DOCSLIB.ORG

Yellowstone National Park Wyoming, Montana, Idaho

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Yellowstone National Park Wyoming, Montana, Idaho National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Yellowstone National Park Wyoming, Montana, Idaho Yellowstone National Park WINTER USE PLAN / ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT November 2011 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR NATIONAL PARK SERVICE YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK WINTER USE PLAN / ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Lead Agency: National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Department of the Interior This Yellowstone National Park Winter Use Plan / Environmental Impact Statement (plan/EIS) evaluates the impacts of a range of alternatives for managing winter use/access in the interior of Yellowstone National Park (Yellowstone or the park) in a manner that protects and preserves natural and cultural resources and natural processes, provides a variety of visitor use experiences while minimizing conflicts among various users, and promotes visitor and employee safety. Upon conclusion of the plan/EIS and decision-making process, the alternative selected for implementation will become the winter use plan, which will specifically address the issue of oversnow vehicle (OSV) use in the interior of the park. It will also form the basis for a special regulation to manage OSV use in the park should an alternative be selected that allows OSV use to continue. This plan/EIS evaluates the impacts of the no-action alternative (alternative 1) and seven action alternatives (alternatives 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and the preferred alternative (alternative 8)). Alternative 1 would not permit public OSV use in Yellowstone because the 2009 interim rule expired March 15, 2011, but would allow for approved non- motorized use to continue. Alternative 1 has been identified as the NPS environmentally preferable alternative. Alternative 2 would manage OSV use at the same levels as the 2009 interim rule (up to 318 snowmobiles and 78 snowcoaches per day). Alternative 3 would allow for snowmobile and snowcoach use levels to increase to the levels set forth in the 2004 plan (up to 720 snowmobiles and 78 snowcoaches per day). Alternative 4 would allow for commercially guided wheeled vehicles, in addition to OSVs (up to 100 commercially guided wheeled vehicles, 110 snowmobiles, and 30 snowcoaches per day). Alternative 5 would initially allow for the same level of use as alternative 2 (up to 318 snowmobiles and 78 snowcoaches per day), but would provide for a transition to snowcoaches only if user demand is present to support such a transition or at the discretion of the park Superintendent. Upon complete transition, there would be zero snowmobiles and up to 120 snowcoaches per day. Alternative 6 would provide for use levels that vary each day, with a seasonal limit of up to 32,000 snowmobiles and 4,600 snowcoaches, and a daily limit of up to 540 snowmobiles and 78 snowcoaches. Up to 25 percent of snowmobile permits under alternative 6 would be for unguided or non-commercially guided use. Alternative 7 would also allow for variable use levels throughout the season, with snowmobile use ranging from 110 to 330 snowmobiles per day and snowcoach use ranging from 30 to 80 vehicles per day. The varying use levels would provide for high and low OSV use days, allowing for a variety of motorized and non- motorized visitor experiences throughout the winter season. The preferred alternative (alternative 8) would implement the one-year transition portion of the DEIS preferred alternative (alternative 7), allowing OSV use in the park during the 2011/2012 season, at the same levels and with the same requirements and restrictions as the 2009/2010–2010/2011 interim regulation. The plan/EIS analyzes impacts of these alternatives in detail for wildlife and wildlife habitat, air quality, soundscapes and the acoustic environment, visitor use and experience, visitor accessibility, health and safety, socioeconomic values, and park operations and management. The NPS notice of availability for the draft plan/EIS was published in the Federal Register on May 20, 2011. The draft plan/EIS was posted online at the NPS PEPC website at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/yell on May 6, 2011. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) notice of availability for the draft plan/EIS was published on May 20, 2011, which opened the public comment period and established the closing date of July 18, 2011, for comments. Responses to public and agency comments received on the draft plan/EIS are included as appendix D and, where needed, as text changes in this final plan/EIS. The publication of the EPA notice of availability of this final plan/EIS in the Federal Register will initiate a 30-day wait period before the Regional Director of the Intermountain Region will sign the Record of Decision, documenting the selection of an alternative to be implemented. After the NPS publishes a notice in the Federal Register announcing the availability of the signed Record of Decision, implementation of the alternative selected in the Record of Decision can begin. For further information, visit http://parkplanning.nps.gov/yell or contact: Yellowstone National Park Winter Use DEIS Box 168 Yellowstone National Park Wyoming 82190 National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Yellowstone National Park Wyoming, Montana, Idaho YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK WINTER USE PLAN / ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT November 2011 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Yellowstone National Park Winter Use Plan / Environmental Impact Statement (plan/EIS) analyzes a range of alternatives and actions for the management of winter use at Yellowstone National Park (Yellowstone or the park). The plan/EIS assesses the impacts that could result from implementation of any of the seven action alternatives, and assesses the impacts that would occur if the park were to take no action at all (“no-action” alternative). Upon conclusion of the plan/EIS and decision-making process, the alternative selected for implementation will become the winter use plan, which will specifically address the issue of oversnow vehicle (OSV) use in the interior of the park. It will also form the basis for a special regulation to manage OSV use in the park should an alternative be selected that allows OSV use to continue. BACKGROUND Winter use in Yellowstone National Park, specifically issues related to OSVs, has been the subject of debate for more than 75 years. At least 12 times since 1930, the National Park Service (NPS) and park stakeholders have formally debated what the park should look and be like in winter. Interest in accessing the park in the winter began in the early 1930s and has increased throughout the years. In the 1970s, 1980s, and early 1990s, snowmobile use in the park grew consistently, with the use of snowcoaches following in popularity. Historically, the increase in the use of these vehicles to enter the park, collectively known as OSVs, brought unanticipated problems, specifically air and noise pollution, conflicts with other users, and harassment of wildlife, as documented in past planning efforts. To address these problems, planning for the management of OSV use began with the park’s Master Plan in 1974 that was a general, park-wide, planning document. Since then, a series of planning processes have examined winter use in Yellowstone. A detailed description of these processes can be found on the park’s winter use website at http://www.nps.gov/yell/planyourvisit/winteruse.htm. Recently, as a result of litigation over the 2007 planning effort, on September 15, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia vacated the 2007 Winter Use Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement, as well as the associated Record of Decision and rule. Because the court’s ruling left no provision in place for snowmobile or snowcoach use (effectively meaning that OSV use would not be allowed in the park because there was no rule to support it), the NPS issued an Interim Winter Use Plan / Environmental Assessment on November 3, 2008. A proposed rule to support it was published on November 5, 2008. However, on November 7, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming issued an order reinstating the 2004 rule, allowing snowmobile and snowcoach use in Yellowstone until a new rule could be completed. For the winter of 2008/2009, the park operated under the 2004 rule which allowed up to 720 snowmobiles and 78 snowcoaches per day. The Wyoming decision was appealed, but the litigation was declared moot by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals because the NPS had already developed an interim plan and put into effect a replacement rule. Winter Use Plan / Environmental Impact Statement i In 2009, the NPS completed a new Interim Winter Use Plan Finding of No Significant Impact and put into effect a new interim rule. The interim plan and rule allowed access for up to 318 snowmobiles and 78 snowcoaches per day into Yellowstone during the 2009/2010 and 2010/2011 winter seasons. It continued to require all snowmobiles and snowcoaches to be commercially guided, and snowmobiles were required to meet best available technology (BAT) requirements. In addition, the rule provided for motorized OSV travel over Sylvan Pass and Yellowstone’s east entrance road as agreed to by the Sylvan Pass Study Group (the NPS, state of Wyoming, Park County, Wyoming, and the City of Cody). The interim plan and rule did not allow snowmobile and snowcoach use after March 2011. The interim plan and rule were challenged by the State of Wyoming and Park County, Wyoming. On September 17, 2010, the Wyoming court issued a ruling in favor of the NPS on the interim plan and rule which expired on March 15, 2011, following the close of the 2010/2011 winter season. PURPOSE OF THE PLAN The purpose of this plan/EIS is to establish a management framework that allows the public to experience the unique winter resources and values at Yellowstone National Park.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Snow Avalanches J
    , . ^^'- If A HANDBOOK OF FORECASTING AND CONTROL MEASURE! Agriculture Handbook No. 194 January 1961 FOREST SERVICE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Ai^ JANUARY 1961 AGRICULTURE HANDBOOK NO. 194 SNOW AVALANCHES J A Handbook of Forecasting and Control Measures k FSH2 2332.81 SNOW AVALANCHES :}o U^»TED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOREST SERVICE SNOW AVALANCHES FSH2 2332.81 Contents INTRODUCTION 6.1 Snow Study Chart 6.2 Storm Plot and Storm Report Records CHAPTER 1 6.3 Snow Pit Studies 6.4 Time Profile AVALANCHE HAZARD AND PAST STUDIES CHAPTER 7 CHAPTER 2 7 SNOW STABILIZATION 7.1 Test and Protective Skiing 2 PHYSICS OF THE SNOW COVER 7.2 Explosives 2.1 The Solid Phase of the Hydrologie Cycle 7.21 Hand-Placed Charges 2.2 Formation of Snow in the Atmosphere 7.22 Artillery 2.3 Formation and Character of the Snow Cover CHAPTER 8 2.4 Mechanical Properties of Snow 8 SAFETY 2.5 Thermal Properties of the Snow Cover 8.1 Safety Objectives 2.6 Examples of Weather Influence on the Snow Cover 8.2 Safety Principles 8.3 Safety Regulations CHAPTER 3 8.31 Personnel 8.32 Avalanche Test and Protective Skiing 3 AVALANCHE CHARACTERISTICS 8.33 Avalanche Blasting 3.1 Avalanche Classification 8.34 Exceptions to Safety Code 3.11 Loose Snow Avalanches 3.12 Slab Avalanches CHAPTER 9 3.2 Tyi)es 3.3 Size 9 AVALANCHE DEFENSES 3.4 Avalanche Triggers 9.1 Diversion Barriers 9.2 Stabilization Barriers CHAPTER 4 9.3 Barrier Design Factors 4 TERRAIN 9.4 Reforestation 4.1 Slope Angle CHAPTER 10 4.2 Slope Profile 4.3 Ground Cover and Vegetation 10 AVALANCHE RESCUE 4.4 Slope
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of CALGARY Estimating Extreme Snow
    UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY Estimating Extreme Snow Avalanche Runout for the Columbia Mountains and Fernie Area of British Columbia, Canada by: Katherine S. Johnston A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING CALGARY, ALBERTA AUGUST, 2011 ©Katherine S. Johnston 2011 ABSTRACT Extreme snow avalanche runout is typically estimated using a combination of historical and vegetation records as well as statistical and dynamic models. The two classes of statistical models (α – β and runout ratio) are based on estimating runout distance past the β-point, which is generally defined as the point where the avalanche slope incline first decreases to 10°. The parameters for these models vary from mountain range to mountain range. In Canada, α – β and runout ratio parameters have been published for the Rocky and Purcell Mountains and for the British Columbia Coastal mountains. Despite active development, no suitable tall avalanche path model parameters have been published for the Columbia Mountains or for the Lizard Range area around Fernie, BC. Using a dataset of 70 avalanche paths, statistical model parameters have been derived for these regions. In addition, the correlation between extreme and average snowfall values and avalanche runout is explored. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thank you to Bruce Jamieson for giving me the opportunity to work on this project, and for coordinating the financial support for this project. His thoughtful advice, numerous reviews, and inspirational leadership have helped make this a fantastic experience. My thanks to Alan Jones for providing numerous hours of guidance, mentoring, and thoughtful discussion throughout this project, and for facilitating data acquisition from outside sources.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report Fhwa-Wy-09/05F Snow Supporting
    FINAL REPORT FHWA-WY-09/05F State of Wyoming U.S. Department of Transportation Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration SNOW SUPPORTING STRUCTURES FOR AVALANCHE HAZARD REDUCTION, 151 AVALANCHE, HIGHWAY US 89/191, JACKSON, WYOMING By: InterAlpine Associates 83 El Camino Tesoros Sedona, Arizona 86336 April 2009 Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the information contained in this document. The contents of this report reflect the views of the author(s) who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Wyoming Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The United States Government and the State of Wyoming do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objectives of the document. Quality Assurance Statement The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement. Technical Report Documentation Page Report No. Government Accession No. Recipients Catalog No. FHWA-WY-09/05F Report Date Title and Subtitle April 2009 Snow Supporting Structures for Avalanche Hazard Reduction, 151 Avalanche, US 89/191, Jackson, Wyoming Performing Organization Code Author(s): Rand Decker; Joshua Hewes; Scotts Merry; Perry Wood Performing Organization Report No.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comprehensive Technology Assessment for Highway Avalanche Hazard Management: ‘Choosing the Right Tool for the Job’
    FINAL REPORT WYDOT WY-18/03F A Comprehensive Technology Assessment for Highway Avalanche Hazard Management: ‘Choosing the Right Tool for the Job’ Rand Decker, Ph.D., Principal Investigator 83 El Camino Tesoros, Sedona, Arizona 86336 (928) 202-8156 [email protected] Disclaimer Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Wyoming Department of Transportation (WYDOT) in the interest of information exchange. WYDOT assumes no liability for the use of the information contained in this document. WYDOT does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of the document. Quality Assurance Statement WYDOT provides high-quality information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. WYDOT periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement. Quality Assurance Statement WYDOT provides high-quality information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. WYDOT periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement. Copyright No copyrighted material, except that which falls under the “fair use” clause, may be incorporated into a report without permission from the copyright owner, if the copyright owner requires such. Prior use of the material in a WYDOT or governmental publication does not necessarily constitute permission to use it in a later publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Avalanche Protection and Control in the Himalayas
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Defence Science Journal Def Sci J, Vol 35, No 2, April 1985, pp 255-266 Avalanche Protection and Control in the Himalayas N. MOHANRAO Snow & Avalanche Study Establishment, Manali Abstract. The problems of snow avalanches, their prediction and control in the Himalayas have assumed great relevance and importance not only for the Army but also for the progress of the Himalayan States of Jammu & Kashmir. Himachal Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, whose upper reaches remain snowbound for nearly six months in a year. The paper discusses br~eflythe gravity of the problem and presents a broad outline of a case-study of avalanche control for Badrinath Temple and Township in Uttar Pradesh undertaken by the Snow & Avalanche Study Establishment (SASE), Manali. This and many other studies undertaken by the SASE illustrate the contribution of Defellce Science to the solution of this major problem affecting communications, tourism and hill development, as a spin-off from Defence Research. The Pirpanjals and the Great Himalayas, besides other ranges, experience heavy snow during the winter months particularly from January to March. The total snowfall is as much as 1500 cm in some years in the Western Himalayas. Storms lasting for several days bringing down at times more than 200 cm of snow in one spell lasting from 3 to 7 days are not uncommon. The problem is further accentuated when high intensities of 8 to 10 cm/hr prevail. The result is a heavy avalanche activity affecting Army posts and movements, communications, villages and winter tourism.
    [Show full text]
  • The Design of Avalanche Protection Dams .Pdf
    The design of avalanche protection dams. Recent practical and theoretical developments 1-DRAFT some sections still remain to be written, the document shows the intended section structure and contains draft introductory sections, sections about the design of deflecting and catching dams, and braking mounds, sections about impact pressures on walls, masts and other narrow constructions, appendixes about overrun of avalanches at Ryggfonn, loading of obstacles and a subsection about Iceland in an Appendix about laws and regulations July 25, 2006 1 Photographs on the front page: Top left: Mounds and catching dam in Neskaupstaður, eastern Iceland, photograph: Tómas Jóhannesson. Top right: A deflecting dam at Gudvangen, near Voss in western Norway, af- ter a successful deflection of an avalanche, photograph: ? ???. Bottom left: A catching dam, deflecting dam, and concrete wedges at Taconnaz, near Chamonix, France, photograph Christopher J. Keylock. Bottom right: A catching dam and a wedge at Galtür in the Paznaun valley, Tirol, Austria, photograph: ? ???. Contents 1 Introduction 9 2 Consultation with local authorities and decision makers 12 3 Overview of traditional design principles for avalanche dams 13 4 Avalanche dynamics 16 5 Deflecting and catching dams 18 5.1 Introduction . 18 5.2 Summary of the dam design procedure . 18 5.3 Dam geometry . 20 5.4 The dynamics of flow against deflecting and catching dams . 22 5.5 Supercritical overflow . 25 5.6 Upstream shock . 26 5.7 Loss of momentum in the impact with a dam . 31 5.8 Combined criteria . 32 5.9 Snow drift . 34 5.10 Comparison of proposed criteria with observations of natural avalanches that have hit dams or other obstacles .
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3: the Affected Environment
    Chapter 3: The Affected Environment 3.0 THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3.0.1 Introduction Chapter 3 – The Affected Environment describes the physical and biological environment (e.g., water resources, wildlife, etc.) as well as the human environment (e.g., social and economic factors, recreation, etc.), which may be affected by the range of alternatives, as described in Chapter 2 - Alternatives. Much of the information on the affected environment is compiled from detailed technical reports and other analyses prepared by the USFS and consultants. Some of these reports are attached to this FEIS as appendices. All reports are available for review as part of the Analysis File maintained for this project at the MBSNF Supervisor’s Office. References cited in this FEIS are provided in Chapter 5 - References. 3.0.2 Analysis Area The “analysis area” (referred to as the “Study Area” throughout this document) varies by resource area. The Study Area includes all public (USFS) lands as well as private land owned by Ski Lifts, Inc. and other land holders. When discussing individual projects within the Study Area, the following terms are used to distinguish the different locations within the SUP: Summit East, Summit Central, and Summit West, are collectively referred to as “The Summit.” Alpental, when discussed individually, is referred to as “Alpental.” All four ski areas are collectively referred to as “The Summit-at-Snoqualmie.” Figure 3.0-1, Study Area illustrates the boundaries of the Study Area, including The Summit and Alpental. Figure 3.0-2, 5th Field Watersheds illustrates the boundaries of the two 5th field watersheds used in this FEIS analysis: the South Fork Snoqualmie River Watershed (S.F.
    [Show full text]
  • Feasibility of Seismic Monitoring to Identify Avalanche
    FEASIBILITY OF SEISMIC MONITORING TO IDENTIFY AVALANCHE ACTIVITY: SNOQUALMIE PASS, WA __________________________________ A Thesis Presented to The Graduate Faculty Central Washington University __________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science Geology __________________________________ by Kathryn Johnston June 2013 CENTRAL WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Graduate Studies We hereby approve the thesis of Kathryn Johnston Candidate for the degree of Master of Science APPROVED FOR THE GRADUATE FACULTY ______________ _________________________________________ Dr. Tim Melbourne ______________ _________________________________________ Dr. Paul Winberry ______________ _________________________________________ Dr. Susan Kaspari ______________ _________________________________________ Dean of Graduate Studies ii ABSTRACT FEASIBILITY OF SEISMIC MONITORING TO IDENTIFY AVALANCHE ACTIVITY: SNOQUALMIE PASS, WA by Kathryn Johnston June 2013 Avalanches across the Interstate-90 corridor over Snoqualmie Pass, in Washington State, are a concern for winter travelers and backcountry recreation. The temporary closure of the interstate for avalanche mitigation work also affects commerce by delaying transportation of merchandise. The study of seismic signals associated with snow avalanches could allow for greater understanding of avalanche properties, while remote sensing of avalanche activity could help established avalanche control programs and regional avalanche centers with forecasting and mitigation efforts. Two seismic stations were installed near the Alpental ski area on Snoqualmie Pass and recorded seismic activity throughout the winters of 2009-2010 and 2010-2011. During the winter of 2010-2011, two avalanches were successfully recorded, one artificially released with explosives and one naturally during a rain on snow event. These results show that it is possible to record avalanche activity over the traffic noise of the interstate and that avalanche activity can be distinguished from other seismic sources.
    [Show full text]
  • It Came to Pass 50 Years of Highs and Lows on the Salmo-Creston
    Bringing the FREE Creston Valley together. October 2013 It Came to Pass 50 years of highs and lows on the Salmo-Creston Mayor’s Desk Toyota becomes firefighter for a day The Arts Health Music teachers present Cold and flu season Mosaic of Sound inspires comparison It’s Deere Season *4.9% for 48 months-Oer valid from March 1, 2013 until July 31, 2013. Subject to John Deere Financial approval and dealer participation. In the event you default on this or any John Deere Financial Multi-Use Account transaction, interest on all outstanding balances on your Multi-use accounts (including on this and all special Term transactions on your Multi-use Account) will begin to accrue immediately at 19.75% AIR from the date of default until paid in full, and you will be required to make monthly payments on your Multi-use Account equal to 2.5% (personal use); 3.0% (commercial use) of the original amounts nanced plus interest. Taxes, set-up, delivery, freight, and preparation charges not included and may increase price or monthly payment(s). Minimum purchase and nance amount may be required. See your dealer for details. Program subject to change, without notice, at any time. For purchases on your Multi-use Account for personal, agricultural and commercial use. For eligible purchases of goods and services: 1) a minimum monthly payment of $342.65 is required; and 2) nance charges will begin to accrue immediately on amount nanced at 17.9% per annum. †0% for 72 months-Oer valid from February 1, 2013 until April 30, 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • 5.4.1 Avalanche Figure A.5 Indicates the Debris Run-Out Areas Which Affect the Town of Alta, and It Indicates Which Structures in Alta Are Vulnerable to Avalanches
    Alta, Utah Hazard Mitigation Plan (2014) Town of Alta Emergency Management Contacts Chris Cawley Mike Morey John Guldner Assistant Town Town of Alta Marshal Town Administrator, [email protected] Administrator Emergency 801-363-5105 [email protected] Manager 801-363-5105 [email protected] 801To access-363-5105 the 2005 Town of Alta General Plan and the official Town Code, please visit www.townofalta.com/gov.shtml# Salt Lake County Multi-Jurisdictional Natural-Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex A Page 2 of 33 Alta, Utah Annex A: Town of Alta 1 Introduction 1.1 Background This document is based in part on existing documents such as the 2009 “WASATCH FRONT NATURAL HAZARDS PRE-DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN,” as well as several documents prepared by Salt Lake County Emergency Management Staff. These documents assist the 16 municipalities and partner agencies within Salt Lake County in reducing the costs of natural disasters by providing comprehensive hazards identification, risk assessment, vulnerability analysis, mitigation strategies, and an implementation schedule. This document reflects elements of the Town of Alta Emergency Operations Plan, regional pre- hazard and emergency management plans and strategies, and mitigation needs and strategies identified in previous hazard mitigation planning exercises. This plan reflects Town of Alta policy as stated in the 2005 Town of Alta General Plan, as well as the Town of Alta, Utah Code. 1.2 Purpose The purpose of this plan is to enumerate hazards which could affect the Town of Alta, describe mitigation strategies for each of those hazards, and provide a framework for revision of hazard mitigation strategies. This document was created by Town of Alta staff with significant guidance from Salt Lake County Emergency Management staff, and it is based on guidelines for local hazard mitigation strategies prescribed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
    [Show full text]
  • REDACTED Letter Presents Avalanche Hazard Observations For
    November 20, 2015 (b) (6) Environmental Restoration 2140 North Redwood Rd, Suite 10 Salt Lake City, UT 84116 801-209-0368 (b) (6) PN: 54056AV Subject: Avalanche Hazard Observations for The Gold King Mine Project Site Gladstone, Colorado (b) (6) , This letter presents our observations of our cursory evaluation of the avalanche hazard associated with the Gold King Mine Site and access road near Gladstone, Colorado. We visited the site on November 19, 2015 and met with (b) (6) and Mr. Steve Way of the Environmental Protection Agency. There was a significant winter storm in the area this week with 30 inches of new snow and 2.65 inches of snow water equivalent. The avalanche hazard bulletin from the Colorado Avalanche Information Center (CAIC) had the avalanche hazard at High on Tuesday and Wednesday November 17 and 18. We visited the portal at the Gold King Mine and observed several potential avalanche paths on the access road from Gladstone to the mine and on the slopes above the mine. Cursory examination of the avalanche paths on Google Earth show that the starting zones of the potential avalanche paths above the Gold King Mine are between 34 and 36 degrees. There are numerous avalanche paths on the north facing slopes along the access road that are not obvious avalanche paths because they run through timbered slopes. We observed numerous small slab avalanches and tension cracks in the snow from the recent avalanche cycle on the north facing slopes adjacent to the access road. There are large avalanche paths on Bonita Peak to the east that have the potential to reach the access road.
    [Show full text]
  • TAR Sjaparticle19/4
    TAR SJAParticle19/5 The San Juan Avalanche Project - FOR THE AVALANCHE REVIEW 19/5 By Don Bachman [email protected] 406.587.3830 (Authors note: This article is edited and expanded from one first published January, 2001 in the Silverton Mountain Journal (issue 21/volume 1), and includes a separate examination of the Alternative Methods Project. I am indebted for review and suggestions by Richard Armstrong and Ed LaChapelle.) Prolog: In early May of 1971, I was detailed by the University of Colorado, Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research (INSTAAR), to Silverton, Colorado in the western San Juan Mountains. I arrived with a State purchase order and instructions to locate a house of suitable size to establish an office and living quarters for a newly funded avalanche research project. Most information in small towns can be found in a bar or the Post Office. I wisely visited the Post Office first and asked the clerk about the rental market. As luck would have it, she and her husband had a substantial Main Street house on the market and would love to rent the State of Colorado for as long as we could use it. A task I expected would take a week, took ten minutes. That night I stopped at the Grand Imperial Hotel to listen in on a busy mountain community of 850 people supported by the employment of two large metal mines, the Sunnyside and Idarado. I wasn't long on the bar stool before two fellows got up from a table and sandwiched me, right and left with the admonition from the big one on the right of "…we don't allow no @#$%^&*~ hippies in here".
    [Show full text]