DOCSLIB.ORG

BIG COTTONWOOD CREEK Stream Survey Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
BIG COTTONWOOD CREEK Stream Survey Report BIG COTTONWOOD CREEK Stream Survey Report United States Department of Agriculture Wasatch-Cache National Forest Salt Lake Ranger District By Kate Schwager Biological Technician And Paul K. Cowley Forest Fisheries Program Leader Wasatch-Cache National Forest November 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………………………i List of Tables and Figures…….………………………………………………………………….ii Map of Big Cottonwood Creek Reach Breaks…….……………………………………….…….iii Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………….….1 Project Area……………………………………………………………………………………….1 Methods- General Information……………………………………………………………………2 Methods- Survey Details………………………………………………………………………….2 Results Reach 2……………………………………………………………………………4 Reach 3……………………………………………………………………………4 Reach 8……………………………………………………………………………5 Reach 9……………………………………………………………………………5 Discussion…………………………………………………………………………………….….12 Project Opportunities…………………………………………………………………………….15 Literature Cited………………..…………………………………………………………………16 Appendix…………………………………………………………………………………………17 i LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES TABLE PAGE 1. Count of habitat type, by reach, for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted in the summer of 1999………………………………..……. 6 2. Percent of habitat type, by reach, for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted 2in the summer of 1999…………………………………...… 6 3. Count of habitat area (m ), by reach, for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted2 in the summer of 1999………………………………. 6 4. Percent of habitat area (m ), by reach, for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted in the summer of 1999………………………………. 6 5. Total length (m) of habitat type, by reach, for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted in the summer of 1999………………..……. 6 6. Average length (m) of habitat type, by reach, for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted in the summer of 1999………………..……. 6 7. Average width (m) of habitat type, by reach, for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted in the summer of 1999…………………...… 6 8. Average depth (m) of habitat type, by reach, for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from3 surveys conducted in the summer of 1999…………………...… 6 9. Total volume (m ) of habitat type, by reach, for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from 3surveys conducted in the summer of 1999…………………...… 6 10. Average volume (m ) of habitat type, by reach, for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted2 in the summer of 1999…………………...… 6 11. Percent of habitat by area (m ), by reach, for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted2 in the summer of 1999…………………...… 6 12. Adjusted percent of habitat by area (m ), by reach, for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted in the summer of 1999………….. 6 13. Stream habitat bank conditions, by reach, for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted in the summer of 1999…………………...… 7 14. Woody debris counts and dominant riparian types, by reach, for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted in the summer of 1999….. 7 FIGURE PAGE 1. Reach 2 substrate composition for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted in the summer of 1999……………………………….....… 8 2. Reach 3 substrate composition for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted in the summer of 1999……………………………….....… 8 3. Reach 8 substrate composition for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted in the summer of 1999……………………………….....… 8 4. Reach 9 substrate composition for Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted in the summer of 1999……………………………….....… 8 5. Length frequency distribution of Rainbow Trout in Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted in the summer of 1999……….…………… 9 6. Length frequency distribution of Brook Trout in Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted in the summer of 1999……….…………… 10 7. Length frequency distribution of Brown Trout in Big Cottonwood Creek, Salt Lake County, Utah, from surveys conducted in the summer of 1999……….…………… 11 ii INTRODUCTION In the summer of 1999 a fish habitat inventory was conducted on Big Cottonwood Creek. These stream sections are located in Big Cottonwood Creek in Salt Lake County, Utah. Big Cottonwood Creek is a tributary of the Jordan River on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. The R1/R4 (Northern/Intermountain Regions) Fish and Fish Habitat Standard Inventory (Overton et al. 1997) was performed July-September 1999 by Kate Schwager and Tammy Smith. The purpose of the survey was to assess fish habitat and abundance in Big Cottonwood Creek. PROJECT AREA st Big Cottonwoodnd Creekrd is a 1 order stream at the headwaters of Big Cottonwood Canyon and becomes a 2 to 3 order stream as it flows through the canyon. The creek flows from around 9600 feet at the headwaters to around 4250 feet when it reaches the confluence with the Jordan River. The stream flows in a northwest direction as it leaves the headwaters near Brighton and then travels southwest about half way down canyon near Reynolds Gulch. At the base of the canyon the stream leaves the Wasatch-Cache National Forest and a portion of the flow enters the Big Cottonwood Treatment Plant to provide municipal drinking water. At this point the stream again flows northwest until the confluence with the Jordan River around the Taylorsville-Murray area. The source waters at the top of the canyon begin near the Brighton Ski Resort and flow from Silver Lake, Twin Lakes Reservoir, Lake Mary, Lake Martha, Lake Catherine, and Dog Lake. Additionally precipitation and many tributaries along the canyon contribute to Big Cottonwood Creek’s water volume. Brighton receives over 50 inches of precipitation annually, most in the form of snow. 400 inches of total annual snowfall are measured. The average water yield of Big Cottonwood Creek is 52,864 acre-feet, which is the highest water yield of any Wasatch Front canyon stream in Salt Lake County. This canyon is a protected watershed area under strict management controls since it is a major source of drinking water for Salt Lake City. No dogs or horses are allowed. The water quality provides an excellent source for drinking water. There were no exceedences of state drinking water standards in 1999. (Utah Department of Wildlife Resources as cited in: USDA Forest Service 1999) The Utah Department of Wildlife Resources has identified Big Cottonwood Creek as a Class II Fishery. This classifies the area as “a moderate to large productive stream with high aesthetic value where fishing and other recreational uses should be the primary consideration”. It was determined to be an especially important water body due to its capacity to provide a strong resident trout fishery close to a metropolitan area. (Utah Department of Wildlife Resources as cited in: USDA Forest Service 1999) Big Cottonwood Canyon and the surrounding Wasatch-Cache National Forest have a long history of resource use and development. As Salt Lake City grew through the mid 1800’s to early 1900’s tremendous demands were placed on natural resources through population growth, mining, railroading, and manufacturing. The canyons were stripped of timber, forage, and minerals by 1900. A serious impact was the timber industry’s sawmills. The first mills were 1 built in the lower portion of Big Cottonwood Canyon by 1850 and in the next decade the mills moved up the canyon. Today the canyon continues to be impacted through recreational demands and urban pressure. (Peterson et al. 1980) Outdoor activities in the canyon include fishing, seasonal hunting, camping, hiking, picnicking, sightseeing, biking, rock climbing, skiing, and snowboarding. The National Forest land in the canyon is intermixed with private land. The private land contains many homes, some of which are right alongside Big Cottonwood Creek. Two large ski resorts are also located in the canyon. All of these activities further influence this ecosystem. Big Cottonwood Creek from the Big Cottonwood Treatment Plant to Brighton can be divided into 17 reaches. From July 27, 1999 to September 15, 1999 a complete survey was performed on reaches 2, 3, 8, and 9, while a general survey was performed on reaches 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 11. Both reaches 10 and 12 were completed in the 1997 survey and will not be discussed in detail in this paper. METHODS General Information The 1999 Big Cottonwood Creek Fish Habitat Inventory was conducted using the R1/R4 (Northern/Intermountain Regions) Fish and Fish Habitat Standard Inventory Procedures Handbook. (Overton et al. 1997) This handbook was designed for fisheries biologists working for the Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture in order to assess the effects of National Forest management activities on fish and fish habitat. The standardized data collected through this procedure can help identify factors limiting fish populations and future extinction risks. There is a basic four-step process to this inventory procedure that includes: preinventory, inventory, postinventory, and data entry and reporting. In the preinventory stage, survey reaches are delineated based on flow changes from: tributaries, channel type, and substantial gradient changes. These reach breaks are then recorded on 7.5 minute topographic maps. Header forms are completed to give an overall description
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Big Cottonwood Canyon, Central Utah
    SEDIMENTOLOGY OF THE PRECAMBRIAN BIG COTTONWOOD FORMATION, BIG COTTONWOOD CANYON, CENTRAL UTAH by Mwjorie A. Chan Department oj Geology and Geophysics University oj Utah CONTRACT REPORT 93-1 FEBRUARY 1993 UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY a division of UTAH DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES o THE PUBLICATION OF THIS PAPER IS MADE POSSmLE WITH MINERAL LEASE FUNDS A primary mission of the UGS is to provide geologic information of Utah through publications. This Contract Report represents material that has not undergone policy, technical, or editorial review required for other UGS publications. It provides information that, in part, may be interpretive or incomplete and readers are to exercise some degree of caution in the use of the data. The UGS makes no warranty of the accuracy of the information contained in this publication. SEDIMENTOLOGY OF THE PRECAMBRIAN BIG COTTONWOOD FORMATION, BIG COTTONWOOD CANYON, CENTRAL UTAH Marjorie A. Chan Department of Geology & Geophysics University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT 84112-1183 (801) 581-6553 CONTENTS Abstract ................................................. 2 Introduction .............................................. 2 Geologic Setting ........................................... 3 Locality ................................................. 3 Previous Work ............................................ 4 Tides ................................................... 4 Facies .................................................. 5 Quartzites ............................................ 5 Shales ...................
    [Show full text]
  • Reconnaissance of Toxic Substances in the Jordan River, Salt Lake County, Utah
    RECONNAISSANCE OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES IN THE JORDAN RIVER, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH by KendalI R. Thompson U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 84-4155 Prepared In cooperation with the SALT LAKE COUNTY DIVISION OF FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY Salt Lake City, Utah 1984 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WILLIAM P. CLARK, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional nformation Copies of the report can write to: be purchased from: District Chief Open-File Services Section U.S. Geological Survey Western Distribution Branch 1016 Administration Building U.S. Geological Survey 1745 West 1700 South Box 25425, Federal Center Salt Lake City, Utah 84014 Lakewood, Colorado 80225 Telephone [(303) 234-5888] CONTENTS Page Abstract ................................................................ 1 Introduction ............................................................ 2 Hydrologic setting ................................................. 2 Previous studies ................................................... 4 Sampling sites ..................................................... 5 Methods ............................................................ 5 State stream-use classes and associated standards for toxic substances ................................................. 6 Toxic substances ........................................................ 6 General discussion of toxic substances that exceeded State standards in the Jordan River study area ................... 6 Distribution of toxic substances in
    [Show full text]
  • Salt Lake County Integrated Watershed Plan (2015)
    2015 Salt Lake County Integrated Watershed Plan Update to the 2009 Salt Lake Countywide Water Quality Stewardship Plan This page is intentionally blank. 2015 Salt Lake County Integrated Watershed Plan 2015 Salt Lake County Integrated Watershed Plan Update to the 2009 Salt Lake Countywide Water Quality Stewardship Plan Published September 2016 Prepared By: Salt Lake County Watershed Planning & Restoration 2001 South State Street, Suite N3-120 Salt Lake City, UT 84190 HDR Engineering, Inc. 2825 East Cottonwood Parkway, Suite 200 Salt Lake City, UT 84121 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Water quality and watershed issues are complex, multi-faceted, and at times contradictory. Establishing and maintaining effective stewardship requires cooperation between local municipal governments, stakeholder groups, and various management and regulatory agencies. It is only with continued cooperation that we will collectively improve water quality and watershed health in Salt Lake County. Our thanks go to the numerous individuals and organizations that supported and contributed to the development of this plan as critical thinkers, technical experts, and reviewers. In particular, we thank Mayor Ben McAdams and Salt Lake County Council for their continued support of environmental stewardship and integrated watershed planning. Salt Lake County Mayor Ben McAdams Administration, Flood Control Engineering, Township Services, Parks and Recreation, Salt Lake County Health Department Salt Lake County Council Jim Bradley, Arlyn Bradshaw, Max Burdick, Steve DeBry, Sam Granato, Michael
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Economics: a Case Study for the Big Cottonwood Canyon Watershed Robert Hull Pomona College
    Claremont Colleges Scholarship @ Claremont Pomona Senior Theses Pomona Student Scholarship 2013 Environmental Economics: A Case Study for the Big Cottonwood Canyon Watershed Robert Hull Pomona College Recommended Citation Hull, Robert, "Environmental Economics: A Case Study for the Big Cottonwood Canyon Watershed" (2013). Pomona Senior Theses. Paper 73. http://scholarship.claremont.edu/pomona_theses/73 This Open Access Senior Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Pomona Student Scholarship at Scholarship @ Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pomona Senior Theses by an authorized administrator of Scholarship @ Claremont. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Environmental Economics: A Case Study for the Big Cottonwood Canyon Watershed Robert Hull In partial fulfillment of a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Environmental Analysis, 2012-13 academic year, Pomona College, Claremont, California Readers: Bowman Cutter Char Miller Acknowledgements First, I would like to thank my readers, Bowman Cutter and Char Miller for all of the wonderful help and insight they have provided throughout this entire process. From the beginning, their comments and ideas have been an instrumental part in the successful completion of this thesis. I would also like to thank Pomona College and the Career Development Office for the summer internship funding they offered. I would like to thank Laura Briefer, Tammy Wambeam, and the Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities for the summer internship opportunity. Without their support and help with GIS, this thesis would not have been completed. Finally, I would like to thank my parents, Carol Clawson and Steve Hull. Their overall support has been amazing, and they have been very helpful with the editing process and have guided me through roadblocks along the way.
    [Show full text]
  • Jordan River Total Maximum Daily Load Water Quality Study - Phase 1
    Jordan River Total Maximum Daily Load Water Quality Study - Phase 1 Prepared for: Utah Department of Environmental Quality Division of Water Quality 195 North 1950 West Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 Carl Adams- Project Supervisor Hilary Arens- Project Manager Prepared by: Cirrus Ecological Solutions, LC 965 South 100 West, Suite 200 Logan, Utah 84321 Stantec Consulting Inc. 3995 South 700 East, Suite 300 Salt Lake City, Utah 84107 EPA APPROVAL DATE JUNE 5, 2013 i Jordan River TMDL Jordan River – 1 (UT16020204-001) Waterbody ID Jordan River – 2 (UT16020204-002) Jordan River – 3 (UT16020204-003) Parameter of Concern Dissolved Oxygen Pollutant of Concern Total Organic Matter Class 3B Protected for warm water species of game fish and aquatic life, including the necessary Impaired Beneficial Use aquatic organisms in their food chain. Loading Assessment Current Load 2,225,523 kg/yr Total Organic Matter Loading Capacity 1,373,630 kg/yr or 3,763 kg/day Total Organic Matter (38% reduction) Load capacity based on OM concentrations that result in DO model endpoint of 5.5 mg/L, Margin of Safety including 1.0 mg/L implicit MOS added to the instantaneous DO water quality standard of 4.5 mg/L. Bulk Load Allocation 684,586 kg/yr Total Organic Matter (35% reduction) Bulk Waste Load 689,044 kg/yr Total Organic Matter (41% reduction) Allocation Defined Total OM load to lower Jordan River (kg/yr) <= 1,373,630 kg/yr Targets/Endpoints Dissolved Oxygen => 4.5 mg/L Nonpoint Pollutant Utah Lake, Tributaries, Diffuse Runoff, Irrigation Return Flow, Groundwater Sources
    [Show full text]
  • Ground Water in Utah's Densely Populated Wasatch Front Area the Challenge and the Choices
    Ground Water in Utah's Densely Populated Wasatch Front Area the Challenge and the Choices United States Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2232 Ground Water in Utah's Densely Populated Wasatch Front Area the Challenge and the Choices By DON PRICE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 2232 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL MODEL, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON: 1985 For sale by the Branch of Distribution U.S. Geological Survey 604 South Pickett Street Alexandria, VA 22304 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Price, Don, 1929- Ground water in Utah's densely populated Wasatch Front area. (U.S. Geological Survey water-supply paper ; 2232) viii, 71 p. Bibliography: p. 70-71 Supt. of Docs. No.: I 19.13:2232 1. Water, Underground Utah. 2. Water, Underground Wasatch Range (Utah and Idaho) I. Title. II. Series. GB1025.U8P74 1985 553.7'9'097922 83-600281 PREFACE TIME WAS Time was when just the Red Man roamed this lonely land, Hunted its snowcapped mountains, its sun-baked desert sand; Time was when the White Man entered upon the scene, Tilled the fertile soil, turned the valleys green. Yes, he settled this lonely region, with the precious water he found In the sparkling mountain streams and hidden in the ground; He built his homes and cities; and temples toward the sun; But without the precious water, his work might not be done. .**- ste'iA CONTENTS Page Preface ..................................................... Ill Abstract ................................................... 1 Significance Ground water in perspective ................................ 1 The Wasatch Front area Utah's urban corridor ....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cottonwood Canyons Scenic Byways Corridor Management Plan Cottonwood Canyons Corridor Management Plan 2008
    Little Cottonwood Canyon Big Cottonwood Canyon Scenic Byway Scenic Byway Cottonwood Canyons Scenic Byways Corridor Management Plan Cottonwood Canyons Corridor Management Plan 2008 Project Team: Carol Majeske, US Forest Service Claire Runge, Town of Alta Barbara Cameron, Big Cottonwood Canyon Community Council Laura McIndoe Briefer, Salt Lake City Public Utilities Ritchie Taylor, Utah Department of Transportation Peter Jager, Utah Department of Transportation Prepared for: Cottonwood Canyons Scenic Byways Committee Prepared by: Fehr & Peers 2180 South 1300 East Salt Lake City, Utah 84106 p 801.463.7600 MGB+A 145 West 200 South Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 p 801.364.9696 HW Lochner 310 East 4500 South Salt Lake City, Utah 84107 p 801.262.8700 ADOPTED DECEMBER 2008 Page 2 Cottonwood Canyons Corridor Management Plan Contents 1 Introduction 5 2 Travel Conditions along the Byways 9 3 Intrinsic Qualities 19 4 Byway Issues 27 5 Vision 31 6 Goals and Strategies 33 7 Byway Specific Plans 37 8 Implementation 65 Cottonwood Canyons Interpretive Plan Page 3 Cottonwood Canyons Corridor Management Plan Page 3 x Page 4 Cottonwood Canyons Corridor Management Plan Chapter 1 : Introduction A Corridor Management Plan is a written plan developed by the communities and stakeholders in a byway area that outlines how to define and enhance the byway’s intrinsic qualities and character. Utah is a state of contrast, where red rock gorges meet snow capped peaks. Among the most scenic and visited locations in the state, the Wasatch Mountains in northern Utah are a collection of special places that draw residents and visitors in quantity.
    [Show full text]
  • The Historical Development of Wasatch Trails in Salt Lake County
    Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 1975 The Historical Development of Wasatch Trails in Salt Lake County Clyde Brian Hardy Brigham Young University - Provo Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons, and the Mormon Studies Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Hardy, Clyde Brian, "The Historical Development of Wasatch Trails in Salt Lake County" (1975). Theses and Dissertations. 4759. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/4759 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. 41 JOE THE historical development OF WASATCH TRAILS IN sadtSALTsalt LAKE COUNTY A thesis presented to the department of recreation education brigham young university in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree master of arts by clyde brian hardy august 1975 this thesis by clyde brian hardy isis accepted in its present form by the department of recreation education of brigham younsyoung uni- versity as satisfysatisfyinging1 hettheehe thesis requirement for the degreedeg ree of master of arts ON Y 4 cayciy Yeenjajjinj a J nrf fdehoyoscommitF dehoyos committeetee oatcu r n catC 1 00 CX 571771 gayjytay tiariattaITA y atreermerftr C atnmiiyileeceeee Mbembmembeabermbere r r 1 4 T 17 william J hafiiafewiafeew department chiirmanchchoirmanChi
    [Show full text]
  • Valleys of Utah Lake and Jordan River, Utah
    Water-Supply and Irrigation Paper No. 157 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES D. WALCOTT, DlKKCTOK UNDERGROUND WATER IN THE VALLEYS OF UTAH LAKE AND JORDAN RIVER, UTAH BY G. B. RICHARDSON WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1906 CONTENTS. Page. Introduction.......................... 5 Topography and drainage.............. 5 Geology.............................. 7 Literature........................ Descriptive geology of the highlands Late geologic history.............. 11 Tertiary..................... 11 Quaternary.................... 11 Climate.............................. 13 Precipitation.. 14 Temperature.. 15 Wind velocity. 16 Humidity..... 16 Evaporation-.. 17 Summary..... 17 Hydrography...... 18 Streams tributary to Utah Lake and Jorc an River. 18 Utah Lake.................... 23 Jordan River.................. 24 Great Salt Lake................ 25 Underground water.................. 27 General conditions............. 27 Source.................... 27 Distribution............... 29 Quality................... 30 Recovery................. 35 Suggestions................. 38 Occurrence.................... 38 West of Jordan .River........ 38 Divisions of area....... 38 Upland area............ 39 Lowland area.......... 41 East of Jordan River........ 43 Salt Lake City......... 43 South of Salt Lake City. 45 Utah Lake Valley........... 48 Lehi and vicinity. 48 American Fork, Pleasant Grove, and vicinity. 49 Provo and vicinity....... i- 51 Springville and vicinity... 52 Spanish Fork, Payson, and vicinity.
    [Show full text]
  • Selected Aquatic Biological Investigations in the Great Salt Lake Basins, 1875-1998, National Water-Quality Assessment Program
    SELECTED AQUATIC BIOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS IN THE GREAT SALT LAKE BASINS, 1875-1998, NATIONAL WATER-QUALITY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM By Elise M. Giddings and Doyle Stephens U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4132 National Water-Quality Assessment Program Salt Lake City, Utah 1999 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director FOREWORD The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is to assess the quantity and quality of the earth resources of the Nation and to provide information that will assist resource managers and policymakers at Federal, State, and local levels in making sound decisions. Assessment of water-quality conditions and trends is an important part of this overall mission. One of the greatest challenges faced by water-resources scientists is acquiring reliable information that will guide the use and protection of the Nation’s water resources. That challenge is being addressed by Federal, State, interstate, and local water-resource agencies and by many academic institutions. These organizations are collecting water- quality data for a host of purposes that include: compliance with permits and water-supply standards; development of remediation plans for specific contamination problems; operational decisions on industrial, wastewater, or water- supply facilities; and research on factors that affect water quality. An additional need for water-quality information is to provide a basis on which regional- and national-level policy decisions can be based. Wise decisions must be based on sound information. As a society, we need to know whether certain types of water-quality problems are isolated or ubiquitous, whether there are significant differences in conditions among regions, whether the conditions are changing over time, and why these conditions change from place to place and over time.
    [Show full text]
  • Parks, Trails, & Open Space Master Plan
    Cottonwood Heights PARKS, TRAILS, & OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN Acknowledgements Elected Officials Planning Team • Michael J. Peterson, Mayor • Tim Tingey, City Manager • Douglas Peterson, Council Member, District 1 • Mike Johnson, Community and Economic • Scott Bracken, Council Member, District 2 Development Director • Tali Bruce, Council Member, District 3 • Matthew Taylor, Senior Planner • Christine Mikell, Council Member, District 4 • Andrew Hulka, Senior Planner • Samantha DeSeelhorst, Associate Planner & Planning Commission Sustainability Analyst • Gabrielle Regenhardt, Assistant Planner • Christine Coutts, Chair • Melissa Blue, GIS Specialist • Jesse Allen, Vice-Chair • Ben Wheeler, Planning Intern • Craig Bevan • Michael Makris, Planning Intern • Jessica Chappell • Graig Griffin • Dan Mills • Doug Rhodes • Sue Ryser • Bob Wilde Parks, Trails, and Open Space Committee • Jennifer Follstad Shah, Chair • Sarah Ricketts, Vice-Chair • Ronna Cohen • Erin Davis • Matthew Dominesey • Melissa Fields • Greg Hilbig • Ben Hill • Bruce Jorgensen • Roger Kehr • Dave McFerren • Kristy Morrison • Greg Reid Table of Contents Acknowledgements ii Elected Officials �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ii Planning Commission ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ii Parks, Trails, and Open Space Committee �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ii
    [Show full text]
  • Impossible Heights: from Mining to Sport in the Mountain West, 1849 to 1936 Jason Strykowski
    University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository History ETDs Electronic Theses and Dissertations 9-1-2015 Impossible Heights: From Mining to Sport in the Mountain West, 1849 to 1936 Jason Strykowski Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/hist_etds Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Strykowski, Jason. "Impossible Heights: From Mining to Sport in the Mountain West, 1849 to 1936." (2015). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/hist_etds/74 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Electronic Theses and Dissertations at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in History ETDs by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Jason Strykowski Candidate History Department This dissertation is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication: Approved by the Dissertation Committee: Paul Andrew Hutton, Chairperson Margaret Connell-Szasz Virginia Scharff Andrew Kirk - UNLV i IMPOSSIBLE HEIGHTS: FROM MINING TO SPORT IN THE MOUNTAIN WEST, 1849 TO 1936 By Jason Andrew Strykowski DISSERTATION Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy History University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico July, 2015 ii DEDICATION For Fran, David and Jill – my guides through life. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Finding encouragement and inspiration is never easy. Professor Paul Andrew Hutton provided both in spades during my time at the University of New Mexico. None of this would have been possible without his mentorship. Thanks also to my committee members Professors Andrew Kirk, Margaret Connell-Szasz and Virginia Scharff who gave their wisdom and time so generously.
    [Show full text]