DOCSLIB.ORG

Skull Valley Land Exchange UTU-89605FD/PT

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Skull Valley Land Exchange UTU-89605FD/PT BLM United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-UT-W010-2009-0026-EA July 2018 Skull Valley Land Exchange UTU-89605FD/PT (Note: Original BLM serial number UTU-81900FD/PT) West Desert District Office Location: Skull Valley, Tooele County, Utah Applicant/Address: Castle Rock Land and Livestock Company, a Utah general partnership, and Skull Valley Company, Ltd., a Utah limited partnership – Salt Lake FieldOffice West Desert District Office Salt Lake Field Office 2370 South Decker Lake Boulevard West Valley City, Utah 84119 Phone: (801) 977-4300 Fax: (801) 977-4397 Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-UT-W010-2009-0026-EA TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 —PURPOSE AND NEED ..................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Background .................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.3 Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................ 1-2 1.4 Conformance with BLM Land Use Plan ..................................................................... 1-2 1.4.1 Proposed Action ..................................................................................................... 1-2 1.4.2 No Action Alternative ............................................................................................ 1-3 1.5 Relationship to Statutes, Regulations, Plans and Supporting Documentation............. 1-3 1.6 Decision to Be Made .................................................................................................... 1-6 1.7 Identification of Issues ................................................................................................. 1-6 1.7.1 Cultural Resources ................................................................................................. 1-6 1.7.2 Fuels and Fire Management ................................................................................... 1-6 1.7.3 Invasive Species/Noxious Weeds .......................................................................... 1-6 1.7.4 Livestock Grazing .................................................................................................. 1-7 1.7.5 Mineral Resources ................................................................................................. 1-7 1.7.6 Recreation .............................................................................................................. 1-7 1.7.7 Special Status Animal Species Including Migratory Birds.................................... 1-7 1.7.8 Special Status Plant Species (Pohl’s Milkvetch) ................................................... 1-7 1.7.9 Water Rights .......................................................................................................... 1-7 1.7.10 Wildlife Excluding Special Status Species ............................................................ 1-7 1.7.11 Wilderness and Wilderness Characteristics ........................................................... 1-7 1.7.12 Wild Horse Herd Areas and Herd Management Areas .......................................... 1-8 1.8 Issues Considered but Eliminated from Further Analysis ........................................... 1-8 2.0 —DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................ 2-1 2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Alternative A – Proposed Action (Exchange) ............................................................. 2-1 2.3 Alternative B – No Action (status quo/no exchange) .................................................. 2-8 2.4 Alternatives Considered, but Eliminated from Further Analysis................................. 2-8 2.4.1 Purchase ................................................................................................................. 2-8 2.4.2 Sale ......................................................................................................................... 2-8 2.4.3 Other Configurations ............................................................................................. 2-9 3.0 —AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ......................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 General Setting............................................................................................................. 3-1 3.3 Potentially Affected Resources/Issues ......................................................................... 3-2 3.3.1 Cultural Resources ................................................................................................. 3-2 3.3.2 Fire and Fuels Management ................................................................................... 3-8 3.3.3 Invasive Species/Noxious Weeds .......................................................................... 3-9 i Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-UT-W010-2009-0026-EA 3.3.4 Livestock Grazing .................................................................................................. 3-9 3.3.5 Mineral Resources ............................................................................................... 3-11 3.3.6 Recreation ............................................................................................................ 3-13 3.3.7 Special Status Animal Species Including Migratory Birds.................................. 3-16 3.3.8 Special Status Plants (Pohl’s Milkvetch) ............................................................. 3-22 3.3.9 Water Rights ........................................................................................................ 3-22 3.3.10 Wildlife Excluding Special Status Species .......................................................... 3-23 3.3.11 Wilderness and Wilderness Characteristics ......................................................... 3-24 3.3.12 Wild Horse Herd Areas and Herd Management Areas ........................................ 3-25 4.0 —ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS....................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 4-1 4.2 General Analysis Assumptions and Guidelines ........................................................... 4-1 4.3 Direct and Indirect Impacts .......................................................................................... 4-2 4.3.1 Alternative A – Proposed Action ........................................................................... 4-2 4.3.1.1 Cultural Resources .......................................................................................... 4-2 4.3.1.2 Fire and Fuels Management ........................................................................... 4-3 4.3.1.3 Invasive Species/Noxious Weeds ................................................................... 4-3 4.3.1.4 Livestock Grazing ........................................................................................... 4-3 4.3.1.5 Mineral Resources .......................................................................................... 4-4 4.3.1.6 Recreation ....................................................................................................... 4-5 4.3.1.7 Special Status Animal Species including Migratory Birds ............................ 4-7 4.3.1.8 Special Status Plants (Pohl’s Milkvetch) ...................................................... 4-10 4.3.1.9 Water Rights ................................................................................................. 4-11 4.3.1.10 Wildlife Excluding Special Status Species ................................................... 4-11 4.3.1.11 Wilderness and Wilderness Characteristics .................................................. 4-12 4.3.1.12 Wild Horse Herd Areas and Herd Management Areas ................................ 4-13 4.3.1.13 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................... 4-14 4.3.1.14 Residual Impacts........................................................................................... 4-15 4.3.1.15 Monitoring and/or Compliance .................................................................... 4-15 4.3.2 Alternative B – No Action ................................................................................... 4-16 4.3.2.1 Cultural Resources ........................................................................................ 4-16 4.3.2.2 Fire and Fuels Management ......................................................................... 4-16 4.3.2.3 Invasive Species/Noxious Weeds ................................................................. 4-16 4.3.2.4 Livestock Grazing ......................................................................................... 4-16 4.3.2.5 Mineral Resources ........................................................................................ 4-16 4.3.2.6 Recreation ..................................................................................................... 4-16 4.3.2.7 Special Status
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Comprehensive Ecological Land Classification for Utah's West Desert
    Western North American Naturalist Volume 65 Number 3 Article 1 7-28-2005 A comprehensive ecological land classification for Utah's West Desert Neil E. West Utah State University Frank L. Dougher Utah State University and Montana State University, Bozeman Gerald S. Manis Utah State University R. Douglas Ramsey Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/wnan Recommended Citation West, Neil E.; Dougher, Frank L.; Manis, Gerald S.; and Ramsey, R. Douglas (2005) "A comprehensive ecological land classification for Utah's West Desert," Western North American Naturalist: Vol. 65 : No. 3 , Article 1. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/wnan/vol65/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Western North American Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Western North American Naturalist 65(3), © 2005, pp. 281–309 A COMPREHENSIVE ECOLOGICAL LAND CLASSIFICATION FOR UTAH’S WEST DESERT Neil E. West1, Frank L. Dougher1,2, Gerald S. Manis1,3, and R. Douglas Ramsey1 ABSTRACT.—Land managers and scientists need context in which to interpolate between or extrapolate beyond discrete field points in space and time. Ecological classification of land (ECL) is one way by which these relationships can be made. Until regional issues emerged and calls were made for ecosystem management (EM), each land management institution chose its own ECLs. The need for economic efficiency and the increasing availability of geographic informa- tion systems (GIS) compel the creation of a national ECL so that communication across ownership boundaries can occur.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogeologic and Geochemical Characterization of Groundwater Resources in Rush Valley, Tooele County, Utah
    Prepared in cooperation with the State of Utah Department of Natural Resources Hydrogeologic and Geochemical Characterization of Groundwater Resources in Rush Valley, Tooele County, Utah Scientific Investigations Report 2011–5068 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover: Groundwater-supplied stock tank in southwestern Rush Valley, Utah. Hydrogeologic and Geochemical Characterization of Groundwater Resources in Rush Valley, Tooele County, Utah By Philip M. Gardner and Stefan Kirby Prepared in cooperation with the State of Utah Department of Natural Resources Scientific Investigations Report 2011–5068 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2011 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Gardner, P.M., and Kirby, S.M., 2011, Hydrogeologic and geochemical characterization of groundwater resources in Rush Valley, Tooele County, Utah: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Complete Meeting Packet
    PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE Nevada Land Management Task Force (Established Pursuant to Assembly Bill 227 enacted in the 2013 Legislative Session) August 16, 2013, 1:00 p.m. Eureka Opera House 31 S. Main St. Eureka, NV 89316 AGENDA Some Task Force members may attend via telephone from other locations. Items on the agenda may be taken out of order. The Task Force may combine two or more agenda items for consideration. The Task Force may remove an item from the agenda or delay discussion relating to an item on the agenda at any time. Call to Order, Roll Call 1. Public Comment. Please Limit Comments to 3 Minutes 2. Approval of Agenda. For Possible Action. 3. Approval of the Minutes of the June 28, 2013 Meeting of the Nevada Land Management Task Force. For Possible Action. (Attachment) 4. Overview of Legislation in Other Western States Regarding the Transfer of Public Lands. 5. Presentation on Studies Commissioned by Eureka County in 1994 and 1996 on Public Lands Transfer Issues. 6. Initial Discussion on Potential Lands to be Included in a Transfer of Public Lands from the Federal Government to Nevada. (Attachment) 7. Initial Discussion of Cost and Revenue Implications of the Transfer of Public Lands to Nevada. (Attachment) 8. Initial Discussion on Transferring Multiple Uses, Including but not Limited to Outdoor Recreation, Mining and Prospecting, Timber, Grazing, and Fish and Wildlife Purposes, with the Transfer of Public Lands. 9. Initial Discussion on Which Public Lands, if Transferred to State Ownership, Should be Sold or Exchanged into the Private Sector and How Should the Sales Take Place? 10.
    [Show full text]
  • A.1 List of Preparers
    A.1 List of Preparers Core Interdisciplinary Team Name Area(s) of Expertise Education Years Experience Bob Campbell Ecology B.S., Botany; B.S., Plant Science 25 M.S., Forestry (Ecology) Linda Chappell Air Quality, Fuels B.S., Forest Management; B.S., Range Science 15 Ivan Erskine Fire Management B.S., Watershed Mgmt. and Forestry 31 B.S., Elementary Education David Hatfield Team Leader, Planning B.A., M.S., Geology 17 Karen Ogle Team Leader, Fire Ecology B.S., Forest Management; M.S., Fire Ecology 12 Frances Reynolds Public Involvement B.A., British History and Literature 22 Linda Wadleigh Fire Ecology, Fuels, TESP B.S., Forest Management; M.S., Fire Ecology 12 Extended Interdisciplinary Team Name Area(s) of Expertise Education Years Experience Ellen Daniels Support Services 10 Sherel Goodrich Ecology B.S., Range Management; M.S., Plant Taxonomy 30 Kevin Greenhalgh Fire Planning, Fuels B.S., Forest Mgt.; B.S., Recreation Res. Mgt. 10 Arlene Heap GIS/Database Mgt. 24 Stan McDonald Cultural Resources B.S., M.A., Anthropology 20 Steve Robertson Aquatic Biota B.S., Fisheries Management; M.S., Zoology 25 Tom Scott Recreation, Visual B.A, History; M.A., Anthropology 25 Mgt., Human Uses Kelly Shanahan Hydrology, Watershed B.S., Geology; M.S., Watershed Science 11 Michael Smith Soils B.S. Natural Resource Management 20 Liz Van Genderen Editing B.S. Natural Resource Management 13 Richard Williams Terrestrial Wildlife B.S., Wildlife Management 26 A.2 Glossary of Terms Activity Fuels - Fuels generated from management activities (i.e., timber harvest). Air Quality - The characteristics of the ambient air (all locations accessible to the general public) as indicated by concentrations of the six air pollutants for which national standards have been established (e.g., particulate matter, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, carbon monoxide, and lead), and by visibility in mandatory Federal Class I areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Flora of the Stansbury Mountains, Utah
    Great Basin Naturalist Volume 43 Number 4 Article 11 10-31-1983 Flora of the Stansbury Mountains, Utah Alan C. Taye U.S. Army Intelligence Center and School, Fort Huachuca, Arizona Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn Recommended Citation Taye, Alan C. (1983) "Flora of the Stansbury Mountains, Utah," Great Basin Naturalist: Vol. 43 : No. 4 , Article 11. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn/vol43/iss4/11 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Basin Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. FLORA OF THE STANSBURY MOUNTAINS, UTAH Alan C. Taye' Abstract.— The Stansbury Mountains of north central Utah rise over 2000 m above surrounding desert valleys to a maximum elevation of 3362 m on Deseret Peak. Because of the great variety of environmental conditions that can be found in the Stansburys, a wide range of plant species and vegetation types (from shadscale desert to alpine mead- ow) exist there. This paper presents an annotated list of 594 vascular plant species in 315 genera and 78 families. The largest families are Asteraceae (98 species), Poaceae (71), Brassicaceae (33), Fabaceae (27), and Rosaceae (26). Elymiis flcwescens was previously unreported from Utah. Statistical comparison of the Stansbury flora with neighboring mountain floras indicates that the Wasatch Mountains lying 65 km to the east have probably been the primary source area for development of the Stansbury flora.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of the Southern Stansbury Range Tooele County Utah
    ~+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++"~, i UTAH GEOLOGICAL AND MINERALOGICAL SURVEY I AFFILIATED WITH + i+ + * THE COLLEGE OF MINES AND MINERAL INDUSTRIES .:. i UNIVERSITY OF UTAH I f SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH .r. :t.:. .:- i... :i: * GEOLOGY OF THE SOUTHERN :i:.:- i STANSBURY RANGE i + TOOELE COUNTY, UTAH i by .:- .:..:­ 1 John A. Teichert .:- I.:.. .:. I :i: .:­ -:. -:. i I+ * *.1- *+ t Bulletin 65 May, 1959 i + PRICE $1.50 i + +-:. ~++++++++++++++++~1-++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++~ UTAH GEOLOGICAL AND MINERALOGICAL SURVEY The Utah Geological and Mineralogical Survey was authorized by act of the Utah State Legislature in 1931; however, no funds were made available for its establishment until 1941 when the State Government was reorganized and the Utah Geological and Mineralogical Survey was placed within the new State Department of Publicity and Industrial Development where the Survey functioned until July 1, 1949. Effective as of that date, the Survey was trans­ ferred by law to the College of Mines and Mineral Industries, University of Utah. The Utah Code Annotated 1943, Vol. 2, Title 34, as amended by chapter 46 Laws 0/ Utah 1949, provides that the Utah Geological and Mineralogical Survey "shall have for its objects": 1. "The collection and distribution of reliable information regarding the mineral resources of the State. 2. "The survey of the geological formations of the State with special ref­ erence to their economic contents, values and uses, such as: the ores of the various metals, coal, oil-shale, hydro-carbons, oil, gas, industrial clays, cement materials. mineral waters and other surface and underground water supplies, mineral fertilizers, asphalt, bitumen, structural materials, road-making ma­ tE,'rials.
    [Show full text]
  • Helicopter Landings in the Twin Peaks, Lone Peak, and Mount Timpanogos Wilderness Areas to Capture and Collar Mountain Goats
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Helicopter landings in the Twin Peaks, Lone Peak, and Mount Timpanogos wilderness areas to capture and collar mountain goats and bighorn sheep project Environmental Assessment Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest, Salt Lake and Pleasant Grove Ranger Districts, Salt Lake and Utah Counties, Utah July 2017 Environmental Assessment Helicopter landings in the Twin Peaks, Lone Peak, and Mount Timpanogos wilderness areas to capture and collar mountain goats and bighorn sheep Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest, Salt Lake and Pleasant Grove Ranger Districts, Salt Lake and Utah Counties, Utah Lead Agency: U.S. Forest Service Responsible Official: David C. Whittekiend, Forest Supervisor 857 West South Jordan Parkway South Jordan, UT 84095 For Information Contact: Pamela Manders, Forest Wildlife Program Manager 857 West South Jordan Parkway South Jordan, UT 84095 Cover Photo: Photo by Rusty Robinson. In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.
    [Show full text]
  • The LDS Hawaiian Colony at Skull Valley, Utah 1889-1917
    cannon was determined to learn hawaiian was very sharp and did so finally THE LDSLOSHAWAIIAN COLONY AT SKULL VALLEY UTAH 188919171889 1917 he and soaesome others began to make some converts brigham young then sug- by leonard J arringtonarlington gested they set up a temporary gathering place where they could all live prepared for the polynesian LDSLOShistory association conference laie hawaii august 2 1980 together A committee investigated all of the islands after a careful survey they finally decided on lanai an island which was almost uninhabited one of the nostwostmost solidly established principles of the early church riding to the interior the committee found what they were looking for and was the gathering the lord instructed the saints as early as 1831 that selected the crater of lalawaiPapalawailawai this crater was about three and a half the elect should gather out of babylon to live work and worship liesilesmileswiles videwide an important obstacle was the lack of water but the committee together as a community of saints this principle was applied as the thought this could be overcome by building reservoirs the owner of the body of the church moved1ronoved froaaroa new york to northeastern ohio to jackson land faaleleahaaleleaHaa lelea agreed to letietlot the saints experiment with itit rent free for county clay county and caldwell county missouri and to hancock county four years it was a 200acre200 acraaracre site which they called the city of joseph in illinois it continued after the grationmigrationai to the salt lake valley
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1464 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1132
    § 1132 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION Page 1464 Department and agency having jurisdiction of, and reports submitted to Congress regard- thereover immediately before its inclusion in ing pending additions, eliminations, or modi- the National Wilderness Preservation System fications. Maps, legal descriptions, and regula- unless otherwise provided by Act of Congress. tions pertaining to wilderness areas within No appropriation shall be available for the pay- their respective jurisdictions also shall be ment of expenses or salaries for the administra- available to the public in the offices of re- tion of the National Wilderness Preservation gional foresters, national forest supervisors, System as a separate unit nor shall any appro- priations be available for additional personnel and forest rangers. stated as being required solely for the purpose of managing or administering areas solely because (b) Review by Secretary of Agriculture of classi- they are included within the National Wilder- fications as primitive areas; Presidential rec- ness Preservation System. ommendations to Congress; approval of Con- (c) ‘‘Wilderness’’ defined gress; size of primitive areas; Gore Range-Ea- A wilderness, in contrast with those areas gles Nest Primitive Area, Colorado where man and his own works dominate the The Secretary of Agriculture shall, within ten landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where years after September 3, 1964, review, as to its the earth and its community of life are un- suitability or nonsuitability for preservation as trammeled by man, where man himself is a visi- wilderness, each area in the national forests tor who does not remain. An area of wilderness classified on September 3, 1964 by the Secretary is further defined to mean in this chapter an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its of Agriculture or the Chief of the Forest Service primeval character and influence, without per- as ‘‘primitive’’ and report his findings to the manent improvements or human habitation, President.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1517 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1131 (Pub. L
    Page 1517 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1131 (Pub. L. 88–363, § 10, July 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 301.) Sec. 1132. Extent of System. § 1110. Liability 1133. Use of wilderness areas. 1134. State and private lands within wilderness (a) United States areas. The United States Government shall not be 1135. Gifts, bequests, and contributions. liable for any act or omission of the Commission 1136. Annual reports to Congress. or of any person employed by, or assigned or de- § 1131. National Wilderness Preservation System tailed to, the Commission. (a) Establishment; Congressional declaration of (b) Payment; exemption of property from attach- policy; wilderness areas; administration for ment, execution, etc. public use and enjoyment, protection, preser- Any liability of the Commission shall be met vation, and gathering and dissemination of from funds of the Commission to the extent that information; provisions for designation as it is not covered by insurance, or otherwise. wilderness areas Property belonging to the Commission shall be In order to assure that an increasing popu- exempt from attachment, execution, or other lation, accompanied by expanding settlement process for satisfaction of claims, debts, or judg- and growing mechanization, does not occupy ments. and modify all areas within the United States (c) Individual members of Commission and its possessions, leaving no lands designated No liability of the Commission shall be im- for preservation and protection in their natural puted to any member of the Commission solely condition, it is hereby declared to be the policy on the basis that he occupies the position of of the Congress to secure for the American peo- member of the Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • 3-5-19 Transcript Bulletin
    Looking back at Stansbury, Tooele and Grantsville’s basketball season See B1 TOOELETRANSCRIPT S T C BULLETIN S TUESDAY March 5, 2019 www.TooeleOnline.com Vol. 125 No. 79 $1.00 Boulder kills woman on Stansbury Island hike STEVE HOWE line, with the woman in the STAFF WRITER middle, when she stepped out A 37-year-old woman died of the path and onto a rock, Saturday on Stansbury Island Scharmann said. The rock after a large rock fell on top of began to slide and she tried to her, according to the Tooele jump off it, but the rock landed County Sheriff’s Office. on top of her in the bottom of The Salt Lake area woman, the gully. whose identity has not been Scharmann said the boulder released, was hiking on was about 4 feet by 4 feet by Stansbury Island with her 18 inches and too heavy to husband and a friend Saturday move by hand. He said the trio afternoon, according to Tooele was not on the marked trail County Sheriff’s Lt. Travis from a nearby trailhead and Scharmann. They were walking in SEE BOULDER PAGE A8 ® FRANCIE AUFDEMORTE/TTB PHOTO Tyson Hamilton, the owner of Another Man’s Treasures in Tooele, stands behind the counter of his antique store. Former Tooele New chamber chairman wants cop charged to bring community together with custodial Buy local, tourism, unity, and community spirit top sexual relations Hamilton’s 2019 to-do list STEVE HOWE federal parolee, supervised by TIM GILLIE STAFF WRITER the federal government. EDITOR A Tooele City police officer A Tooele City detective A full-blooded Tooelean, the new has been charged with a felony conducted an investigation, in chairman of the Tooele County Chamber after he allegedly had sexual which he interviewed Dudley of Commerce and Tourism board of relations with a federal parolee and the parolee, the statement directors is fervent about building local during his time as an officer.
    [Show full text]
  • Wilderness Areas on the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National
    Wilderness Areas On The Uinta‐Wasatch‐Cache National Forests “Wilderness is the land that was wild land beyond the frontier...land that shaped the growth of our nation and the character of its people. Wilderness is the land that is rare, wild places where one can retreat from civilization, reconnect with the Earth, and find healing, meaning and significance.” The United States was the first country to define and create designated wilderness areas. In 1964 the Wilderness Act was passed in congress. The Act describes wilderness as the following: "...lands designated for preservation and protection in their natural condition..." Section 2(a) "...an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man..." Section 2(c) "...an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvement or human habitation..." Section 2(c) "...generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable..." Section 2(c) "...has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation..." Section 2(c) "...shall be devoted to the public purposes of recreation, scenic, scientific, educational, conservation and historic use." Section 4(b) Within the Uinta‐Wasatch‐Cache National Forest there are 9 designated wilderness areas. These areas include: Mount Naomi Wilderness, Wellsville Mountain Wilderness, Mount Olympus Wilderness, Twin Peaks Wilderness, Lone Peak Wilderness, Mount Timpanogos Wilderness, Mount Nebo Wilderness, Deseret Peak Wilderness and the High Uinta Wilderness. Each of these areas offer unique wilderness opportunities and experiences. The Mount Naomi Wilderness was designated in 1984 and includes 44,523 acres.
    [Show full text]