DOCSLIB.ORG

Registration Form Jul 2 4 Z007 |

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Registration Form Jul 2 4 Z007 | NFS Form 10-900 RECEIVED 2280 °' 'B No. 1024-0018 (Rev. 10-90) United States Department of the Interior JUL 2 4 Z007 | National Park Service NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES REGISTRATION FORM This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking V in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If any item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NPS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer to complete all items. 1. Name of Property historic name Grand Canyon Airport Historic District other names/site number Airport at Red Butte: Red Butte Aerodrome: AR-03-07-04-807 2. Location _————————————————.j.———————————————j——.—————————————T——._____ street & number app. 2.6 mi. east of ict. of US Highway 180 & Forest Road 305 not for publication N/A city or town Tusavan________________________________ vicinity X______ state Arizona code AZ county Coconino code 005 zip code 86023 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1986, as amended, I hereby certify that this X nomination __ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property X meets ___ does not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant __ nationally__ statewide X locally. ( See continuatipmsheet for additional comments.) State or Federal agency and bureau In my opinion, the property X meets __ does not meet the National Register criteria. (__ See continuation sheet for additional comments.) 1± Signature of commenting or other officia Date State or Federal agency and bureau 4. National Park Service Certification I hereby certify that this property is: entered in the National Register _ See continuation sheet. determined eligible for the National Register __ See continuation sheet. determined not eligible for the National Register removed from the National Register other (explain): ___________ Signatur^ofXeeper Date of Action 5. Classification Ownership of Property (Check as many boxes as apply) X private __ public-local __ public-State X public-Federal Category of Property (Check only one box) __ building(s) X district __ site __ structure __ object Number of Resources within Property Contributing Noncontributing 3 1 buildings ____ ____ sites 4 ____ structures ____ ____ objects 7 1 Total Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register ___N/A Name of related multiple property listing (Enter "N/A" if property is not part of a multiple property listing.) N/A 6. Function or Use Historic Functions (Enter categories from instructions) Cat: TRANSPORTATION_______ Sub: air-related DOMESTIC____________ ____multiple dwelling COMMERCE/TRADE_______ business Current Functions (Enter categories from instructions) Cat: VACANT/NOT IN USE______ Sub: 7. Description Architectural Classification (Enter categories from instructions) LATE 19th & EARLY 20th CENTURY AMERICAN MOVEMENTS: Bungalow OTHER__________________________ Materials (Enter categories from instructions) foundation CONCRETE: METAL (steel): STONE (sandstone) roof METAL (steel, tin): OTHER (rolled roofing): EARTH walls METAL (steel, tin): WOOD (weatherboard): STONE (sandstone)_________ other N/A_________________________________________ Narrative Description (Describe the historic and current condition of the property on one or more continuation sheets.) 8. Statement of Significance Applicable National Register Criteria (Mark V in one or more boxes for the criteria qualifying the property for National Register listing) X A. Property is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history. __ B. Property is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past. __X__ C. Property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction. ___ D. Property has yielded, or is likely to yield information important in prehistory or history. Criteria Considerations (Mark "X" in all the boxes that apply.) __ A. owned by a religious institution or used for religious purposes. __ B. removed from its original location. __ C. a birthplace or a grave. __ D. a cemetery. ___ E. a reconstructed building, objector structure. __ F. a commemorative property. __ G. less than 50 years of age or achieved significance within the past 50 years. Areas of Significance (Enter categories from instructions) ____TRANSPORTATION: (Grand Canyon air tourism) ARCHITECTURE ________ Period of Significance 1927-1956 Significant Dates 1927-28 Significant Person (Complete only if Criterion B is marked above) N/A___________________________ Cultural Affiliation N/A_______________ Architect/Builder Shaw. Benson Russell (engineer/builder for hangar) Shaw. Benson Russell: & Van Zandt. John Parker (engineers/designers of airstrips) Porter. Bill: Chambers. B.D.: Lockridae. Bill: & Williams. Jack (builders of bungalow) Narrative Statement of Significance (Explain the significance of the property on one or more continuation sheets.) 9. Major Bibliographical References Bibliography (Cite the books, articles, and other sources used in preparing this form on one or more continuation sheets.) Previous documentation on file (NPS) __ preliminary determination of individual listing (36 CFR 67) has been requested. __ previously listed in the National Register __ previously determined eligible by the National Register __ designated a National Historic Landmark __ recorded by Historic American Buildings Survey # ________ __ recorded by Historic American Engineering Record # ________ Primary Location of Additional Data: __ State Historic Preservation Office __ Other State agency X Federal agency __ Local government X University X Other Names of repositories: Grand Canyon National Park Museum Archives. Grand Canyon. AZ: Kaibab National Forest. Williams. AZ: Arizona Historical Foundation. Tempe. AZ: Cline Library. Northern Arizona University. Flagstaff. AZ Private collection: Eugene Ernest Tissot Jr.. Monterev. CA 10. Geographical Data Acreage of Property 90.01 acres (90 acres + 0.01 acres) UTM References Zone Easting Northing Zone Easting Northing 1 12 401330 3968180 5 12 401455 3967650 2 12 401710 3968070 6 12 402360 3966960 3 12 402520 3968920 7 12 402300 3966900 4 12 402580 3968870 8 12 401330 3967610 Discontiguous element (entrance sign structure): Zone 12 397995E 2967020A/ Verbal Boundary Description The discontiguous district contains two parcels (the airport proper, and a discontiguous entrance sign structure), described as follows: (1) airport proper, a polygon containing 90 acres, the vertices of which are shown on the accompanying USGS quadrangle titled "Red Butte"; and (2) entrance sign structure: a square parcel measuring 20ft by 20ft (0.01 acre), centering on the structure, the centerpoint of which is indicated on the accompanying USGS quadrangle titled "Red Butte SW." Boundary Justification The boundary of the airport proper (shown on the "Red Butte" quadrangle) has been drawn to encompass the concentration of remaining resources contributing to the significance of the Grand Canyon Airport and to exclude acreage not directly contributing to the significance of the property. In the case of the entrance sign structure (shown on the "Red Butte SW" quadrangle), the 20ft by 20ft boundary has been drawn to center on and be slightly larger than the structure's footprint of 12ft by 9.5ft. } 1 1 . Form Prepared By name/title Pat Stein/Owner. Arizona Preservation Consultants; based on research and an earlier draft prepared bv Giacinta Bradlev Koontz/Aviation Historian organization Arizona Preservation Consultants date Jan. 2007, revised Mav 2007 street & number 6786 Mariah Drive telephone (928)714-0585 citvortown Flagstaff state AZ ziocode 86004-1232 Additional Documentation Continuation Sheets Maps A USGS map (7.5 or 15 minute series) indicating property's location. See two enclosed USGS 7.5'maps. A sketch map for historic districts and properties having large acreage or numerous resources. See enclosed district sketch map. Photographs Representative black and white photographs of the property. See b/w Photos 1 through 9. Additional items See "additional documentation" continuation sheets showing historical photographs. Property Owners Buildings and structures are owned by: name Red Butte Airpark Restoration LLC street & number 4117 Guadaluoe Street___________________ telephone (512)374-0300 city or town Austin_______________ state TX zip code 78751________ Land owned by: U.S. Department of Agriculture (Kaibab National Forest). 800 S. 6th St.. Williams AZ 86046 NPS Form 10-900-a OMB No. 1024-0018 (8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Canyon's 'Guardians' Press for Protections by Matthew Putesoy - Jul
    THE ARIZONA REPUBLIC Canyon's 'guardians' press for protections by Matthew Putesoy - Jul. 25, 2009 My Turn The Grand Canyon is a national treasure, inviting 5 million people every year to explore and be inspired by its beauty. To the Havasuw 'Baaja, who have lived in the region for many hundreds of years, it is sacred. As the "guardians of the Grand Canyon," we strenuously object to mining for uranium here. It is a threat to the health of our environment and tribe, our tourism-based economy, and our religion. Thank you, Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar, for announcing a two-year moratorium on new mining claims in the 1 million acres of lands around Grand Canyon National Park. But existing claims, such as those pursued by Canadian-based Denison Mines Corp., still threaten the animals, air, drinking water and people of this region. Denison, which has staked 110 claims around the Grand Canyon, is seeking groundwater-aquifer permits that would allow it to reopen the Canyon Mine, near Red Butte on the South Rim, as well as two other mining sites. Uranium mining has been associated with contamination of ground or surface water. Here, mining could poison the aquifer, which extends for 5,000 square miles under the Coconino Plateau, and serves as drinking water for our tribe and neighboring communities. As I told Congress recently, if our water were polluted, we could not relocate to Phoenix or someplace else and still survive as the Havasupai Tribe. We are the Grand Canyon. Thanks to Arizona Congressman Raul Grijalva for introducing the Grand Canyon Watersheds Protection Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Mineral Appraisal of the Kaibab National Forest, Arizona MLA 6-92
    ! a [MLA[6"g2 I Mineral Land Assessment Open File Report/1992 I I Mineral Appraisal of the Kaibab National Forest, I Arizona I I I I tional I I I i L I BUREAU OF MINES I UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR I I I I I MINERAL APPRAISAL OF THE KAIBAB NATIONAL FOREST, ARIZONA ! I by I David C. Scott I I MLA 6-92 I 1992 I I -.4 Intermountain Field Operations Center ! Denver, Colorado ! UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR I Manuel Lujan Jr., Secretary BUREAU OF MINES I T S ARY, Director I I l I I PREFACE A January, 1987 Interagency Agreement between the Bureau of Mines, U.S. Geological Survey, and U.S. Forest Service describes I the purpose, authority, and program operation for the forest-wide studies. The program is intended to assist the Forest Service in incorporating mineral resource data in forest plans as specified by I the National Forest Management Act (1976) and Title 36, Chapter 2, Part 219, Code of Federal Regulations, and to augment the Bureau's mineral resource data base so that it can analyze and make I available minerals information as required by the National Materials and Minerals Policy, Research and Development Act (1980). This report is based on available data from literature and field investigations. I l I I I I I I I I This open-file report summarizes the results of a Bureau of Mines forest-wide study. The report is preliminary and has not been edited or reviewed for conformity with ! the Bureau of Mines editorial standards.
    [Show full text]
  • CANYON URANIUM MINE REVIEW Review of the Canyon Mine Plan of Operations and Associated Approval Documentation in Anticipation of Resumption of Operations
    CANYON URANIUM MINE REVIEW Review of the Canyon Mine Plan of Operations and Associated Approval Documentation in Anticipation of Resumption of Operations US Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Kaibab National Forest 6/25/2012 Executive Summary Canyon Uranium Mine Review June 25, 2012 On September 13, 2011, Denison Mines informed the Kaibab Forest Supervisor they intended to resume operations at Canyon Mine under the existing Plan of Operations and Record Of Decision. A review has been completed of the Canyon Mine Plan of Operations and associated approval documentation in anticipation of the resumption of operations. Canyon Mine is within the area segregated in 2009 and then ultimately withdrawn in the Northern Arizona Withdrawal process by the Secretary of Interior on January 9, 2012. Under the segregation and subsequent withdrawal, any mining claimant pursuing approval for exploration or mining would need to prove their claims had valid existing rights prior to the 2009 segregation. Denison Mines’ mining claims at the Canyon Mine were evaluated by US Forest Service mineral examiners with regards to valid existing rights under the 1872 Mining Law. This mineral validity examination, completed on April 18, 2012, confirmed that the mining claims have valid existing rights. In addition to the mineral validity examination, the Forest undertook a review of the 1986 Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision, and associated documents. Resource specialists from the Kaibab National Forest and the Southwestern Regional Office reviewed the documents to determine if any modification or amendment of the existing Plan of Operations was required and whether there was any new information or changed circumstances indicating unforeseen significant disturbance of surface resources.
    [Show full text]
  • A Hiker's Companion to GRAND CANYON GEOLOGY
    A Hiker’s Companion to GRAND CANYON GEOLOGY With special attention given to The Corridor: North & South Kaibab Trails Bright Angel Trail The geologic history of the Grand Canyon can be approached by breaking it up into three puzzles: 1. How did all those sweet layers get there? 2. How did the area become uplifted over a mile above sea level? 3. How and when was the canyon carved out? That’s how this short guide is organized, into three sections: 1. Laying down the Strata, 2. Uplift, and 3. Carving the Canyon, Followed by a walking geological guide to the 3 most popular hikes in the National Park. I. LAYING DOWN THE STRATA PRE-CAMBRIAN 2000 mya (million years ago), much of the planet’s uppermost layer was thin oceanic crust, and plate tectonics was functioning more or less as it does now. It begins with a Subduction Zone... Vishnu Schist: 1840 mya, the GC region was the site of an active subduction zone, crowned by a long volcanic chain known as the Yavapai Arc (similar to today’s Aleutian Islands). The oceanic crust on the leading edge of Wyomingland, a huge plate driving in from the NW, was subducting under another plate at the zone, a terrane known as the Yavapai Province. Subduction brought Wyomingland closer and closer to the arc for 150 million years, during which genera- tions of volcanoes were born and laid dormant along the arc. Lava and ash of new volcanoes mixed with the eroded sands and mud from older cones, creating a pile of inter-bedded lava, ash, sand, and mud that was 40,000 feet deep! Vishnu Schist Zoroaster Granite Wyomingland reached the subduction zone 1700 mya.
    [Show full text]
  • Tusayan East Wireless Communications Sites Final Environmental Assessment
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Tusayan East Wireless Communications Sites Final Environmental Assessment Tusayan Ranger District, Kaibab National Forest, Coconino County, Arizona February 2016 Tusayan East Wireless Communications Final Environmental Assessment For More Information Contact: Sheila Sandusky Realty Specialist Kaibab National Forest Supervisor’s Office 800 S. Sixth Street Williams, AZ 86046 Phone: (928) 635-8200 Email: [email protected] Fax: (928) 635-8208 Cover Page Picture – View from Grandview Lookout Tower, Tusayan Ranger District, looking towards Grand Canyon, taken by Ken Jacobs, June 2014. 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
    [Show full text]
  • Valle Area Plan
    Valle Area Plan An Amendment to the Coconino County Comprehensive Plan Developed by the Residents of the Valle Community with assistance from the County Community Development Department Approved by the Coconino County Board of Supervisors October 18, 1999 VALLE AREA PLAN Approved by Valle Area Planning Committee July 14, 1999 Planning and Zoning Commission August 31, 1999 Board of Supervisors October 18, 1999 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Matt Ryan, Chairman District 3 Paul J. Babbitt, Jr. District 1 Elizabeth C. Archuleta District 2 Thomas E. Chabin District 4 Louise Yellowman District 5 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Deb Hill, Chairman Mark Sykes Janis Crosman Carl Taylor Joshua J. Copley Nancy M. Taylor Jimmy Jensen David Watters Manny Montoya VALLE AREA PLANNING COMMITTEE Normand Gobeil, Chairman James Greene Tom Jones Dave McNelly Linda Speckles Dick Olson COCONINO COUNTY PLANNING STAFF William L. Towler, Community Development Director Sue E. Pratt, Principal Planner, Valle Area Plan Project Manager David R. Mann, Transportation Planner John P. Aber, Planner II Michelle Majeski, Planner I Francis R. Regan, Jr., Zoning Inspector TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Page 1 HISTORY Page 5 VALLE VISION STATEMENT Page 9 UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE Page 10 Water Page 10 Wastewater Page 11 Other Utilities Page 12 Solid Waste Page 13 Lighting District Page 13 Utility Infrastructure Goals Page 14 Utility Infrastructure Policies Page 14 PUBLIC SAFETY Page 16 Law Enforcement Page 16 Fire Protection Page 17 Emergency Medical Services Page 20 Public Safety Goals
    [Show full text]
  • Cocowaterreport For
    GR WTH O ON THE COCONINO PLATEAU Potential Impacts of a Water Pipeline for the Region march 2001 On the Cover: FLAGSTAFF’S “NEW TOWN” CIRCA 1881 When the railroad bypassed Flagstaff’s original town site, a new business district was constructed along the tracks. GR WTH O ON THE COCONINO PLATEAU Potential Impacts of a Water Pipeline for the Region march 2001 Rick Heffernon Principal Investigator and Senior Research Analyst Morrison Institute for Public Policy Mark Muro Senior Research Analyst Morrison Institute for Public Policy with Assistance from Rob Melnick, Director, Morrison Institute for Public Policy Christina Kinnear, Graduate Research Associate, Morrison Institute for Public Policy Special Contribution by John Kent Hill Timothy D. Hogan Tom R. Rex Center for Business Research, Arizona State University Copyright ©2001 by the Arizona Board of Regents for and on behalf of Arizona State University and its Morrison Institute for Public Policy. BITTER SPRINGS OVERLOOK The Navajo community of Bitter Springs, located at the base of Echo Cliffs, would be one of the beneficiaries of a regional pipeline proposed for north-central Arizona. TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary . 7 Introduction . 11 Purpose of Study. 11 Study Area . 11 Role of Research in Regional Water Planning. 11 Features of the Pipeline Proposal . 12 Research Methods and Activities. 12 Resources and Expectations: Views of Stakeholders. 15 Key Observations . 16 Water Resources and Needs. 16 Population Effects of Pipeline . 18 Land Uses and Development . 18 Regional Infrastructure . 19 Policies Regarding Growth, Infrastructure, and Water Management . 20 A Development Wildcard: State Trust Lands . 21 Critical Issues . 21 History .
    [Show full text]
  • Ethnographic Resources in the Grand Canyon Region
    Interim Report Ethnographic Resources in the Grand Canyon Region Prepared by Saul Hedquist and T. J. Ferguson School of Anthropology University of Arizona Prepared for Jan Balsom Grand Canyon National Park Task Agreement Number J8219091297 Cooperative Agreement Number H1200090005 May 30, 2010 Table of Contents 1. Research Objectives .................................................................................................................... 1 2. Study Area .................................................................................................................................. 2 3. Ethnographic Resources Inventory Database ............................................................................. 3 4. Ethnographic Resources Inventory GIS Project ......................................................................... 4 5. Geographical Distribution of Ethnographic Resources in the Vicinity of the Grand Canyon ... 6 Aboriginal Lands as Ethnographic Resources ............................................................................ 7 Ethnographic Resources Associated with the Proposed North Parcel Withdrawal Area ........... 9 Ethnographic Resources Associated with the Proposed East Parcel Withdrawal Area ........... 11 Ethnographic Resources Associated with the Proposed South Kaibab Withdrawal Area ....... 13 Ethnographic Resources within Grand Canyon National Park ................................................. 15 6. Tribal Distribution of Ethnographic Resources .......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ·Rme 155 Rme-155
    Energy 'l!BME-1~5< ·RME 155 RME-155 TID UC-51 PRELIMINARY RECONNAISSANCE FOR URANIUM IN ' -COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA, 1951 TO 1955 By Grand Junction Office, AEC and U. s. Geological Survey June 1970 (supersedes PB-172479) Division of Raw Materials U. s. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C. 20545 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C., 20402 - Price $1 Mesa State College Library Grand Junction, CO FILE ED-R-1130 PRELIMINARY RECONNAISSANCE REPORT E:>ru\MINED BY H. p. Horner and D. F. 0 Is en 2. STATE Arizona COUNTY Coconino DA.TE(S) EXAMINED ----'2;J./...ol-=.l/~.,..,5~3----- DISTRICT______ U~n~o~r~g~a~n~1~·z~e~d~----------- 1. SAMPLES Nl.JiffiER TYPE AND WIDTH RADIOACTIVITY NEAREST TOl-IN ___C~a~m~e~r~o~n~------------- 22 108 Grab from hot spots 300-400 cps PROPERTY Public Land - anomaly No. 18 22 109 LOCATION: SEC. ___ T. ___ R. 3. TYPE OF EXAMINATION: Surface, radiometric and geologic 4, DIRECTIONS TO DEPOSIT: See sketch map.* This map is diagrammatical only. Anomaly is about 3 miles north of prominent leva-capped mesa. Mileage begins at Buck Roger's Trading Post on highway 89, about 2 miles south of Cameron, Arizona. Roads are unimproved dirt tracks. Bearings from anomalous area: S.5° W. to intersection of lava cap and monocline ridge on skyline. S.l7° E. to east end lava cap. * See map for ED-R-1129. 5 , OWNER OR OPERATOR: ADDRESS: 6. MINE OR PROPERTY HISTORY, PRODUCTION AND WORKINGS: Discovered by AEC airborne reconnaissance methods; anomaly No.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Map of the Valle 30'X 60'Quadrangle, Coconino County
    Prepared in cooperation with the Water Resources Division of the National Park Service Geologic Map of the Valle 30‘ x 60‘ Quadrangle, Coconino County, Northern Arizona By George H. Billingsley, Tracey J. Felger, and Susan S. Priest Pamphlet to accompany Scientific Investigations Map 2895 View looking downstream into Cataract Canyon showing the Lower Permian strata of the Coconino Plateau (photograph by G.H. Billingsley, 2003). 2006 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey INTRODUCTION the Coconino Plateau along State Highway 64 northeast corner of the map area, to about 4,200 ft (,280 m) at the The geologic map of the Valle 30´ x 60´ quadrangle is bottom of Cataract Canyon. the result of a cooperative effort between the U.S. Geolog- Settlements within the map area include Tusayan ical Survey and the National Park Service to provide geo- and Valle, Arizona (fig. ). State Highway 64 and U.S. logic information for regional resource management and Highway 80 provide access to the Tusayan and Valle visitor information services for Grand Canyon National areas. Indian Route 8 is a paved highway in the north- Park, Arizona. The map area encompasses approximately west corner of the map area that is maintained by the ,960 mi2 within Coconino County, northern Arizona and Hualapai and Havasupai Indian Tribes and leads from is bounded by long 2° to 3° W. and lat 35°30´ to 36° State Route 66 about 7 mi ( km) east of Peach Springs, N. and lies within the southern Colorado Plateaus geo- Arizona to Hualapai Hilltop, a parking lot just north of logic province (herein Colorado Plateau).
    [Show full text]
  • Geomorphology of the Navajo Country W
    New Mexico Geological Society Downloaded from: http://nmgs.nmt.edu/publications/guidebooks/24 Geomorphology of the Navajo country W. Lee Stokes, 1973, pp. 61-67 in: Monument Valley (Arizona, Utah and New Mexico), James, H. L.; [ed.], New Mexico Geological Society 24th Annual Fall Field Conference Guidebook, 232 p. This is one of many related papers that were included in the 1973 NMGS Fall Field Conference Guidebook. Annual NMGS Fall Field Conference Guidebooks Every fall since 1950, the New Mexico Geological Society (NMGS) has held an annual Fall Field Conference that explores some region of New Mexico (or surrounding states). Always well attended, these conferences provide a guidebook to participants. Besides detailed road logs, the guidebooks contain many well written, edited, and peer-reviewed geoscience papers. These books have set the national standard for geologic guidebooks and are an essential geologic reference for anyone working in or around New Mexico. Free Downloads NMGS has decided to make peer-reviewed papers from our Fall Field Conference guidebooks available for free download. Non-members will have access to guidebook papers two years after publication. Members have access to all papers. This is in keeping with our mission of promoting interest, research, and cooperation regarding geology in New Mexico. However, guidebook sales represent a significant proportion of our operating budget. Therefore, only research papers are available for download. Road logs, mini-papers, maps, stratigraphic charts, and other selected content are available only in the printed guidebooks. Copyright Information Publications of the New Mexico Geological Society, printed and electronic, are protected by the copyright laws of the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Uranium Mining in the Grand Canyon
    Havasupai Make a Stand Uranium Mining in the Grand Canyon By BRENDA NORRELL Indigenous Havasupai people held a gathering to stop uranium mining in the Grand Canyon and protect ancestral Havasupai Territory, at the south rim of the Grand Canyon, in July of 2009. Indigenous peoples and activists came from the four directions, from Arizona Hopi land and from as far away as Hawaii, to participate with sacred songs and ceremonies. For four days, Havasupai elders gathered on sacred Red Butte and listened to the legacy of uranium mining on Indian lands. They heard directly from the victims of the trail of death and cancer left behind by uranium mining corporations that were never held responsible on Pueblo and Navajo lands in the Southwest United States. They also listened to the promise of solidarity from the hundreds who gathered here to stand with them: Navajos from Big Mountain, Hualapai, Hopi, Kaibab Paiute, Paiute, Aztecs, and other American Indians from throughout the Americas. The Havasupai Nation, with the Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity, and Grand Canyon Trust, sponsored the gathering to halt uranium mining on Red Butte, July 23-26, 2009. Supai elders gave testimony for official U.S. records in their Havasupai (Pai) language and in English. Supai traditional singers sang as a camp was established on this mesa where Toronto-based Denison Mines is threatening to reopen a uranium mine. Recent congressional legislation protects the Grand Canyon from new mining claims, but does not deter mining under existing claims held by Denison and others. When the price of uranium increased in recent years and new interest in nuclear power grew, mining claims exploded in Arizona, even in the pristine region of the Grand Canyon.
    [Show full text]