DOCSLIB.ORG

The Distribution of Rock Art Elements and Styles in Utah

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Distribution of Rock Art Elements and Styles in Utah Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 163-175 (1981). The Distribution of Rock Art Elements and Styles in Utah KENNETH B. CASTLETON DAVID B. MADSEN TAH is a veritable treasure house of datable timbers or other organic artifacts then Uprehistoric rock art, with Uterally thou­ one might make an unverifiable assumption sands of sites, panels, and element/style varia­ that the site and the panel are contemporary tions of petroglyphs and pictographs. The and thus ascribe a date to the rock art. Often purpose of this paper is primarily to plot the it is not that simple, however. The site may locations and distribution of the various contain several components indicating the elements and styles of the art and, secondarily presence of several cultures or time periods. to see if any patterns emerge which might be In such cases it may be impossible to know of value in determining relationships between with certainty which of these time periods is the prehistoric groups which produced it. related to the rock art. Moreover the rock art The determination of the age of rock art panel may show signs of more than one time and the identification of the culture that period by superimposition of figures over produced it are usually difficult, and often older ones, by differential patination, or by a impossible. This is primarily due to the lack mixture of different styles. of a direct method of determining age of Another even more indirect method of either petroglyphs or pictographs. Radio­ dating is the association of the rock art with metric dating techniques are of little value chronologically well controlled artifacts such and the newer methods of absolute dating are as pottery. In many cases, pottery may be difficult to apply on a large scale. Some idea dated with considerable accuracy by style, of age may be obtained by the presence of temper, decoration, and corrugation. In single hchens, the degree of patination, and the component sites it may be used not only in amount of weathering, but these are at best of determining the approximate time but also in limited utility and generally produce only determining the culture. Again this is not relative age estimates on panels with super­ exact since the rock art panel and the site imposed styles. cannot usually be directly correlated. As a result, most rock art must be dated Probably the best method of dating rock by other techniques. For example, if a panel art by association occurs when unique and is found associated with ruins that contain readily identifiable elements are found within or on dated artifacts. In the Great Basin, Kenneth B. Castleton and David B. Madsen, Antiquities Section, Utah State Historical Society, 300 Rio Grande, Salt engraved stones within dated contexts have Lake City, UT 84101. been used to date rock art not directly [163] 164 JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY associated with archaeological sites (Thomas Canyon Project. Age determinations are based and Thomas 1972). In the Southwest, design on ceramic associations and rock art deterior­ elements on plastered dwelling walls may ation by weathering, patination, and lichen provide dates on similar elements on rock art growth on the figures. Turner identifies five panels. styles — Style 1 being the most recent, extending from A.D. 1850 to the present, and PREVIOUS RESEARCH Style 5 the oldest, covering the period from In 1929 Julian Steward charted the loca­ Archaic time to A.D. 1050. Style 5 consists tion of 28 rock art elements in California, almost exclusively of rectilinear outline Nevada, Arizona, and Utah. Although the forms: sheep with large rectangular bodies number of sites that he charted in Utah was and small heads and legs, and anthropo­ very small compared with the number that are morphs with elongated bodies, elaborate now known to exist in this state, the geomet­ headdresses, cross hatching, and "squiggle ric elements that he terms Curvilinear are in maze"—an interlocking network of lines. As many cases similar or identical to many would be expected, this style shows the described here. There are, however, many greatest amount of weathering and patination. differences between some of his figures and Style 4 (dated to A.D. 1050-1250) is the most those hsted here; primarily in the number and abundant and includes birds, flute players, styles of anthropomorphs in Utah. In Stew­ hunting scenes, anthropomorphs with ard's series the vast majority of elements are enlarged appendages and genitals, bird-bodied geometric although there are some anthropo­ sheep, concentric circles, spirals, solid triangu­ morphs and animals. lar anthropomorphs, large hands, bows and Heizer and Baumhoff (1962) charted the arrows, footprints, and complex pottery and distribution of rock art in Nevada. They blanket designs. Although the area involved in identified 58 design elements in 71 sites. The Turner's study is included in our study, it areas of greatest concentrations were in the constitutes a relatively small part of the entire west central and the southeast portions, state of Utah, albeit an area with an abun­ although others were scattered in virtually all dance of rock art. parts of the state. They proposed a classifica­ As might be expected there are major tion of five styles as follows: (1) Great Basin differences between the rock art described by painted; (2) Great Basin scratched; (3) Pit and Turner and that reported by Heizer and Grooved; (4) Puebloan painted; and (5) Great Baumhoff, and Steward. The Nevada and Basin pecked. They also divided them into CaHfornia studies consisted largely of geomet­ four groups: (1) Curvilinear; (2) Rectilinear; ric (abstract or curvilinear) figures with few (3) Representational; and (4) Great Basin human or animal figures. Turner reported Abstract. We prefer to use the terms Geomet­ large numbers of anthropomorphs and ani­ ric, Representational, and Bizarre; the latter mals and many of the anthropomorphs that term being used mainly to describe certain he reported were of a different style than anthropomorphs and animal figures of a weird those of the other investigators. A minor and bizarre type. difference between Turner's study and ours is Christy Turner's "Petroglyphs of the Glen simply one of areal extent. Turner's study was Canyon Region" (1963) is of especial interest restricted primarily to the southern portions to this study. It describes the rock art of Glen of the state and hence the number of ele­ Canyon and San Juan Canyon, and adjacent ments he identified is considerably less than territory, and was an outgrowth of the Glen this study. A major substantitive difference is ROCK ART IN UTAH 165 that Turner found relatively few pictographs The rock art of Nine Mile Canyon in in comparison to petroglyphs in the Glen eastern Utah was evaluated by Hurst and Canyon/San Juan area, while substantially Louthan (1979). They identified six styles higher proportions of pictographs were identi­ within the canyon and suggested ethnic affili­ fied for the same area in this study. Turner ations with four of the six, including the dated many panels by association with pot­ Desert Culture, Fremont, Ute, and Historic tery. This has not been done here, although American. The styles identified by Hurst and we essentially agree with many of his Louthan all contain elements of the three conclusions. styles described in this report and are not Schaafsma (1971) analyzed the frequency comparable. of elements and attributes of rock art in CULTURAL AFFILIATIONS several areas of the Uintah Basin in northeast- em Utah, the northern San Rafael area. The number of specific elements of rock Barrier Canyon, the Clear Creek Canyon of art is very large indeed. In our study we have south central Utah, and western Utah. She did included about 60 types, but this is essentially not include in her study the southeast quarter a sample and does not include all of the of the state or the southern strip from known types. We have charted their location St. George and the Virgin River in the west to as accurately as possible. Some elements are the lower Colorado River or the San Juan common to all parts of the state and appar­ River area on the east. In the Dry Fork area ently were produced by all cultures. she found that anthropomorphs constituted The principal prehistoric cultures that 45 percent of all figures, animals 19 percent, inhabited what is now Utah were the Desert other representational elements 3 percent, Archaic, the Fremont, and the Anasazi (Jen­ and abstract (geometric) figures 24 percent. nings 1978). All of these produced rock art, In the Dinosaur Monument area these figures as did some of the historic people such as the are 50 percent, 28 percent, 8 percent, and 14 Utes, Paiutes, and the Navajos. The Archaic percent respectively, and for the northern San people lived here as early as 9000 B.C., and Rafael area which consists of Nine Mile archaeological evidence of their presence has Canyon, the Price area. Desolation Canyon, been found in all or most parts of the state. etc., showed 20 percent anthropomorphs, 34 The Fremont left evidence of their presence percent quadrupeds, 7 percent other represen­ in many parts of the state, with especially tational figures, and 39 percent abstract ele­ heavy concentrations in the Uinta Basin, the ments. The corresponding figures for the Capitol Reef area, the Richfield area, around Barrier Canyon style show 79, 12, 9, and 1 the Great Salt Lake, the San Rafael area, the percent. For the Clear Creek Canyon area south-central area around Richfield, Parowan, these are 11, 28, 5, and 52 percent. For and near Escalante.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • New Core Study Unearths Insights Into Uinta Basin Evolution and Resources
    UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY SURVEY NOTES VOLUME 51, NUMBER 2 MAY 2019 New core study unearths insights into Uinta Basin evolution and resources CONTENTS New Core, New Insights into Ancient DIRECTOR’S PERSPECTIVE Lake Uinta Evolution and Uinta Basin • Exploration and development of Energy Resources ..........................1 by Bill Keach unconventional resources. Oil shale Drones for Good: Utah Geologists As the incoming Take to the Skies ...........................3 director for the Utah and sand continue to be a provocative Utah Mining Districts at Your Fingertips . .4 Geological Survey opportunity still searching for an eco- Energy News: The Benefits of Utah (UGS), I would like to nomic threshold. Oil and Gas Production.....................6 thank Rick Allis for his Glad You Asked: What are Those • Earthquake early warning systems. Can Blue Ponds Near Moab?....................8 guidance and leader- they work on the Wasatch Front? GeoSights: Pine Park and Ancient ship over the past 18 years. In Rick’s first • Incorporating technology into field Supervolcanoes of Southwestern Utah....10 “Director’s Perspective” he made predic- Survey News...............................12 tions of “likely hot-button issues” that the mapping and hazard recognition and UGS would face. These issues included: using data analytics and knowledge Design | Jenny Erickson sharing in our work at the UGS. Cover | View to the west of Willow Creek • Renewed exploration for oil and gas in core study area. Photo by Ryan Gall. the State. The last item is dear to my heart. A large part of my career has been in the devel- State of Utah • Renewed interest in more fossil-fuel-fired Gary R.
    [Show full text]
  • Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment and Friends of Great Salt Lake, Petitioners/Appellants, Vs. Executive Director Of
    Brigham Young University Law School BYU Law Digital Commons Utah Supreme Court Briefs (2000– ) 2015 Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment and Friends of Great Salt Lake, Petitioners/Appellants, vs. Executive Director of the Department of Environmental Quality Et Al., Respondents/ Appellees Utah Supreme Court Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/byu_sc2 Part of the Law Commons Original Brief Submitted to the Utah Court of Appeals; digitized by the Howard W. Hunter Law Library, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah. Recommended Citation Supplemental Submission, Utah Physicians v Department Environment, No. 20150344 (Utah Supreme Court, 2015). https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/byu_sc2/3312 This Supplemental Submission is brought to you for free and open access by BYU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Utah Supreme Court Briefs (2000– ) by an authorized administrator of BYU Law Digital Commons. Policies regarding these Utah briefs are available at http://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/ utah_court_briefs/policies.html. Please contact the Repository Manager at [email protected] with questions or feedback. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH UTAH PHYSICIANS FOR A HEALTHY Appeal No. 20150344-SC ENVIRONMENT and FRIENDS OF GREAT SALT LAKE, Agency Decision Nos. Petitioners/Appellants, N10123-0041 v. DAQE-AN101230041-13 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE UTAH DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, et al., Respondents/Appellees. SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF OF HOLLY REFINING AND MARKETING CO. Appeal from the Final Order of the Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Executive Director Amanda Smith Joro Walker Steven J. Christiansen (5265) Charles R. Dubuc David C.
    [Show full text]
  • County Commission Update: Protecting a Vital Natural Resource
    County Commission Update: Protecting a Vital Natural Resource By Wade Mathews, Public Information Officer It’s a remnant of an ancient body of water that once covered most of our county and much of the western states region. Now the Great Salt Lake is all that remains of Lake Bonneville. Because of its unique mineral qualities, the Great Salt Lake, specifically its south arm, provides a valuable resource to our county. The lake’s minerals are utilized by several large businesses in Tooele County, it provides recreation opportunities, and the lake is a great tourist attraction to this area. But that resource that is the Great Salt Lake is being threatened. The Tooele County Commission has learned of a proposal by Great Salt Lake Minerals Corporation (GSL), located on the north side of the lake that has the potential of decreasing the level of the southern arm by six to 30 inches a year. GSL originally proposed withdrawing 360,000 acre feet of water per year from the north arm of the lake. Due to some criticism, GSL may reduce that request. The lake is already at historic low levels due to the past draught experienced in the region. Commissioner Jerry Hurst says, “GSL’s proposal could have a drastic effect on the operations of our businesses located along the southern shore. Five major companies and several small businesses rely on the lake being at a certain level and on having high salinity content.” Those major companies include Morton Salt, Cargill Salt, Broken Arrow, US Magnesium and Allegheny Technologies. They make up the Tooele County Great Salt Lake South Arm Industry Consortium.
    [Show full text]
  • Nutrient Dynamics in the Jordan River and Great
    NUTRIENT DYNAMICS IN THE JORDAN RIVER AND GREAT SALT LAKE WETLANDS by Shaikha Binte Abedin A thesis submitted to the faculty of The University of Utah in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering The University of Utah August 2016 Copyright © Shaikha Binte Abedin 2016 All Rights Reserved The University of Utah Graduate School STATEMENT OF THESIS APPROVAL The thesis of Shaikha Binte Abedin has been approved by the following supervisory committee members: Ramesh K. Goel , Chair 03/08/2016 Date Approved Michael E. Barber , Member 03/08/2016 Date Approved Steven J. Burian , Member 03/08/2016 Date Approved and by Michael E. Barber , Chair/Dean of the Department/College/School of Civil and Environmental Engineering and by David B. Kieda, Dean of The Graduate School. ABSTRACT In an era of growing urbanization, anthropological changes like hydraulic modification and industrial pollutant discharge have caused a variety of ailments to urban rivers, which include organic matter and nutrient enrichment, loss of biodiversity, and chronically low dissolved oxygen concentrations. Utah’s Jordan River is no exception, with nitrogen contamination, persistently low oxygen concentration and high organic matter being among the major current issues. The purpose of this research was to look into the nitrogen and oxygen dynamics at selected sites along the Jordan River and wetlands associated with Great Salt Lake (GSL). To demonstrate these dynamics, sediment oxygen demand (SOD) and nutrient flux experiments were conducted twice through the summer, 2015. The SOD ranged from 2.4 to 2.9 g-DO m-2 day-1 in Jordan River sediments, whereas at wetland sites, the SOD was as high as 11.8 g-DO m-2 day-1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Tectonic Evolution of the Madrean Archipelago and Its Impact on the Geoecology of the Sky Islands
    The Tectonic Evolution of the Madrean Archipelago and Its Impact on the Geoecology of the Sky Islands David Coblentz Earth and Environmental Sciences Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM Abstract—While the unique geographic location of the Sky Islands is well recognized as a primary factor for the elevated biodiversity of the region, its unique tectonic history is often overlooked. The mixing of tectonic environments is an important supplement to the mixing of flora and faunal regimes in contributing to the biodiversity of the Madrean Archipelago. The Sky Islands region is located near the actively deforming plate margin of the Western United States that has seen active and diverse tectonics spanning more than 300 million years, many aspects of which are preserved in the present-day geology. This tectonic history has played a fundamental role in the development and nature of the topography, bedrock geology, and soil distribution through the region that in turn are important factors for understanding the biodiversity. Consideration of the geologic and tectonic history of the Sky Islands also provides important insights into the “deep time” factors contributing to present-day biodiversity that fall outside the normal realm of human perception. in the North American Cordillera between the Sierra Madre Introduction Occidental and the Colorado Plateau – Southern Rocky The “Sky Island” region of the Madrean Archipelago (lo- Mountains (figure 1). This part of the Cordillera has been cre- cated between the northern Sierra Madre Occidental in Mexico ated by the interactions between the Pacific, North American, and the Colorado Plateau/Rocky Mountains in the Southwest- Farallon (now entirely subducted under North America) and ern United States) is an area of exceptional biodiversity and has Juan de Fuca plates and is rich in geology features, including become an important study area for geoecology, biology, and major plateaus (The Colorado Plateau), large elevated areas conservation management.
    [Show full text]
  • Controls on Geothermal Activity in the Sevier Thermal Belt, Southwestern
    PROCEEDINGS, 44th Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering Stanford University, Stanford, California, February 11-13, 2019 SGP-TR-214 Controls of Geothermal Resources and Hydrothermal Activity in the Sevier Thermal Belt Based on Fluid Geochemistry Stuart F. Simmons1,2, Stefan Kirby3, Rick Allis3, Phil Wannamaker1 and Joe Moore1 1EGI, University of Utah, 423 Wakara Way, suite 300, Salt Lake City, UT 2Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Utah, 50 S. Central Campus Dr., Salt Lake City, UT 84112 3Utah Geological Survey, 1594 W. North Temple St., Salt Lake City, UT 84114 [email protected] Keywords: Sevier Thermal Belt, hydrothermal systems, heat flow, geochemistry, helium isotopes, stable isotopes. ABSTRACT The Sevier Thermal Belt, southwestern Utah, covers 20,000 km2, and it is located along the eastern edge of the Basin and Range, extending east into the transition zone of the Colorado Plateau. The belt encompasses the geothermal production fields at Cove Fort, Roosevelt Hot Springs, and Thermo, scattered hot spring activity, and the Covenant & Providence hydrocarbon fields. Regionally, it is characterized by elevated heat flow, modest seismicity, and Quaternary basalt-rhyolite magmatism. There are at least five large discrete domains (50 to >500 km2) with anomalous heat flow, including ones associated with Roosevelt Hot Springs, Cove Fort, Thermo and the Black Rock desert. Helium isotope data indicate connections to the upper mantle are developed over the region of strongest and most concentrated hydrothermal activity. By contrast, stable isotope data demonstrate that most of the convective heat transfer is associated with shallow to deep circulation of local meteoric water. Quartz-silica geothermometry suggests that convective heat transfer is compartmentalized by stratigraphic horizons and sub-vertical faults.
    [Show full text]
  • Great Salt Lake FAQ June 2013 Natural History Museum of Utah
    Great Salt Lake FAQ June 2013 Natural History Museum of Utah What is the origin of the Great Salt Lake? o After the Lake Bonneville flood, the Great Basin gradually became warmer and drier. Lake Bonneville began to shrink due to increased evaporation. Today's Great Salt Lake is a large remnant of Lake Bonneville, and occupies the lowest depression in the Great Basin. Who discovered Great Salt Lake? o The Spanish missionary explorers Dominguez and Escalante learned of Great Salt Lake from the Native Americans in 1776, but they never actually saw it. The first white person known to have visited the lake was Jim Bridger in 1825. Other fur trappers, such as Etienne Provost, may have beaten Bridger to its shores, but there is no proof of this. The first scientific examination of the lake was undertaken in 1843 by John C. Fremont; this expedition included the legendary Kit Carson. A cross, carved into a rock near the summit of Fremont Island, reportedly by Carson, can still be seen today. Why is the Great Salt Lake salty? o Much of the salt now contained in the Great Salt Lake was originally in the water of Lake Bonneville. Even though Lake Bonneville was fairly fresh, it contained salt that concentrated as its water evaporated. A small amount of dissolved salts, leached from the soil and rocks, is deposited in Great Salt Lake every year by rivers that flow into the lake. About two million tons of dissolved salts enter the lake each year by this means. Where does the Great Salt Lake get its water, and where does the water go? o Great Salt Lake receives water from four main rivers and numerous small streams (66 percent), direct precipitation into the lake (31 percent), and from ground water (3 percent).
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3 of the State Wildlife Action Plan
    Colorado’s 2015 State Wildlife Action Plan Chapter 3: Habitats This chapter presents updated information on the distribution and condition of key habitats in Colorado. The habitat component of Colorado’s 2006 SWAP considered 41 land cover types from the Colorado GAP Analysis (Schrupp et al. 2000). Since then, the Southwest Regional GAP project (SWReGAP, USGS 2004) has produced updated land cover mapping using the U.S. National Vegetation Classification (NVC) names for terrestrial ecological systems. In the strictest sense, ecological systems are not equivalent to habitat types for wildlife. Ecological systems as defined in the NVC include both dynamic ecological processes and biogeophysical characteristics, in addition to the component species. However, the ecological systems as currently classified and mapped are closely aligned with the ways in which Colorado’s wildlife managers and conservation professionals think of, and manage for, habitats. Thus, for the purposes of the SWAP, references to the NVC systems should be interpreted as wildlife habitat in the general sense. Fifty-seven terrestrial ecological systems or altered land cover types mapped for SWReGAP have been categorized into 20 habitat types, and an additional nine aquatic habitats and seven “Other” habitat categories have been defined. SWAP habitat categories are listed in Table 4 (see Appendix C for the crosswalk of SWAP habitats with SWReGAP mapping units). Though nomenclature is slightly different in some cases, the revised habitat categories presented in this document
    [Show full text]
  • Desolation Canyon 5 DAY EXPEDITION
    Desolation Canyon 5 DAY EXPEDITION The morning of your trip: Check out of your accommodations & eat a good breakfast. Meet in the morning at Moab Adventure Center at: A.M. Come dressed and ready to raft (see diagram below): We’ll caravan cars to our secure lot north of town for complimentary parking, then take a 20 minute bus ride to the Moab airport for a 40 minute flight on 5-9 passenger planes to Sandwash airstrip near the put-in for Green River. After landing, choose between a shuttle van or a scenic 1.5 mile (somewhat steep) hike down to the rafts waiting at the river. (Note: hike is optional). BIG SMILE A smile is a curve that HAT FOR SUN PROTECTION Wide-brimmed hat, baseball cap or visor sets a lot of things straight Gear provided: RETENTION DEVICE(S) COMFORTABLE SHIRT River guides invented these thirty years Best with UPF for sun protection Large water-resistant gear bag ago for hats and sunglasses. They work! containing a sleeping bag, sheet, and ground tarp. Once you are SUNGLASSES dressed and ready for the river LIFE JACKET / PFD They’re not just for Hollywood looks Available at the river’s edge, with the rafts that day, you should pack your personal duffel inside this large QUICK DRY SHORTS rubber bag where you can access LIP BALM & SUNSCREEN it again that night at camp. At least 30 SPF - You will have Makes sitting on the raft more comfortable time to apply this on the bus ride (Inaccessible during the day).
    [Show full text]
  • Canyonlands As a Contested Landscape of Conservation
    Canyonlands as a Contested Landscape of Conservation by Brooke Larsen, 2014-15 State of the Rockies Project Student Researcher For this year’s State of the Rockies Project, Brooke Larsen researched the contested landscape of the Greater Canyon- lands and the larger Southeastern Utah region. The year 2014 marks the 50th anniversary of the designation of Canyon- lands National Park, but the conservation of the larger Canyonlands landscape still remains uncertain. Brooke analyzed four different policy case studies applicable to public lands across the state of Utah, all with potential implications for the future of Canyonlands. These include America’s Red Rock Wilderness Act, Utah’s Transfer of Public Lands Act, the proposed Canyonlands National Park expansion and Greater Canyonlands National Monument, and the Eastern Utah Public Land Initiative. These case studies not only provide a glimpse into the potential future of the Canyonlands landscape, but they also reveal cultural, political, socioeconomic, and legal factors important for understanding why landscapes such as Canyonlands are so contested in Southern Utah. Introduction The Canyonlands region of Southeastern Utah is one As Western states urbanize and develop into discon- of these contested landscapes with unique factors leading to the nected metropolitan regions, contrasting views over how to dispute. For nearly the past ninety years, government agencies create healthy communities, economies, and environments and representatives, as well as citizens and conservation orga- make the future of large landscapes in the West tenuous. Our nizations, have proposed and urged for the conservation of the national parks often protect the cores of contested landscapes in larger Canyonlands landscape.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Great Salt Lake Bird Festival Visitors: Applying the Recreational Specialization Framework
    Understanding Great Salt Lake Bird Festival Visitors: Applying the Recreational Specialization Framework Steven W. Burr David Scott1 Introduction The growth of birdwatching over the last two decades has been staggering. According to the recent National Survey of Recreation and the Environment (NSRE) (2000-2002), one-third (33%) of American adults said they went birdwatching at least once during the previous 12 months. According to NSRE data, the number of people who regarded themselves as birdwatchers increased 27% between 1995 and 2001 and an incredible 225% between 1982 and 1991. Although most people watch birds exclusively in their yards, 40% of birdwatchers leave their homes to look at birds (U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, 2002). The economic impacts of birdwatching are remarkable as well, with thousands of birders visiting birding “hotspots” and collectively spending millions of dollars during such outings, resulting in significant economic benefits locally (Crandall, Leones, & Colby, 1992; Kerlinger & Wiedner, 1994; Kim, Scott, Thigpen, & Kim, 1997; Eubanks, Kerlinger, & Payne, 1993). This has spurred community development and conservation leaders to develop festivals and special events attractive to birdwatchers. Today, there are approximately 200 birdwatching and wildlife-watching festivals held throughout the United States and Canada (American Birding Association, 2001). One of these is the Great Salt Lake Bird Festival, which was established in 1999 and has experienced growth over the years in the number of visitors attending, with approximately 3,000 visitors attending in 2002 and 3,500 attending in 2003 (N. Roundy, personal communication, July 15, 2003).
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Dates** and Rates Adventure with **These Dates Are Subject to Change
    PO Box 1324 Moab, UT 84532 (800) 332-2439 (435) 259-8229 Fax (435) 259-2226 2021 Dates** and Rates Adventure with **These Dates are subject to change. Email: [email protected] www.GriffithExp.com A Touch of Class! The Colorado River Cataract Canyon 6 Days/5 Nights By Oarboat 4 Days / 3 Nights By motorized J-rig Rates $1699 Youth (10-16): $1550 Rates $1499 Youth (10-16):$1399 May 10, August 9, October 4 April 7, 14, 21, May 12, 19, 26 6 Days / 5 Nights By Oarboat-Hiking (Green River) June 2, 9, Rates $1699 Youth (10-16): $1550 July 7, 14, 21, 28 (Paddleboat Available) May 24, June 28, October 18 August 4, 11, 18, 25 (Paddleboat Available) September 1, 8, 15, 22, 29(Paddleboat Available) 5 Days / 4 Nights By Oarboat October 6, 13, 20, 27 Rates $1599 Youth (10-16) $1450 March 2, 9, 16, 23, 30 3 Days / 2 Nights By motorized J-rig April 6, 13, 20, Rates Adults: $1150 Youth (10-16) $1150 May 11, 18, 25 April 1, 8, 15, 22, June 1, 8, May 13, 20, 27 July 6, 13, 20, 27 June 3, 24 August 3, 10, 17, 24, 31 July 8, 15, 22, 29 September 7, 14, 21, 28 August 5, 12, 19, 26 October 5, 12, 19, 26 September and October available by request 7 Days / 6 Nights 2 Days / 1 Night By motorized J-rig Rates Adults: $2149 Rates Adults: $1049 Youth (10-16) $1049 September 9 May 21, 28 June 4 http://www.griffithexp.com/cataract-canyon *Includes free Canyonlands scenic return flight with every trip! Fisher Towers Family Trip On the Colorado River 2 Days / 1 Night 1 Day Rates Adults: $420 Youth (5-16):$330 Rates Adults: $95 Youth (5-16): $80 April 10, June 4, July 3, 23 August 3, 27 Charter Trips Only (Minimum 10 guests) Other Dates Available by Request (Please Call For Availability) http://www.griffithexp.com/moab-daily-rafting Westwater Canyon 3 Days / 2 Nights 2 Days / 1 Night Rates Adults: $670 Youth (10-16):$520 Rates Adults: $550 Youth (10-16):$399 Chartered Trips Only (Minimum 8 Guests) March 4, 11, 18, 25 April 1, 8, 15, 22, 29 Please call for availability May 6, 13, July 8, 15, 22, 29 Aug.
    [Show full text]