19'59 YOUII PASS BOOK IS FOR RECORDIHG DEPOSITS OHLY AHD SHOULD BE PRESEHTEo WITH EACH DEPOSIT. STATEMEtH WILL BE ISSUED ON HIE FIIiST OF EACH MONTH . PLEASE CALL FOil YOUII STATE"'ENT BEFORE THE TENTH OF EACH "'ONTH . WE AC KNOWLEDGE BY LETTER DEPOSITS RECEIYEO DV MAIL. YOUCHEIIS RETUIIHEO AS LISTED ABOYE. ALL ITEMS ARE CREOITEO SUBJECT ro m"AL PAY"'EIH. NOTIFY US IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT 32.40* LAST AMOU NT IN THIS .4.. COLU MN IS YOUR BALANCE ~ KEY SC - SERVICE CHARGES EX-EXCHANGE RET- RETURNED ITEM OO-OVERDRAfT IN - I NTEREST CC-CERTIFIED CHECK D", - 0[8IT MEMO CM-CREDIT ME MO J �IN ACCOUI(T W ITH STATEMEN T OF ACCOUNT r Hi ghw ay 89 I nternation al P ro ~ otina l .. _----_ .. Fund 130 1 East L Highway 89 Logan, Utah OATE 97-22 DEPOSITS AND OTHER CREOI TS CHECKS IN DETAIL BALANCE FORWAR D DATE NEW BALANCE I7" MARl S '59 MAR18 '59 YOUR PASS BOOK IS fOR RECORDING DEPOSITS ONLY AND SHOULD BE PRESE NTED WITH EACH DEPOSIT. STATE HENT WILL BE ISSUED ON THE FI RST OF EACH MONTH. PLEASE CALL FOR YOUR STATE MENT BEFORE THE TENTH OF EACH MONTH. WE ACKNOWL. EDGE 8'f LETTER DEPOSITS RECEIVED BY IoIAIL. VOUCHERS RETURNED AS LISTED ABOVE. ALL ITEIoIS ARE CREDITED SUBJECT TO FINAL PAY MENT. NOTIFY us IF ADDRESS IS INCORRECT 2 4 .l1 1 * LAST AMOU NT IN THIS .l CO LUM N IS YOUR BALANCEj.:I KEY SC-SERVICE CHARGES EX-EXCHANGE RET - RETURNED ITEM OD-OYERDRAFT IN_INTEREST CC - CERTl FIEO CHECK OM - DEBIT 101[1010 CM-CRE DIT IoI EMO J � 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 4376 Image Width Image Width in pixels 3387 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/1584">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/1584</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 400 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example RGB Checksum 2935701367 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 Highway 89 International promotional account statments Description An account of the resource Highway 89 International promotional account statments from First National Bank of Logan. Subject The topic of the resource Accounts 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 1957 1958 1959 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1950-1959 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, Edgar Bentley Mitchell Papers, 1950-1959, COLL MSS 322 Box 1 Folder 20 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/xv06356">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv06356</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 MSS322Bx1Fd20 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/28d5c6fcca62fa31b7bd9933795718b1.pdf 74dc32bdda407de4eda6d712100c41f0 PDF Text Text APPLICATION FOR CHARTER Application is hereby made to the 59'era INTERNATIONAL HIGHWAY ASSOCIATION, Inc . for 8 CHARTER granting the establishment and operation of a LOCAL 89'ers CLUB as defined and described herein . Charter to be issued when and if all provisions of the "CHARTER REQUIREMENTS" outlined be low have been met. TERRI'roRY All towns and communi ties on and adjacent to the INTERNATIONAL 89 HIGHWAY SYSTEM BETWEEN and INCLUDING the following points: SOUTH NORTH (Specify town, county line, or definite address on Highway) ~~:------------------------------------------------------NAME The name of the proposed Local Club will be: (choose one) §9.'er CLUB OF (Use name of your The town 8q'ers cum or some phrase describing the area) SEND NECESSARY MA~R~ ro: ________~~--~~----- (PRINT full name and complete mail address) Detatch "APPLICATION" and mail to Executive Secretary at 140 West Second South St., Salt Lake City 1, Utah. Retain "CHARTER REQUIREMENTS" f or your file. ...... CHARTER REQUIREMENTS (1) Any individual or group may apply for a charter on the above specified f orm and may select the Club name and define the territory to be included. (2) Upon receipt of application the Executive Secretary will furnish a list of present members in the prescribed territory, and supply necessary membership material. (3) - A MINIMUM of 25 PAID-UP MEMBERS within the area defined is required before the charter 'Will be issued. Present members to be included in making up the required 25· (4) Application for membership must be on the Association's prescribed form properly filled in, and accompanied by REMITTANCE IN FULL for one year's dues in advance. (5) - Dues in the INTERNATIONAL ASSVCIATION are $15.00 f o r ONE FULL YEAR. Remit the full amount. When and if the Charter is issued, your LOCAL CLUB will receive a REFUND of $5.00 on each NEW member secured and a like a.mount on the ANNUAL RENEWAL of ALL members affiliated therewith. (6) - When chartered, each Local Club will elect local officers and function as a selfgoverned unit under the provisions of a set of BY-LAWS to be prescribed by the parent INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION. These by-laws will permit great latitude and freedom of action at l ocal level. 'll1ey will neither "police" nor restrict l ocal activity not in conflict with the established regulations and policies of the parent Corporation. They will, however be designed to standardize procedure and foratall duplication of effort or conflict between local club activities and the over-all projects of the International Association. �N? Con necting MEXICO Rt. U with CANADA Rt. 2 II 2821 ~ Club Prop. Mgr. Check Whic:h Business City County State Other Organizations, POlIltions held, etc. (OPTIONAL) MAKE ALL CHECKS PAYABLE TO THE ASSOCIATION Address All Co mmunicatio ns To 89'ers INTERNATIONAL HIGHWAY ASSOCIATION , Inc. 140 Wesl Second Sou th St. ~ ~ The unders igned hereby applies fo, membership and tenders FIFTEEN DOLL ARS payment in fu ll or dues for one year. (PLEASE PRINT) Mall Ad dress • 0 • u .; • Date APPLICATION FOR MEMBERSHIP Full Name 2821 N? Salt Lake C ity I, U tah ~ 0" ~ ~ 0 + Q. u " " "" .; u •, •S > ~ •• u • £ , u ~ • • S • •u Q • ~ , :2 • • ~ ~ ill ~ ~ < ~ ~ ~ • ~~ ~ d ~ ~ £ < ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f • • ." ~ ~ 0 ., ~ ..•• , e ~ ~ "• Q ~ • > ~ '" ~ ~ 0 ~ .. 0 ~ • " • ~ .; E ~o "'0 ~~ ~ Ew , t;: a • .2~ ~8. ~Il INSTRU(' TIONS FOR USE " PRINT or TYPE- Double c hec k Initlalll and correct spelling of nMle. FILL ALL SPACES ON BOTH FORMS- Use carbon or PRINT or TYPE duplicat e. IN ALL CASES- Original Application and Receipt Stub (e ntire brown form) mUlIl remain Intact and be lIe nt to AseoclatJon Ofrtce with remittance for duclI attached. INDIVIDUAL MEMBERSHIPS- (l.... rom AI"1!8. in which no AppllcaUon for LoeRI Club C harter hu been made.) R etain ONLY the DUPLICATE RECEIPT STUB as a memo record or your remitance. Mall r cmRlnlng portions of form to Association with re mittance attached. Membership card, when Issued. will be your receipt for dues. LOCAL CLUB CHARTER APPLIED FOR- Membersh ip Committeeman will sign. detach, and give DUPLICATE Receipt Stub t o AppJlcant. Retain DUPLICATE Application blan k ror Club Records. : a!l ONGINAL Applicatio n Blank and M Recei pt stub to Association Office with remittance atta chcd IN FULL ($13.00l. ASIIoclation Treasurer will rerund Local Club one-third thereot when and If Charter is Issued. , �N? Connecting MEXICO Rt. 13 wit h CANADA Rt . 2 2821 2821 N? • " Date • " ~ ~ § APPLICATION FOR MEMBERSHIP The undersigned hereby applies tor membership and tenders FIFTEEN DOLLA RS payment in fu ll of dues for one year. (PLEASE PRINT) Prop. Mv· Mall Address Cheek Which Bus iness Full Name City Cou nty State MAKE ALL CHECKS PAYABLE TO THE ASSOCIATION Address All Communications To 89'ers INTERNATIONAL HIGHWAY ASSOCIATION , Inc. Salt Lake City 1, Ut:ah ~ --------------------------------------------------------- -- ~ a" " ~ ~ • • • • • •2 = ~ ,. ~ ~ ~ " a. 51 ~ u " 15 . ~ ~ ,!I - " • • = ~~ d • • < • > Ii " + e z < U J a e o " 4 ~ ~ 0 " "" Other Orpniutlonl , Positions held, etc. (OPTIONAL) 140 West Second South St. • " • •3 > ":l 8 ~ Club ~ ~ ~ 0 0 z ~~ ~ ~ ~ < , u a o ~ ~ < ~ ~ • ~~ ~ • " • ~ ish •• ~~ ,ti -------------------------------------------------- �BS;n LSY :.l n C:1ZLL , v 1~ E :::!3 R~3 . 0:.:9 ' :':HS loU I CHZL L ~W :'!i: L . 130 1 InJ~ . 8 9 LO;;A7II . u r An �CIlARTZR APFLICATION FOR A LOOAL CLUB on UNIT OF The 89 ' ers International. Highway Associat1on , InD • • •••••• *** ••• *............................*••••••• *••••••••••••••••••••••• All applicationS tor the charterins ot a loosl 89 ' ero Club shall be subject to t he tollowins Regulations. Ally individual, or group cay arlilY to the International Organization tor a Oharter to opera te a local 89 era Club by t illins in the torm below and eubmittins seme , pr operly signed to the Exeoutive Seoretary . hen a ppli oat i on for a Looe.l Club is made , the propos od Olub shall be requi.ed to seoure a minimum quot a of 2; paid up mombars , organize and eleot offioers on or before 60 days fram the dat e ot the Charter ApplIoation in order to earn and reoeive the refund of . ; . 00 per membership as provided for in the Local Olub By- Laws . unless the above haS been aocomplished withi n the prosoribed 60 day period, the Charter Application shall expire , and al l rights snd olaim to any and a ll ac cumulated refunds Bhall be torfeited . Another Oharter Application may be tiled at a future date and any suoh forfeited members hips shall be considered as "old members" , counting towards the required 2; membership quota , but no retunds shall be peyable to the Olub on these momberships until renewal dues are oollected , as provided for, and in the cnnner speoif ied in the Loca1 Olub By- Laws • •••••••••••••••• ** • •••••••• ** •••••••*..................................... Havins read the. abovo Regulat iOns , and the Local Cl ub By- Laws furnished with this Application , ( I ) (.... ) agree to e1l ot the terms and conditions oontained therein , and hereby make application f or the Charterins or a Looal unit ot The 89 ' ors International Highway Association , Inc , To wit : NAlIE : _______....:: ERS ~LUB of the 89 ' ers International. lii gh.IaY 8:.29~·~~_C = Aosociation , Ino . TERRITORY: (North and South Limits) Town , Junotion , or other Address NORTll ON US 89__________T" -_ : ;O Town , Junotion , or other Address SOUTH ON US 89_____________ Including the f ollowing Cities , Town , end Communiti es : , D : ATE C~ttee. Si gnatures and Addreo of indi vidual or ·Organi zntion App~lcation for Charter; makIng this • • \ �1 BY -L AWS Ot All Local Olubs and units Chartered by THE 89 ' ERS INTERNATIONAL HIGHWAY ASSOCIATION , INC. ARTICLE 1 - NAWK The name ot this Local Unit shall be "The,_____________ 89 ' ERS CLUB ot the 89'ers International Highway Assooiation, Inc. ARTICLE ·ll - l(EI{B]'llSHp' Membership in this CLUB shall oonsist ot those persona over 21 years or age , partnerships or oorporations within ths predetermined geographioal area desoribed t he the Charter App11cat1on who have t1rst been aooepted 1nto members h1p ot the Internat10nal Assoo1ation. Memborships shall oonsist ot two olasa1tications being "ACTIVE" and "ASSOCIATE" , and ahall not be transterable . ARTICLE 111 - ANNUAL DUES Annual dues tor eaoh "ACTIVE" member shall be $15.00 , payable in advanoe , and annual dues tor "ASSOCIATE UEIoIBERS" shall be any ot $15.00 to be determined by eaoh such member . SUll! in exoesa No SPCEIAL ASSE96MEN'l'S shall be made upon the momber. ot this olub . ARTI CLE 1 V - TlIlU4 O MEMBERSHIP F The term ot membership shall be for one callender year, renewal dues being due and payable upon the l a st day ot the m onth in wh10h the original membership Tms entered in t he books ot t he Internat10nal Assoo1at 1on . Any momber in detault ot payment ot dues for a period ot more than 60 days shall be fort hwith suspended , without hear1ng , trOll! all privileges ot member sh1p . �2 ARTI CLE V - OVFI CERS apd DI EOTORS SECTION 1 . The Offioer s an~ Di reot or s of this Cl ub shall be eleot ed at tho ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING. The Officers shall consist of a ane or more Vioe Presidents , Seoret ar y and Treasurer . oft ices may be held by tho oace person. Pre 8 i~ent , TWo or mors orf1cers shall servo f or a t orm ot one year unless sooner resigned or r emoyed . SRCTI O]! 2. The CLUB may, at ita dosoretion also elect a Boord of Direotors to serve in staggered terma. SECTION 3. The Offioers and Direotors sO eleoted ahall constitute an Exeout1ve COJDIIl1ttee to OOMuot the aff airs at the Looal Olub. A majority of the Exeoutive Committee m embere , at the time in offioe shall oonstitute a quorum for the transaot ion of any and ell business . SECTION 4. The Cffioers and Directors at this Looal Club ahall s.e rvs without compensation , but may be reimbursed their aotual expenses i nourred in t ho performance of ~utie8 on the behalf ot the Looal Olub. ARTICLE Vl. - XEETINGS SECTION 1. The ANNUAL MEETING O the membership at this Local Club shall be F hel~ during t he period bot_en AlI6ust 1, and September 15 at each year tor t he purpose ot eleoting Otfioers, ODd the transaotion at other business which may be properly presented. Notice in writing shall be given a ll members in good standing not leas than ten UERl'ING . ~ay8 prior to the ~ate at eaoh ANlI1JAL �SECTION 2. 3 SPECIAL Jo!l!lF.'l'moa or t he .....bereh i p shell be held at such pl aco , dar , and tirDB a s prescril(],d by the Exeoutive Committee , with t hroe daY" notioe be1ng 81 ven to all l!18!1lbers in good otandill8 . ARTICLE Vll - QUORUM and VOTING SEOTION 1 . Those members present at anr duly noticed ANlUAL or SPECIAL neeting shall const! tute a quorum ror the transaction or a~ and all bU8inoS8 . SIOTION 2 . Eaoh JII8IIIber prosent in person at anr AllNUAL or SP OIAL JIIlullbership lIleeting or this LoGal Club shall be entitled to one (1) vote ror his individual lI18J11bership , OR for tho oorporation or partncrship he in person represents . Each corporation or partnership shall have only one vote tor eaah lI18Jllbership oarried . ARTICL!: Vlll - lNDEBTED S LIMIT The highest amount of INDlll3Tl!DNESS or liabil1tr to whiah this Looel Club mar a t n~ tl.Jne subjeot itself shall not bo mors than twice the amount ot mombership -refunds oolleoted during the prior rear: PROVIDED ALWAYS that t his LoGal Club has no right to , and JDar not inourr an)' indebtedness or liabilitr tor or on behalf of the 89 ' ers International B1ghvmr Assooiation, a oorporation. • TIOL!: _ - FUND RAI S mo lX SECTION 1 . The Looal Olub shall have the right to raise funds tor its aotivities by an)' method not in oonfliot with the polioies or the International Assooiation, BUT shall not inorease the dues , nor levy assesamsnts upon its mambers . �SECTION 2 . 4 ALL tunds reoeived by t he Loolll Club trom any s ouroe shall be oxpended under direction ot the Exeout1ve Committee tor t he 901e purpose ot attraot1ng and lolding tourist trade within t he geographioal area 01' t he Local Club . ARTICLE X - INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION Eaoh Looa l Club shall be required to have representllt n present eaoh Annual Internat10nal Convent10n ot t he persnt Asso.,illt10n. t Said repreoentllt10n may oonsist ot one or more or the Ottioers , O other R seleot od delegation. ARTICLE n - CASH REFUND ON !L!!M!lE!lSHl;P DUES COLLECTED SECTION 1 . By virtue ot ita Charter , any Looal Club may eleot' to a ot as an ll8ent tor t he International Assooiation in the matter ot soIling memberships , and the oolleotion ot renewal dues within ita territory. SECTI ON 2 . Loeal Clubs _ aoting as agents , shall reoeive a caah retund ot • .5 . 00 tor s lloh and every new membersh1p sold _ a nd "enewa]. msmberah i p dues oolleoted PROVIDED ALWAYS that the renevml mnmberahip tee is oolleotod end • remitted to t he Aseooiations salt Lake C1ty ortiee w1thin t hirty (30) days from the date said renewal mamberahip tee is due and payable . It is understood thet the Looal Club torteits all olaim to this retund on mamborsh1pa whioh booome more than t hirty days delinquent , and whioh may t hen be oolleoted by an agent 01' the International AS800iation. SECTION 3 . The Exacutive Seoretary or other agent ot tho International Associat1on may Goll01te and sell new memberships within the area 01' any Local. Club, a nd th.. Looa l Club shall r .. oei ve no ossh retund on suoh new memberships until a nd unless the 1.0041 Cl ub oolloots the seoond year ronewal dues . �• 5 ART ICLE n l - STATUS 01 LOCAL CLUBS Loca l Clubs shall be oonsidored in GOOD STAnDING aD long as a llIin1lnum of 25 p aid up mEllIlbers is maintained , and allot the terms and oonditions or these by- laws are compl1ed with . Tha Charter at any Cl ub may be revoked for just cause by a ot ion of the Board of Diroctors of the International Assooiation . ARTICLE nll - GENERAL POLI CY SECTION 1 . Tho full nn.me of the Locel Club &hall be used in ALL advertising done by eeid Club . For Example: nThe Blank 89 ' ers Club of the 89 'ors International Highway Association, Ino . n SECTION 2. Looa l matters and problems shall be referred to a nd disoussed wi th t he Stato Director, who after investiga.tion will reco......nd aotion to the Intornational Assooia tion . BEeTIOl. 3. lIo Club ahall issue an ofUoial sta t ement in the natle or the 89' era to the press on any matter i nvolvi ng other oOJllllunities 01' US 89 in which a differenoe 01' op inion is involvod . Offioia l sta t onts on such oontraversialmatters must be released by the lo cal Dire otor of the Internat ional Assooiat ion . SECTION 4. The Looal Club shall at a ll times COOPERATE with other Looal Uni t s , and wit h the Internat ional Associa tion in the furtheranoe and pr omotion of t he objeoti vea of t h is International Organization. �6 SECTI O 5. N Intormation requested by the EXeoutlvQ Secretary, or any Officer or Direotor of t he Interno.t1onal M sooiation s hall be furnished prOOlptly , and Looal Clubs aro required to advise tho Salt Lake Oftice regarding their projects and aotivities at trequent intervals in order that the International Directors cay be o tacl1liar 1ii1 th the acti vi tiBs of Looal Clubs , and also in order that these notivities cay be given proper publioity in the Assooiation' s Bulletins . ARTICLE XlV - CONFLICTING PROVISIONS SECTIO 1. Any provisions ot these By- laws which may be in oonflict with the Artioles ot Inoorporation OR the By- Laws ot tho International Associat ion shall become null nnd void . SECTION 2 • •\ny provisions oontained in the printed Charter issuod to Local units whioh cay confliot with the provisiono of thase By- laws shnll beoom e nU}l and void . � 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 3254 Image Width Image Width in pixels 2540 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/1596">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/1596</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 2227518403 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 Applications for 89'ers charter and membership Description An account of the resource Applications for charter, charter requirements, and membership, by-laws of all local clubs and units chartered by 89'ers International Highway Association. Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Alberta Route 2 Mexico Route 15 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 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Salt Lake City (Utah) Salt Lake County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1950-1959 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, Edgar Bentley Mitchell Papers, 1950-1959, COLL MSS 322 Box 1 Folder 16 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/xv06356">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv06356</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 MSS322Bx1Fd16 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/3cd8bb887e6ae08b09d584ec9ebb6556.pdf f315c09a70a65f62cddeb9fb95f5c2be PDF Text Text Reprint From November Issue of 89 'er Bulletin R E 5 o L u Adopted October 12, 1956 at Kanab, Utah - T I o N 5 Second Annual Membership Meeting 89'ers INTERNATIONAL HIGHWAY ASSOCIATION. Inc. RESOLUTION No. 10 RESOLUTION No. 13 WHEREAS U. S. Highway 89 is tru ly the " Boulevard of National Parks," and two of these national parks are located within northwest Wyoming, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the present routing of U. S. Highway 89 thru Wyoming be in no way changed or altered. The 89'ers International Hi ghway Association in convention at Kanab. Utah , this 12th day of October, 1956, H ERE BY RESOLVE that th e association is opposed to the designation of any other Highway in Arizona as " Hi ghway 89," and that the routing of Highway 89 in Arizona be retained in its present form . RESOLUTION No. 3 WHEREAS the on ly portion of the U. S. Highway 89 not accessible for safe year-round travel is within the boundaries of Yellowstone National Park and this cond ition is unwarranted in light of known fac ls, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that all possible efforts be made by the 89'ers International Associa ti on and its indivi dual mem bers, to bring about the yearround maintenance for general traHic use for that portion of Hi ghway 89 within the boundaries of Yellows tone Na tional Park. RESOLUTION No.2 WHEREAS final road co nstruction has been repeatedly defe rred on that portion of U. S. Highway 89 from Alpine, Wyoming, through the Snake River Canyon to Jackson , Wyoming, causing inconvenience to travelers and creating a situat ion whereby cenain agencies mi ght readily seize the canyon area as the si te of an unwanted power dam , THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED th at all possible united efforts be made to expedite the completion of thi s road work through one of Wyoming's most scenic areas. RESOLUTION No. 11. WHEREAS the matter of highway construction and routing into the Jackson Hole area and the Yellowstone National Park area is of nati ona l, rather than local concern , THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that members of the International 89'ers Association act on the preceeding reso luti ons not only thru organ izational channels but as private citizens of this country anxious to see our recreational areas properly enjoyed and conserved in all times and seasons. A private citizen's proper appeal to members of his Congressional delegation can do much in furthering this phase of the International 89'ers Associa tion program. Only 3% of T eton County, Wyomin&", the "Jackson Hole Country" Is private ly owned. The remaining- 97 % Is larg-el y federally-owned. The forel'olng resolutio ns a re th erefore rightly the concern ot ALL Americans. RESOLUTION No.9 WHEREAS the press and radio of the States of Arizona, Utah, Wyoming, Idaho and Montana, the Republic of Mexico and the Dominion of Cana da ha\'e given outs tanding coverage of the 1956 89'e rs International Highway Association Co nventi on in Kanab, Utah, NO W THER EFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we the delegates of said convent ion hereby express our s ince re appreciation to the members of the press and radio for the exceptionall y fin e coverage of this convention. RESOLUTION NO.6 WHEREAS the 89'ers International Highway Association has enjoyed the hospitality of Kanab, Utah, during the Association's Annual Convention AND WHEREAS Glen Canyo n Clu b No.2 as hos ls. and Mr. and Mrs. Delmar G. Robinson and their committee, and Director Burnett Hendryx all have worked dili gently to make our s tay in Kanab enjoyable, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we the delegates to the 1956 89'ers International Conventio n hereby express our s incere appreciation to the City of Kanab, Glen Canyon Club No.2. Mr. and Mrs. Del mar G. Robinson, their comm ittee. and Director Burnett Hendryx for the splendid arrangements made for the 1956 89'era International Convention. RESOLUTION No. 4 WHEREAS the following sign is now erected on Highway 89 a short distance north of the intersection of Highways 66 and 89 near Flagstaff, Arizona TO WIT; " TH IS ROAD TO GRAND CANYON UNDER CONSTRUCTIO N 46 MILES WEST OF CAMERON INSIDE PARK. YOU MAY BE DELAYED FOR A SHORT PERIOD. SOUTH ENTRANCE ROAD FROM WILLIAMS TO GRAND CANYON IS GOOD." and WHEREAS this sign is located approximately 100 miles from the construction site and WHEREAS the present location of this s ign has adversely affected the economy of the area between Flagstaff, Arizo na, and Kanab , Utah , TH EREFORE BE IT RESOLV ED that the above sign be relocated to a point at Cameron, Arizona, at the junction of Highway 89 and the Grand Canyon Highway. RESOLUTION No. 5 WHEREAS U. S. Highway 89 is a route of scenic attractions and it is to the interest of the Highway 89'ers Association to maintain the scenic and educationa l features of the route, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Congress of the Uni ted Sta tes be asked by the Congressional Delegation s f rom the States of Arizona, Utah, Wyoming and Montan a to app ropriate the sum of $50,000 annually for a period of five years for the purpose or co mpletion and improvement of th e Plains Indian Museum , loclo led in Browning, Montana. Such sum to be administered ~y the Educational De partment of the , Bureau of Indian Affairs, AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that consideration be given by the Congress of the United States t o the establishment of the Plain s Indian Museum , whi~M is the only one of its kind in the United States, as a Nation l(. 1 Monument. . i RESOLUTION No. 12 WHEREAS the story of U. S. Highway 89 was feat ured ' in the Alay and June 1956 issues of Chrys ler Events, as Ameril.;a's Rainbow Road ," authored by Marguerite J ohnso n AND WHE.REAS thi s' fea ture sto ry has resulted in much favorable puMicit y for all Highway 89, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we the delegates to the 1956 89'ers Internation al Convention in session this 12th day of October 1956, at Kan ab .. Utah , express our sincere appreciation to Margu erite John s on an d the ed itors of Chrysler Events for the excell ent tre atment afforded Highway 89, as the " Rainbow R(lad." RESOLUTION No. 7 WHEREAS the affairs of the 8U'ers Interna tional Hi ghway Associ ation are carried on during the year by the Officers and Directors of the Association AND WHEREAS the officers and Directors who ha ve served the Association during 1956 have rendered outstanding service, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we the delegates of this convention express our sincere appreciation to the Officers and Directors of t he Association for their outstanding service during the year im mediately past. RESOLUTION No.8 WHEREAS the Honorable A. Russell Patrick, Minis ter of Econ omic Affairs, Province of Alberta, Dominion of Canada, has participated to an outstanding degree in carrying out the program of the 89'ers, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we the delegates of this convention express our sincere grat itude to the Minister for his outstand in g cont ribution to the success of this convention. ~ � 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 4723 Image Width Image Width in pixels 3679 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/1700">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/1700</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 400 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Checksum 2448644580 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 4892641 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 Resolutions from second annual 89'ers membership meeting, October 12, 1956 Description An account of the resource Twelve resolutions from the second annual 89'ers membership meeting, October 12, 1956 Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Nonprofit organizations Alberta Route 2 Mexico Route 15 Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available 89'ers International Highway Association, Inc. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 10/12/56 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Kanab (Utah) Kane County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1950-1959 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, Edgar Bentley Mitchell Papers, 1950-1959, COLL MSS 322 Box 1 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/xv06356">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv06356</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 MSS322Bx1Fd7 Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/91e61dc0555f897d10dba4364baaf240.pdf 4eec5595213a1f9f35fd24924957e33f PDF Text Text HIGHWAY 89 MEETING: Update: 4/12/90 * JVH is testifying on April 26th to the Appropriations Committee - we will push for whatever the consensus is from local elected officials - work with UDOT to come up with the proposal * Easier to get money for interstate, but will seek demonstration money otherwise * Generally, particularly on highway projects, the authorization process is waived - if you have appropriations fund the project, you don't need authorization ***************************************** state's top priority is improvements on Highway 89. But, they don't have the money to do it. Seeking federal funds could be a way around it. If the state puts up stoplights in anticipation of an expressway, development could occur at those intersec tions, making an expressway more unlikely. Alternatives: 1. Freeway (part of interstate system) - $120 mil. federal funds. 2. Expressway - $85 mil. 3. If no federal funds, try special appropriations from state in yearly budgets. Findlay's Recommendations: 1. Best chance - freeway. may be opposed. But Federal Highway Administration 2. Next best - expressway. 3. He does not recommend traffic signals. Safety considerations and development around lights make it least desirab le. �Problems: Farmington: - Freeway could kill Foxglove Shopping Center. - Farmington doesn't want to put a monkey wrench into progress of freeway or expressway if they don't have to. - Is there a way to go for expressway money first, then try for interstate funds? - Can the Farmington Junction interchange come south to mitigate business losses? Fruit Heights: - Citizens not sure about freeway concept. education could change that. More Actions: * There was a consensus to use appropriated state funds for the EIS instead of lights at 2nd north in Fruit Heights. * Farmington will try to get together with road engineers (including Sen. Craig Petersen) * Gene Findlay will be back in touch later to see which alternative we should pursue. �Highway 89 Meeting: 3/22/90 Among those attending: Robert DeBoer, Wasatch Regional Council Craig Peterson, state Senate Sam Taylor, Chairman - Transportation Commission Mayor Layton, Layton city Bob Dibblee, Senator Garn Dave Porter, Senator Hatch Mayor of Syracuse Gene Findlay, UDOT **************** Transportation Commission comments: * * * * * * Feels comfortable with limited expressway. Would like to see federal demonstration project money pursued. Concerned with residential encroachment on highway. Agreed to sign letter with Transportation Commission's endorsement of the project. Timing for project: - 18-24 months for EIS study - 1 year design period Would be agreeable to designate money to start implementation of EIS to speed timing. (Total EIS would cost around $500,000) What is happening with cut across HAFB? �Highway 89 study The study recommends an expressway-type access for the Hwy. 89 corridor. design wi th limi ted Alternatives: A. NO ACTION * will not accomodate the forecast traffic volumes when the surrounding area is completely urbanized B. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT * no major investment, low cost improvements to the existing roadway system to improve flow including: - improved acceleration/deceleration lanes standardized median treatment channelized movements at intersections climbing lanes selected access closure * will not solve all the problems identified with the existing roadway C. FREEWAY DESIGN ALTERNATIVE * three to four lanes in each direction * full interchanges approx. every two miles between 1-15 and 1-84, grade separated crossings * cross traffic required to use interchanges, ramps will need two lanes * redesign of the 1-84 interchange D.* LIMITED ACCESS EXPRESSWAY DESIGN WITH INTERCHANGES * varies from Freeway Design by permitting right-in/rightout access to US 89 at selected cross streets * two-way frontage roads * three through lanes in each direction and two to three lanes on cross streets * also assumes redesign of the 1-84 interchange E. LIMITED ACCESS EXPRESSWAY DESIGN WITH SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS * modifies the above by the use of signals at 12 major cross streets. Right-in/right-out access permitted at selected streets, but no left turns or cross movements are permitted except at the signalized intersections. �* D. is the recommended study alternative. "This limited access expressway design would have limi ted impact on the existing frontage road system and adjacent street network and woul provide a high level of service and safety while permitting expressway speeds would have minimal adverse impact on the adj acent communities." � 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/1705">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/1705</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 3803785234 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 2321976 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 Highway 89 meeting minutes, March 22, 1990 and April 12, 1990 Description An account of the resource Highway 89 meeting minutes, March 22, 1990 and April 12, 1990 discussing the possible solutions to the problems faced by Farmington and Fruit Heights with the current U. S. Highway 89. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Findlay, Gene Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Roads--Design and construction Roads Improvement--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 1990-03-22 1990-04-12 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Farmington (Utah) Davis County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1990-1999 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Papers of Congressman James V. Hansen, 1970-2003, COLL MSS 351 Series I Box 85 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/xv82138">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv82138</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 MSS351SerIBx85_Item_5.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/9455195b21f82c92df2ef9248f3d7b50.jpg 7996677e359799285cf26b25b34d589e 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. Image Height 2459 Image Width Image Width in pixels 3939 Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by : Merrill-Cazier Library Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 600 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Checksum 1782872409 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 9686199 Bytes Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (400 dpi) display file is JPEG2000. Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2012-10-17 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="%E2%80%9D">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/regreening/id/403">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/regreening/id/403</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 Elk on Tabernacle Square, Logan, Utah, winter of 1915-1916. (1 of 2) Description An account of the resource Logan, Utah. Wildlife. 1916. Elk on Tabernacle Square, winter of 1915- 1916. First herd to be brought to Cache Valley for release in the Bear River Mountains Subject The topic of the resource Elk--Utah--Logan--Photographs Logan (Utah)--Photographs Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Black-and-white photographs Photographs Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1915 1916 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1910-1919 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, Historical Photoboards Collection, A-3677a Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv63613">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv63613 </a> 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 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. Regreening of Cache Valley Type The nature or genre of the resource Image StillImage Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/tiff Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context A-3677a.tiff Tabernacle; Wildlife; Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/d1e87c8032e216552cabdce2c78008cb.jpg fec082b052b6af1ff6873a937c1142fa 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. Image Height 2430 Image Width Image Width in pixels 3909 Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by : Merrill-Cazier Library Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 600 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Checksum 1190676811 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 9499068 Bytes Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (400 dpi) display file is JPEG2000. Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2012-10-17 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="%E2%80%9D">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/regreening/id/424">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/regreening/id/424</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 Elk on Tabernacle Square, Logan, Utah, winter of 1915-1916. (2 of 2) Description An account of the resource Logan, Utah. Wildlife. 1916. Elk on Tabernacle Square, winter of 1915- 1916. First herd to be brought to Cache Valley for release in the Bear River Mountains. Subject The topic of the resource Elk--Utah--Logan--Photographs Logan (Utah)--Photographs Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Black-and-white photographs Photographs Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1915 1916 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1910-1919 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, Historical Photoboards Collection, A-3677b Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv63613">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv63613 </a> 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 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. Regreening of Cache Valley Type The nature or genre of the resource Image StillImage Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/tiff Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context A-3677b.tiff Tabernacle; Wildlife; Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/da251e6fa5ec97c926f640835e196dea.jpg 21c56575cc81ce2260a59547d65a9713 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. Digitized by: Utah State University Merrill-Cazier Library Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 600 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Creo-Scitex Eversmart Jazz+ scanner, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF. Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2003-12-01 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/USU_Photos/id/1237">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/USU_Photos/id/1237</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 Entrance gates to campus, located on the corner of 900 East and Highway 89, 1960s Description An account of the resource Entrance gates to USU campus, located on the corner of 900 East and Highway 89, 1960s. The sign was removed in the summer of 1973 when the entrance was sealed off. Size of photograph: 5 x 7 in. Subject The topic of the resource Utah State University--History--Pictorial works Signs and signage--Utah--Logan--Pictorial works Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Photographs Black and white photographs Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1960-1969 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Cache County (Utah) United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1960-1969 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived USU Historical Photo-board Collection, photo no. USU-A0782a 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 USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890. 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 usu_a0782a.jpg Highway 89; Utah State University; https://highway89.org/files/original/a01a8ee9e16a171ddd30203a679cd344.jpg cda5a2ee5d97af5b639695e2d208ad44 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. Digitized by: Utah State University Merrill-Cazier Library Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 600 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi), display file is JPEG2000. 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/152">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/152</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 Spring Hollow and reservoir at Third Dam looking south from Highway 89/91, Logan Canyon, Utah, 1960s Description An account of the resource Logan Canyon, Utah. Scenes 1960s. Spring Hollow looking south from Highway 89. Herald Journal. Black and white photograph (6 x 8 in) mounted on board. Subject The topic of the resource Spring Hollow (Logan Canyon, Utah)--Photographs Third Dam (Logan Canyon, Utah)--Photographs Reservoirs--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Photographs Black and white photographs Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1960-1969 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Spring Hollow (Utah) Logan Canyon (Utah) Third Dam (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1960-1969 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, Historical Photoboard Collection, A-2344 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 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 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 A2344 Highway 89; Logan Canyon; https://highway89.org/files/original/0a7efd19be1d4eaf8d3b0cbe323abdd9.jpg d6fb0afcebfd8b09265b8ccfd90dc782 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. Digitized by: Utah State University Merrill-Cazier Library Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 600 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University using Creo-Scitex Eversmart Jazz+ scanner, at 600 ppi, 8-bit grayscale, uncompressd image is TIFF. Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2002-08-29 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/USU_Photos/id/100">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/USU_Photos/id/100</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 Campus view, 1945, The Quad Description An account of the resource View of the Quad at looking from Highway 89. The Quad was developed in 1920 from plans drawn in 1912 by a Boston landscape architecture firm. Size of photograph: 8 x 10 in. Subject The topic of the resource Utah State University. Quad--Pictorial works Utah State Unviersity--History--Pictorial works Utah State Agricultural College--History--Pictorial works Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Photographs Black and white photographs Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1945 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Cache County (Utah) United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1940-1949 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived USU Historical Photo-board Collection, photo no. USU-A0064b 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 USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. USU Historical Photo-board collection 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 USU-A0064b Highway 89; Utah State University; https://highway89.org/files/original/772044ee5e9031841635dababee309f8.jpg 0c373e02d2559976ea1a33965dfbf02a 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. Digtized by: Utah State University, Merril-Cazier Library Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 600 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University using Creo-Scitex Eversmart Jazz+ scanner, at 600 ppi, 8-bit grayscale, uncompressd image is TIFF. Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2002-08-29 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/USU_Photos/id/96">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/USU_Photos/id/96</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 Campus view, circa 1930 Description An account of the resource View of campus, Utah State Agricultural College, circo 1930, looking west toward Family Life Building and Old Main from Highway 89. Size of photograph: 7.75 x 9.75 in. Subject The topic of the resource Utah State University. Family Life Building--History--Pictorial works Utah State University. Old Main--History--Pictorial works Utah State University--History--Pictorial works Utah State Agricultural College--History--Pictorial works Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Photographs Black and white photographs Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1930 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Cache County (Utah) United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1930-1939 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived USU Historical Photo-board Collection, photo no. USU-A0081 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 permissilbe 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. USU Historical Photo-board collection 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 USU-A0081.jpg Highway 89; Utah State University; https://highway89.org/files/original/11870e1831050839f3dd5cb621a73757.jpg e073c7b397715c4c6889173f6a83edb6 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. Digitized by: Utah State University Merrill-Cazier Library Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 600 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale 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 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/241">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/241</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 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). Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah)--Photographs Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Photographs Black and white photographs Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1940-1997 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Third Dam (Utah) Logan Canyon (Utah) Utah United States Cache County (Utah) 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 Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv2579">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv2579</a> 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 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 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 P037330802 Highway 89; Logan Canyon; https://highway89.org/files/original/48ef9cf7a7b39d111c7615e85648472b.jpg d9ff2a0cc6be66b3b84865e1878829f4 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. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 600 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale File Size Size of the file in bytes. 75.008KB Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library. Black and white images in this collection are stored as archival TIFF and access JPEG files. Using a Creo-Scitex Eversmart Jazz+ scanner, they were scanned at 600 dpi (5 x7 or larger) or 1200 dpi (smaller) with 8-bit grayscale. Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2007-04-11 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/Bear/id/11298">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/Bear/id/11298</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 View of Bear Lake and Garden City, Utah from Logan Canyon Road, 1930s Description An account of the resource View of Bear Lake and Garden City, Utah from Logan Canyon Road, 1930s. One black and white photograph (7.75 x 9.5 inches) mounted on board. (Negative Available). Subject The topic of the resource Bear Lake (Utah and Idaho)--Pictorial works Logan Canyon road (Utah)--Pictorial works Garden City (Utah)--Pictorial works Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Photographs Black and white photographs Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1930-1939 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Bear Lake (Utah and Idaho) Garden City (Utah) Rich County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1930-1939 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, Historical Photoboard Collection, 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 USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. USU Historical Photo-board collection 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 A2532.jpg Highway 89; Logan Canyon; Bear Lake; https://highway89.org/files/original/89e0814af1fa6d40e1f856d47a896a14.jpg 8d39cf367a5f68d02e19cf5d8750692d 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. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 600 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University using Creo-Scitex Eversmart Jazz+ scanner, at 600 ppi, 8-bit grayscale, uncompressd image is TIFF. Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2003-12-01 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/USU_Photos/id/1620">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/USU_Photos/id/1620</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 Aerial photo of campus looking east toward Logan Canyon Description An account of the resource Aerial photo of campus looking East toward Logan Canyon. Size of photograph: 7.5 x 9.5 in. Subject The topic of the resource Utah State University--History--Pictorial works Utah State University--Aerial views--Pictoral works Utah State Agricultural College--Aerial views--Pictorial works Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Photographs Black and white photographs Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Unknown Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Cache County (Utah) United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. Unknown Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived USU Historical Photo-board Collection, 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 USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. USU Historical Photo-board collection 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 usu_a1074.jpg Highway 89; Logan Canyon; Utah State University; https://highway89.org/files/original/44b1993875640eaaf6874da4999c5104.jpg c70e16ca2c90d66c60cff8194815bd20 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. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Conversion Specs Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library 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/155">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/155</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 View of Bear Lake and Garden City, Utah from Logan Canyon Road,1930s Description An account of the resource Bear Lake. Views. 1930s. View of Bear Lake and Garden City, Utah from Logan Canyon Road. Black and white photograph (7.5 x 9.5 in) mounted on board Subject The topic of the resource Bear Lake (Utah and Idaho)--Pictorial works Logan Canyon road (Utah)--Pictorial works Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Photographs Black and white photographs Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1930 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Bear Lake (Utah and Idaho) Garden City (Utah) Rich County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1930-1939 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, Historical Photoboard Collection, A2532 Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Historical Photoboard Collection, A2532 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 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 Canyon Reflections 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 A2532 Highway 89; Bear Lake; https://highway89.org/files/original/b453ab9427fd09193abec36e68a5b280.jpg 16a97b9a0c3da6efc4add3c852ee4381 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. Digitized by : Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library File Size Size of the file in bytes. 89.983 KB Conversion Specs Black and white images in this collection are stored as archival TIFF and access JPEG files. Using a Creo-Scitex Eversmart Jazz+ scanner, they were scanned at 600 dpi (5 x7 or larger) or 1200 dpi (smaller) with 8-bit grayscale. Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 1/23/2007 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/Bear/id/10515">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/Bear/id/10515</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 View of the Island and mouth of Logan Canyon Description An account of the resource View of The Island and mouth of Logan Canyon early 1900s. Utah State University Agricultural Extension Service photograph. Black and white photograph (5 x 6.75 inches) mounted on board. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah)--History--Pictorial works Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Photographs Black and white photographs Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1900-1909 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1900-1909 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, Historical Photoboards Collection A-0119b 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. Bear River Watershed 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 A0119b.jpg Highway 89; Logan Canyon; Cache National Forest; https://highway89.org/files/original/77d63ee5937cf2447379bc89c59d2178.jpg d1a820ca3c74a59fa02a82b9681b8b7a 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. Image Height 3766 Image Width Image Width in pixels 6359 Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by : Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 1200 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Checksum 797647069 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 23950363 Bytes Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (400 dpi) display file is JPEG2000. Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 9/2/2009 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/regreening/id/441">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/regreening/id/441</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 View looking out of mouth of Logan Canyon onto the valley Description An account of the resource View looking out of mouth of Logan Canyon onto the valley (Logan LDS Temple and Old Main tower visible) Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Somers, Raymond, 1917- Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah)--Photographs Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Photographs Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1910 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1900-1909 1910-1919 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, Raymond C. Somers Photograph Collection 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. Regreening of Cache Valley 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 PO324 06-281.tif Highway 89; Logan Canyon; Cache National Forest; https://highway89.org/files/original/d2f2fab98225699096e02cba6e0c813a.jpg 11037229b1e085fde41932f2e90f8058 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. Digitized by : Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 600 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University at 600 ppi, 8 bit grayscale, uncompressed TIFF image scanned using AGFA Duoscan T2500 scanner Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2008 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/USU_Photos/id/2713">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/USU_Photos/id/2713</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 View looking east from the roof of the Business Building Description An account of the resource View looking east from the roof of the Business Building, 1972. The photo was one in a series taken by Campus Planning to show parking lot wasteland on campus in advocacy of a second quad west of the Engineering Building. View shows the Engineering Building, the Fine Arts Center, and the Reeder and Merrill dormitory halls, as well as parking areas. Subject The topic of the resource Utah State University--History--Pictorial works Utah State University. Engineering building--Pictorial works Utah State University. Fine Arts Center--Pictorial works Utah State University. Merrill (Laura R.) Hall--Pictorial works Utah State University--Student houseing--History--Pictorial works Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Photographs Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1972 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1970-1979 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived USU Historical Photo-board Collection, photo no. USU-A1771 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. Utah State University Historical Photo Collection 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 usu_a1771.jpg Highway 89; Utah State University; https://highway89.org/files/original/351d8e10e112fcff4a3673f619497f3d.jpg e3dda9cde7e715463b960d14e07ec73b 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. Digitized by : Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 600 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example Grayscale Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University at 600 ppi, 8 bit grayscale, uncompressed TIFF image scanned using AGFA Duoscan T2500 scanner Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2008 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/USU_Photos/id/2736">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/USU_Photos/id/2736</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 Aerial view from the west of campus Description An account of the resource Aerial view from the west of campus, featuring Old Main, the Quad, and the Merrill Library, 1967. Subject The topic of the resource Utah State University--History--Pictorial works Utah State University. Old Main--Pictorial works Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Photgraphs Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1967 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1960-1969 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived USU Historical Photo-board Collection, photo no. USU-A1793 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. Utah State University Historical Photo Collection 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 usu_a1793.jpg Highway 89; Utah State University;