GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
Grand County Council Chambers 125 East Center Street, Moab, Utah
AGENDA Tuesday, March 18, 2014
4:00 p.m. Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Approval of Minutes (Diana Carroll, Clerk/Auditor) A. February 21, 2014 (County Council Special Meeting: Workshop on Policies and Procedures of the Governing Body), Postponed from March 4, 2014 B. March 4, 2014 (County Council Meeting) C. March 14, 2014 (County Council Special Meeting: Capital Facilities Workshop) Ratification of Payment of Bills Elected Official Reports Council Administrator Report Department Head Reports D. 2013 Annual Review of Moab Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project (Lee Shenton, Moab UMTRA Liaison) Agency Reports E. 2013 Honey Bee Inspection Report (Jerry Shue, Grand County Honey Bee Inspector) Citizens to Be Heard Presentations F. Introduction of John Foster, Director, Museum of Moab, Postponed from March 4, 2014 (Dave Vaughn and Don Montoya, President, Museum of Moab Board) G. Presentation of 2014 Utah Weed Control Association Biological Award to Wright Robinson (Tim Higgs, Grand County Weed Supervisor and Council Member Paxman) H. Presentation of 2014 Nash Wash Wildlife Management Area Habitat Management Plan (Makeda Hanson, Impact Analysis Biologist, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources) I. Presentation on Community Letters Regarding Congressman Bishop Public Lands Initiative (Susan Roche, Deb Walter, Bob O’Brian and Bill Rau, Citizens) Discussion Items J. Discussion on Funding of Proposed Full Time Lead Technician Position for the Weed Department (Ruth Dillon, Council Administrator, Orlinda Robertson, Human Resources Director, and Tim Higgs, Weed Supervisor) K. Calendar Items and Public Notices (KaLeigh Welch, Council Office Coordinator) General Business- Action Items- Discussion and Consideration of: L. Approving Proposed Letter of Support for Forest Legacy Funding through Forestry, Fire and State Lands for a Conservation Easement in Order to Preserve approximately 541 Acres on the East Slope of the La Sal Mountains (Sue Bellagamba, Canyonlands Regional Director of The Nature Conservancy, and Glenna Thomas, Citizen and Property Owner) M. Approve Contract Award for the Purchase of a Polaris Ranger 6x6 UTV and Accessories for the Sand Flats Recreation Area from Morgan Valley Polaris of Morgan, Utah, State Contractor (Andrea Brand, SFRA Program Manager)
3/14/14 Page 1 of 2 N. Approving Proposed Letter to Uintah County Regarding Interest in Participating in Studies to Address Feasibility of an Enhanced Transportation Corridor in Sego Canyon, and Potentially Crossing SITLA lands to the Existing Road Network in Southern Uintah County (Chairman Jackson)
Consent Agenda- Action Items O. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between KUBL/KKAT and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $13,005.00 P. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between KOSI and KALC and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $16,675.00 Q. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between 103.5 the Arrow and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $14,040.00 R. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between the Zone Sports Network and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $9,000.00 S. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between KZHT and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $14,500.00 T. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between KSL and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $9,080.00 U. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between KXRK and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $13,563.00 V. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between KBCO and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $16,000.00 W. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between KWOF and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $16,000.00 X. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between 102.3 ESPN and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $6,000.00 Y. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Letter Sent to Adam Trupp, General Counsel, Utah Association of Counties for Drafting of Amendments to State Senate Bill 176 on Local Funding of Rural Health Care (Chairman Jackson) Z. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Location Agreement for Off the Fence to Film at Canyonlands Field AA. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Building Permit Application for Additional Remodel at Canyonlands Field BB. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on FY 2014 Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness Planning Grant Application on behalf of the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) Public Hearings- Possible Action Items (none) General Council Reports and Future Considerations Closed Session(s) (if necessary) Adjourn
At the Grand County Council meetings/hearings any citizen, property owner, or public official may be heard on any agenda subject. The number of persons heard and the time allowed each may be limited at the sole discretion of the Chair. On matters set for public hearings there is a three-minute time limit per person to allow maximum public participation. All persons, upon being recognized by the Chair, shall advance to the podium, state their full name and address, whom they represent, and their subject matter. No person shall interrupt legislative proceedings.
Requests for inclusion on an agenda and supporting documentation must be received by 5:00 PM on the Wednesday prior to a regular Council Meeting and forty-eight (48) hours prior to any Special Council Meeting. Information relative to these meetings/hearings may be obtained at the Grand County Council’s Office, 125 East Center Street, Moab, Utah; (435) 259-1346. Those with special needs requests wishing to attend County Council meetings are encouraged to contact the County two (2) business days in advance of these events. Specific accommodations necessary to allow participation of disabled persons will be provided to the maximum extent possible. Requests, or any questions or comments can be communicated to: (435) 259-1346. T.D.D. (Telecommunication Device for the Deaf) calls can be answered at: (435) 259-1346.
3/14/14 Page 2 of 2
AGENDA SUMMARY GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 18, 2014 Agenda Item: D
TITLE: 2013 Annual Review of Moab Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project
FISCAL IMPACT: None
PRESENTER(S): Lee Shenton, Moab UMTRA Liaison
BACKGROUND: Prepared By: See presentation.
KaLeigh Welch, Council Office Coordinator ATTACHMENT(S): (435) 2591346 PowerPoint slide show
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Attorney Review:
N/A
Mill Site, Disposal Cell, Moab Crescent Junction
Progress Environmental Impact Funding What’s Next Liaison Activities Progress To Date
• 41% of tailings moved in first 5 years • Disposal cell functioning as planned • 205 million gal groundwater extracted – Intercepted 4,000 pounds uranium – Intercepted 802,000 pounds ammonia • 13 of 15 Vicinity Properties remediated • 2 million hours worked without Lost Time incident (since October, 2009)
Environmental
Impact 2013
• Offsite air monitoring OK 100 100 mrem/yr
– Highest gamma 35% of allowable Allowable impact Allowable
impact
– Highest radon 47% of allowable impact
– Highest radioparticulates 20% of
allowable impact 116 mrem/yr 116
• River monitoring OK gamma Highest 81 mrem/yr 81
– Well fields effectively protecting river Background Moab – No ammonia exceedances downriver Funding
• FY13 funding $31 million • FY14 funding $38 million – No curtailments for FY14 – Extra FY14 $$$ likely needed for backlog • FY15 $35.8 million proposed What’s Next
• Targeting 900,000 tons for FY14 • Might start removing mill debris – Working on rail transport methods – Aiming to remove 100,000 tons by FY16 • Start remediation of final two VPs – Complete by next year – Final notice 1-2 years before Project ends Liaison 2013 Activities
• Monitored sites: Moab 47x, CJ 10x • Evaluated environmental impacts • Outreach via print, radio, lecture • Handled or routed public inquiries • Provided online status updates • Staff for Steering Committee and Site Futures Committee
AGENDA SUMMARY GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 18, 2014 Agenda Item: E
TITLE: 2013 Honey Bee Inspection Report
FISCAL IMPACT: None
PRESENTER(S): Jerry Shue, County Bee Inspector
Prepared By: BACKGROUND: At the end of 2013 there were thirty beekeepers (23 in Spanish Valley and Jerry Shue 7 in Castle Valley), with 97 colonies, in Grand County, virtually the same as Grand County Honey Bee Inspector in 2012. 867 Rainbow Drive Moab, UT 84532 All but two beekeepers were visited and inspected, some multiple times. 435-260-8581 The remaining two requested to wait until this spring.
No American Foul Brood was found in Spanish or Castle Valley, although two colonies in the Elgin district of Green River were found to be infected FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: and were destroyed. Attorney Review: Colonies in the county are typical of those throughout the country, with evidence of Varroa mites, viruses, and poor queens, although the local beekeeping community as a whole is engaged in queen and colony rearing, N/A and sharing local survivor stock. We have several strains of bees that have survived without antibiotics or treatments for two or more years, which is unusual these days.
A revised map of spring colony locations will be forwarded to Bob Phillips,
of the mosquito abatement district and Tim Higgs, of the weed department, who have both expressed a willingness to communicate and work with beekeepers for the health of the bees.
Items of note:
Aside from some colonies brought in to pollinate the melon fields of Green River, fifty miles to the north, Grand County does not have any commercial/migratory beekeeping, or the constant influx of disease and stressed, medicated bees that accompany it. Because of this we have the opportunity to propagate colonies from our best surviving stock and develop locally adapted sustainable bees, a practice that is proving, all around the country, to be the best strategy for small beekeepers to keep their bees alive.
Along with that, I am finding that the number of wild honey bee colonies throughout Grand and San Juan counties, and their isolation, is quite exceptional in the US. Most wild (“feral”) colonies in the US died out when the Varroa mite arrived in the 1980’s. I have been sending bee samples to researchers at Yale and the Universities of Delaware and Washington, who are looking at everything from genome diversity to gut microflora to antibiotic resistance genes. Finding, trapping and propagating some of these feral bees may contribute to the sustainability of our local domestic bees.
And on a community note, interest in pollinator protection, whether for improving garden and orchard yields or just for the sake of a healthy ecosystem, has risen to the point where several interest groups, including USU, Moab City, Grand Conservation District, Natural Resources Conservation District, Community Rebuilds and the Youth Garden Project, are collaborating on plans for a series of community pollinator demonstration gardens. Several of these should become established this summer.
AGENDA SUMMARY GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 18, 2014 Agenda Item: G
TITLE: Presentation of 2014 Utah Weed Control Association Biological Award to Wright Robinson
FISCAL IMPACT: None
PRESENTER(S): Tim Higgs, Grand County Weed Supervisor and Council Member Paxman
BACKGROUND: Prepared By: I nominated Wright Robinson for the Utah Weed Control Association Biological Award for 2014. He was the one they choose to give it to. I Tim Higgs, Grand County Weed picked it up for him at our annual meeting last month. He was not able to Supervisor attend because he was presenting at another meeting about the mortality of 435-259-1369 the tamarisk from the tamarisk beetle the same day in Grand Junction, twhiggs@grandcountyu Colorado. He has given at least 17 presentations about the beetles over the tah.net last 7 years.
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Attorney Review:
n/a
AGENDA SUMMARY GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 18, 2014 Agenda Item: H Nash Wash Wildlife Management Area Habitat Management Plan TITLE:
FISCAL IMPACT: None
PRESENTER(S): Makeda Hanson, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
RECOMMENDATION: Prepared By: Approve or ratify a letter of concurrence for the Nash Wash Habitat
Makeda Hanson, Habitat Management Plan for the Nash Wash wildlife management area in Grand Biologist County managed by the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Utah Division of Wildlife Resources BACKGROUND: 319 N. Carbonville Road Suite A The habitat management plan describes the history of the property, the 435-630-0805 existing condition of the property, and the potential tools to be used for [email protected] future property management.
ATTACHMENT(S): Nash Wash Habitat Management Plan FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Attorney Review:
Nash Wash Wildlife Management Area
Habitat Management Plan
2014
1
NASH WASH W ILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREA HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Property Description
Location
The Nash Wash Wildlife Management Area (WMA) is located at the foot of the Book Cliffs and North of Cisco, Utah and is centered within the old Cunningham Ranch in Nash Wash (see Map 1, Nash Wash WMA, Location). Interstate 70 runs in an east/west direction and there is a freeway exit on both the west and east side of Cisco. These exits are connected by state road 128, which runs parallel to the freeway on the south side. A county road extends from State Road 128 north under I-70 towards the ranch headquarters. Elevations range from 5,000 to 6,000 feet. The WMA consists of 1,178.75 acres.
The property is located in:
T 20 S, R 21 E Salt Lake Base and Meridian Section 15 N2SW4, W2SE4 Section 16 ALL (acquired spring 2013) Section 17 N2NE4 Section 23 E2NE4 Section 24 SW4NW4, NW4SW4, SE4SW4 Section 25 W2NE4, NE4NW4 Less the following tract in Secs 24 and 25: Beg at the N ¼ cor. of said Sec. 25 and running th. E 687.7 ft.; th S. 43 deg. 10’ E. 826.8 ft.; th. S. 348.2 ft. to the pt. of beg., containing 15 acres more or less.
Encumbrances
Minerals
The Special Warranty Deed (see Appendix A) states that all mineral interests were conveyed from the Nature Conservancy to the Division of Wildlife Resources in 1991 subject to the reservations and limitations set forth in Exhibit B attached in the Special Warranty Deed. Such reservations and limitations include an undivided 75 percent mineral interest, leaving only 25 percent of the actual mineral rights being transferred to DWR ownership.
Water Rights
Water user claim number 01-7, located on the Nash Wash WMA, was conveyed and assigned to 2 the Division of Wildlife Resources in the Special Warranty Deed. All other water use claims mentioned in the deed are part of the Book Cliffs-Little Creek WMA. Water right 01-7 has a priority date of December 26, 1912 and calls for one second-foot of water out on Nash Wash from April 1 to November 1.
Easements
Numerous Easements and Rights-of-Way were listed as exceptions in Exhibit C of the Special Warranty Deed, for a complete list, please see Appendix A. Several are summarized as follows:
A Right of Way Agreement dated August 7, 1972 between the Cunningham’s and Grand Gas Corp., granting the right to construct, operate, and maintain a pipeline across Parcel 3. It was later assigned to Nicor Exploration Co.
A Surface Damage and Easement Agreement dated January 27, 1978 between Cunningham Ranches, Inc., and the Anschutz Corp. granting the right to use an existing road crossing Parcel 3, and to construct a new road and appurtenant facilities across the N2 of Sec. 17, T 20 S., R 21 E in Parcel 4.
There are three Rights of Way Easements dated August 13, 1978 by Cunningham Ranches in favor of Northwest Pipeline Corporation granting the right to select the route for and to construct, operate, and maintain a pipeline and related facilities, over, under, and through the following three areas; W2NE4 of Sec. 23, T 20 S., R 21 E. in Parcel 3.; NE4NE4 of Sec. 23, T 20 S., R 21 E., in Parcel 3; SE4NE4 Sec. 23, T 20 S., R 21 E., in Parcel 3. Each easement was 60 feet in width.
A Right of Way Easement dated November 19, 1981 executed by Cunningham Cattle Co. in favor of Northwest Pipeline Corp., granting a right of way and easement to locate, construct, operate, and maintain a pipeline with appurtenances thereto, over land and up conditions therein set forth.
In addition, there is a reservation of an easement (Special Warranty Deed, Exhibit B) for the purpose of ingress and egress for the Cunningham family. The reservation begins as follows:
“A reservation of an easement for the purpose of ingress and egress in favor of William W. Cunningham, Joyce A. Cunningham, Gregory Cunningham, Caroline Litfin, and Leslie Heikes for the terms of their respective individual lives, over, and on and across the property (excluding any buildings and fixtures) for the purpose of recreational enjoyment of the property such as visiting, camping, picnicking, or horseback riding….”
Rights- of -Way
Right of Way UTU-65511 allows a surface laid pipeline across BLM lands from EPS resources #15-2 to the ranch facilities (T20 R21 S 15 S2NW4). The ROW is 10 feet wide by 1,400 feet
3 long, containing 0.32 acres.
Grazing
State and federal grazing permits or leases from Bureau of Land Management and State of Utah, Division of State Lands and Forestry as purchased by The Nature Conservancy from the Cunningham Cattle Company were transferred to the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources in the sale (Appendix B)
Livestock grazing does not occur on the WMA in order to protect habitat for wintering big game.
Other Leases and Agreements
The dwelling and structures at the Nash Wash WMA are leased in exchange for facility maintenance and farm work. The DWR maintains the use of the bunk house and double-wide trailer. The lease is valid for a term of one, three, or five years.
Land Acquisition History
Acquisition Dates
An installment land purchase contract was entered between the UDWR and The Nature Conservancy on April 15, 1991 to purchase the Nash Wash WMA and Book Cliffs-Little Creek WMA (Appendix B). The contract originally stated that the purchase would be through two installments. The title insurance for the first transaction was made effective on April 30, 1991 (Appendix C). In June 1993, an amendment to the Land Contract modified the purchase schedule to allow the DWR to purchase the property in four separate transactions (Appendix D). The Nash Wash WMA property was included in the first transaction.
Previous Owners
The Utah Department of Natural Resources purchased the property from The Nature Conservancy. Prior property owners were the Cunningham Cattle Company, including William (Bill) and Joyce Cunningham and their children.
Mechanism of Purchase
Funding for acquiring this property came from Federal Aid Grant W-148-L, Bookcliffs Wildlife Habitat Acquisition (Appendix E). The acquisition included Fee Title Land along with BLM and SITLA AUMs on the Cunningham, Graham, and Cripple Cowboy ranches. Federal aid accounted for 75 percent of the funding. The remaining funds came from UDWR restricted match, Big Game Enhancement Fund, Desert Bighorn Sheep Project Fund, RMEF cash donation, and Utah Wildlife Federation donation.
4
Historic Uses of the WMA
Ranching
Bill and Joyce Cunningham provided an oral history of the Cunningham Ranch on August 3, 1994. They stated that Nash Canyon got its name from a man named Mr. Nash, a sheepherder or surveyor, who first settled the area in the early 1880’s. For the next decade people moved in and out of the area fairly quickly. A cattleman named Bill Land came to the area for a few years and built the rock house in Nash Canyon. The rock house was later completed in the late 1880’s by Harry Bogert, a buffalo hunter. It was in 1912 that the Cisco Ranch was homesteaded by a man named Oscar Turner, Bill Cunningham’s great uncle. The present ranch house is one that was built at the time of the homestead. The other original home burnt down in 1986. The original homestead was 160 acres and included alfalfa fields, shade trees, and fruit trees.
The ranch was historically used for cattle grazing. Challenges to local ranchers during early settlement times included interactions between livestock and wolves, as well as hard winters. Other conflicts arose between cattlemen and sheepmen. Before 1934, grazing allotments were nonexistent and stockgrowers roamed anywhere at will, which led to rampant overgrazing. In addition, there was competition for vegetative resources from feral horses that roamed the area. Bill Cunningham’s parents purchased the ranch in 1927. They continued to run cattle, and by 1970, after Bill took over the ranch, enough grazing allotments had been purchased to get a total pasture size of 250,000 acres on which he was allowed to run 900-1,000 cow/calf pairs. The Cunningham’s continued the cattle operation until the property was sold to The Nature Conservancy in 1991.
In addition to running cattle, the Cunningham’s lived a self-sufficient life by planting fruit and nut trees, growing a vegetable garden, planting berries, and raising milk cows, sheep, chickens, and pigs. All irrigation for gardening on the ranch was done through a gravity flow system until 1953 when a pressure pump was installed. Water for the fields was diverted from the Nash Creek stream bed and transported by ditch to the fields, until a pipe and concrete diversion was constructed in the 1980’s.
Wildlife
Wolves and bears were often considered a major threat to stockgrower’s until the mid-1920’s. During that period there was a concentrated effort to eradicate predators. Bounties were offered for coyotes and lions, and bears were chased, trapped, and shot. Also during that time, increased forage for deer from hay production and transition of vegetation on the range resulted in an increase of deer, which had been a novelty during the 1920’s. By the 1950’s, the Cunningham’s gave up hay production because they were unable to compete with the large numbers of deer. They did not resume hay production after deer numbers started to decline to a sustainable number in the mid 1980’s. In the early 1960’s, elk were first observed on the mountains near Nash Wash and they have steadily been increasing since.
5
Purpose of UDWR Ownership
Federal Aid Grant
The Cunningham Ranch purchase was funded by Federal Aid Grant W-148-L. The Grant was issued as part of a project to purchase five private ranches in the Book Cliffs. The project is referred to as the Book Cliffs Conservation Initiative. The Cunningham Ranch itself does not fall within the jurisdiction of Vernal District of the BLM or the Northeastern Region of the DWR and is therefore not pertinent to the Initiative. However, the objectives of the Initiative for which this project was funded are as follows.
To acquire privately owned lands in the area covered by the Initiative to protect critical wildlife habitat, to re-establish and enhance native fisheries, and to assure public access and recreational opportunities for future generations.
Establish the Bookcliffs within the Vernal District of the B.L.M as a multiple use showcase area with emphasis on management of unique ecological values.
To emphasize cooperative management for wildlife riparian habitat, enhance water quality, fisheries’ potentials, and recreational opportunities. Other uses such as livestock grazing and oil-gas exploration production would continue in an environmentally sensitive manner.
Develop with the assistance of all interested parties a coordinated resource management plan to define the specific management objectives and methods of implementation.
Seek Congressional designation as the Bookcliffs National Conservation Area.
Key Wildlife Species occurring on the WMA
The Division of Wildlife Resources sought the purchase of the Cunningham Ranch for its high- quality big game habitat. The area of the ranch encompassed by the Nash Wash WMA in particular provides some of the best winter range for mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) on the Book Cliffs unit. In addition, the northern portion of the WMA provides crucial winter habitat for Rocky Mountain elk (Cervus canadensis), and the southern end of the WMA consists of crucial year-long habitat for pronghorn antelope (Antilocapra americana). Habitat for Rocky Mountain bighorn (Ovis canadensis) sheep exists on the property; however, bighorn are currently removed from the area due to the presence of domestic sheep.
The WMA also provides habitat for the chukar partridge (Alectoris chukar), Rio Grande turkey (Meleagris gallopavo intermedia), and a small population of California quail (Callipepla californica).
6
Other important wildlife species include mountain lion (Puma concolor), black bear (Ursus americanus), waterfowl, shore birds, owls, golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), wintering bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis), peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus), and a variety of species of bats, reptiles, and amphibians.
Wildlife common to the Cisco desert, but not necessarily on the WMA include;
(Fauna of Southeastern Utah and Life Requisites Regarding their Ecosystems)
Amphibians: tiger salamander, great basin spadefoot, great plains toad, red spotted toad, woodhouse’s toad, canyon tree frog, northern leopard frog
Reptiles: collared lizard, long-nosed leopard lizard, short-horned lizard, sagebrush lizard, eastern fence lizard, tree lizard, side-blotched lizard, western whiptail, night snake, striped whipsnake, pine snake, western terrestrial garter snake, western rattlesnake
Birds: turkey vulture (summer), golden eagle, red-tailed hawk, rough-legged hawk (winter), ferruginous hawk, swainson’s hawk (summer), northern harrier, bald eagle, prairie falcon, peregrine falcon (endangered), American kestrel, rock dove, mourning dove (summer), long-eared owl, great horned owl, common nighthawk (summer), white-throated swift (summer), black-chinned hummingbird (summer), broad-tailed hummingbird (summer), eastern phoebe, say’s phoebe, ash-throated flycatcher (summer), eastern kingbird (summer), western kingbird (summer), horned lark, cliff swallow (summer), barn swallow (summer), bank swallow (summer), northern rough-winged swallow (summer), tree swallow (summer), violet-green swallow (summer), scrub jay, common raven, pinyon jay, black-billed magpie, black-capped chickadee (winter), mountain chickadee (winter), white-breasted nuthatch, canyon wren, rock wren, house wren (summer), mountain bluebird, American robin, water pipit (winter), cedar waxwing (winter), loggerhead shrike, European starling, yellow-rumped warbler (transient), yellow warbler (summer), western tanager (transient), black-headed grosbeak (summer), lark sparrow (summer), dark-eyed junco (winter), song sparrow, savannah sparrow (summer), rufous-sided towhee, vesper sparrow (summer), brewer’s sparrow (summer), chipping sparrow (summer), red-winged blackbird, brewer’s blackbird, northern oriole (summer), western meadowlark, yellow-headed blackbird (summer), lesser goldfinch, American goldfinch, house finch, evening grosbeak (winter), rosy finch (winter), house sparrow
Mammals: montane shrew, pallid bat, California myotis, little brown bat, western pipistrelle, townsend’s big-eared bat, coyote, gray fox, raccoon, long-tailed weasel, badger, striped skunk, spotted skunk, white-tailed antelope squirrel, white-tailed prairie dog, rock squirrel, least chipmunk, botta’s pocket gopher, Ord’s kangaroo rat, plains pocket mouse, desert woodrat, brush mouse, deer mouse, western harvest mouse, house mouse, Norway rat, black-tailed jack rabbit, white-tailed jack rabbit, desert cottontail
7
Public Recreation Opportunities
All activities occurring on Division lands are managed under the direction of Rule R657-28, Use of Division Lands. This rule discusses approved uses, prohibited activities, and the process for applying and receiving the various permits required to use Division lands. The Division will work with WMA visitors to ensure that all activities are in compliance with this rule. This rule can be found at http://wildlife.utah.gov/fishing-in-utah/guidebooks/46-rules/rules- regulations/961-r657-28-use-of-division-lands.html
As mule deer are transitioning from summer to winter habitat during the rifle season, there is often opportunity for limited entry mule deer hunters to harvest trophy mule deer at Nash Wash. Following the hunt, in the late fall and early winter, the mule deer can often be viewed at relatively close distances as the distracted bucks display their dominance during the rut. The opportunity to see trophy class bucks during the rut has led to an annual mule deer viewing day sponsored by the UDWR. The mule deer wintering on the WMA also bring several hundred shed antler gatherers to the area in the early spring.
In addition to mule deer, there is also opportunity to hunt upland game such as chukars, which often use the surroundings cliffs as habitat. There has also been opportunity to harvest Rio Grande turkey, cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus spp.), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), and the occasional California quail on the property.
For those not interested in hunting, there are opportunities to view an abundance of wildlife. The UDWR hosts an annual bat viewing day during the summer. Big-free tailed bats (Nyctinomops macrotis) dwell in the mesa verde sandstone and come to hunt and get water at the ponds on the WMA. Townsend’s big-eared bats (Corynorhinus townsendii) are also readily seen using the on- site buildings. Up to 11 different bat species have been seen using the ponds on the WMA. In addition to bats, numerous raptor species may be seen on the property including eagles, falcons, and owls. Predator species frequenting the property include cougar, bear, coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus).
An additional recreation opportunity is to hike or ride horses on a historical unmaintained horse and cattle trail that begins at the old rock house. It is advised that hikers/riders do not continue more than two miles on the trail. The first two miles follows a closed road that terminates at an old gas well site where Nash Wash creek springs emerge. From this point, the trail becomes very treacherous winding up steep cliffs eventually terminating approximately 17 miles into the Bookcliffs Roadless Area near She Canyon.
Conservation Partners Involved in Aquisition
The Nature Conservancy, U.S.F.W.S., Big Game Enhancement Fund, Desert Bighorn Sheep Project Fund, RMEF cash donation, and Utah Wildlife Federation donation.
8
PROPERTY INVENTORY
Existing Capital Improvements
Roads
The Nash Wash (Cunningham) county road leads to the property. There is also a division maintained road that leads to the ranch house. This road is for administrative access only and is blocked by a locked gate.
Fences
Numerous fences occur on the property including pasture fences and corrals.
Facilities
Several facilities associated with the Cunningham Ranch remain on the WMA. This includes a ranch house, doublewide trailer, two bunkhouses (including the old school house), garage, stable, calving barn, generator shed, solar battery and inverter shed, equipment shed, chicken, and two wooden storage sheds
The ranch house, according to Mr. Cunningham was built in 1912 and remodeled in 1949. The exterior walls are concrete block covered with stucco, and the roof is covered with asphalt shingle. It is a four bedroom house, located in Section 15, T 20 S R 21 E. It is the primary facility. The main floor contains a well equipped kitchen, a laundry room, a living room, three bedrooms, two bathrooms, and a large dining room. The floors are hardwood, and the walls are plastered. The main floor is approximately 2, 150 square feet. There is also a partial basement that is approximately 500 square feet. It contains a family room, a bed room, and a storage room. A majority of the appliances in the house are gas operated, excluding the refrigerator/freezer and swamp cooler.
The doublewide trailer is a three bedroom house that serves as secondary housing. It contains a fully equipped kitchen with oven/range, refrigerator, dishwasher, washer and dryer hookups, living room, dining area and two bathrooms. It is approximately 28’ X 60’ and 1,620 square feet. The exterior is wood framed with wood siding and an asphalt roof.
The bunkhouse serves as an additional housing facility. It contains a fully equipped kitchen, oven/range and refrigerator, one bedroom, one bathroom, and is heated by natural gas.
The garage is a five room storage/garage facility. It is approximately 1,400 square feet (28’ X 50’) constructed with a wood frame, wood siding, and asphalt shingles. It has a 12’ x 12’ cellar.
The school house or small bunkhouse is a sleeping quarter that is not presently used. It is 20’ x
9
30’ or 750 square feet. It has one bedroom, one bathroom, a living room, kitchen, and storage area.
The stable is 18’ x 114’ or 2,052 square feet. It has a concrete foundation, wood floor, cinderblock walls, and an asphalt roof. It has an accompanying corral.
There is an old chicken coop that is used intermittently. It is a wood framed building with a concrete foundation, concrete floor, and asphalt roof, containing approximately 436 square feet.
There is a calving barn/ milk barn that is used as a small storage facility. It is 1,764 square feet with concrete floor, wood siding, and metal roof.
The generator shed is 12’ x 21’ and 252 square feet. It has a concrete foundation and floor with steel siding and a steel roof. It is a one room shed that contains one natural gas powered electric generator and one diesel powered generator (installed in 2013).
The cistern/ water pump house is 6’ x 8’ and 48 square feet. It has a concrete foundation, concrete block floor, and frame and roof.
There is one red concrete solar battery and inverter storage shed.
There are two wooden storage sheds. One is 12’ x 8’ with a concrete floor, wood siding, and asphalt roof. The other is 14’x 8’ with a wood floor, wood siding, and metal roof.
There is also an equipment shed located in the pastures south of the main house. It is 16’ x 50’ (960 sq ft) with a dirt floor, wood siding, and asphalt roof.
Water Rights
The Nash Wash WMA includes surface water right 01-7 located in Sec 15 T 20 S R 21 E SLBM. The source of this water right is Nash Wash and has a flow of 1.0 cfs. Uses include irrigation from April to November with an allowance of 183.92 acre-feet (45.98 acres), as well as a year- long domestic use for .90 acre-feet (2.000 EDUs).
Water Developments
A spring and the Nash Wash drainage supplies water for irrigation and culinary purposes. Water flows down Nash Wash from the spring and other precipitation events to a concrete diversion ditch located above the ranch. The open ditch transports water to a large silt trap. From the silt trap, the water flows down the ditch about one-half mile to a head gate diversion that can be opened to take water back to Nash Wash. Just beyond the head gate is a wooden silt trap built of ancient redwood planking that is approximately 50 feet long and 6 feet deep. Approximately 100 feet beyond the silt trap is a metal sand trap constructed out of a culvert which has a head gate
10 which returns water to Nash Wash to allow for the trap to be cleaned. Approximately one and one-half feet below the water level in the sand trap there is a screened pipeline. The pipeline takes the water about 1500 feet where it is collected in a 5,000 gallon cistern to be used for the main yard and facilities. The remaining water exits the metal sand trap and continues down the ditch to irrigate all the fields.
Wood Products
Wood products are limited; however, mixed stands of juniper (Juniperus spp.) and pinyon pine (Pinus edulis) are located along draws and on ridge tops. Wood products are managed according to Administrative Rule R657-28, Use of Division Lands. Harvest of wood products for firewood, fence posts, or Christmas trees will be considered as a management tool if needed. There is also sparse cottonwood trees located along Nash Wash but they should be propagated and preserved for their wildlife and aesthetic value. Fruit and ornamental trees on the property should remain for their historical significance and wildlife value but may be cut-down for safety and facility maintenance purposes.
Cultural Resources
Cultural Resource Report No. U97-24 was done in 1997, by Baseline Data Inc., of the Nash Wash and Bull Canyon areas about 4 miles west of the Cunningham Ranch in Grand County, Utah. However, a majority of the survey occurred on properties outside of the WMA. Nonetheless, this study and previous research lead to the identification of nearby cultural resource sites including prehistoric artifacts and historic structures and items, some of which are eligible for the National Register. Findings include lithic scatters (100+ secondary and tertiary flakes), and a previously unrecorded historic homestead and corral (the ranch house). Isolated items included a complete beer bottle and nearly complete projectile point.
Other cultural resource surveys were completed for the Nash Wash Prescribed Burn, Elk Resources 14 Cisco Dome Wells, Nash Wash Revegetation, and Nash Wash WMA Fire Rehab. A total of six sites have been documented and both prehistoric and historic sites have been recorded. Approximately 80 percent of the WMA has not been surveyed.
The old Cunningham ranch still contains historical farming equipment including buck rakes, buck forks, discs, and a Mormon derrick. Remnants of a 1915 Model T is also on the property.
Sensitive Species
A review of the Utah Natural Heritage Program database (as updated January 03, 2013) indicated that two state sensitive wildlife species have been documented within a two-mile buffer of the WMA. The two species are ferruginous hawk, and white-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys leucurus). Also listed within the buffer of the WMA were several occurrences of golden eagle.
11
Other sensitive species found on the WMA that were not listed in the heritage database include big free-tailed bats and Townsend’s big-eared bats. Big free-tailed bats can be found in the Mesa Verde sandstone and often use the pond on the property. Townsend’s big-eared bats are currently roosting in some of the buildings. Kit fox are also very likely to occur within two miles of the WMA.
Important Fish and Wildlife Habitats
Nash Wash provides crucial winter habitat for mule deer which forage in the sagebrush openings and cultivated fields and take hiding and thermal cover in pinyon-juniper stands. The higher elevation habitats extending deeper into the Book Cliffs also provide crucial year-long habitat for elk. Elk occur rarely on the WMA but can be seen in the fields during spring green up and often use the upper pond when it is cleaned and properly functioning. Substantial year-long habitat for rocky mountain bighorn sheep exists along the cliff faces in open areas free of cover where predators could be lurking, that have suitable grasses, forbs, and shrubs for grazing. Bighorn sheep are not seen on the WMA itself but may be located in nearby Bull Canyon. If bighorn sheep are located near Nash Wash this should be reported immediately due to the presence of domestic sheep in the area. In the lower elevations, pronghorn use the open desert with its rolling hills and valleys to fawn and raise their young throughout the remainder of the year. An occasional pronghorn may be seen on the property, but they typically remain south of the WMA. The desert landscapes also provide quality habitat for small mammals such as the white-tailed prairie dog, which burrow into the soils and forage on grasses. Predators to the prairie dog such as the golden eagle and peregrine falcon can be seen nesting in the cliffs near Nash Wash. Upland game also use the WMA; crucial year-long habitat for Rio Grande turkeys is located along Nash Wash and turkeys have roosted in mature trees near the ranch house, and chukar partridge use the cliffs and lower elevation vegetation as year-long habitat.
General Condition of Habitats
Habitat types include sagebrush/greasewood bottoms, pinyon/juniper forest, agricultural pasture, and willow/tamarisk/cottonwood riparian. The sagebrush/greasewood bottom is composed primarily of greasewood (Sarcobatus vermiculatus). The basin big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata tridentata) is receiving light use and Wyoming sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata wyomingensis) is receiving heavy use by wintering mule deer. Browse utilization transects from 2012 of Wyoming big sagebrush in the Nash Wash/Horse Pasture area demonstrate very high use with a majority of the plants being severely hedged with utilization near 90 percent. The transect data also discloses that there is little to no recruitment with over 50 percent of plants being decadent and total cover of sagebrush being less than 10 percent. The pastures are composed primarily of alfalfa (Medicago sativa). The understory in the pinyon/juniper forest is nonexistent. Riparian areas are primarily willow (Salix spp.) with tamarisk (Tamarix spp.) (although the tamarisk leaf beetle has caused significant declines) and sparse cottonwood (Populus deltoids) and boxelder (Acer negundo).
12
The division’s range trend program monitors habitat conditions statewide by sampling permanently placed vegetation transect’s that have been established in key areas. Transects are read on a 5-year rotational schedule based on the Division’s five administrative regions. One of these transects is located just south of the Cunningham Ranch: West Horse Pasture Trend Study No. 10-16. This trend site, last monitored in 2010, indicates that the key browse species, Wyoming big sagebrush, is mostly mature and decadent with minimal recruitment. Utilization has been a mixture of moderate to heavy hedging. High amounts of cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) on the site may be preventing establishments of seedlings and young plants. Perennial grasses and forbs are not common and have been shown to be decreasing. Cheatgrass has dominated the area. Statewide range trend data and digital photographs for specific sites can be found at the following website: http://wildlife.utah.gov/range
Habitat Limitations
Open sagebrush stands in the bottoms of Nash Wash are heavily utilized by mule deer during the winter months. These stands are showing a decrease in density and vigor of browse. Revegetation is difficult due to invasion of weeds such as cheatgrass and the minimal and unpredictable amount of water available in the Cisco desert. Lack of water and invasive species such as the tamarisk are also having a negative effect on riparian vegetation along the creek, especially on the health of important species such as cottonwood trees. Even cultivated fields are not producing to their full potential due to limited resources (natural and personnel) and the invasion of a variety of weed species including white top (Cardaria draba), houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale), knapweed (Centaurea repens), morning glory (Convolvulus arvensis), and poison hemlock (Conium maculatum). Additionally, there has been a lack of natural disturbance necessary to retain diverse healthy stands of forage and cover for wildlife.
High-quality browse is most limiting for mule deer in Nash Wash. To increase both the quantity and quality of forage, habitat projects are necessary. However, such projects require ideal moisture conditions to be successful due to the necessity of seeding to increase diversity and production. These projects also often require chemical treatments to reduce the threat of non- native species invasion frequently involving follow up treatments. Habitat treatments over the past decade have focused on reducing greasewood and cheatgrass density to decrease hazardous fuels and improve forage quality and quantity. Historical agriculture fields that are no longer irrigated have also been drill-seeded to improve range production for wildlife forage.
The idea of stocking Nash Wash with native Colorado River cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii pleuriticus) was explored through the Aquatic Section and it was determined that Nash Wash did not have a sustainable flow to support a fishery.
Human Use-related Problems
During hunting season there have been issues with hunters shooting at animals within a very
13 close distance of the ranch facilities. This poses a risk to division property and personnel. Additionally, due the remote location of Nash Wash, there have been a few poaching cases.
During winter months, there is often a lot of vehicle traffic from oil and gas field workers, wildlife viewers and antler gatherers. Disturbance to wildlife, especially deer, during this time can cause wildlife to move to less desirable habitats and also lead to an increase in winter mortality due to stress. Damage to roads can also occur during the winter months when roads are wet and easily rutted.
Human-caused fires have resulted in severe damage to quality deer browse. Fire leads to an increase in annual invasive species and when coupled with minimal water received in the desert, reestablishment of quality forage is difficult to achieve and takes a very long time.
One of the BLM fences on the eastern side of the property from the Horse Pasture Wash junction to the rim of the Book Cliffs is in really poor shape which has resulted in trespass livestock.
Adjacent Land Uses and Potential Impacts
The Bureau of Land Management owns a majority of the property adjacent to Nash Wash with one 20-acre private piece on the south end. The surrounding land uses are governed primarily by the BLM’s Grand Resource Area’s Resource Management Plan (1985), which is written for multiple uses. This plan is now incorporated into the Moab Field Office Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan (2008).
The WMA falls within the Cisco BLM allotment managed under the Grand Resource Management Plan (1985) and the Cisco Desert Allotment Management Plan. In 1994, there was an amendment to the plan (EA #UT-068-94-047) which revised the allocation of livestock animal unit months (AUMs). This plan reallocated 56 percent of the AUMs from livestock to wildlife (deer and antelope). Livestock grazing was suspended in the Horse Pasture-Nash Wash area of the allotment to protect critical deer winter range and reduce competition for forage and space as well as increase the antelope herd. The livestock on the remainder of the Cisco allotment consist of domestic cattle and sheep, which graze the allotment in the winter and spring (November-May) for total active AUMs of 5,607. To minimize trespass resulting in browse reduction and potential interactions between bighorn sheep and domestic sheep, fence maintenance should be a priority.
Over 50 stock watering ponds have been constructed to hold water from springs and washes to provide water for livestock (water is trucked in on dry years).
The WMA is also part of the Cisco Dome Oil and Gas Field, which is combined with the Greater Cisco Field. The Cisco Dome field contains approximately 223 oil and gas well sites that are in a variety of stages including the location being abandoned, the well being plugged and abandoned,
14 shut in, or producing. Wells have been developed in this area since the mid-1920s and production is ongoing. Activities associated with the production and maintenance of this field are year-long, however exploration activities are generally restricted in the winter for deer protection. There is some vehicular traffic during the winter on the county and access roads which may cause some disturbance to mule deer. As new wells are developed there are risks for habitat fragmentation.
The Division will pursue exchanges and conservation easements with private landowners, municipalities, counties, and other state and federal agencies that block up land, improve public access, and preserve critical wildlife habitats. This would include lands adjacent to or within the WMA, as well as parcels throughout the county outside of the WMA that would meet the same objectives.
MANAGEMENT GOALS
The acquisition and management of this property is consistent with the resource goal outlined in UDWR’s Strategic Plan (2005-2013) which follows:
Resource goal: Expand wildlife populations and conserve sensitive species by protecting and improving wildlife habitat.
Objective 1: Protect existing wildlife habitat and improve 500,000 acres of critical habitats and watersheds throughout the state by 2014.
Objective 2: Increase fish and game populations to meet management plan objectives, and expand quality fishing and hunting opportunities.
Objective 3: Conserve sensitive species to prevent them from becoming listed as threatened or endangered.
Furthermore, UDWR’s constituency goal has relevance since the public road through the property serves consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife users who are drawn to the area because of its scenic beauty, recreational and wildlife viewing opportunities. Additionally, the Division provides wildlife viewing days for the public. Constituency goals outlined in UDWR’s Strategic Plan are as follows:
Constituency goal: Achieve broad-based support for division programs and budgets by demonstrating the value of wildlife to all citizens of Utah.
Objective 1: Increase public awareness of wildlife as a quality-of-life issue in order to expand our support base and achieve stable funding.
15
Objective 2: Improve communications with wildlife organizations, public officials, private landowners and government agencies to obtain support for division programs.
Objective 3: Expand programs to recruit and retain young hunters, anglers and wildlife watchers.
Wildlife Action Plan (Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy or CWCS)
The most recent Wildlife Action Plan, also known as the Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy (CWCS), was submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and approved in 2005. This plan is effective until 2014 or when revisions are needed. The CWCS provides a framework for planning, cooperation, coordination, and implementation of conservation activities throughout the state. This plan is composed of the following major elements:
Approach for including the public, partners, and stakeholders; addresses the mission and authority of partners Outlines the effort to coordinate the CWCS with other plans Identifies species in greatest need of conservation and provides information about the abundance, distribution, and threats to these species Discusses plans for monitoring and determining conservation success.
Imperiled native wildlife species are ranked according to conservation need. Tier I species are wildlife that are of the greatest conservation concern (very high concern). Tier II species are species of “high concern” and Tier III species are wildlife that are imperiled, rare, linked to an at-risk habitat, or for which there is little information. Tier III species are otherwise referred to as species of “moderate concern”.
The Nash Wash WMA provides potential habitat for the following Utah Sensitive Species:
(Species Accounts- Table 6.1, Utah Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Stategy)
Ferruginous Hawk (Tier II) - Nests in the ecotone between pinyon-juniper and shrubsteppe habitats. Threats include nest abandonment even with low human disturbance, nest site reduction from removal of natural nesting areas, loss of habitat and disturbance to breeding grounds from oil and gas extraction activities, destruction of preferred habitats due to chaining, timber harvest, fire management, and livestock grazing.
Bald Eagle (Tier I) - Mature at 4-6 years old with a lifespan around 30 years. Threats include loss of lowland riparian habitats for nesting and roosting habitat, and nest and roost abandonment from excessive human disturbance.
Mule Deer (Tier III) – Mule deer are browsers that primarily eat shrubs and other woody
16
material, although grasses are also consumed. Threats include recent population declines, and loss of lower elevation winter range.
Kit Fox (Tier II)- Inhabit deserts and semi-arid regions. General threats include indiscriminate trapping, bioaccumulation of rodenticides, and expansion of coyote and other competitors into kit fox habitat resulting from artificial water sources.
Big Free-tailed Bats (Tier II) - Inhabit rugged rocky environments and sagebrush flats. Require tall cliffs for roost sites. General threats include pesticide use in foraging areas and their limited distribution.
Townsend’s Big-eared Bat (Tier II) – These bats are often found in scrub communities and pinyon-juniper habitats, with maternity colonies in warmer portions of mines, caves, and buildings. The species occurs statewide and is moderately common but is thought to be declining. Threats include human disturbance (especially to maternal colonies), mine closures, and a lack of information.
White-tailed Prairie Dog (Tier II) – Commonly occupy lower dry habitats. Colonies spend much of their time in underground burrows, often hibernating during the winter. Diet is composed of grasses and bulbs. Threats include disease (outbreaks of sylvatic plague), rodenticide and agricultural control measures, habitat loss and fragmentation from energy and urban development, and recreational shooting.
Great Plains Toad (Tier III) - Inhabits prairie grasslands and dry, bushy areas. Its population size and trends are unknown. General threats include a lack of information and development (agricultural, municipal, and utility development). Surveys in Southeastern Utah are needed.
Please note, not all species with potential habitat at Nash Wash have been seen or documented on the WMA.
In addition to sensitive species, key habitats are described in the CWCS in order to target habitat restoration and conservation activities to address associated threats and problems.
Two key habitats for species of greatest conservation need (Chapter 7 of the Utah Comprehensive Wildlife Strategy) occur on the WMA:
Shrubsteppe- named after the habitats most abundant plant, sagebrush, and “steppe” meaning large dry grassland with few or no trees. On Nash Wash this habitat is very important for wintering mule deer (Tier Three species- of moderate concern) which rely on the sagebrush for forage. This habitat is in poor condition statewide with sagebrush plants losing health and vigor. Threats include brush eradications, development, drought, energy development, fire cycle alteration, improper grazing practices, improper OHV use, and invasive plant species.
17
Lotic- refers to habitats with bodies of flowing water. These habitats occur in less that 0.1 percent of Utah’s land area. Lotic habitats provide food and cover to diversity of wildlife. Threats include channelization, drought, energy development, environmental contamination, improper grazing practices, improper OHV use, invasive animal species, invasive plant species, nutrient enrichment/sediment loading, and water development.
MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES
Property Management Objectives
The existing capital improvements will be protected by providing maintenance and improvement schedules.
Habitat Management Objectives
Wildlife habitat will be managed to increase its functionality, appeal, availability and use by all wildlife species. Habitat management will be consistent with sound ecological principles and wise land use practices.
Existing deer winter range will be protected from deteriorating and wildlife habitat will be enhanced.
STRATEGIES FOR PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
Development Activities
Establish Property Boundary
Survey Needs
The section of lands acquired from SITLA in 2013 may need to be surveyed.
Boundary Fence Needs
No boundary fencing currently exists, however it is not needed. Adjacent BLM allotments have been fenced to keep livestock from grazing within the WMA and surrounding area. The Division and lessee on Nash Wash have periodically done repairs to the allotment fence to keep livestock off the WMA.
18
Livestock Grazing Plan
There will be no livestock grazing on the WMA. A majority of AUMs (56 percent) for the surrounding Cisco BLM grazing allotment have been transferred from livestock to wildlife. Grazing has been suspended in the Horse Pasture-Nash Wash portion of the allotment in order to protect critical deer winter range.
However, the Division reserves the right to use prescribed grazing on the WMA to reach habitat objectives. Prescribed grazing may result in permits being issued to a grazer outside of the competitive bid process in order to find willing parties that are able to follow a prescribed grazing plan.
At times, trespass livestock are found on WMA’s due to poor fencing and/or gates being left open by visitors. Occurrences of trespass livestock will be handled by Division personnel according to guidelines outlined in the Division’s Land Use Rule, R657-28-10, and in the Divisions livestock trespass policy, W3TER-2.
Sign Needs
One large sign indicates the southern property boundary along the county road. Numerous small signs are also in place along the county road when the WMA boundaries are crossed. Additional signage is needed where the county road crosses the property boundary in Section 16 T 20 S R 21 E. This section was acquired in 2013. Signs are also needed indicating no hunting within 600 feet of facilities.
Develop Public Access Plan
Public access to the WMA is available on the Nash Wash (Cunningham) county road. This road is maintained by Grand County and will remain open for public access throughout the year; however, access may be limited during winter months. The road leading to the main ranch house and facilities will remain closed to the public. Vehicles, including off-highway vehicles (OHVs) are only allowed on the county road. Any other two-track roads throughout the WMA are closed. No new roads are planned for the property at this time. Vehicles may not leave the road for retrieval of big game or antlers
There is parking at the old rock house homestead. A hiking/horse trail commences at this point. This trail allows access to the roadless area; however, it is unmaintained and is recommended for very experienced riders only. All others should turn around after approximately two miles.
The facilities are not available to the public, but camping is allowed. Camping is limited to 14 consecutive days unless otherwise posted and/or a special use permit has been obtained from the
19
Division authorizing a different term. The Division reserves the right to designate camping areas or close camping to protect resources on the Property. There is no garbage collection available (pack it in, pack it out), and no firewood cutting is allowed. Certified weed free hay is required for livestock. Additionally, there is no hunting allowed within 600 ft of ranch facilities.
Annual Maintenance Activities
Fence Maintenance
Unnecessary fencing should be removed. Fence patrols should be completed every year after flood season to ensure fences are still in working order. Fence maintenance will be completed annually by lessee, DWR maintenance crew, and DWR seasonal.
All fences constructed on the property will be four strand barb or smooth wire fences no higher than 42 inches. Strand spacing will also reflect best management practices recommended for wildlife friendly fences, i.e. first strand (bottom-most) will be at least 18 inches off the ground, and the distance between the third and fourth strand (top-most) must be at least 12 inches. Pole fences or jack-leg fences are also acceptable, so long as they meet the minimum requirements for wildlife passage. Net wire fences will not be constructed and where they already exist, should be considered for future replacement.
Road Maintenance/Closures
Gates controlling access to the facilities should remain in working order. The road to the facilities should be maintained annually by lessee and DWR maintenance crew.
Parking Areas
The parking area and trailhead near the old rock house homestead in Section 17 needs to remain in working order. Maintenance will be completed by lessee and DWR maintenance crew.
Noxious Weed Control
Property will be surveyed annually to detect the presence of noxious weeds. Weeds will be controlled using approved methods, including herbicide. Weed removal will be completed by lessee, DWR maintenance crew, and DWR seasonal. The following noxious weeds have been found on the property:
Class B: Noxious weeds not native to the State that have a moderate population and are generally thought to be controllable in most areas.
Poison Hemlock (Conium maculatum) Russian Knapweed (Centaurea repens)
20
Hoary Cress (whitetop) (Cardaria draba)
Class C: Noxious weeds not native to the State that are found extensively in the State and are thought to be beyond control with statewide efforts generally being towards containment of smaller infestations.
Field Bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) Houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale) Salt Cedar (Tamarix ramosissima)
Invasive weeds found on the property include cheatgrass and burdock (Arctium spp.)
Certified weed free hay is required for livestock on the property.
Sign Replacement
Signs should be in place where the county road crosses the property boundary. Signs should be legible and free of bullet holes. All signs on the property should follow GLN-22 DWR signage guidelines. Sign maintenance will be completed by DWR seasonals.
Maintenance of Water Developments
Water system should be free of sediment. All silt traps and pipes should be clear and working. Pump house should be checked and any unsanitary items removed (i.e. dead rodents). Pumps should be working. Water system should be winterized. Ponds should be cleared out and free of sediment. Maintenance will be completed by lessee and DWR maintenance crew.
Facilities
Water and heating systems should be in working order. Natural gas delivery system should be evaluated and working with appropriate utilities. Solar energy system should be functioning. Generators should be in working order. Facilities should be painted when needed. Winterization of facilities needs to be completed annually. Facility maintenance will be the responsibility of lessee and DWR maintenance crew.
Compatibility of Proposed Uses with Local Government Planning and Zoning
The property is zoned RG, Range and Grazing District by Grand County. RG is designed to accommodate agriculture and agriculture-related, and low density residential development uses in those parts of the county with limited public services. All development in the RG district is subject to the lot design standards in Article 5 of the Grand County Land Use Plan.
21
STRATEGIES FOR HABITAT MANAGEMENT
Habitat Improvement Plan
Enhance habitat in fields by disking and seeding
Use prescribed fire and reseeding
Enhance riparian habitat in Nash Wash and ponds
Irrigate fields to improve habitat and prove water right
Enhance cover and windbreak
Accomplish rangeland seedlings in pasture fields
Control pinyon-juniper encroachment
Other habitat improvement projects may include but are not limited to: shrub planting, chemical control, water developments, tree plantings, willow plantings, and fencing exclosures
Habitat improvement projects for this property will be considered on an individual basis as proposed through existing forums, i.e. Utah Partners for Conservation and Development (UPCD) and Division’s Habitat Council. Proposed projects must meet the objectives defined in this Habitat Management Plan, UDWR’s Strategic Plan and the Wildlife Action Plan. Implementation of projects will take place only after these criteria have been satisfied.
Habitat improvement projects should be designed to benefit the largest diversity of wildlife possible and should consider their impact upon all other species, especially sensitive species identified in the Wildlife Action Plan. It is expected that the focus of habitat improvement projects in the near future will target mule deer and upland game.
Access Management Plan
(See “Strategies for Property Management” above)
Fire Management Plan
Due to the abundance of cheatgrass on the property and its ability to outcompete native species and reduce browse, wildfires will be suppressed on this property. Any fire in the riparian area will be suppressed to protect cottonwood trees. Any prescribed burns on the property will be 22 under close supervision of qualified fire personnel. All activities dealing with wild and prescribed fire will be coordinated with the Division of Forestry, Fire, and State Lands (DFFSL) according to guidelines established in the Memorandum of Understanding (2005) between DWR and FFSL.
Day-use campfires are allowed in enclosed fire pits, but cannot be unattended, and adequate provisions must be taken to prevent the spread of fire (R657-28). The Division reserves the right to ban open fires to protect valuable wildlife habitat on the WMA, such as during extremely dry weather when risk of wildfire is most severe.
Wood Products
Wood products are limited; however, mixed stands of juniper and pinyon pine are located along draws and on ridge tops. Wood products are managed according to Administrative Rule R657- 28, Use of Division Lands. Harvest of wood products for firewood, fence posts, or Christmas trees will be considered as a management tool if needed.
Compatibility of Proposed Plans with Local Government General Plans and Zoning and Land Use Ordinances
The property is zoned RG, Range and Grazing District by Grand County. It is designated to accommodate agricultural and agriculture-related uses in those parts of the county with limited public services.
23
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF PROPOSED USES
This property was purchased as part of the Book Cliffs Conservation Initiative for the purpose of maintaining and improving fish and wildlife habitat and providing sportsman access to the Book Cliff’s roadless area. The Nash Wash WMA will be managed to promote, propagate, and enhance wildlife habitat and hunting opportunities. The primary goal is the preserve, enhance, and protect mule deer winter range. The Division will allow for and provide wildlife-related recreational activities which are consistent with the goals of this plan.
MONITORING AND EVALUATION
The Southeastern Region Habitat section, district wildlife biologist, and district conservation officer will be responsible for monitoring the overall success of this plan. Appropriate sections and staff will provide expertise as required. The habitat maintenance specialist will monitor the needs and effectiveness of physical facilities and improvements. A regional team will amend this plan as needed.
ATTACHMENTS
Map 1 – Nash Wash WMA, Location Map 2 – Nash Wash WMA Map 3 – Nash Wash WMA, Facilities Map 4 – Nash Wash WMA, Road Map
Appendix A Special Warranty Deed Appendix B Land Purchase Contract Appendix C Title Appendix D Contract Appendix E Initial Grant
24
• •
•elSe• • 0 \ . un .. + ,
---
"""""' [", Ool.o
N Nash Wash Wildlife Management Area
_ Nasn Wash WMA o 2 4 Miles
25
• • • - U SGS , FM>, NPS,,
N A Nash Wash Wildlife Management Area _ Nasn Wash WMA o 0.2 0.4 0.8 Miles I I I I I I I I
26
• Facilities .' , Equ ipme nt She d • Rand1 House .\ .' ,'. '" Dow ll>-..... de Trailer
, Garage
, Smod Hoose , Bunl<1louse
Solar Biitery and Inve rter Storage She d
~oo
F.iold ll13
F.ie ld /11 6
F.i~dltll0
F.ie ld 119
Nash Wash Wildlife Management Area
o 0_0250.05 0.1 Miles
27
,. \ ~ " ,GN ,00
N -- R-lbl icAccess Nash Wash Wildlife Management Area --;\(jrninistrat rv e W:.UlSS _ N.sI1 Wash WMA 0 0.2 OA 0_8 Miles A , , , , , , I I I
28
AGENDA SUMMARY GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 18, 2014 Agenda Item: I Presentation on Citizens' Review of Public Lands Letters TITLE:
FISCAL IMPACT: None
PRESENTER(S): Bob O'Brien, Bill Rau, Susan Roche, and Deb Walter
BACKGROUND: Prepared By: Several of us were deeply touched by the thoughtfulness and passion SUSAN ROCHE AND DEB expressed in Grand County citizens' letters to the Council about the use of WALTER public lands in our county. We got together informally to study, code, and summarize the content of these letters and have prepared a report of our analysis. We'd like to share this information with the Council.
ATTACHMENT(S): "A CITIZENS' REVIEW OF PUBLIC LANDS LETTERS"
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Attorney Review: BODY OF REPORT = PAGES 1-7 APPENDIX 1, METHODOLOGY = PAGES 8-10 N/A APPENDIX 2, SPECIFIC AREAS NOTED BY WRITERS = PAGE 11
A Citizens' Review of Public Lands Letters
March 2014 2
Introduction
The Grand County Council invited county citizens to submit letters stating their views on the future use and disposition of public lands in the county. A total of 182 letters, with 253 signatures, were received as a part of the process to inform and guide Congressional decision making. It is important to note that letter writers were not guided or prompted to say certain things; there were no check lists or form letters. The only guidance from the County Council was for citizens to express their thoughts about public lands within the context of the Bishop initiative.
Our review of all of the letters (see methodology in Appendix 1) found that nearly 90% of county residents favored designating protection for public lands. 1 Their reasons varied, but usually involved deep appreciation of the benefits offered by public lands: clean air, protection of watersheds, major contributions to the local economy, the uniqueness of the land, and a legacy for future generations to enjoy. Even residents who voiced support for multiple uses of the land argued in favor of designating certain protected areas.
The letters were written in a spirit of deep “Grand County has some of the most thoughtfulness, a passion for public lands within spectacular scenery and sought after which we live and work, and the recreation recreation areas in the country....If opportunities afforded by wilderness. There was we lose these areas to extraction industries, Grand County's reputation little support in the letters for further for amazing wilderness will be forever development of public lands for oil, gas, tar sands damaged.” or potash extraction. The letters showed that --- from one of the letters Grand County citizens recognize that extractive
1 The percent of the letters that indicate support for protective designations is 89.6% and the percentage that indicate opposition 13.2%. They add up to slightly more than 100% because some of the letters indicated both opposition and support for protective designations.
3
industrialization will destroy public lands, undermine the recreation and tourism economy of the county, and contribute little to their economic livelihoods.
One of the outstanding features of the letters is the extent to which citizens know and visit the lands in Grand County. Residents noted over 100 areas they regularly visit for hiking, camping, biking, photography, and solitude, among other reasons. These are areas visited not just once, but over and over throughout the year and over the years. We expect that many visitors to the county also come to enjoy these areas. It is well-documented that the recreation and tourism sector of the economy accounts for $140 million annual spending in the county. Recreation and tourism-based businesses provide over 80% of jobs in Grand County. By contrast, the extraction industries yield only 2% of the county's jobs.
What do citizens want protected?
Grand County citizens voiced strong support for protecting large sections of the public lands in the county. By protection, people meant different things, but for the most part they included statements about designating lands as wilderness or open to public access. About 100 areas were specifically noted as worthy of protection, encompassing over 850,000 acres in Grand County. These include areas from the Book Cliffs region in the north of the county, to Labyrinth Canyon in the south. It includes the Big Triangle and Dome Plateau areas in eastern Grand County and the Green River canyons to the west (a full list of areas mentioned for protection by letter writers is in Appendix 2).
In addition to the 2010 Grand County General Plan, the “We must remember that our findings from these citizen letters constitute a powerful undeveloped public lands are like and authoritative statement on what people want for a savings account for the future.” the lands within (and beyond) the county. There is broad ---from one of the letters dissatisfaction with the growing industrialization of the county. Some 50% of citizens explicitly said they wanted no new extraction or limits on extractive industries in the county. There are deep concerns that once land is opened to oil, potash, tar sands or other mining, those lands will never be the same again and any economic benefits will be short-lived or have unexpected impacts. Similarly, people say that their reasons for living in Grand County include access to and enjoyment of the lands across the county. A better quality of life and a sense of community in a special land have drawn people to the county; those values are why they stay. The legacy for the future if industrialization of the land continues apace will not be, as many people wrote, scenic, wild, and unique lands, but land damaged and without lasting intrinsic value. It is informative to read about the number of people who intentionally moved to Grand County because of the nature of the land and 4
opportunities to explore and find home in the canyons, plateaus, mesas, and slickrock across the landscape.
Just over 13 percent of the letters received expressed opposition to designating protection for public lands. However, within this group, opposition was not total; people nuanced their statements. For example, two writers wanted no new protected land designations, but felt that existing Wilderness Study Areas should be classified as Wilderness Areas. The two most cited reasons for opposing designating public lands were to keep a diverse economy, and maintain public access to roads and 4WD routes. Most of the people opposed to protecting public “We do not need to be lulled into thinking lands supported multiple use, which we that this is a choice between interpreted as broadly similar to the Bureau of development and protection. The fact is that both can occur, alongside other uses Land Management's use of that term. But in such as recreation and tourism.” saying multiple use, there was a realization that public lands needed to be buffered from ---from one of the letters extractive actions and that public lands provided numerous recreation and economic benefits. Some people felt that protected land designations would hurt the local economy by limiting other sources of revenue and jobs for the county. Other writers recognized the value of the public lands for the local economy.
Why Designate Protected Lands?
Protection of water supplies and sources (watershed), maintaining clean air and soils, preventing pollution of air and ground are key reasons why citizens support protecting the land. All these relate to what By Letter By Signer Count Count other letter writers Support Protective Designations 89.56% 91.70% referred to as public and environmental Oppose Protective Designations 13.19% 10.67% health. There is a Reasons for supporting protective designations recognition of the on- Tourism and economy 59.89% 69.17% going impacts of a changing climate on Recreation 52.75% 62.45% our region. Unique Landscape 54.95% 61.26% Quality of Life 48.35% 53.75% There is widespread Future Generations 33.60% 56.52% understanding that recreation and tourism Health and Environment 57.69% 46.64% are the mainstays of Solitude/ Quiet 21.74% 39.13% the economy of Grand 5
County. Over half of all writers mentioned tourism and the local tourism/recreation economy as reasons to protect public lands. A number of letter writers argued that without extensive protected lands, the strength of our tourism/recreation-based economy would be seriously compromised.
Percentage of Letters that Mention these Reasons for Protective Designations
100.00%
90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
59.89% 60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00% Tourism and Recreation Unique Quality of life Future Health and Solitude/ economy Landscape Generations Environment Quiet
6
Percentage of Letters that Mention these Reasons for Opposition to Protective Designations 100.00%
90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.44% 9.34% 9.89% 8.79% 8.79% 10.00% 3.30% 2.75% 0.00% Maintain Stable and Public Access, Responsible Mechanized Certainty Contributions Multiple Use Diverse Roads, 4WD Extraction Recreation to Public Economy/Jobs Routes Finance Recreation-based businesses derive their income from people coming to the county and enjoying the land and support facilities that are available. Motels and restaurants, numerous shops depend on tourism dollars. And, people visit Grand County because of the spectacular scenery, unique landscapes, and recreation opportunities. They leave the busyness of their own communities to sample what Grand County has to offer. As one local business owner said, and other residents concurred in their own letters, “When things change too much, and all you can see in Arches at night is a line of drill rigs at Dead Horse Point, they [visitors] will leave and not return.”
How to Achieve Protection for Public Lands
Letter writers noted several existing initiatives to protect public lands. The American Red Rock Wilderness Act was mentioned explicitly by 20% of writers. Over 17% of writers directly or indirectly noted the Grand Canyon Trust’s Forest Wilderness proposal as a way to protect public lands.
Most writers focused on how the existing use of public lands (for tourism and recreation) was the key element of Grand County’s economy, providing diversity and stability to the local economy. An estimated two million people visit the county every year to look at and play within the public lands. After the Wasatch Front counties, Grand County has the highest sales tax 7
revenue and the highest transit tax revenue in “Any proposal for legislation...should the state. In 2012 tourists spent over $140 first consider wilderness or other million in Grand County. It is clear that county protective designations for all primary revenue is highly enhanced by tourism. In turn, watersheds and aquifer recharge areas.” tourism is determined by the open landscapes ---from one of the letters and recreation opportunities available across the county (mining and resource extraction account for about 4% of the county’s revenue). The letters were very clear on economic factors alone: protect public lands from extraction for the long-term economic health of the county.
Concerns about the Process
Most writers expressed appreciation to the County Council to offer their views on public lands. Writers took their responsibility to address the issue very seriously. At the same time, some 30% of letter writers expressed concerns about the process being followed. Several noted that Grand County had already engaged in a long and public process of outlining land use, resulting in the 2012 Grand County General Plan. Over 20% of letter writers felt there has been a lack of public participation as the Council sub-committee develops its alternative proposals to submit to Representative Bishop. Still others opined that Representative Bishop’s motivation was less about protecting and more about opening public lands, including the Book Cliffs region to major extractive actions.
Conclusion
We feel that the 182 letters sent to the Grand County Council are a representative sample of the views and opinions of county residents about the use of public lands. While the absolute numbers and percentages are impressive, even more, the strong feelings of writers stand out: a deep love and sense of caring for the land; concern about the well-being of the land as it is; an appreciation of the links between open public lands and the county’s economy and a healthy vibrant community; and strong opposition to further industrial impacts on the land. Writers feel at home in Grand County and they value being here and enjoying the beauty that surrounds all of us.
Citizen members of the ad hoc committee that reviewed all of the letters and prepared this report included Jane Butter, Pam Hackley, Wayne Hoskisson, Nancy Kurtz, Bob O’Brien, Bill Rau, Susan Roche, Sarah Stock, Deb Walter, Gerrish Willis. 8
Appendix 1: Methodology
In response to the Grand County Council’s request for input on Representative Bishop’s Public Lands Initiative, the Council recorded 183 letters received. These were ‘date stamped’ by the County Administrator. The letters were posted to www.grandcountyutah.net .
From this source, the Committee made hard copies of the letters and numbered them in sequence from 1-183. One letter had been published twice so the total published letters under review were 182.
An initial review of 60 or so letters was conducted to get a sense of what people were saying and to record a preliminary list of the noted observations, issues, concerns, places, and recommendations concerning the disposition of public lands in Grand County, and in some cases beyond.
The committee identified three major categories that would encompass the overall perspective of each letter. The first two were: Support Protective Designations and Oppose Protective Designations. Under each of these categories were listed the type of designation that was supported or not:
Support Protective Designations a) Support Protective Designations b) General Wilderness Support c) America’s Red Rock Wilderness d) Forest Service wilderness e) Grand Canyon Trust Forest Wilderness f) BLM Wilderness Study Areas/Wilderness g) Public Land Solutions h) Greater Canyonlands National Monument i) National Parks j) Watershed protection k) No New Extractive Developments l) No Extractive Developments
Oppose Protective Designations a) Oppose Protective Designations b) Wilderness Opposition 9
c) Release Wilderness Study Areas d) No Expansion of Wilderness e) Oppose New National Monument
It should be noted that a few letters did not express support or opposition to protective designations and some opposed and supported protective designations.
The third major category identified was Process Issues to reflect expressed concerns about the Congressman Bishop’s Public Lands Initiative, the Grand County Council’s process or other concerns.
Process Concerns a) Concerns About What the County is Doing b) Lack of Public Participation in Developing GC Proposal c) GC Clarify what and what not proposing d) Protect wilderness leads to success Bishop's PLI e) Thanks for extending deadline f) Council minutes on PLI not available g) Needs larger GC planning context/analysis
We also coded reasons for supporting protective designations and for opposing protective designations.
As the committee read through the letters, other items were noted that did not appear on the original list.
A separate listing was made of each place name mentioned in every letter.
The tally sheet was constructed in a spreadsheet format. Each reader was assigned about 20 letters to read through and code. Information gathered included number of signers and letter source (for example: individual, business, organization, government). When an item on the tally sheet was mentioned, it received the number, 1, beside it. Any additional comments were added for later review by the committee. A second, independent read-through of each letter and tally was conducted by another reader. The pair of readers then met to confirm tallies and resolve any discrepancies.
10
The number of letters that noted each comment was compiled. Then each comment was expressed as a percent of the total number letters as well as the total number of signers. The committee reviewed these results and decided upon further consolidation of the information to provide a succinct representation for the report. The tallies for oppose protective designations and support protective designations tally to slightly greater than 100% because some letters expressed both support for protective designations and opposition to protective designations.
11
Appendix 2: Specific Areas Noted by Writers
Note: We recognize that some areas extend beyond Grand County, but have recorded what people noted .
Eastern Book Cliffs North of I70 128 Corridor Fisher Towers Onion Creek Adobe Mesa Fishlake National Forest Porcupine Rim/Sand Flats Amasa Back Gemini/Tusher Potash Rd Amasa Back Bike Trails Goldbar Canyon Professor Valley Arches Adjacent Grand View/Mt. Waas Rainbow Rocks Areas near Gr & CO rivers Granite Creek or Canyon Range Creek Around Moab Gray Canyon Renegade Point Around National Parks Green & Colorado Rivers Roan Cliffs Backcountry Grey Canyon Rock Creek/Sinbad Ridge Bartlett/Tusher Hell Roaring Canyon San Rafael Swell Beaver Creek Hells Hole Secret Spire Beckwith Plateau Hidden Valley Seven Mile Canyon Behind the Rocks Hideout Canyon South Mountain Big Horn Mountain Hill Creek Spring Canyon Big Triangle Horsethief Point SRMA Bitter Creek Hunter's Canyon Stillwater Canyon Black Mesa Island in the Sky Survey Point Bookcliffs Jack Creek Canyon Sweetwater Canyon Castle Ridge Johnson's Up on Top Tavaputs Plateau Castle Valley Kane Creek Taylor Canyon Cataract Canyon Kane Spring Road Tenmile Canyon Cedar Mesa La Sals Three Canyon Cliffhanger Trail Labyrinth Canyon Tombstone Rock Confluence Green and Colorado Long Canyon Turtle Canyon Culvert Canyon Mary Jane Canyon Upper Horseshoe Canyon Dark Canyon Mexico Point Westwater Canyon Dead Horse Point Mill Creek White Rim Desolation Canyon Mineral Canyon Wild & Scenic Rivers Diamond Canyon Morning Glory Willow Basin Dome Plateau Mt. Peale Willow Creek Dragonfly Canyon Myton-Sand Wash Yellow Bird Duma Point Negro Bill Canyon
AGENDA SUMMARY GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 18, 2014 Agenda Item: J Discussion on Funding of Proposed Full-Time Lead Technician Position for TITLE: the Weed Department
FISCAL IMPACT: Remaining 8 months of 2014: up to $13,175 in benefits costs (unbudgeted) Ruth Dillon, Council Administrator; Orlinda Robertson, Human Resources PRESENTER(S): Director; and Tim Higgs, Weed Supervisor
BACKGROUND: Prepared By: The County is charged with “an effective program for the control and containment of noxious weeds on all lands under their control or Ruth Dillon Council Administrator jurisdiction…," as per The Utah State Noxious Weed Act, State Code 4-17- (435) 259-1347 10 (attached). [email protected] with Tim Higgs The Weed Department operates an annual General Fund budget of Weed Supervisor $97,000 plus an annual Grant budget of $70,000 to $80,000. and Orlinda Robertson During the 2013 budget workshops, the Weed Supervisor and HR Director Human Resources requested support for a new position for the 2014 budget. The Weed Director Supervisor was tasked with locating grant monies for the position or for
some portion of the position.
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: The following information provides a basis for the current proposal: Attorney Review: In 2013 the Weed Department was forced to turn down $20,000 worth of N/A work for another agency, due mainly to lack of personnel. High turnover, creating more than $6,000 in unemployment benefit costs, combined with this opportunity loss, prompted the Weed Supervisor to bring this $26,000 hard cost inefficiency to the Council (as well as a multitude of soft costs in inefficiencies) with a request for support in funding a higher functioning department “with solid feet on the ground.”
Problem: High Turnover Resulting in Expensive Inefficiencies. In 2013, the Weed Department experienced a high rate of turnover: recruiting, hiring, certifying, and providing on-the-ground training of 3 new hires at different times. Historically, there have been 13 different employees for the past 13 years for the seasonal positions, with turnover occurring every 1 or 2 years. Proper identification of plant identification takes 2 to 3 years, rendering the 1 or 2 years of training ineffective and a waste of time for the Weed Supervisor when seasonals do not return.
Why the turnover? Low wages at $10.00/hr (Grade 1, Step 1) at the new limited hours results in a limited pool of applicants; A limited pool of applicants means an increased probability of hiring a lower-quality seasonal; Lower-quality seasonals can be and have been problematic in the field, resulting in reduced interest in the job for other seasonals; No benefits, combined with low wages, results in lack of incentive to return the following year.
Impact of high turnover: Weed Supervisor’s charge for an effective program for noxious weed control in the County is compromised due to reduced productivity. Without licensed spray applicators, the Weed Supervisor must do the work of seasonals until licensed (typically one month) and thus cannot focus on other priorities; Without returning trained seasonals, the Weed Supervisor must provide training and thus cannot focus on other priorities; With a lack of staff, the Weed Supervisor is unable to take advantage of new grant-funded opportunities ($20,000 in 2013); Staff turnover means higher unemployment benefit costs to the County ($6,000+ in 2013).
Proposed Solution: Incentivize Staff to Return. o Increase seasonal grant-funded wages… o … from Grade 1, Step 1 at $10.00/hr to Grade 6, Step 1 at 12.72/hr; o This position requires a Pesticide Application License within 30 days of hire, thus the adjustment is justified; o This higher wage would increase interest, attracting higher quality applicants and increased likelihood of a consistent seasonal staff each year; o No cost to County. o Add a new full-time position… o This would allow for 2 teams of 2 licensed staff (1 full-timer and 1 seasonal in each team); o Teams of 2 would improve efficiencies for work done simultaneously at separate team locations in the backcountry (for example, Book Cliffs for one team and along the riverbanks (via boats) for another team); o Teams of 2 would improve efficiencies in digging & bagging plants and in hose-pulling & spraying of plants in difficult to reach areas; o The third seasonal would continue to work on bio- control and research. (Bio-control includes treatment of noxious weeds by biological agents such as the tamarisk leaf beetle, the Russian Knapweed gall midge, and bindweed mites.)
Current Weed Department organization (compared to 2012 with a staff of 5): 1 full-time Weed Supervisor (Tim Higgs) 1 seasonal part-time grant employee for bio-control (Wright Robinson) 2 part-time seasonal grant Weed Technicians licensed for pesticide application (both currently vacant)
Proposed Weed Department organization: o Add 1 new full-time Lead Technician (licensed) at Grade 9, Step 1, $14.73/hr o Wages and taxes for remaining 8 months of 2014: o Apply approximately $21,200 of current unused grant balances, as allowed by the grants o no cost to County for 2014 o Benefits for remaining 8 months of 2014: o Requires Council approval of up to $13,175 (unbudgeted); amount is as much as 40% less for the individual health plan vs. the family health plan; o Note: Benefits for a 30-hour work-week on average must be provided due to the new Affordable Care Act o Note: Grants do not cover benefits
According to the Weed Supervisor, most Utah counties pay salary and benefits for their seasonal Weed Department staff, while utilizing grant- funded seasonals for special projects only. Grand County could still rely on grants for seasonal part-time Weed Department staff.
For 2015 and beyond, a budget request will be made for the County Council to consider approving the wages ($30,600), taxes ($2,800), and benefits (up to $19,600) for a total of up to $53,000 for the new full-time position, just as the County has done over the years for other departments in need of a functioning department.
In the Council Administrator’s view, to expect the Weed Supervisor to annually find an additional $33,400 in grants to help fund wages and taxes for a full-time position is unreasonable and would re-create the turnover problem and the ensuing inefficiencies in controlling noxious weeds in Grand County.
Lack of an effective program of noxious weed control can mean a drop in value of farming properties, toxicity to wildlife and livestock, including horse diseases, reduced garden production, and much more. For our county, effective control requires pairs of trained “feet on the ground,” and teams of 2 is sensible.
ATTACHMENT(S): 1. State Code 4-17 2. Proposed Job Description
4-17-10. Jurisdiction of state and local agencies to control weeds. The departments or agencies of state and local governments shall develop, implement, and pursue an effective program for the control and containment of noxious weeds on all lands under their control or jurisdiction, including highways, roadways, rights-of-way, easements, game management areas, and state parks and recreation areas.
Enacted by Chapter 18, 1985 General Session Grand County Job Description
Job Title: Weed Lead Technician Department: Weed Location: 1000 E. Sand Flats Road, Moab Reports To: Weed Supervisor
Pay Range: Type of Position: Job Status:
Grade 9 Full time Exempt Public Safety Part time Non-exempt Safety Sensitive Revised 03/2014 Seasonal Grant funded On-call Emergency Enterprise Appointed
DOT
Job Summary Under the direction of the Weed Supervisor, the Weed Lead Technician performs a variety of work associated with the collection of data and control of noxious weeds and bio-control; collaborates with individuals from many other agencies both State and Federal; and supervises technicians when necessary. This is a grant funded position. If at any time, funds become unavailable due to termination of or reduction in the grant, this position may be terminated or reclassified.
Supervision
Received: Weed Supervisor Given: Weed Staff, when required
Essential Duties • Identifies, locates and maps noxious weeds within the County. • Works with different State and Federal agencies to ensure noxious weeds are controlled on these agency lands as well as, private land. • Controls vegetation in specified areas of the County road right-of-ways and other County properties. • Operates and does minor maintenance on the spray equipment. Maintains daily records of work done and a spray log with all information required by the state. • Keeps current on all regulations that apply to chemical application, endangered species and wetland laws. • Works in different areas of county collecting and organizing data related to noxious weeds. • Assists the Weed Supervisor in the treatment of noxious weeds which may include bio-control, chemical and manual methods.
Knowledge, Skills & Abilities
Knowledge of: • Computers and software applications which may include Excel, Word, and Outlook. • Use of office equipment including fax machines, phone systems, computers, two-way radio equipment, etc. • Establish and maintain effective working relationships with the public and county personnel. • Plant identification preferred.
SFRA Rec Tech I (seasonal), Updated 5/2012
• The use of a GPS unit to map the location of any noxious weeds within the county regardless of land ownership and ensure that an annual map of the noxious weeds is printed out preferred.
Skills in: • Collection and organization of data. • Supervision of subordinates. • Maintaining records and preparing reports.
Ability to: • Identify the 27 plants listed on the State Noxious Weed list, and other vegetation. • Operate and do minor maintenance on spray equipment. • Work and complete tasks without direct supervision. • Identify the State Noxious Weeds • Collection and release of bio-control agents. • Work independently
Physical Demands • Must be able to lift fifty (50) pounds. • Ability to carry forty (40) pounds on back. • Daily work requires standing, hiking, bending, pushing, pulling and stooping.
Working Conditions • Potentially stressful, busy and fast-paced work with extensive public contact. • Majority of work is done outside in extreme temperatures. Summer temperatures can reach over 100 degrees.
Education & Experience • Must possess High School diploma or equivalent. • Job related experience preferred. • Certification in pesticide application must be obtained with first thirty (30) days of hire.
Special Requirements • Must possess a valid Utah driver’s license. • Successful completion of pre-employment drug screening is required. • Position is subject to grant funding and requirements. • A twelve (12) month probationary period is a prerequisite to this position. • Must pass a five (5) year FBI background check. • Must exercise tact and judgment in communicating with people; requires a well developed sense of timing and self control when communicating.
The above statements are intended to describe the general nature and level of work being performed by the person(s) assigned to this job. They are not intended to be an exhaustive list of all duties, responsibilities, and skills required of personnel so classified. The approved class specifications are not intended to and do not infer or create any employment, compensation, or contract rights to any person or persons. This updated job description supersedes prior descriptions for the same position. Management reserves the right to add or change duties at any time. Grand County is an EEO/ADA employer.
SFRA Rec Tech I (seasonal), Updated 5/2012
February 2014 April 2014 S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 1 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 March 2014 16 21 22 20 21 25 26 17 18 19 20 22 23 24 23 24 25 26 27 28 27 28 29 30
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
9:00AM Administrative 5:00PM Agenda 10:00AM UAC Legislative Workshop (if needed) Summaries Due Broadcast (MRH) (Chambers) 6:00PM Planning 1:00PM Association of Commission (Chambers) Local Governments (Price) 23 24 25 26 27 28 1
10:00AM Sky West Open 8:30AM Safety & Accident 10:00AM UAC Legislative House (Canyonlands Field Review Committee Broadcast (MRH) Airport) (Chambers) 5:30PM Moab Mosquito 2:00PM USU Advisory 4:00PM Council Meeting Abatement District Board Board (Moab Campus) (Chambers) (CANCELLED) 4:00PM Weed Board 7:00PM Grand Water & (Grand Center) Sewer Service Agency 6:00PM Airport Board (Water District Office) 2 (Chambers)3 4 5 6 7 8
12:30PM Council on Aging 12:00PM Trail Mix 12:00PM Housing Authority 3:00PM Sand Flats 9:00AM Council Workshop (Grand Center) Committee (Grand Center) Board (City Chambers) Recreation Area Capital Facilities Plan 3:00PM Travel Council 5:00PM Agenda Stewardship Committee (… (Chambers) Advisory Board Summaries Due 4:00PM Solid Waste (Chambers) 6:00PM Planning District (District Office) 5:30PM OSTA Advisory Commission (Chambers) 5:30PM Library Board Committee (Arena Conf. Meeting (CANCELLED) Rm.) 6:00PM Thompson Fire 6:00PM Cemetery Dist (Thompson Fire Maintenance District Station) (Sunset Memorial) 7:00PM Thompson Water 9 10 6:00PM1 Transportation1 12 Dist.13 (Thompson Fire 14 15 District (Road Dept. Office) Station)
12:00PM Chamber of 11:00AM 7 County Eco 9:00AM Canyon Country 8:00AM RSVP Gov Econ Commerce (Zions Bank) Dev Coalition (Carbon Partnership (Arches Visitor Summit (SLC ) 4:00PM Council Meeting County Event Center) Center) (Chambers) 6:00PM Recreation District 12:00PM Local Emergency Board (City Chambers) Planning/Hasmat Committee (Fire Station w/ lunch @ 11:30) 5:30PM Canyonlands Health Care Dist. (Grand Center Game Rm) 7:00PM Grand Water and 16 17 18 19 Sewer20 Service Agency 21 22 (Water District Office)
9:00AM Administrative 5:00PM Agenda 11:00AM Affordable 11:30AM City-County Joint Workshop P&P Gov Body Summaries Due Housing Task Force (City Meeting (TBD) (Chambers) 6:00PM Planning Chambers) 9:00AM Envision Utah Commission (Chambers) 1:00PM Association of (TBD) Local Governments (Price) 2:45PM Four Corners Mental Health Board (Green River) 5:00PM Public Health Dept 23 24 Board25 (Green River City) 26 27 28 29
9:00AM UDOT Annual 8:30AM Safety & Accident 8:00AM Gov. Econ. 8:00AM RSVP UAC Manag Meeting (Chambers) Review Committee Summit (SLC ) Conf (SLC) 4:00PM Council Meeting (Chambers) 5:30PM Moab Mosquito (Chambers) 12:00PM Homeless Abatement District Board Coordinating Committee (District Office) (Zions Bank) 7:00PM Grand Water & Sewer Service Agency 30 31 1 2 (Water District3 Office) 4 5
3/14/2014 3:57 PM 1/1 KaLeigh Welch March 2014 May 2014 S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 1 2 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 April 2014 16 17 22 18 19 23 24 18 19 20 21 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 30 31
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
9:00AM - 11:00AM UDOT 8:30AM - 8:30AM Safety & 8:00AM - 8:00AM Gov. 8:00AM - 8:00AM RSVP Annual Meeting Accident Review Econ. Summit (SLC ) UAC Manag Conf (SLC) (Chambers) Committee (Chambers) 5:30PM - 5:30PM Moab 4:00PM - 4:00PM Council 12:00PM - 12:00PM Mosquito Abatement Meeting (Chambers) Homeless Coordinating District Board (District Committee (Zions Bank) Office) 7:00PM - 7:00PM Grand Water & Sewer Service Agency (Water District 30 31 1 2 Office) 3 4 5
2:00PM - 2:00PM USU 9:00AM - 12:00PM 12:00PM - 12:00PM 4:00PM - 4:00PM Solid 10:00AM - 10:00AM Advisory Board (Moab Envision Utah (TBD) Housing Authority Board Waste District (District Historical Preservation Campus) 12:00PM - 12:00PM Trail (City Chambers) Office) Commission (Museum of 4:00PM - 4:00PM Weed Mix Committee (Grand 5:00PM - 5:00PM Agenda 5:30PM - 5:30PM Library Moab) Board (Grand Center) Center) Summaries Due Board Meeting (Public 6:00PM - 6:00PM Airport 5:30PM - 5:30PM OSTA 6:00PM - 6:00PM Planning Library) Board (Chambers) Advisory Committee (Arena Commission (Chambers) 7:00PM - 7:00PM Conf. Rm.) Thompson Water Dist. 6:00PM - 6:00PM (Thompson Fire Station) Cemetery Maintenance District (Sunset Memorial) 6:00PM - 6:00PM 6 7 Transportation8 District 9 10 11 12 (Road Dept. Office)
12:30PM - 12:30PM 12:00PM - 12:00PM UAC Manag Conf SLC Council on Aging (Grand Chamber of Commerce Center) (Zions Bank) 7:00PM - 7:00PM 5:30PM - 5:30PM 4:00PM - 4:00PM Council Recreation District Board Canyonlands Health Care Meeting (Chambers) (City Chambers) Dist. (Grand Center Game Rm) 7:00PM - 7:00PM Grand Water and Sewer Service Agency (Water District 13 14 15 16 Office)17 18 19
3:00PM - 3:00PM Moab 5:00PM - 5:00PM Agenda 9:00AM - 9:00AM Canyon Tailings Project Steering Summaries Due Country Partnership Committee (City 6:00PM - 6:00PM Planning (Castle Dale or Ferron) Chambers) Commission (Chambers) 1:00PM - 1:00PM 3:00PM - 3:00PM Travel Association of Local Council Advisory Board Governments (Price) (Chambers) 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
9:00AM - 9:00AM 8:00AM - 8:00AM RSVP 5:30PM - 5:30PM Moab Administrative Workshop (if Gov Energy Deve Sum Mosquito Abatement needed) (Chambers) (SLC) District Board (District Office) 7:00PM - 7:00PM Grand Water & Sewer Service Agency (Water District 27 28 29 30 Office) 1 2 3
3/14/2014 3:57 PM 1/1 KaLeigh Welch Grand County Job Listings
TYPE OF POSITION JOB TITLE DEPARTMENT CLOSING DATE & STATUS
Deputy Sheriff Note: This job requires the Grand Sheriff’s Office Full-time, Non-exempt County Sheriff's Office Application Packet
Corrections Officer Note: This job requires the Grand Sheriff’s Office Full-time, Non-exempt County Sheriff's Office
Application Packet
Assistant Food Service Manager Note: This job requires the Grand Grand County Jail Full-time, Non-exempt County Sheriff's Office
Application Packet
NOTICE OF COUNTY BOARD VACANCIES for Citizen NOTICE OF DISTRICT BOARD VACANCIES for Citizen Participation. The following Grand County Boards and Participation. The following District Boards in Grand Commissions will have vacancies at year end. Must reside in County will have vacancies at year end. Must reside in Grand County unless otherwise indicated, have the appropriate Grand County; must be a registered voter within the expertise when required by law, and agree to abide by the District; may not be an employee of the District.
County’s Conflict of Interest Ordinance. Apply now. Apply now. Applications Accepted until Applications Accepted until Vacancies are Filled Vacancies are Filled
COUNTY BOARD OR TERM Term VACANCIES DISTRICT BOARD Vacancies COMMISSION EXPIRATION Expiration Historical Preservation Transportation Commission (May reside in 2 12/31/2015 District (must reside in 1 12/31/2017 Grand, San Juan or Emery unincorporated Grand
County) County) Housing Authority of 2 1 12/31/2017
ALTERNATE 12/31/2015 Southeastern Utah Board of Adjustment BOARD 12/31/2017 MEMBERS
For more information call Ruth Dillon, Council Administrator at (435) 259-1347. Interested applicants shall complete the “Board, Commission, and Committee Certification and Application Form” available at www.grandcountyutah.net/pdf/BoardAppForm.pdf or at the County Council’s Office. Completed forms may be emailed to [email protected] or delivered to Grand County Council Office, 125 E Center, Moab, UT 84532 . The County Council will begin making appointments for these volunteer positions during a regular Council meeting before year end.
Board member responsibilities and board meeting dates are available at www.grandcountyutah.net/boards.htm
Updated 2/28/2014
AGENDA SUMMARY GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 18, 2014 Agenda Item: L Approving Proposed Letter of Support for Forest Legacy Funding through TITLE: Forestry, Fire and State Lands for a Conservation Easement in Order to Preserve approximately 541 Acres on the East Slope of the La Sal Mountains
FISCAL IMPACT: None Sue Bellagamba, Canyonlands Regional Director of The Nature PRESENTER(S): Conservancy and Glenna Thomas, Citizen and Property Owner
Prepared By: RECOMMENDATION:
I move to approve the proposed letter of support for Forest Legacy Funding KaLeigh Welch Council Office Coordinator through Forestry, Fire and State Lands for a conservation easement in order to preserve approximately 541 acres of property owned by Glenna Thomas on the east slope of the La Sal Mountains and authorize the Chair to sign all associated documents.
BACKGROUND:
A presentation was made to Council on March 4th by Sue Bellagamba, FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Attorney Review: Canyonlands Regional Director of The Nature Conservancy and Glenna Thomas, citizen and property owner. A request was made during that meeting to place this item on the March 18th agenda for action. Please see n/a the March 4th agenda summary attached for further details.
ATTACHMENT(S): 1. March 4, 2014 Agenda Summary 2. Proposed Letter of Support 3. Property Maps
AGENDA SUMMARY GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2014 Agenda Item: E
Glenna Thomas is requesting a letter of support for Forest Legacy Program TITLE: funding from Forestry Fire and State Lands to purchase a conservation easement on 541 acres that she owns on the east side of the La Sal Mountains.
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
Sue Bellagamba, Canyonlands Regional Director and Glenna Thomas, PRESENTER(S): Citizen and Property Owner
Prepared By: RECOMMENDATION: I MOVE THAT GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL EXTEND SUE BELLAGAMBA, CANYONLANDS REGIONAL SUPPORT VIA A LETTER TO LAURA VERNON, FOREST LEGACY COORDINATOR DIRECTOR, THE NATURE DIVISION OF FORESTRY, FIRE AND STATE LANDS, UTAH DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVANCY, P.O. BOX NATURAL RESOURCES FOR A CONSERVATION EASEMENT ON APPROXIMATELY 1329, MOAB UT 84532, 259- 2551, 541 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SLOPE OF THE LA SAL MOUNTAINS IN [email protected] GRAND COUNTY.
BACKGROUND: THE FOREST LEGACY PROGRAM PROTECTS “WORKING FORESTS” THOSE THAT PROTECT WATER QUALITY, PROVIDE HABITAT, FOREST PRODUCTS, OPPORTUNITIES FOR RECREATION AND OTHER PUBLIC BENEFITS. THE THOMAS PROPERTY IS VERY CRUCIAL TO ELK, MULE DEER, BLACK BEAR, MIGRATORY BIRDS, RAPTORS AND SMALL MAMMALS. BY UTILIZING FREE MARKET PRINCIPLES AND PURCHASING CONSERVATION EASEMENTS FROM WILLING LANDOWNERS, IMPORTANT LANDS CAN BE PROTECTED FOR THE USE FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: AND ENJOYMENT OF FUTURE GENERATIONS. A FOREST LEGACY Attorney Review: CONSERVATION EASEMENT ON THIS PROPERTY WOULD HELP MAINTAIN THE
INTEGRITY OF THIS AREA AND PREVENT FURTHER HABITAT FRAGMENTATION. N/A THE LANDOWNER IS WILLING TO DONATE 25% OF THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF
THE EASEMENTS. THE VALUE OF THE EASEMENT WILL BE DETERMINED AT A LATER TIME BY AN INDEPENDENT APPRAISAL. THE FOREST LEGACY PROGRAM
REQUIRES THAT LANDOWNERS WORK WITH A QUALIFIED ENTITY TO PERFORM ALL DUE DILIGENCE. THE THOMAS FAMILY HAS SELECTED TO WORK WITH THE NATURE CONSERVANCY, A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION THAT HAS PROTECTED OVER 4,000 ACRES IN GRAND COUNTY.
ATTACHMENT(S): WE HAVE ATTACHED TWO MAPS – GTOMASTOPO.JPG AND GTHOMASLOCATION.JPG. UPON REQUEST WE CAN SUPPLY A SAMPLE LETTER OF SUPPORT. GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL MEMBERS A. Lynn Jackson (Chair) ∙ Elizabeth Tubbs (Vice Chair) Gene Ciarus ∙ Ken Ballantyne ∙ Pat Holyoak Jim Nyland ∙ Rory Paxman
March 19, 2014
Laura Vernon Forest Legacy Coordinator Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands Utah Department of Natural Resources P.O. Box 145703 1594 West North Temple, Suite 3520 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-5703
RE: Forest Legacy Application for Thomas Property, Grand County: T25S, R23E, Sec. 3
Dear Ms. Vernon:
The Grand County Council would like to extend support for a conservation easement on approximately 541 acres located on the east slope of the La Sal Mountains in Grand County.
Wildlife: Due to the property’s high elevation and varied topography and vegetation this area has great species diversity, including habitat for black bear, Abert’s squirrel, American pika and band-tailed pigeon. Further, there are several wildlife species of concern in the general area of the property including American three-toed woodpecker, Lewis’s woodpecker, Northern Goshawk, Gunnison’s prairie dog, big- free-tailed bat, spotted bat, and Smooth greensnake. Perhaps most importantly the area is important big game summer range. A conservation easement on Thomas property would help to protect key wildlife habitat and continue the wildlife management goals of the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources.
This area is crucial to elk, mule deer, black bear, migratory birds, raptors and small mammals. A Forest Legacy Conservation Easement on this property would help maintain the integrity of this area and prevent further habitat fragmentation.
Vegetation/Rare Plants: The property is diverse in topography and vegetation. Forest stands are largely composed of Quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce, and Subalpine fir. In addition there is significant acreage of Gamble oak. Lastly, there is one United States Forest Service (USFS) sensitive plant species found in the vicinity, the La Sal daisy, which is found nowhere else in the world.
Water/Watersheds: Five springs, two ponds, one stream and four intermittent drainages are located on the property.
Proximity to Other Protected Land Parcels: The Thomas property is bordered to the south by School Trust Lands, and to the north, east and west USFS-managed lands are either adjacent or within 1-3 miles away. Numerous land trusts are active in the
Council’s Office ∙ 125 E. Center St. ∙ Moab, UT 84532 ∙ (435) 259-1346 ∙ www.grandcountyutah.net vicinity including Utah Open Lands and The Nature Conservancy each protecting thousands of acres in Grand County through ownership of conservation easements and fee title. One such project is in Bachelor Basin, about three miles to the west of the Thomas parcel where The Nature Conservancy holds a conservation easement on over 335 acres. The Thomas property’s proximity to numerous protected land parcels makes it a strong candidate for preservation.
This project is an example of the Forest Legacy Program’s ability to safeguard private property rights by using free-market principles to guide property transactions between willing sellers and buyers.
Conservation action will help to protect an area that is not only important livestock forage and open space; it also supports habitat for numerous wildlife species.
By working with willing landowners, the Forest Legacy program is helping to protect working lands and traditional livelihoods.
We support this project and hope you will give their application full and fair consideration.
Sincerely,
A. Lynn Jackson, Chair Grand County Council
cc: Sue Bellagamba, Canyonlands Regional Director of The Nature Conservancy
Council’s Office ∙ 125 E. Center St. ∙ Moab, UT 84532 ∙ (435) 259-1346 ∙ www.grandcountyutah.net Thomas Property
Miles C:::J Property Boundary o 25 5 10 Thomas Property
~ ,{, ..' =-, ---/
)\S \
Miles o 0.25 05 N c::::J Properly Bounda ry -(-
GRAND COUNTY COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 18, 2014 Agenda Item: M
TITLE: Approve Contract Award for the Purchase of a Polaris Ranger 6x6 UTV and Accessories for the Sand Flats Recreation Area from Morgan Valley Polaris of Morgan, Utah, State Contractor
FISCAL IMPACT: 2014 budget for Capital Equipment $15,000. Actual cost is $11,431.35
PRESENTER: Andrea Brand, Sand Flats Program Manager
RECOMMENDATION: PREPARED BY: I move to approve the contract award for the purchase of a Polaris Ranger 6x6 UTV and accessories for Sand Flats Recreation Area through the state Andrea Brand, contract with Morgan Valley Polaris in Morgan, Utah in the amount of Program Manager, Sand Flats, $11,431.35 and authorize the Chair to sign all associated documents.
125 E. Center St., Moab 435-259-1386 BACKGROUND: Sand Flats has chosen the Polaris Ranger 6X6 because no other make or model is configured to our needs like the ranger. It has the highest load FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: capacity and horsepower in its class. This is important as we are routinely Attorney Review: maxing out the load capacity of our current machine over very rugged APPROVED AS TO FORM terrain and steep hills. This greatly increases the difficulty of operation and creates some safety issues as well. The Polaris Ranger 6X6 will resolve
these issues. n/a ATTACHMENT(S): Morgan Valley Polaris Sales Deal Summary, Morgan Valley Polaris Parts and Accessories
RANGER'" 8x6 'SAGE GREEN
:::~UOTE ADr::;"" ~"' .. I"~;;:oo I SPORT ROOF , 2877945 RH/i;lSfl ham ean enjoy oho •• $n~ ,,"''''''Ion fro", m. e!eme"", I $299.99 ! ! ' willi this dIllOn!. b1acl< p<>lyeth)llbralion.,educlng P·oIamps and ils flat'.oign ko .... th. roof 'I ' i *meh aboYt) 'tie ¢all frame. I
HEADACHEi RACK 2876816 This ~111'I8$h Headaooe Rad\; provides oummndins prom~on I $299,00 5:tthe rear Oftt\e saafing area wlthoutcomproflJlQing rearward ~"bllll)l, I
I • Durable a;s~ WI'lnlde nnlln .- PrtMdes mounting locations for lour wor!< light; {sold I , sepor'''1;j ! . Willnot1itwltha_rp"nol ' I I, I J HORN KIT ; Thi$ Hl>m Kltwm allow)Qu to eujd Be warning nOm to the. console $89.9' 1 I area af1he 20QtHl& RANGElt vehi.cle.1t oonnccto to the whit;l$'s : bat£$rypowersupp!y.
LOCK & RID~~HN.F 2818756 i Thi& dura bit. poly;e.roOf!ste Look & Ride.· ha1fwtnd&bield for WlNDSH';:lO i RANGER Int:llall~ qUicldY""flcleasilywitheuttcol'$ and otf&rs: 8. ! combinatii)1l of protection and wn6!atkm.
• laclc & Rids damps lock onto the W:hJcle frame to hoJd th~ windal1ield sscuralyin place Open ~1'i!Ce I!bo't'e wind$l'ri6ld promotes alrficw into $mns 0"'"
LOCK & RIDE® TOoL RACK 2877039 Cal1)'iPots in , th.e flick ie, nQ longer neededl it cen be remn'Jied in $i:}GOndi and stored !,ITt1ll the ne:4 project Morgan Valley Polaris $ales Deal Summary 800 Fast 10D South .. beaI NuJ\:lllll': Mlr!l>m, \.IT fi40SO " ': . ",' 801-829-64113 IlSe-S29-!lSIiIJ l:Iale: ~D14 .I:le!kery i1lIl« 3[412014 I'Inartz.d Do!s: Customer: GRANOCOUNlY - SANOFlATSRECAI Stock# Year Malo> Modol Modol No"" VIN GRAND IlXS 2014 f'OIARlS Rl_W RGFI EOOl 4XAliR76A7AIl12a456 Major Units Fees & Insurance Down Payment ~Rlc .. $1O,45~.IlIJ VeIl1cla Tax $1).00 Total R"avlau$ Folyments $.00 "'eight $G.oo Sal ... T"" $0.00 Add!llonal Art Today Sll.QO H1mdling $0.00 OO.F.... $0.00 Deferred I':iYll'OnI :sa.00 license Fees $0.00 1'Inarn:ID9 $0.00 Towl Unit $1 ....55,00 TalodFe"3 ~!l.1lIJ ManU! to euotReilat. $G.OO __AC_SOI'I ... $844.35 SenlI<>e ConItOCl $0.00 Total Down "aymehl $1).00 installation $132.00 ~op I Liab Insu",""" $0.00 Tr'ad&Altowanee SO.OO Total Parts and Install $9111.35 TOlal o.."l~t o..floe Tolal Rice $1'1.431.35 Term 1 Les.Down SO"OO AfR 0,000% Add-on 0.0% Amount financed $11.431.35 11.0% Ffnenco Chame- $0.00 Tolal of "">'",..'" $11,431.35 Manlllly ~e"l- $11,431.30 MORGAN VALLEY POLARIS 1 MOto~ole parts and Aac~a8Qriaa DElIL # 22911 Year Ma.Ji:a Model VIN # ;)014 ];'~l:S R14HR76AJ 4XAHR76A7AB223456 Part II: OeBroripti<:>n Qty , 1> .. :i.,,0> Extan"ion 287'1946 SPORT ROOU lPIEC3 1 $236.99 $0.00 2875049 HORN ~GER rRT BA~r 1 $<;1.$9 $0.00 2878756 lRGR aALF W;CNDSln:ELD til L&R 1 ~175.99 1)0.00 2877039 TOOL RACK, RGa 1 $111.79 $0.00 2678818 HElAOACH& MCK 1 $:a57.~9 $0.00 x GRAND COtlN'l'Y - SAND FLAT <30, 'd Ev9E BaS 108 'ON XVj AGENDA SUMMARY GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 18, 2014 Agenda Item: N Approving Proposed Letter from to Uintah County regarding interest in TITLE: participating in studies to address feasibility of an enhanced transportation corridor in Sego Canyon, and potentially crossing SITLA lands to the existing road network in southern Uintah County FISCAL IMPACT: None PRESENTER(S): Lynn Jackson, Chairman RECOMMENDATION: Prepared By: I move to send the attached letter to Uintah County regarding interest in participating in studies to address feasibility of an enhanced transportation Lynn Jackson Grand County Council corridor in Sego Canyon, and potentially across SITLA lands to the existing Chair road network in southern Uintah County, and for the Chair to sign the attached letter. BACKGROUND: See attached ATTACHMENT(S): FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Attorney Review: Letter from Grand County to Uintah County Sego Road Proposal and Briefing Points N/A GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL MEMBERS A. Lynn Jackson (Chair) ∙ Elizabeth Tubbs (Vice Chair) Gene Ciarus ∙ Ken Ballantyne ∙ Pat Holyoak Jim Nyland ∙ Rory Paxman March 19, 2014 Mike McKee, Chair Uintah County Commission 152 East 100 North Vernal, Utah 84078 Dear Commissioner McKee: In the spirit of cooperation envisioned by the newly formed Seven County Eastern Utah Economic Development Coalition, and a desire for closer coordination with our adjacent county neighbors, Grand County would like to advise you of a concept we are considering in regard to enhancing access and transportation systems in northern Grand County. We suggest such potential access enhancements could also be of interest to Uintah County. In 2013, the State Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) entered into a development agreement with Anadarko on 100,00 + acre state land block in the Book Cliffs area of northern Grand County. Our primary county population center of Moab has limited access to this remote SITLA land due to terrain and a poorly developed and maintained transportation system. Currently the only direct route from Moab is an un-surfaced 15 mile long Grand County Class B road which extends north from I-70 at Thompson, Utah through Sego Canyon to the southern end of the SITLA land block. The road now stops where it enters onto a one mile section of Native American lands at the top of Sego Canyon. In the mid- 1980’s the Northern Ute Tribe placed a gate across the route on their boundary to guard against trespass onto their lands by unauthorized hunters and fishermen. Prior to closure this road continued for another 7-8 miles on SITLA lands to an old gas well location. Grand County would like to investigate the feasibility of improving transportation in this area between the SITLA block and the I-70/railway corridor, and perhaps additional routes between our counties. We are hopeful SITLA would participate in both these analysis, due to potential for enhanced economic return from any development on their large state block. We believe two studies could provide information, analysis and projections regarding a potential transportation corridor associated with the Sego Canyon access. One study would focus on potential economic factors that could be attributable to various transportation systems in this corridor. The second study would provide a reconnaissance level analysis of potential routes and costs for these types Council’s Office ∙ 125 E. Center St. ∙ Moab, UT 84532 ∙ (435) 259-1346 ∙ www.grandcountyutah.net of use. The two reports would complement one another, utilizing similar corridor use scenarios. Specific questions and information requirements for the studies would be developed in further detail once agreement was made to move forward. We understand recent studies have been conducted in the Uintah Basin regarding basin-wide economic and transportation analysis affiliated with hydrocarbon production and transportation. It may be beneficial to both counties to augment those basin-wide studies with more site specific study on this direct potential transportation corridor between Grand and Uintah Counties. With Grand counties limited financial assets, it would also benefit our county if financial assistance were available through existing agreements and associated funding affiliated with the basin-wide studies. If this concept is of interest to you we would be glad to engage in additional discussions and develop more tangible plans. We appreciate your consideration in this matter and thank you for your time. Sincerely, A. Lynn Jackson Grand County Council Chair cc: Mr. Kevin Cater, Director School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration Council’s Office ∙ 125 E. Center St. ∙ Moab, UT 84532 ∙ (435) 259-1346 ∙ www.grandcountyutah.net Sego Canyon Transportation Corridor Concept Current Situation Based on SITLA’s 2013 development and leasing agreement with Anadarko for the 100,000+ SITLA land block in northern Grand County, the future use of those lands have been determined; if initial wells are successful, then oil and gas development will occur. Geologically, there is a high likelihood that oil and gas resources will be present in the SITLA land block. Grand County has extremely limited access to this area of our county due to difficult terrain presented by the Bookcliffs. The current Sego Canyon road is a 15 mile long Class B County road connecting I-70 and Thompson with the southern end of the SITLA block in northern Grand County. This is part of a 23- 25 mile road constructed in 1979-80 to drill exploratory gas wells on the SITLA lands. These wells were drilled and plugged, but the roads were not reclaimed. In the mid-1980’s the southern Ute tribe blocked access along this road at mile 15, where the road crosses over about 1 mile of tribal lands before entering back onto SITLA lands. It has remained blocked since that time. The next nearest access alternative is through Hay Canyon, approximately 40 miles northeast of Thompson along I-70. This route involves a 3.5 to 4 hour drive from Moab to get to the northern end of the SITLA block along existing routes. The southern end of the SITLA block, from Moab through Sego Canyon, currently takes about an hour to get to the blocked gate. As a result of this current transportation situation, if oil and gas resources are developed on the SITLA land block, Grand County will receive virtually no benefit from development. Jobs and service industry business will be based in Vernal and Grand Junction. Currently there is minimal commercial trade between Moab and Vernal due to transportation constraints. Additional transportation upgrades that could connect an upgraded Sego Canyon road, cross the SITLA land block to existing paved roads in southern Uintah County, could cut mileage between Moab and Vernal from 230 miles to perhaps 160 miles. This could be beneficial economically for both counties and could greatly enhance commercial business between the two major cities in regard to tourism, goods and service exchange and transportation of hydrocarbons from the southeastern section of the Uintah Basin to I-70 and the railway corridor in central Grand County. Concept Analyze opportunities and options for enhancing transportation system to allow Grand County to benefit economically from: • Potential hydrocarbon development on the SITLA land block in northern Grand County. • Providing transportation for other hydrocarbon development currently occurring in the southeastern portion of the Uintah Basin. • Exploring an opportunity to charge a fee (friction cost) for transportation of hydrocarbons from the Uintah Basin, across a county owned Sego Canyon road right of way, to I-70 and our railroad. • Enhancing overall long-term commercial trade between Vernal and Moab in the tourism/recreation industries. 1 Under provisions that could be placed in the Bishop public lands legislation bill, Grand County would be given RS 2477 ownership of the Class B County road in Sego Canyon, along with required widths to accommodate upgrade. Ownership of this 15 mile corridor would allow the County to charge a fee (friction cost) for every barrel of hydrocarbon transported along this road or pipeline. Indications are that funding to build and maintain this road could come from developers, not Grand County residents. Options for hydrocarbons once at I-70 would be placing on rail cars at a facility in the Crescent Junction- Thompson area, trucking to regional refineries, or piping to a refinery proposed in Emery County near Green River. Proposal Work with Uintah County, SITLA and other partners to conduct feasibility studies for a possible transportation corridor from I-70 north through Sego Canyon to the large SITLA block in northern Grand County. The studies would consider economic factors that could be associated with such a transportation corridor. They would look at the feasibility of upgrading and paving the existing Class B Grand County Sego Canyon route to handle vehicle and truck traffic, and would also look at potential for pipelines. They would also analyze extending this road system through the SITLA land block to connect with existing northern Grand and southern Uintah County road systems. Uintah County and SITLA would likely be interested in assisting in the preparation of the suggested feasibility studies. It appears there may be project feasibility funding available through recent UDOT and CIB projects in the Uintah basin related to transportation and economic studies regarding hydrocarbon production in the basin. The SITLA land block is part of the southern terminus of the Uintah basin. Benefits Residents of Grand County could receive substantial economic gain through development on lands in northern Grand County and the Uintah basin, with minimal adverse impacts other than a road. • Share in development revenue from currently inaccessible state road block. • Provide easy access for Grand County residents to jobs developing the resource, building the road and other infrastructure improvements. • Provide additional commercial exchange between Grand County and the Uintah Basin of all forms, particularly recreation and tourism. • No direct impact to any of Grand County’s recreation assets in southern Grand County. Activity would all be confined along and north of I-70. • Fees, or friction charges, from transport of oil and or natural gas out of the Uintah basin could amount to millions of dollars per year to Grand County for use in providing facilities and services for our residents. 2 CONSENT AGENDA SUMMARY GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 18, 2014 Consent Agenda Item: O-BB O. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between TITLE: KUBL/KKAT and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $13,005.00 P. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between KOSI and KALC and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $16,675.00 Q. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between 103.5 the Arrow and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $14,040.00 R. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between the Zone Sports Network and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $9,000.00 S. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between KZHT and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $14,500.00 T. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between KSL and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $9,080.00 U. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between KXRK and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $13,563.00 V. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between KBCO and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $16,000.00 W. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between KWOF and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $16,000.00 X. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Promotional Agreement Between 102.3 ESPN and Grand County for Moab Area Travel Council in the Amount of $6,000.00 Y. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Letter Sent to Adam Trupp, General Counsel, Utah Association of Counties for Drafting of Amendments to State Senate Bill 176 on Local Funding of Rural Health Care (Chairman Jackson) Z. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Location Agreement for Off the Fence to Film at Canyonlands Field AA. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on Building Permit Application for Additional Remodel at Canyonlands Field BB. Ratifying Chair’s Signature on FY 2014 Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness Planning Grant Application on behalf of the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) FISCAL IMPACT: See Corresponding Agenda Summary, if any PRESENTER(S): None RECOMMENDATION: Prepared By: I move to approve the consent agenda as presented and authorize the KaLeigh Welch Chair to sign all associated documents. Council Office Coordinator BACKGROUND: See corresponding agenda summary, if any and related attachments ATTACHMENT(S): See corresponding agenda and related attachments FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Attorney Review: N/A Proposed Schedule for Moab Area Travel Council Weeks of 3/17, 3/24 5/12, 5/19 and 6/2,6/9,6/16, 7/7 & 7/14 on KUBL/KKAT SALT LAKE CITY-OGDEN-PROVO (Metro Survey Area) JAN14! NOV13 I OCT13 I SEP13 P25-54 ; .' SuSa-Sp 3: 60 $45.00 M-F 6a~ip 20 i 50 $5.00 0.5% 10.0 $100.00 1.5 ; 'SOs M:P8j,:7p 10 $(},1l0 0.5% 2.5 $0.00 . 2.4% 1.1 Daily-Dirt Report ~p • Sa Sa:6p $50.00 0.6% 1.B $150.00 1.4% • 1.2 . 57,000 ; - su 83,..ap 3 $15.00 0,3% 0.9 $45ll0 0.7% 1.2 25,700 . ... ; M-F 6a-7p 20 60 $5.00 0.5% ; 10.0 $100.00 6.6% 1.5 ; 145,800 Streaming :600 M..f" 7a-10a 2 60 $115.00 0,6% 1.2 $230.00 1.0% 1.1 61,300 This report was created using the follOWing InforTTl<:1tion: SALT LAKE CtTY-OGDEN~ROVO; JAN14 I NOV13! OCT13 I SEP13; IVlctro: Multiple OayParts Used; P 25-54; Station Combos Used: "KUBL-FMiKKAT-AM = KKAT~AM, KUBL~FM; See Detailed SourCing Page for Complete DetaUs Copyright 2014 Arbilron Inc_ AU RightS Reserved See the Detailed Sourcing S:.wnrr:aryfor additional page 1 of3 SChedule sourcing, ARBITRON Do", ~~~~~~I~. ~~q en! ~{\ .~ Date This .raOOn does not discriminate in 1l1e sale~=rtis~~ will accept no advertising which is placed with an intent to discr.im.fuate on 1h. basis OIrac., geru:ter or etlmicity. Advertiser bereby certifies that it ismt buying broadcastfug air time under tbis advertising sales oontract fur a discriminatory purpose, including but not limited to decisions not to place advertising on particular .rations on the basis ofmee, gender, national origin., or ancestry. This report was cre.ated using the following information' SALT LAKE CrrY-OGDEN~PROYO; JANi4 I NOV13! OCT13 I SEPi3; Metro: Multiple Dayparts Vsed; P 25·54; Station CombOS Used: -KUBL-FM/KKAT·AM;;.: KKAT·AM, KUaL~FM: See De1alled SoufCing Page for Complete Details, Copyright 2014 Arbitron Inc, All Rights Reserved. See the Detailed Sourcing Summary fur additional Page 2 of3 •••• Schedule sourang. MOAB Getaway Campaign Timeframe: 4/28-5/2 KOSI 101 will feature Moab for a week long promotion where our listeners will win the ultimate grand prize getaway to discover Moab! For 1 week during the campaign, we'll give away station qualifying prizes on-air that will then give them the chance to win the grand prize; two nights lodging for two, one activity for two, your choice of golf, mountain bike, rafting, jeep ride, or horseback and dinner for two. Moab will Receive: -Minimum of 30x live and recorded promotional mentions on-air -Minimum of 30x live and recoded announcements on streaming player -Inclusion in KOSI 101 newsletter (approximately 30,000 members) -Presence on contest page -Creative for on-air and digital components -OJ chatter about activities and contest i Moab to Provide: ~ -1 trip giveaway. 2 weekend night giveaway for two along with dinner for one night and an adventure -~ option for two; golfing, mountain biking, jeep tour, horse back riding, or white water rafting. Trip to be AAmAcl by 1211/14. \O\~\~\'-I /ft..5 Client Initial Adventures in MOAB Promotional timeframe: 4/28-5/4 Only our ALICE 105.9 A-Listers will have the exclusive chance to win a 2-night adventure getaway for two. We'll direct listeners to the Alice A-listers section on our website where listeners will have the chance to win the ultimate weekend getaway to Moab. MOAB will receive: • Inclusion in a minimum of 20 live/recorded promotional mentions running on air 4/28-5/4 • Inclusion in a minimum of 20 livelrecorded promotional mentions online running 4/28-5/4 • Presence on website as an Alice A-Lister with logo, link • Opportunity to have inclusion in station newsletter • Creative for on-air and digital components Moab to Provide: ·1 trip giveaway. 2 weekend night and an adventure option for two; riding, or white water rafting. Trip Proposed Schedules for KALe and KOSI KALe Profile Not only is KAle the top rated station in the market it also reaches a qualified individual! #1 KALe- Adults 25-54 #1 KALe- Adults 25-49 #1 KALe- Women 25-49 #1 KALe -Adults 35-54 English Speaking Ranker "'£IM!"~i,lMl" ""_ At"'! '~1:3l~·1;1.1 cxrn.9< $~H fl2~1l13: _':<-IIU\li13 .---""',...~- .... """ QualilaHvlI> Cllteila Used: (Pal1lclpalecllnl:ll<;yclln!!\Yr) O;R Partl!;jpaleilln ¢IiIn;plng (YO OR Parjldpated In gI>It (yr) OR. P.,ttI,lpallciln 1I1~ln" ' b.ekp~(~r')OR PlIrlfCipAi" In .lior.. ba~k riding: Iyrl OR Partlelrloledlrllogglng - runnlngl\ And ALICE listeners are £ilIIftl=~=~~Ca ~QS8tel>'I~if,{¥l;'Jt$8"t1!>$r$6Cfi!!ll Quafflatl.v.. Ctjj<>f!a UHd: VI.~ed LIlah ijrl Alice is MORE Than Just a Radio Station We are red carpet radio, delivering Denver's active trendsetters and Denver's most passionate and loyal listeners. With a blend of modern adult contemporary and adult top 40, ALICE 10S.9FM focus' on what's hot today. With topical, irreverent programming all day long, ALICE keeps our listeners up to date, with the latest trends, hottest artists can current pop culture. Household tntOma$ Gender Home Ownership Female 52.7% Own 73.6% Male 47.3% Rent 26.0% Employment Status Education Employed Full-Time 67.9% College Degree or More 47.3% ..1f1r Employed Part-Time 13.2% .J,'.f' :f,!.f" ,.,# ,', *'~ ~#r Some College 30.3% Occupation Family & Children Management/Business 4O.0Ii Age 30.0% 3O.0Ii ------... -- PS£.64 P65+ KOSI is Denver's Most Listened to Radio Station!!!! #3t KOSI -Adults 25-54 #2t KOSI-Women 25-54 #2t KOSI -Adults 25-49 The KOSI listener loves outdoor activities, are familiar with Utah, and have the money to travellli The KOSI Listener is: • KOSI is14% more likely than the Denver market average to go mountain biking! • 82,700 do YogaJpilates • 40,600 KOSI listeners go to Utah at least once a year, • 242,400 KOSI listeners have a Household Income of $75k or more! KOSI is Denver's Most Listened to Radio Station KOSI reaches over 700,000 adults every week and has consistently reached the most sought after women in the market for the past four decades. KOSI is Denver's "At Work" station and delivers both quantity and quality, reaching more full-time and white collar workers than any other station in Denver. Household-In-c-o-m-e------,I 25,0% Occu[;1ation 20.0% +------,.,,~:__=""'__i Management I 13.5% 15.0% +--:-:-=-4h9l~-l Business & Financial 10.0% Professional 19.5% 5.0% Sa les a nd Office 12.4% 0.0% White Collar 45.4% ,,{;>"" ;,"''0'''' ~,>"" ;\'0"" tl''''' 6 ",'" ",-," ",'> ,,# 0 ¥ "",'? ",,'" .;.'? "" .:;," ,,1:l Famil~ & Children ...... ---_... .._--- _--_ __ No Children 65.7% One Child 15.2% Two Children 14.0% Age Em[1lo~ment Status Three or More Children 5.2% Employed Full-Time 48.7% ~.~20.~ ..-=--~~---~~-~~---- 19.5% 19.9% Employed Part-Time 16.2% Sex Homemaker / Student 25.7% Male 43.6% or Retired Female 56.4% Home Ownership Education P18·24 P25·34 P35·44 P45-54 P55-64 P65+ Own 70.8% College Degree or More 37.2% Rent 28.0% Some College 31.8% Other 1.2% High School Graduate 26.6% Denver-Baulder Metro Release 1 Mar 2011 -FEB 12 SCarborOlJgh Market Rankers ..... English Speaking Ranker OE",VER'IlOUlOER (..,.,,,, SUM\' ",""I 0EC'l31NOV1310CT13 SI.at.lM Rar1~11& I3o:ted ore TQjJ.5 Uoor$l!lIB$d English Speaking Ranker DENVER-BOULDGR (t;,~ SUrvey'Area) DEC13 I NOViS; OCT13 SCARBOROUGH R2 2013: SEP12-AUG1S Stallon R:3!'lkmg$ BasOOoo: TQP 5 UserSetec\5!d: Qualitative Criteria US<>baCk riding (yr) OR Particlpaledln Jogging - running (yr) OR PartiCipated In Mountsln.biklng (,.,.) OR PartiCipated in Yoga - pllates (yr)) ~ J~ Moab Travel Council 2014 From: Gary Zane Phone: (1101) 526·1046 EOlail: [email protected] 2121120144:411 PM Flight o.tes: 0312412014· 07120{2014 Geography: /lAetro Market SALT lAKE CrT'/.()GDEn-PROVO D&[1o: P 35-54 Survey: JAN14 1 HOllSI DEC13! NOV1S! ocml SEP13 . ~" .. ".. ,,-~.-.- '"~'~"--""'--'-r-'----~" 7,109 J3(10,OO, 13,300 $105.00; 4,~00 12 The cost of fIlSching each target person an ivemge of 3,5 times Is 5,7 cents, This $latlon dC$ not discriminate in the sale of advertising time and wil accept no advertising which is placed with an intent to discriminate on tho basts of raCe, gender or etlmicity, Advertiser hereby certifies thai it Is !'lot buying broadcasting alf time under this advertising sales contract for a diScriminatory puq>ose, inCluding but not limited to decisions not 10 place advertising on particular stations on the basis of race, gender, national origIn or ancestry. --:p~~~V\ JiM A9j'tI, kraJ ~ dw'rr ~L~1 $'J~iJ , ~ S4;ln Th-k: f) TIU! flrstdemO listed is !he PrImary Demo, This rejIDI1 was ~d III TAPSCAN USing the Iu~fng !IrIormallOn: SALT lAKE CITY-OODEN-PROVO; jAN14! HOL13! OEC13 J NOV13! OC [131 seP13; Metro; MuIIlpie Oayparts Used; P 3&.54; See Del611ed Sourcing Pal]9 for Complete Delails. AARBITRON €I 21)14 Arbl!rtlflll'l(:, AU Rlgh15 Resmed. Page1of1 - The Zone Sports Network Moab Area Travel Council will run the following weekly schedule for three (3) weeks in May and three (3) weeks in June on The Zone Sports Network: FLIGHT WEEKS (6 Weeks -TBD) 515, 5112, 5119, 612, 619, 6116, 1280 AM - 97.5 FM - 960 AM (Simulcast) lOx :60 sec M-F 6A-10A DJ and PK in the Morning 10x :60 sec M-F 3P-7P The Big Show with Monson and Checketts 10x :60 sec M-F noon to 3P Cougar Sports with Alema Harrington on 960AM (2) :30 sec Saturday 7A-9A Inside the Outdoors exclusively on 97.5 FM (8 weeks) (196) Total radio spots on the Zone Sports Network :? Live Call-ins from Steve Brown in Moab on May 15th in PM (4P- 6P) and 16th during AM drive time 17A-9AI on 1280 AM - 97.5 FM- 960 AM ,. (4) :60 second live reads from Moab's Rally on the Rocks each day (8 total) Inside the Outdoors Remote Broadcast from Moab - Saturday, May 17th: (May be prerecorded on Thursday or Friday) ~ Two hour show with Interviews with Steve Brown and Bob Grove Saturday from 7 A-SA .. ~ The Zone Network Webpage: ",". k Moab Area Travel Council will receive an ad (630px x 300px) in the Feature Rotator on the 1280thezone.com home page.:>./, '~ for the months of May and June 2014 campaign. ~ ~ _.£. 0: . G;'fa,J. (!.i; t). i r .' • TOTAL Investment: $9,000 , L un -:rat1islJ1 lrIf... : :s-/S'/t.., ~ SPDRTS"'ETWDRK ~ 12BOmlll 9SDrnm 97.srnm ~ ______~--'-'... ~·.s Djgital Schedule KZHT·FM 2 Weeks: :ltI7-3124 4 Weeks; 612-6123 In App 320x5O Banner • O~ nn~ denoted With an a$ttlflsk f"} are tl'iO$e With user defined audIence estimates. ThIs audience eslimai:e is derived by LAN lniemai.Jonal based on Arbltron's'N copyrighted and propria/8/)' audience estimates. The PPM ratings are based on audience estimates and are the opinion of Arbitron TIl and should not be relied on for precise accuracy or precise representativeness of a demographic or radio market. KZHT·FM 2 Weeks: 6/30·717 KZHT·FM· MOAB :05 2 Weeks 6130-717 KZHT·FM • IHeart Stream 2 Weeks: 6130·717 • • KZHT -FM • Endorsement w/Frankie 2 Weeks; 619-6116 • KZHT·FM • Promo get a way 2 Weeks: 619-6116 KZHT·FM • IHeart Stream Promo get a way 2 Weeks: 6/9-6116 KZHT·FM·'~m MOAB Interview wlFrankie 1 Week: 619 • Order Ones denoted With an astensk (.} are those wlth lIser defined audIence estimates. This audience estimate is derived by LAN Internalional based on Arbiiron's'N copyrighted and proplieiary audieoce estimates, The PPM ratings are based on audience estimates and are the opinion of Arbltron TIl and should not be relied on for precise accuracy or precise representativeness of a demographic or radio market. KZHT-FM 2 Weeks: 515-5112 KZHT -FM - MOAB :05 2 Weeks: 515·5112 KZHT -FM - iHeart Stream 2 Weeks: 515-5112 KZHT-FM 3 Weeks: 619·M3 KZHT-FM - MOAB :05 3 Weeks: 619-5123 KZHT -FM - IHeart Stream 3 Week.: 619-6123 • Grtler linss denofed with an asterisk: (") are thase with user defined audience estimates. This audience eslimale is derived by LAN IntemaLional based 00 ArbUron's"" copyrighted and proprietary audience estimates. The PPM ratings are based on audience estimates and are the opinion of Arbitron 1M and should not be relied on for precise accuracy or precise representativeness of a demographic or radio market. "'th~~C~~~G Par~niore, Margaret . (~Ql)90B-j491 (BOl}910-13iolfAx:j margarefj:iarcllriore@cleamhannel~oom Prepared For: Date: ~2121/2014 Moab Travel Advertiser: Moab Area Travel Council Attn: Marion Delay Spots: 519 PO Box 550 Total Cost: $14,500.00 Rates guaranteed until: 2128/2014 Moab, UT 84532-0550 Summary Moab Area Travel Council ...... ···:"rii'l .. MOAB Area Travel Council 2014 (62024) : Broadcast, Combined Revenue Invoice Salt Lake City-Ogden-Provo - Jan '14 (MSA) Women 18-49 Spot Schedule KZHT-FM 2 Weeks: 3/17-3/24 KZHT-FM - MOAB :05 KZHT -FM - iHear! Stream 2 Weeks: 3/17-3/24 • Order lines denoted with an asterisk (*) are those with user defined audience estimates. This audience estimate is derived by LAN Intemational based on Artitron'sTM copyrighted and proprietary audience estimates. The PPM ratings are based on audience estimates and are the opinion of Arbitron 1M and should not be relied on for precise accuracy or precise representativeness of a demographic or radio market. TERMS AND CONDITIONS The Term "Advertiser" shall include edllert!ser and eny agency or buying service named in Order Confirmation, and aU persons and enflties Included within Advertiser agree that 1hey are jOintly and severally Uable for alt Obligations of Advertiser under this contrnd r~rd!ess ofwho is billed, except any agency is liable tor inlIOIce payments only to the extent the agency has been paid by the advertiser. 1. PAYMENT (a} Advertiser agrees to pay in edllance for the transmission covered by this contract unless Oiherwlse expressly agreed in wming. (b) If Stalion has extended credit, Statlen shall render Invoices monthly. Payment by Advertiser is due within 30 days unless Involce Is senllo agency or buying service, then ne1 payment is due wilhin 45 days. Past due accounts shall be charged inleres! at the rate at 1 annual percentage ratej or, if less, the highest rate allowed by applicable law, from the dale of the invoice. If Advertiser nO(lces .any error on an inllOice, Adverliser must conlad Stalion in Wriiiog within 7 days ot the lnvoice date, stating the invoice number, amount and description of alleged error, and including any supporting documentation as may be required by Clear Channel. All invoice charges will be <:Onsidere,d" valid if no writlen dispute from the Cbent is received by Station within the 7 day paria TO THE EXTENT PERMiITED BY LAW, STATION MAKES NO WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, ABOUT THE SERVICES DESCRIBED IN THIS AGREEp..1ENT AND DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE . .. Order lines danOied with an asterisk (") are those WIti'! user defined audience estimatss. This audience estimate Is derived by LAN International based on Arbitron'sTW copyrighted and proprietary audiEnce estimates. The PPM ratings are based on audience estimates and are the opinion of Arbitron 1M and should not be relied on for precise accuracy or precise representativeness of a demographic or radio market. ARBJTRON Proposed Schedule for Moab for October With KSL SALT LAKE CITY-OGDEN-PROVO (Metro Survey Area) JAN14 I DEC131 NOV13 I OCT13 P 18-54 KSL Schedule includes Prime Time :60's, Traffic Sponsorships, Weekends and Matching treaming Bonuses KSL·AM March: 1 Week (3117} Oaypart' Notes I Spots l.ength Rate Avetage: Persons : Tu-Th 3p-7p Afteroon Drive 4 ,j 60 1 $165.00 1, 7,400 • • Tu-Th 3p-7p ~ _~~~_~o~_~~_ Sponsorship Bon~~_l 4 • 7-$0,00, -YAOO : - ---'.'" .".- 6a-7p W~~~e.~~_~_~'S _ !_ 3! 60 "-[$30iiol 3,900 "-"' f"'-""~~'~- TU-Th5a-7p Pm Drive Traffics 4 10 'S60,00 • 6,500 , Sa iOa-6p : Saturady Traffics 3 10 '$1S.00T 5,600 Su 10a-6p "~'" Su~-day -- 5 60 --'- .- ...... 12m-12m Overnights 3 60 : $5,00: Traffic ---~----.-.-.- ,,:;--:;. -:::7a--_1"2,c-m --rEve'rilng 3 • 10 -$1000T I\.1·Su 5a~12m : FuJI Week bonus 1 ' 60 $0,00'1 One Week Tota! .j 30 I' $36£"" : Right Total 30 , $36.83 : 5,100 : KSL·AM March: 1 Week (3124} 'Paypaii NoteS. Sptlts Length Average Persons 7p Drive 60 , $165.00 : '--i Tu-__ .______Th 3p d_~_ *' -1_~_~Afteroon ______~ _,_., __~ _____ d'_" __ .d I_' ___ d~---_d4 , 7,400 ' l Tu-Th3p-1p ... ! Afte~oo::E~~aspons~~,~~~~,~~~.,j 4_~.,_~ ____ _ $0,00 : 7,400 : f Sa6a-7p i Weekend 60's .. __ ... __ J __ .~~ __3 l60 $3{),00 : 3,900 Tu-Th Sa-lOa Am Dlive Traffic 4 ' 10 ! $65,00' : Sa 10a-6p sawradyTrafflc,;' " , 3T10"'''$15,001 10a-6p- Tsunday--' ''''---''''-,,', '5T60-'c-"S5.00J~"'-' , Tu-Th 12m-12m iOvemlghts 3 • 60 __ ,:,1 $5.00 i ""~:":c~i : Tu-Th 7a·12m : Evening Traffic 3 ' 10 '$10:riii'! 5,200, 1M-Su Sa-12m ~ FuIlWe~k'borlus'---- 1 60 $0.00 : 4,400 ') One Week Tota[ , 30 $37,5c-O:~'- - 5,200 croatsd t:Sl,lg ~1)8' "QI!D\*.'ing In''2.r::abr;r:; SALT :..J\KE :::n-Y·OG02N·;::>ROVO. Jr;N14! :JEC13- i NOV13l :\ilvl:ipi8 UdYPW;-($ C:;,t:'i~. p ,&-54; Sse D..;;L,,;tsd ':'}('tl;:,ilng P~FJ'j ;Dr ~-::t~:':r.:4et0 D6!$i1s. Page 10f7 Schedule ARBITRON KSL-AM March: 1 Wee!< (3/24) Daypart 1 _ 1 ~ - Notes ~ - Spots Flight Total 30 . $37.50 5,200 . KSL-AM May: 1 Week (5/5) Daypart I ~ - ~Notes Spots length Average Persons Tu-Th 3p-7p Afternoon Drive 5 60 . $160.00 7,400 Tu-Th 3p-7p Afternoon Drive Sponsorship Bonus 5 7 $0.00 7,400 Sa 6a-7p Weekend 60's 4 60 $30.00 3,900 Tu-Th 5a-10a Am Drive Traffic 10 $65.00 7,400 Sa 10a-6p Saturady Traffics $15.00 5,600 Su 10a-6p Sunday $5.00 1,900 Tu-Th 12m-12m Overnights 60 $5.00 3,500 Tu-Th 7p-12m Evening Traffic 3 10 $10.00 1,900 One Week Total 33 : $41.21 5,100 Flight Total 33 $41.21 5,100 Notes • I Spots , Afternoon Drive Tu-Th 6a-7p Afernoon Drive Sponsorship Bonus Sa 6a-7p Overnights 60's Tu-Th 5a-10a . Am Drive Traffic Sa 10a-6p : Saturady Traffics Su 10a-6p i Sunday $5.00 1,900 Tu-Th 12m-12m. Overnights $5.00 3,500 Tu-Th 7p-12m . Evening Traffic $10.00 1,900 M-Su 6a-12m Full Week bonus , 60 $0.00 4,400 O-~'e-'Week Tolal 1 $40.30 4,900 . ______1., ,, __ ._~ ___ ~ ... ___ ..•. __ • ~_~ .. _, __ ._L_~, _ ...... ""--$40.30' . Flight Total 4,900 . Aftemoon Drive 7.400 Weekend 60's 3,900 Tu-Th 5a-10a Am Drive Traffic' 7,400 ~ _._n Sa 10a-6p Saturady Traffics 5,600 Su 10a-6p 1,900 3 3,500 'li;'':, Ui/8i00 usin91.h8 fo!ioNfn;: lnforr"at!orl SAl, Ui-Kt::' cn-y.·OGOEi'J-PRCVO: JAN44,' DL:C~0; NOV13: \!k,:~·::. \~)_d\'r+~ C"l:»;-~:::(~: ,-'~<;:j . P f 3· .s·t, SV~ ;) ';:~l;ie:i Sour::;:':] PaGe ~CT Ccrnp:s'f; D('!:;l;;~:. Copyriqh: 20"(/ r\.'b~iro~,; inc. AH High::> Ri~SO:'vcd. 80f; thG ;:)t~t3:jEJ(~ SO~H'dn9 SUnJF1i3ry fer additior:al SD,li"dl'fJ, ARBITRON KSL-AM June: 1 Week (6130/ ~ O;;ypart: Notes ~ SpOts Length ,R~te 'Average Parsons Tu-Th7p~12m EvenlogTraffic 3 ' 6(l $10,00 1.900 M~Su Sa-12m : Full \o;;ieek bonus 1 : 60 $0,00 4,400, One"Week Total; 35 $39,71 5.200 , r" Flight Total 35 $39.71 5,200 KSL-AlI'l July: 1 Week (7/14/ Notes i Spol$ Length .-; Tu-Th 3p-7p ~ Afternoon Drive . $165,00 5 ' 60 7.400 : Tu~Th 3p-7p j Afernoon Drive Sponsorship Bonus 5 7 7,400 :,-.-,,- Sa 6a-7p Weekend 60's 4 60 $30,00 ' 3.900, , Tu-Th 5a~10a Am Olive Traffic 6 10 $55.00 , 7.400 1oa·6p , Saturady T raffles 3' 10 $15,00 5.600 Su 10a-Gp ; Sunday 5 60 $5,00 1.900 : Tu~Th 12m~12m :' Overnights 3 6(l S500 ' 3,500 Tu-Tn 7p~12m ,Evenlpg Traffic 3 10 S10.00 1,900 : One Week Total 34 $40,88 5,200 : Flight Total 34 i 540.88 5.200. KSL-AM July: 1 Week (7/21) bayport, Noles· - . Sjjot$ 4 Length • Rate ,Av'?1090 Persons , Tu-Th 3p·7p : Afternoon Dnve 5,60 ! $165,00 ' 7.400 ' !iu:i'h3p:7p 1 Prime Time Sponsorship Bonus : 5'7 $0,00 ! 7,400 i ; ------._'-.''<, ,. ----,---,-,---_. , Sa 6/l·7p ~ Weekend 60's 4"60 $30,00 ······3:900' - .-,-.-., -.,~-- !'Tu-~Th 5a~10;-- 6 10 $55.00 7.400 1Sa 10a-6p -'r~_~!~~~dy-Trafflcs 3 10 $15.00 5.600 . , So 1Oa~6p Sunday 3 60 $5.00 1,900 ;,-~" 1 Tu-Th 12m-12m i OVernights 3' 60 3.500 ]"Tu~'Th 7p-12m" --'i"Evening Traffic 1.900 . f"one Week' Total 5,400 , iFlIght]',,!al """.,-'" MOil' KSL-AM March Streaming Match: 1 Week {3/17} Da;.;part Notes Spots Length:: Rate Average Persons'" 1_~:~~~~~._~~~:gg:@:·$P~~~rs.hip.:~oii~~:r .··~34+~6~·0: :=j~$Oo,:~o'~o i.'· .-.. ~: ::~~ • :,~~a 6a~7p [ Weekend 60's ~ 1,000 ; Til-- Th 5a-7p ; Pm Drive Troffics 4 ' 10 . $0,00 1,600 . : Sa 10a-6" 1 Saturady TraffiCs 3 10 , $0,00 1.400 " This r€'pcr, 'Has. (:[O-;':1\eo u31r:.; th: fotlC::'Nin;; h1fopl'n~:k:;n: S}\L:' U' C(;p-yrlgh.i 20 it" l'.1(:!li'D;, <'C, Ai! R!;:j:')t;~ R9:$(';vo(:~ SaG tbQ D;;ta:ieG SOVrdi,;! Summ:;I"r f;f;" Go;!;;ior:nt F(1:g~,- 3 of 7 s':K!rdc'f,l. ARBITRON KSL·AM March Streaming Match: 1 Week (3/17) Notes Spots Length, Rate_Average Persons , Su 10aw 6p , Sunday S 60 $0.00 , soo Tu-Th 12m-12m Overnights 3 60 $0.00 900 Tu-Th 7a-12m 'Evening Traffic 3 10 $0.00 1,300 M-Su 5a-12m i Full We~k bonus 60 $0.00 , 1,100 One Week Total 30 . $0.00 ' 1,300 30 '$O()() I 1,300 Tu-Th 3p-7p Afternoon Drive Sponsorship Bonus Sa 6a-7p Weekend 60's 3 60 1,000 Am Drive T raffie 4 10 $0.00 1,800 Saturady Traffics 3 10 $0.00 1,400 Su 10a-6p Sunday S 60 $0.00 SOO Tu-Th 12m-12m: Overnights 3 60 $0.00 900 ; Tu-Th 7a-12m Evening Traffic 3 10 $0.00 1,300 , M-Su 6a-12m Full Week bonus 60 $0.00 , 1,100 1'-"'6rie Week Tot'a'i"'" 30 $().ooT 1,300 ; .. .. ---~--.~~.--~ ._-_ __ ------,------~-; --_.-.-,----_.-- Flight Total 1 30 $0.00 1,300 KSL·AM May Streaming Match: 1 Week (S/5) . Notes Em Length t Rate ; Average Persons, ! Tu-Th 3p-7p , Afternoon Drive j 5 i 60 $0.00 1,800 ! Tu-Th 3p-7p Afternoon Drive Sponsorship Bonus l S 7 $0.00 1,800 - , i Sa 6a-7p Weekend 60's 4 60 , $0.00 1,000 Tu-Th 5a-1Da Am Dlive Traffic S 10 $0.00 : 1,800 i Sa 10a-6p Saturady Traffics 3 10 $0.00 ' 1,400 S 60 $0.00 SOO i Su 108-6"p " •...... • s,u.... " ....d ....a."y...... i Tu-Th 12m-12m Overnights 3 60 $0.00 900 Tu-Th 7p-12m Evening Traffic 3 . 10 i $0.00 SOO .~. ------$0.00 1,300 'l---- 33: ! Flight Total i 33· $0.00 ; 1,300 Notes Spots Afternoon Drive c·······.·····"Afernoon Drive Sponsorship Bonus : ThiS rep:>rt W8S u9nt9d uSfng t!""~ fG!!o~·Jin9 InfoiT,l2t!cn: -SALT Lj>.J Afternoon Drive Afternoon Drive Sponsorship Bonus ~ Sa 6a-7p Weekend 60's Tu· Th 5a·1Qa Am Drive Traffic' · S.10a.-6p Saturady Traffics 1,400 Su 10... p SUnday 500 Tu~Th 12m~12m Overnights $0.00 r 900 Tu·Th 7p-12m Ever:lI':g Traffic 3 . 60 · $0.00 ! 500' M-Su 5o.12m Full Week bonus 1 60 r$0:00 1,100 . ; One Week Total 35 · $0.00 1,300 • Flight Total 35 : $0.00 , 1,300 ! KSL·AM July Streaming Match: 1 Week (7114) Notes .' Spots • Tu·Th 3p·7p Afternoon Drive 5 60 $0.00 1,800 . Tu-Th3p-7p Afemoon Drive Sponsorship Bonus 5 7 1,800 S.6a·7p : Weekend 60's 4 60 1,000 .... ~~~"" ...... Tu-Tb 5a-1()a ~ Am Drive Traffic 1,800 ------i- Sa fOa-6p Salurady Traffics 1,400 • • Su 10.·6p : Sunday 500 ' 900 Tu·Th 7p·12m Evening Traffic 500 I' "O'nc··;';'ieek' Total 34 i SO.OO. 1,300 ['Fllght Total 34. 1'$0.00 i 1,300, Th~s r:;..~~crt V}2S CBflW(i l:sing 1~,!0 infOiTn2UOG S/\L~·" LAKt C7Y OGDE.N -PROVO: J/-\N·14 / C-:;::C~::' NOV; 3 ! OCT1:3; ivk:·~!'(;, 7~'k,ui:jd D;;Ylk:,';S~; j~>:_:--i: ;SD-C :r_~" ,,,.,; S,j.;.m;,;:.j f';:Z;0 -m C>.:;:-r'p!2~f; D\.'\_olo:~, Schedule ARBITRON KSL-AM July Streaming Match: 1 Week (7/21) Daypart Notes 1 Spots 1 liength Average Persons Tu-Th 3p-7p Afternoon Drive : $0.00 . 1,800 Tu-Th 3p-7p Prime Time Sponsorship Bonus . $0.00 1,800 Sa 6a-7p Weekend 60's $0.00 1,000 Tu-Th 5a-1Da Am Drive Traffic 1,800 Sa 10a-6p Saturady Traffics 1,400 Su 10a-6p Sunday 500 Tu-Th 12m-12m Overnights 900 "- , ~~--."-,." Tu-Th 7p-12m Evening Traffic 500 One Week Total 1,300 Flight Total 1,300 Grand Total StatiOn Spots investment KSL-AM 454 $9,080.00 ! Total 454 $9,080.00 For your investment of $9,080,00, your message will reach 408,600 Adults aged 18-54 an average of 5,7 times each. Dale 3/7/'<1 Date f ~ nt M This statton does not dls~minate in the sa;:~ertising time, and will accept no advertismg which IS placed with an mtent to discriminate on the basis of race, gender or ethnicity. Advertiser hereby certifies that it is not buying broadcasting air time under this advertising sales contract for a discriminatory purpose, including but not limited to decisions not to place advertising on particular stations on the basis of race, gender, national origin, or ancestry. 'lilis report was u0elBd Ui3ing the foi!owi[;Q information: SALT LAKE C!TY·O':'~DEN--t-1ROVO; ,J/\;\!1/j : DEC,3 : (lGVI3 f ()CT'f3; i'i;'.':<'; \:1U~':i_'(" ')2/;13'-[" ,j',·e::i ~) '0-5-;- :>:,0 D;.;~;2U0,d S()ur:;in'J PYj\; ~Dr (;C:Y1:)!;::;'" ~}e-:>:;~,: C(lpyri~!ht 201" /\!-:);tron ii~C. P,!i Fl(1:1tS KSsen'(;;j. See th<~ Detailct:l Soui'dng Su:mnDry f(n addi;ionai Schedule s~!urcir,9· ARBITRON Schedule Detailed Sourcing Summary Market: SALT LAKE CITY-OGDEN-PROVO Survey: Average of Arbitron January 2014, Mitron Decomber 2013, Arbitron November 2013, Arbitron October 2013 Geography: Metro Oaypart: Multiple Dayparts Used Demolintab/Population: Ago/Gonder Population , lntab Adults 18-54 Avg Daily: 1,162,400 Avg Daily: 515 Avg Weekly; 1.162,400 Avg Weekly: 453 Stations: User Selected Additional Notices: Bold, italicized text Indicates this daypart's ratings have been weighted by the user. Estimates reported for dayparts which start and end between 12m and 5a ao'e based on the 5a~5a broadcast day, Estimates for all other dayparts are based on the 12m~12m calendar day, Encoded statfons qualify to be reported if they have received credit for five Of more minutes of hstening within a quarter hOJf from at ,east one PPM Panelist and an Average Weekly Cume Ratir1g of at least .495 during the Monday - Sunday Gam ~ Midnight daypart for the survey period. PPM eslj;r:ates are derived from the PPM technology and methodology and are s:.Jbject to the qualifications and limitations staled in '\hat Report. The TAPSCAN Web software product is accredited by MedfB Rating CounCil and reports both accredited and non-accredited data. For a list of the accredited and non-accredited Arbilron markels and data available through TAPSCAN, click here: h!~p:l:www.arbil!on.com!home{n1f.;;~llCCleditaLion.asp Estimates are derived from panelists that provided the listening data fOi the PPM Service and are subject to the Hm:tations stated within that Service Report, The Reach and Frequency Model utiUzed by Arbitron is formulated on the bases of the Harris Model, a Linear Frequency reach~am}.frequency mode!, and the Slide Rule audience (cume) growth model. Ascription Website: I1Up:ifascrrplion,arbil;o~.oom Ratings Reliability Estimator hHps:/frre.arbitron.com An aBack Special Notices and Station Activities document has been generated fOr each survey. Please select the hyperllnk to the sJrvey that interests you. t'i!tps:tiebooK,arbl~I\i;1.comtsecure!PP6f2Q14JAN!O;01lpdf$lSpedaINO!lCBS,pdf h ttps:ffebo:)lcm bilroru:ornisecu I e!PPSf2{) 13DECf01 ClIpdfs/$pecialf\!oUCes,pdf Ilftps:ifebooi("arbilr\?fl-comfsecure1PP6f2013NOVn101(pdfg/Sj:>i!(:!aINolices_J.,'df h!lps:!.lebook.aruilron-1X,)!nisec-,velPP8I2013OCTffi101ipdfsl$peciBINoli:::::as,f-!df iZtTcn; C,;llV:i~l:: '2~jn;Z /':\'itr.:)!' in.;, Scfil-;2n:: I\rbltr{j~' li>;. /-,\1 i~,' ''-'''''',,",: FI}r n;ZI., :'iF"~' wnt r,,! ;; li~t;l':"e Crum ':Fl)l'T;'il 11';\;, [:ll.li:Jjc:Z': ~1} ''tv ~i n;u;:,')f!:; linn t;U"lit1,,'2Ii t ;"b 1': l':<;-~, T-\P;;:( X\' i:>~: :~":,';~ ,:fT,\?S( ,\,,' 1;;;;_ ~>:::d '" '{;l' :i..:\::::.~-, ARB.TR.ON Proposed Schedule: Marian Delay Executive Director Moab Area Travel Council From: Mike Gurr, [email protected], KXRK. [email protected] SALT LAKE GITY-OGDEN-PROVO (Metro Survey Area) JAN141 DEG131 NOV131 OGn31 SEP13 P 18+ KXRK-FIA March: 2 W.eks (3/24, 3131) Daypan DaYPilrt Trtle Length SpotS! flat. J Frequency Ave"'.'J<' Rating - CPR GRPs In'''''lment Weight' Nl1!es M-F 411-7. • 60 5: $5.00' 1.3 0.2%. $25.00. 1.0 ,i, _,, __~~:?? L:_~?:~:~ --.--~---.~~ .. ___ ;_ · W-F 6a-1Oa .. ----.- ·s'o'·· +31 $'16500' 1.2 ·~-O~S%-~r-$2i5:00~i 1.8 $495.00 100.0",<, i W-F 10a-3p 60 3 $85.00' 1.2 0.5% • $170.00 1.5 $255.00 100.0"/. -t- IW-F 3p-7p OO I 3 $99.00 1.1 0.6% i$198.00 1.5$297.0011000% • 60 $25.00 I 1.3 • 0.2% . $125.00 2.0 $250.00 : 100.0"'<' Sa6a-10p 60 $300'0' 1.2 • 0.3% . $100.00 1.5 $150.00 i 100.0% Su 6aw 12m 6() :15.00' 1.2 0.2%: $25.00: 1.0 .$25.00 '100.0% M~Su 6a-12m 60 10 I $0.00 i ""'1:'2"t 0.4%: $0.00 4,0 $0.00 100.0%' ,. -." i················,·· '-'-'-r --_ ..... -.-- ...... Ooe Week Total _ 44; $34.02 1.7 • 0.3% • $104.69. 14.3' $1.497.00 .. _ ... '" -"-,-,,-~~~-"~.-- · AlghtTotal 8Jl $34.02 I :2.0 -o:::i0k"$104.69T28.s" $2:994:00 • KXRK-FM May: 2 Weeks (Sn 2, sn 9) Daypart . Daypart 1111. tef1!lllj Spols I Rate i Fr<;quenyy Average Rating CPR GRPs Investmen!' Weighl Notes · M,F 4.-7. SO 5 $5.00 1.3 0.2% I $25.00 1.0 $25.00 100.0% W-F 6a-loa 60 1.2 0.6% $275.00 1.8 : $495.00 : 100.0% - -.-._. . 60 1.2 0.5% • $170.00 1.5! $255.00! 100.0% IW-F ioa=ii' • __ .. j ...... · W-F 3p-7p 1.1 0.5% . $198.00 1.5 $297.00 ' 100.0% -M-F 7p-12m 0.2% , $125.00 '-"2'.'0='; $250.00 100.0% sa S.-10p 0.3% i $100.00: 1.5 $1"50.00 100.00/~-;-· Su 6a~12m -():2~kr $25.00 . $25.00 100.0% M-8u Sa-12m iO'$OOO'; 1.2 • 0.4% 1 $0.00 $0.00 100.0% " ---. ccc 44, $34.02. . -0,3% Til()4.69+ ·ccc··" $1,497.00 This report was created using the following information: SALT LAKE CITY -OGDEN-PROVO; JAN14! DEC13! NOV13! OCT13 I SEP13; Metro; Multiple Oayparts Used; Pi 8;-; See Detailed Sourcing Page for Complete Datails. Copyright 2014 Arbltron Inc, All Rights Reserved. See the Detailed Sourcing Summary for additional Page 1 of 3 Schedule sourcing. AR.BITRON KXRK-FM -- - -'-- May: 2 Weeks (5112, 5119) ~ Daypan Daypart Tille [enlJlh SPOl$ j ',Rate Ft<¥lueno:y A'wage Rati/)!f CPR - GRj>_ lnvesMent! Weight Nmos : Flight Total 88, $34.02: 2.0 : 0.3% : $104.69. 28.6: 02.994.00: KXRK-FM June-July: 5 Weeks (6/16, 6123, 6130, 7{7, 7N4) Daypart - i Oaypart Tille, Li;mJ!h Sp{)lS I Rate Frequ1lncy Average Raling CPP 'GRPs Investment: Weighl Noles I M~F 4a-7a 60 : 5 $5.00 1.3 O.2<:>/~ $25.00 1.0 $25.00 . 100.0"" . '-~!.-.- 60 3$170~()O 0.6% $283.33 $510.00 I 100.0% . W-FSa:l0a ~_." •. _. ______,____ 1 _____ . W-F loa-3p 60 3 $85.00' 0.5% : $170.00 : 1.5 $255.00 i 100.0% - -'/'" W-F3p·7p 60 3 $100.00 0.5% $200.00 1.5 $300.00 ,_. ------,-- c, ___ "",. M-F7p-12m 60 10 $25.00 1.3 0.2% $125.00 2.0 .,.".,., ..... ---- .. -- Sa 6a-IOp 5 $30.00 1.2 . 0.3% $100.00'" 1.5 $150.00 100.0% 60 ---.--,-.- '60 5; $5.00 : 1.2 0.2% : $25.00 1.0 : $25.00 100.0% : -_.,,------,-, ------~ --.._-- ..•_- '" -', 60 10 . $0.00 1.2 0.4% -_$():O()l· . 4.0 $0:00-100.0% ---1------.. -,-, ------; .. , 44 $34.43 1.7 0.3% $105.94 14.3 $1.515.00 Flight Total 220 $34.43 2.8 0,3% $105.94 71.5 , $7,575.00 l • Grand Totafs Station j Spots Rate FrEtgUency I Average Rating! CPR GAPs I Jnvestment 0.3% : SI05.38: 128.7 i $13,563.00 • ~ 0.3%' $i05.38i1is:7~'$13:563IJOl J'fsjw yC of ~f\ - Date T h IS statton. does not d""Iscnmmate 1Il th e saI e 0 fad~~dvertlsmg Umet an WI'II accept no ad" vertlsmg Wh' Ie h' IS p 1a ced W1t'h an mtent. to discriminate on the basis of race~ gender or ethnicity. Advertiser hereby certifies that it is not buying broadcasting air time under this advertising sales contract for a discriminatory purpose, including but not limited l'O decisions not to place advertising on particular stations on the basi-s of race; gender, national origin, or ancestry, This report was created using the following lnfarmatlon: SALT LAKE GrTY·OGDEN-PROVO; JAN141 DEC13/ NOVi3 / OCT13 I SEP13; Metro; Multiple Dayparts Used; P 18+; See Detailed Sourcing Page for Complete Details. Copyright 2014 Arbilron Inc. All Rights Reserved. See the Detailed Sourcing Summary for additlonal Page 2 of 3 Schedule saUteing. Prepared For-: Dale: 31312014 MOAB AREA Adve!1iser. MOAB AREA TRAVEUCANYONIAND Spots: 240 PO Box 550 Total Cost: $16,000.00 Rates guaranteed until: 3'1012014 Moab, UT 84532-0550 Summary .. ·' Spot Schedule KBCO-FM 2 Weeks: 3110-3117 !hIs audience estimate IS derillfj(j by LAN Inlemationaf based on Artlitron'STiO copyrighted and proprietaly audience estimates. The PPM ratings are based on audience estimates and are the opinion of Arbitron TM and should not be relied on for precise accuracy or precise representativeness of a demographic or radio market. RBCO·FM 2 Weeks: 311O-lIt) Proposal Totals .. ' .....;; •::.....:);.. ':"".:' .•. ;.'" ..': ::;:i f;~~~ .t9lillf®'i 160 $15,200.00 so $800.00 Total 240 $16,000.001 This audience estimnle is derived by LAN Inlemalional based on ArDitron's n. copyrighted and proprietary audience estlmales. The PPM ratings are based on audience estimates and are the opinion of Arbitron 1M and should not be relied on for precise accuracy or precise representativeness of a demographic or radio market. ARBlTRON Proposed Schedule DENVER-BOULDER (Metro Survey Area) DEC13 I NOV13 I OCT13 I SEP13 I AUG131 JUL 13 P 12+ KWOF·FM Flight A: 10 W..,ks (3124, 3131, 4f1, 4114, 1121, 7128, 814, 8111, 10127, 11/3) Daypad ~ , _ J 0?Y1¥I~ TItle ,Sppts f Length i WeIght ~te, I Average Battoo CRR 0ume Persons Fregl1enGY. J InvBstmeot M-F Sa-9a 5 60 ; 100.0% $80.00 : 0.2% $400.00' 82,200 . 1.2 $400.00 M-F 7p-10p 5 ' 60 100.0% $15.00 0.2%· $75.00' 77,200 1.2 $75.00 Sa·.su 9a-4p 5 60 100.0% $25.00 0.2% $125.00 86,900 1.3 $125.00 . M-Su6a~a 10 60 100.0% : $0.00 , 0.2% $0.00 289,500 1.1 SO.oo One Week Total 25. . $24.00 0.2% . 5120.00 _ 289,500 1.4 . $600.00 F!ight T atal 250 . : $24.00 ' 0.2% -~ $120.Q(i-~-- 590,600 2.9 $6,000.00 Grand T atals $taljorr $ppts 1j Rafe ; Average: RatIng, CPR ; :Come Persons i Frequency Investment KWOF·FM 250 $24.00 0.2% : $120.00 590,600 . 2.9 $6,000.00 : Total 250 $24.00 0,2% $120.00 i 590,600 . 2.9 $6,000.00 Date .~7rq /\ .:J Da'. This station does not discrimmate in the sale of a~ will accept no advertising which is placed with an intent to discriminate on the basis of race, gender or ethnidty, Advertiser hereby certifies that it is not buying broadcasting air time under this advertising sales contract for a discriminatory purpose, including but not limIted to decisions not to place advertising on partIcular stations on the basis of race) gender; national origin, or ancestry. D::',/'v'ET1.·30.;LDHt DEC'::} } ,,0'./:0 " ;)CT'i3; SEP1~';! /\uC i:; i $z,=<,; !)t:<--c,;ie:.; S;'j(:~-;:; '\I P?;.if' ~~-_< "ip:,;kc ',bt:.;E;;. C:;pyr';.;hi 2( 1,;'· l\ri.1j!fU: \ inc ;\.11 :~:ghls 1<-0St;;;YC(j. Set? ttl>;:' U01;ji!,yj 30ur(;!!'{~ SUi;)!~iic\,'y fo; acdiij{;;ld! {cQ;,,;::inr;:, Proposed Schedule • 25x spots per week -$600 net per week Weeks to run: 3/24, 3/31,4/7,4/14, 7/21, 7/28,8/4,8/11, 10/27,11/3 Accepted By Date Accepted By Wllks Broadcasting Date This contract is non-cancellable. Slmon~ not di~milla.."<\ ill. t!resakl O(M\'Ilrti$ll1& time, alld will t\Ot ~ ao;n."rtl$ing whld! is ~ \l41/l tim intent tQ QberimiDollaoo lhe b!l.$i&of ram orcth.nicill'. Any ptVvi$l()l'l in any=ilT07 ~t Ii>: ad~l'rtk All scbeduk:iili\IllP:IIN\'a!li!bility..... 'IM ~ Group teSl1!'V1)1itne rlghtttHm_or=:K:E! witllou! n(ll'\n,. In ~n of .. d~ertllJnt;sa->.ices, 110.1<1",;1;01'1 servi(2';, or relaled~ Ilro>ided by Wilb Broade!lstlnsilieAd"'lrtU;n-and trn.ir Agencies st'amntl'eall amm:mt October 30'" 2014 This Agreement is between Discover Moab and ESPN Denver beginning March 17th, 2013 and ending.october 30'", 2014. Discover Moab will receive: • 300 X 100 Discover Moab web tile on ESPNDenver.com for duratiollS of campaign flights (See schedules) • Discover Moab Handouts at ESPN Denver Broadcast Remotes for duration of campaign flights • Inclusion in (3) ESPN Denver email blasts for duration of campaign flights • A commercial schedule airing the weeks of3117416, 6/23-6/29, 717-7118, and 10123-10/30 (119 :60 commercials, 35 :10 Second Live Sports Updates) • Matching commercial schedule streaming online at ESPNDenver.com Discover Moab Weekly Commercial Schedule on 102.3 ESPN-March 17" - April 6th 30'" 2014 (3 weeks) Mon Tues Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mike and Mike/Colin Cowherd 5a-12p 2x 2x 2x 2x 2x CJ and Les/Locker Room 12p-1p Ix Ix Ix Ix Ix Live Sports Updates 5a-7p Ix Ix Ix Ix Ix NCAA Tournament Games lO·6p Ix Ix June 23rd June 29th, and ,July 7'",-July 18th 2014 (3 weeks) Mon Tues Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mike and MikelColin Cowherd 5a-12p 2x 2x 2x 2x 2x CJ and LeslLocker Room 12p-7p Ix Ix Ix Ix Ix Live Sports Updates 5a-7p Ix Ix Ix Ix Ix MLB Game of The Week 6p-9p 2x October 23rd - October 30th, 2014 (1 week) Mon Toes Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mike and Mike/Colin Cowherd 5a-12p 2x 2x 2x 2x 2x CJ and Les/Locker Room 12p-7p Ix Ix Ix Ix Ix Live Sports Updates 5a-7p Ix Ix Ix Ix Ix NFL Game of The Week 10-6p 2x Total Investment For Discover Moab: $6000.00 Discover Moab will be billed $2500 in March, $2000 in July and $1500 in October '~""'~'~-"---- Sal Wolf ESPN Denver RANG GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL MEMBERS A. Lynn Jackson (Chair) . Elizabeth Tubbs (Vice Chair) ('.ene Ciarus . Ken Ballantyne' Pat Holyoak Jim Nyland' Rory Paxman March 13,2014 Mr. Adam Trupp General Counsel Utah Association of Counties 5397 S. Vine St. Murray, UT 84107 Salt Lake City, Utah 84102-2818 Dear Mr. Trupp: The Grand County Council would like to express our sincere gratitude for the contributions that you made on S.B. 176, amendments to "Local Funding for Rural Health Care." We acknowledge the time and energy that you put forth and deeply value your consistent communication with us to make certain that the bill fit the needs of Grand County, our citizens, and more specifically the needs of Canyonlands Health Care Special Service District and the long-term care center in Moab. Thank you for the superior job that you do and the service that you provide to Grand County. Sincerely, A. Lynn Jackson, Chair Grand County Council cc: Jeanette Kopell, Chair, Canyonlands Health Care Special Service District Council's Office' 125 E. Center Sf.' Moab, UT 84532' (435) 259-1346· www.grandcountyutab.net Location Agreement DATE ~«.M. \6,1D\..rJ... (Name) ~{~ l~ (Address) iCk 'bt, Owner hereby grants to OFF THE FENCE ("Producer") and its respectNa parents, subsidiaries and affiliates, licensees, successors and assigns, for good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, permission to ent,r up~nd USIA.,th1\i, property and the contents thereof and the appurtenances thereto located at pA~~'j, 5i~ '(Q?fr- (the "Property") for the purpose of photographing and recording certain scenes in connection With a program provisionally entitled Stan Lee's Superhumans (the "Program") during production thereof, and as necessary during any extension, reshooting or preparation of publictiy or promotion thereof. All physical embodiments of filming, recording and photography on the Properiy shall hereinafter ba known as the "Materials". Producer may place all necessary facilities and equipment on the Property and agree to remove same after completion of work and leave the property in as good of condition as when received, Producer will use reasonable care to prevent damage to said Property, and will indemnify the owner, and all other parties lawfully in possession, of said Property, and hold each of them harmless from any claims and demands of any person or persons arising out of or based upon personal injurtes, death or property damage suffered by such person or persons resulting directiy from any act of negligence on Producer and/or OTF's part in connection with Producer andlor OTF's use of the Property, Owner grants to Producer all rights of every kind in and to the Materials including without limitation the right to exploit the Meterials throughout the world, an unlimited number of times, in perpetuity in any and all media, now known or hereafter invented, and in connection with the Program or otherwise and for advertising and promotional purposes in connection therewith and all rights, including copyright in the Materials shall be and remain vested in Producer, and neither Ihe Owner, nor any tenant, nor other party now or hereafter having an interest in the Property, shall have any right of action against Producer or any other party arising out of any use of said Materials whether or nol such use is, or may ba claimed 10 be, defamatory, untrue or censoreble in nature. The undersigned acknowledges thaI Producer is photographing and raconding such scenes in express reliance upon the foregoing, The undersigned represents and warrants that the undersigned has all rights and authorijy to enter into this agreement and 10 granllhe righls granted hereunder, Producer are not obligated to actually use the Property or produce the Program or include the Materials in the Program for which it was shot or otherwise. Producer may at any time elect not to use the Property by giving the owner written nalice of such election, in which case, neither party shall have any obligalion hereunder. This is the enlire agreement, No alher authorization is necessary to enable Producer to use the Property for the purpose herein contemplated. AGHEED ANDA E~P Df) BY. ______~.~ 4 I DATE t;JhaJA. Dete ofFilming: ______ Registered office: The Sion, Crown Glass Place, Nailsea, Bristol, BS48 1RB CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE I DATE(MMJOD/YYYY) THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND. EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES I'IOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. PROctlCER ~ lynasa Nash Joshua D Cranney ~ 7610P84 65 E Center st i I NAle' Moab UT 84532 '","OFO " Truck • 21709 INSURED INSURER B, Farme ... I • 21652 H&L Hanger LLC , Mid Century I I • 21687 3071 S HWY 191 Mesa I i I Moab. UT 84532 ,, • II ~. THIS_I~_~9 .... ~~:.:~.~_T~~!.!_H.~.. I :E~.. LISTED BElOW.~.~V_E_ B.~~~ ~~~~r:~.:'"9 7.':1E_ ~~~.r~E"~_~~.~~~ !.£.~.THE POLICY !.~~~ ~ERALLIABIUTY ~ ~~ is 'x "eNeAAI u ••" • $ 100,000 _ P CLAlMS-~MDE [XJ OCCUR i:$ 5,000 MP00430010Q0449 211312014 211312015'~QV.INJJRY s 1.000,000 -- _ ...... _...... ------, I LIABILITY ... _____ ANY AUTO ,OOILY ALL OWNED SCHEDULED 'OOILY .... ____ AUTOS AUTOS NON.QWNED _ HIRED AUTOS AUTOS :s _I UMBRELLA UA8 h OCCUR I I : $ OESCRIPTlDN OF OPERATIONS I LOCATIONS I VEHICLES (Attach ACORD 1 01, Additional Remarks Schedule, it more space is !equiredj Location: Canyonlands Field, 1 Airport Rd Moab, UT 84532 Grand CO:.Jnty to be named additional insured CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE Grand County THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTiCe WILL BE DELIVERED IN 94 Aviation Way ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. Moab. UT 84532 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ACORD 25 (2010/05) © 1988-2010 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights ,eserved. The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF MOAB - GRANO COUNTY, UTAH 125 E CENTER ST • MOAB, UT 84532 CALL 435·259-4134 TO SCHEDULE INSPECTIONS Building Receipt ate ermit WIssued O? • \ ~ • \ A liNumber 0 Address "tLf. 11 J An \-t'rm IJ }nllv Number -753 Subdivision• oelty o County o Castle Valley Utah St.t. # GRA \ iJ..tJ:3 {.? CO (not required) i Assessor's o Residential C1 Commercial Vah.lation: Parcel # $ (2... DD(')-oo NameD Ii ~\ AI ..1- Building SF ~ulldrng fees $ 14! OD ...'"z Malt Address l'1. Ih .ft, Rough SasementSF Pian Check Fees $ ~ Ct,i 11 kIlt,- 4, OD A. ~ !City/State/ZIP WIotA b IH- ';pi finish BasE!ment SF Water Conn $ Cov~red Patio/Deck SF State 1% Fee ...:E :Email $ I L! \ '""- Phone Garage/Carport SF Impact Fee $ Type of Construction Name ('n ,II lAM r:",.."u..-kt. .d PlanDe~~:~ I ,lew $ '" a. ~ Mail Address U U Number of Bud dings Investigation $ .. Re-lnspectlon .. Phone C.II Number of Dwellings $ Z'" Fee 0 " u Number of Stories $ ~ Email ~'?trtLe.~' JU ~1tJ1fJ w Utah State Contractor's License # Number of Bedrooms $ '"Z r--5c;6 w vu1.If:::~~ III : Utah Municipality Business License it Number of Sati1rooms $ .. Name tI. \- ~ Cl .,k.',d Max Occupancy Load $ ~ ~ [] No ToTAlFEl:S ,... Mail Address Fire Sprinkler DYes .. " .... $ 'l't>9.' 4\ '. 'Phone Cell OFFICIAL USE ONLY 0~ u ~ § Email b Utah State Contractor's License # V)E.h~ !:I ... Utah Municipality Business license"# .. Name CULINARY WATER DWell o Utility ~ Mail Address SEWAGE o Septic Tank o $ewer o Other ti Phone Cell FlOOD PLAIN STATUS Elevation Certification 8 Email ARE DEPARTMENT I (R£QUIREO fOR All.. COMMERCIAl APPUCATIONS) :;; Utah State Contractor's license # Approved by Date ~ ""- Utah Municipality Business License # FLOOD PLAIN PERMIT '" Name Apprpved by Date ~ Mall Address MOAB CITY PUBLIC WORKS ~ Phone Cell 8... Approved bv Date § Email GRAND WATER AND SEWER SERVICE AGENCY z Utah State Contractor's license # ~ Approved by Date :.::;; Utah Municipality Business Ucense # ZONING ADMINISTRATION LIST ALL ADDITIONAL CONTRACTORS/ARCHITECTS/ENGINEERS .. proved by Date ON THE BACK OF THIS FORM HEALTH DEPARTMENT Type of Improvement/Kind of Construction o Sign 0 Build :J ~model o Additlon o ~ Convert Use tJ Demolish Side Side Rear Plan cSubmitted oN/A HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS UTAH HMEP PLANNING GRANT PROGRAM 2014 APPLICATION PACKET UTAH LOCAL EMERGENCY PLANNING COMMITTEES TRIBAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE COMMITTEES Administered by Utah Department of Public Safety Division of Emergency Management 1110 State Office Building Salt Lake City, Utah 84114 Phone: (801) 538- 3400 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE L INTRODUCTION 3 IT. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS 4 III ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES 5 IV. INELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES 6 V. EVALUATION PROCESS 7 VI. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS 8 VII. AVAILABILITY OF ADDITIONAL FUNDS 8 VIII. APPLICATION 9 -12 VIII. NOTIFICATION OF SELECTION 13 IX. PROJECT DURATION, REPORTS, AND EXTENSIONS 14 X. APPENDIX A (Final Report Form) 15 XI. APPENDIX B (Reimbursement Form 85 -21) 16 XII. APPENDIX C (HMEP Grant Contact Information) 17 2 I. INTRODUCTION On September 9, 1992, the United States Department of Transportation, Research and Special Programs Administration released its Final Rule, 49-CFR-Part 110. This rule provided a reimbursable grant to every state, Indian Tribe and U.S. territory, to assist in hazardous materials response planning and training related activities. This Final Rule, originally outlined in the Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act (HUMTUSA), has since been renamed the Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness Program (HMEP). Under this format, a single agency for each state is designed to be the coordinator of these grants funds. In Utah, the HMEP grant coordinator is the Utah Division of Emergency Management (DEM) in cooperation with the Utah State Fire Marshals Office (FMO) and the Utah State Hazardous Chemical Emergency Response Commission (SERC). The Division of Emergency Management will be assisting the Utah State Fire Marshall's Office to administer the planning portion of the HMEP grant The FMO is required to "pass-through" 75% of the funding directly to the Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPC's) and Tribal Emergency Response Committees (TERC's) to assist them in their planning activities related to Hazardous Materials (HazMat). The DEM Community Support Section will be assisting the State Fire Marshall and the SERC in the following ways: 1. Community support liaisons will attend LEPC'sl TERC's and assist communities in their planning efforts. 2. Administer HMEP grant program to LEPC'sl TERC's for the purpose of conducting specific projects related to their respective hazardous materials emergency planning needs. 3. Serve as a liaison between the SERC and Local LEPC's I TERC's. 3 II. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS The HMEP Pass-Through Grant Program is open to aU LEPC's and TERCS's in Utah. No other governmental or non-governmental entities may apply. While work may be done under one or more agencies of a county or municipal government, application must be made by the jurisdiction's LEPCITERC. A. LEPClTERC Chairpersons must sign all applications. B. Completed any required reports and financial documentation for the previous year HMEP Grant if applicable. C. An applicant must be a viable LEPCI TERC, or working towards having one, and is recognized by the Utah SERC. A copy of the current LEPCI TERC membership will suffice. D. Provide the Division of Emergency Management a copy of meeting minutes, agendas and meeting notices as requested. E. Hold at a minimum, quarterly LEPCITERC meetings. F. LEPCI TERC is in compliance with Sections 301 and 303 of SARA Title III (EPCRA) G. The jurisdiction sponsoring the LEPC has met the NIMS (National Incident Management System) requirements for the current grant year. H. A Tribal Emergency Response Committee is only eligible after applying directly to the Federal Government and not currently receiving HMEP funds. 4 III. ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES Only certain activities are allowable under the HMEP Grant Program. The SERC will use the same eligibility criteria that the USDOT uses for state level programs. Work can be done by the county, tribe or municipality itself or by outside contractors. Examples of eligible projects* are as follows: A Expenses related to the management of the LEPCITERC program, meeting costs, postage, office supplies, etc. B. HazMat analyses for a particular geographic region with regard to the impact on the community should an accident/incident occur. C. Improvement/enhancement of the municipal or county Hazardous Materials Response Plan and/or Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) that addresses HazMat Response. D. Travel and perdiem costs for participating in Regional Hazardous Materials planning efforts including Regional Response Teams. E. Contract or force account costs for planning salary from a non - LEPC member. (ie. Not the emergency manager, fire chief, police chief etc.) F. Commodity Flow Studies of hazardous materials within a jurisdiction or between jurisdictions. An information and instructional guidebook on how to conduct these Commodity Flow Studies is available at the FMO. G. Development of Standard Operating Procedures (SOP), Field Operations Guide (FOG) and the like for hazardous materials emergency response personnel and first responders. I-I, Hazardous Materials public awareness programs and public information. L Overtime, travel, registration, perdiem, and lodging expenses to send an -_...... _-.. LEPC member to Hazardous Materials Planning conferences and workshops, 1. Development of Hazardous Material Policies such as cost recovery ordinances. ,. While applicants may utilize the above listed activities as guidelines, other projects will be considered as long as they are related to hazardous materials emergency planning. 5 IV. INELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES A. Expenditures funded under other grants or agreements B. Purchase of operational equipment C. Purchase of response equipment D. Personnel expenses, overtime, travel, group meals or per diem for participation in drills and exercises E. Any costs relating to the non-planning aspects of Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act such as Sections 304,311,312 or 313 activities F. Costs incurred with no local match provided G. Costs incurred before October 1, or after September 30, of the performance period H. Personnel expenses, overtime, travel, group meals or per diem for LEPC members to attend LEPC Meetings I. Food for LEPC meetings, planning meetings, responses, or exercises. (per diem for LEPC members to attend planning conferences, workshops, and Regional Response meetings is allowable) 6 VI. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS For the budget period (2013-2014), U.S. DOT will be providing approximately $95,000.00 to Utah for HMEP Planning Pass-Through Grant funding. All of this funding will be passed directly to LEPC's. A maximum award cap of $3,200 per application has been established for an LEPC with at least $4,000 in eligible expenses. Applicants may develop project proposals, which exceed $4,000 in cost, however, Utah Division of Emergency Management will fund only those activities, which are eligible under this grant program, and applicants will be responsible for all costs beyond the$4,000 ($3,200 federal share) maximum allowable cap. This is a reimbursement grant program onlv! Upon satisfactory completion of the project by the LEPCfTERC and submission of the final report, OEM will reimburse the LEPCTERC for expenditures which were deemed eligible by the Division of Emergency Management according to the original award notification letter, and which have been adequately documented. No funds will be paid to LEPC'sfTERC's in advance of the antiCipated completion of work! VII. AVAILABILITY OF ADDITIONAL FUNDS The Utah Division of Emergency Management will have an early close-out option with the potential for additional funds. An LEPC that has submitted their final report and 85-21-reimbursement form with at least $4,000 in eligible expenses ($3,200 federal th share) by Friday Aug. 15 , 2014 will become eligible for additional funding if available. The additional funding will come from any money not allocated to or used by other LEPC's by Sept. 30th 2014. The additional funding is not guaranteed and the amount will vary each year. Additional documentation of eligible expenses might be required as match in order to receive any additional funding. The process the Division of Emergency Management to determine additional funding will be to divide the total unused money evenly between the LEPC that qualified through the early close-out option. 8 VIII. APPLICATION FISCAL YEAR 2014 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EMERGENCY PLANNING GRANT APPLICATION Page 1 of 4 APPLICANT NAME (Jurisdiction) & Address: Grand County LEPC I Veronica Bullock : 125 East Center Street Moab, UT 84532 REQUIREMENTS CHECKLIST: ¥' THIS APPLICATION FORM (signed by a governmental official of the jurisdiction) ¥' DESIGNATION OF LEPCfTERC CONTACTS FORM ¥' HMEP PROJECT PROPOSAL ¥' HMEP DETAILED BUDGET WORKSHEET & MATCH CERTIFICATION FORM ¥' PROOF OF AN LEPCfTERC JURISDICTION'S EMERGENCY OPERATION PLAN. (The LEPCfTERC must update its HazMat Response Plan and/or HazMat portion of their EOP annually the SERC to review as part of the grant process.) -I' PROOF OF A VIABLE LEPCfTERC. (A copy of the jurisdiction's LEPCfTERC attendancel membership roster will qualify.) CERTIFICATION: The undersigned certify that all grant requirements have been met and agree to Statement that the LEPC is in compliance with Sections 301 and 303 of SARA Title III (EPCRA) http://www.epa.gov/oemlcontentlepcraiepcra plan.htm The LEPC meets regularly and is actively working to reduce the threat of hazardous materials incidents as indiceted in Federal and state codes. Agencyl Department authorized by local government to receive grant funds: EIN Number: 87-6000304 Print Name of Authorized Official Print Name of lEPCfTERC Chairperson Veronica Bullock 9 FISCAL YEAR 2014 DESIGNATION OF LEPCITERC CONTACTS Page 20f4 ~--..... APPLICANT (Jurisdiction): lEPCITERC CHAIRPERSON NAME Veronica Bullock f-: --..... Official Mailing Address 125 East Center Street Moab, Utah 84532 ! ...... , Daytime Phone Number • 435-259=8116 Fax Number • 435-259-8651 ~------vbullock@grandcountl£sheriff.org E-mail Address I ' .. HMEPGRANT POINT OF CONTACT NAME Diana Carroll Official Mailing Address 125 East Center Street Moab Utah 84532 .... -...... ~------...... , Daytime Phone Number 435-259-1322 I Fax Number , 435-259-2959 I E-mail Address I [email protected] I TIER II REPORTING POINT OF CONTACT I NAME Veronica Bullock I Official Mailing Address 125 East Center Street Moab Utah 84532 -+~ ..... - ..... -:=------~ Daytime Phone Number 435-259-8115 Fax Number 435-259861 • E-mail Address vbullock@grandcountysheriff,org 10 FY 2014 HMEP PRO.. IECT PROPOSAL Page 30f4 PROJECT NAME: I LEPC Meetings and HAZMATTeam Exercises PROJECT AMOUNT REQUESTED: (maximum of $3,200 Federal Share) [ ... ~...... 3,200 PROJECT POINT OF CONTACT: NAME: Veronica Bullock ------PHONE:435-259-8115 EMAIL: vbullock@grandcounty:sheriff.org Description: Details of the jurisdiction, LEPCfTERC, and the hazardous material(s) presenting the risk. - -'--. Transportation incidents, Keeping familiar with HAZMAT plans and HAZMA T exercise & -. -=- planning meetings Workplan: Explain how the work will be done. Also discuss if the lEPCfTERC staff itself will accomplish the work in-house, by outsi(je_cCll1tractors, or by a combination of both. LEPC quarterly meetings (March, June, September, and December) Quarterly HAZMAT team exercises and planning meetings Intermountain HAZMAT conference 11 FY 2014 HMEP BUDGET DETAIL WORKSHEET Page 4 of 4 If the project exceeds the budget period cap of $3,200, then the additional amount necessary to conduct the program must be provided by the jurisdiction itself. All financial expenditures should be identified and substantiated. Expenditures must be made during the 2014 performance period starting Oct. 1st 2013 and ending Sept. 30th 2014. Estimated Cost i 20% Local Match . $600 $120 . $600 . $120 . I Travel $ $ I ! Supplies $ $ i • Community Outreach $ $ HazMat Planning Expenses $ $ HazMat Training Expenses ! $2,000 $400 - .. Other Expense (List): T $ Other Expense (List): $ Other Expense (List): $ _..... Other Expense (List): it $ __~~_, __.~'~~~","_,","_'_'_N ___ ''''____ ~~~_~~ ,. --~--~~~~---_. ------Total LEPCITERC Budg(:!t • $3,200 , .... Total LEe~[[ERC 20% Match Required ,~-~--- i$640 Match Certification I, Financial Officer for ______(Sponsoring Jurisdiction) certify that our jurisdiction will meet the 20% match requirement as defined* in the Hazardous Materials Emergency Planning Grant Guidance. .:r 1('1 fur D~te Financial Officer Signature Date *The grant is awarded on an 80120 match basis. This means that the jurisdiction is required to contribute 20% the amount of hard (Cash) or in-kind (Services) match to the amount of the funding received from OEM. 12 ili! Applications under this program must be postmarked no later than lIil March 71', 2014. Applications postmarked after this date may not be consideredl lti'i Project applications and all supporting documentation should be forwarded to DEM at the following address: Utah Division of Emergency Management ATTENTION: Ty Bailey 1110 State Office Building Salt Lake City, UT 84114 Or Scanned and emailed as a PDF File with Signatures to [email protected] 13 IX. NOTIFICATION OF SELECTION The decision to fund projects will be made by the Division of Emergency Management and presented to the SERC, All applicants will receive written notification as to the status of their grant application, Project approval will be made March 31 St, 2014 and an award document and articles of agreement will be sent to those Jurisdiction's who will receive HMEP Grant funds. Each recipient will need to sign and return the original articles of agreement, Form 76 - 10, to the Division of Emergency Management. 14 X. PROJECT DURATION. REPORTS AND EXTENTIONS Once notification of an HMEP Pass-Through Grant award is sent to the applicant and the articles of agreement are signed, it is assumed that the project will be carried out in full, as originally outlined in the initial application. Any changes in the intended scope of work, without express written permission of the Division of Emergency Management are strictly forbidden. Any work for which reimbursement is sought, but which wasn't included in the originally approved LEPC'sITERC's project application, will not be reimbursed. All th work and expenditures made must be completed by SEPTEMBER 30 , 2014. A. Time Frame: Applicants will be required to adhere to the reporting procedures specified below. All required documentation must be provided in order to receive reimbursement for approved expenditures. There will be no time extensions. B. Reports: Grant recipients will be required to fife a final report (Appendix A) following the grant period. th C, Final Report: A Final Report will be required no later than Oct. 10 , 2014, and will include all information and pertinent data relevant to the completed project. A sample of all deliverables and products should be included (or made available for review by FMO) if applicablR The Final Report should, at a minimum, include the following items: I) A discussion of the completed project and all resultant benefits. Describe the manner in which the project will be used by the jurisdiction in any future HAZMAT planning activities. 2) A listing of all expenditures incurred. lEPC'sITERC's should distinguish between in-house work and contracted work. Work that is accomplished by county or municipal personnel should reflect all time, activity, salary, and fringe rates for the participating individual. For contracted work, each expenditure should be itemized, explained, and accompanied by a copy of a paid invoice or receipt. It is critical that these expenditures are well documented since FMO must have proof that the LEPCITERC actually incurred such expenses before the reimbursement can take place. Additional expenditures for items beyond those that received prior approval may be denied reimbursement. 3) Reimbursement requests should be submitted on form 85-21 (Appendix B). Please be reminded that there IS a 20% match requirement. 15 .r'!lo!""'''. '''''IA ...,.. STATE SPONSCRIN3 AGEt-.CY TOWHiCHTHIS Page 0' FORM REPCRT IS SUBMITTED' REIMBURSEMENT REQUEST FORM 1 I P..... 85-21 UTAH DEPARTMENT OF I'UIIUC SAFETY AGREEMENT NUMBER DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 2013-2014 HMEP PLANNING GRANT ATTN: TV BAILEY, DEM BURSAU CHIEF HM-HMP-0341-13-01-00 1110 STATE OFFICE BUILDING PERFORMANCE PERIOD HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EMERGENCY SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 114114·1710 PREPAREDNESS 1-.. 10/01/2013 - 09/30/2014 IN SLSMI'TTIf>.¥3 THIS CLAIM, THE CLAIMANT REPRESENTS THAT JU$TIF!CAllCN TQSlJPP(.RTTHIS CLAIM IS CQ'\ITAINED tN1l-E WCRJ<, PLAN APPHQVEO AS PART Cf' THE JURISDltmCNS PR03RAM PAPER. IT IS U'-\)ERSTOCO _T FAILURE TO EXECUTE l1-E aEMENTB OF _T WrnK P<.AN MAY RESULT IN WI1HHOLDING OR RECOIIERY CF FCMlS CLAIMED AND APPROVED HEREON. RECIPIENT NAME AND REMITTOAODRESS: DATI! REVIEWED BY INVOICE NUMBER DATI: SUBMITTED DPSIDEM PROGRAM MANAGER ------ ITEMS PURCHASED· REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT ~EPC E~~IGIB~E (PLEASE A 7TA CHALL aACKtJP DOCUMENTA nON) EXPENSES DPSIDEM Use Onlv TOTA~ CHECK # OR OTHER PROOF OF PAYMENT DPSlDeM Usa Orly TOTAL EXPENDITURES REOIPIENT SHARE OF EXPENDITURES (Match Portion) _ FEDE~ SHARE OF EXPENDITURES Certification: J3y signing tlrls report, I cortlfy that all billa, peyrolls, etc. listed on this billing have been paid, Orlglna' Signa/ufO of Authorized Certltylng Official Date l7 Appendix C HMEP Program Contacts Ty Bailey HMEP Program Manager (801) 232-3812 (801) 538-3770 (fax) [email protected] LIAISONS Community Liaison Officer (LNO) Assignments: If you need assistance, please contact the LNO that coincides with the CountylTribe that your LEPC/TERC falls under. Kimberly Giles (801) 209-7542 [email protected] Box Elder, Cache, Rich, Davis, Morgan, Weber Counties & Shoshone Tribe Jesse Valenzuela (801)-707-0930 [email protected] Salt Lake County, Summit, Wasatch, Tooele, Utah Counties & Confederated Tribes of the Goshute and Skull Valley Band of Goshute Tribes Jeff Gallacher (801) 209-5236 [email protected] Juab, Millard, Piute, Sanpete, Sevier and Wayne Counties Scott Alvord (801) 703-1924 [email protected] Beaver, Iron, Garfield, Kane, Washington Counties & Paiute Tribe Mechelle Miller (801) 707-1631 [email protected] Daggett. Duchesne, Uintah Counties & Ute Tribe Martin Wilson (801)664-5861 [email protected] Carbon, Emery, Grand, San Juan Counties & Utah Strip of Navajo Nation and Ute Mountain Ute Tribes