DOCSLIB.ORG

Bull Mountain Master Development Plan DEIS DOI-BLM-UT-G010

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bull Mountain Master Development Plan DEIS DOI-BLM-UT-G010 Sent via electronic mail (comments only) and hand delivery (comments and exhibits) April 16, 2015 Bureau of Land Management Attn: Gina Jones Uncompahgre Field Office 2465 South Townsend Avenue Montrose, Colorado 81401 Email: [email protected] RE: Comments Regarding the Bull Mountain Unit Master Development Plan Draft Environmental Impact Statement DOI-BLM-CO-SO50-2013-0022-EIS Dear Ms. Jones, The following comments are submitted by Western Environmental Law Center (“WELC”) on behalf of Citizens for a Healthy Community (“CHC”), High Country Conservation Advocates (“HCCA”), Western Colorado Congress (“WCC”), Great Old Broads for Wilderness (“Broads”), the Crystal River Caucus (“CRC”), EcoFlight, WildEarth Guardians (“Guardians”), Rocky Mountain Wild (“RMW”), Sierra Club Rocky Mountain Chapter, Rocky Mountain Recreation Initiative, and Wilderness Workshop (together, “Citizen Groups”) in response to the Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) Uncompahgre Field Office (“UFO”) Draft Environmental Impact Statement (“DEIS”) for the Bull Mountain Unit Master Development Plan (“MDP”), DOI-BLM-CO-SO50-2013-0022-EIS. Given the critical impacts that this proposed development would have on the region’s environment, and, more broadly, on climate change, we appreciate the opportunity to participate and comment on this Draft, as well as BLM’s commitment to integrate the following concerns into its NEPA analysis. See 43 C.F.R. § 1610.2; 42 U.S.C. § 4332. Citizen Groups hereby incorporate by reference our supplemental information letter, submitted June 3, 2011, providing BLM with new information and circumstances affecting the Bull Mountain Unit (“Unit”) (attached as Exhibit 1); comments for the preliminary EA/FONSI for the Bull Mountain Unit (attached as Exhibit 2) and exhibits (“EA Exhibits”), submitted April 23, 2012; and our supplemental comments on the Bull Mountain EIS submitted February 14, 2014 (attached as Exhibit 3). Bull Mountain Master Development Plan DEIS 1 DOI-BLM-UT-G010-2009-0217-EIS Citizens for a Healthy Community (“CHC”) is a grass-roots organization with more than 375 members formed in 2010 for the purpose of protecting people and their environment from irresponsible oil and gas development in the Delta County region. CHC’s members and supporters include organic farmers, ranchers, vineyard and winery owners, sportsmen, realtors, and other concerned citizens impacted by oil and gas development. CHC members have been actively involved in commenting on BLM’s oil and gas activities. High Country Conservation Advocates (“HCCA”) is located in Crested Butte, Colorado with over 800 members. HCCA was founded in 1977 to protect the health and natural beauty of the land, rivers, and wildlife in and around Gunnison County now and for future generations. HCCA has engaged on oil, natural gas, and coal bed methane development in Gunnison County for over a decade to prevent irreparable harm to its members' interests. HCCA's members and supporters live in, use, and enjoy the communities and landscapes that the proposed Bull Mountain development would affect. Western Environmental Law Center (“WELC”) uses the power of the law to defend and protect the American West’s treasured landscapes, iconic wildlife and rural communities. WELC combines legal skills with sound conservation biology and environmental science to address major environmental issues in the West in the most strategic and effective manner. WELC works at the national, regional, state, and local levels; and in all three branches of government. WELC integrates national policies and regional perspective with the local knowledge of our 100+ partner groups to implement smart and appropriate place-based actions. Western Colorado Congress (“WCC”) is an alliance for community action empowering people to protect and enhance their quality of life in Western Colorado. We have been working for land conservation and the responsible use and development of our natural resources for 35 years. We have over 1,500 members across Western Colorado. Great Old Broads for Wilderness (“Broads”) is a national conservation organization with 5,200 members, including 700 in Colorado. Broads engages and ignites the activism of elders to preserve and protect wilderness and wild lands, giving voice to the millions of older Americans who want to protect their public lands as Wilderness for this and future generations. We bring experience, commitment, and humor to the movement to protect the last wild places on Earth. The Crystal River Caucus (“CRC”) represents the residents and landowners in the Crystal River Valley in Pitkin County, Colorado. In Colorado, a caucus is a voter-approved entity that provides a recommendatory function to County Commissioners. The Crystal River Caucus represents approximately 700 Pitkin County residents. EcoFlight educates and advocates for the protection of remaining wild lands and wildlife habitat through the use of small aircraft. The aerial perspective and our educational programs encourage an environmental stewardship ethic among citizens of all ages. Rocky Mountain Wild (“RMW”) is a conservation advocacy organization focused on protecting wildlands for wildlife throughout the Southern Rocky Mountain region (Colorado, eastern Utah, southern Wyoming, and northern New Mexico). The organization has around 600 members who are passionate about protecting the biodiversity and ecosystem health throughout the Bull Mountain Master Development Plan DEIS 2 DOI-BLM-UT-G010-2009-0217-EIS region. RMW advocates for its members’ interests through participating in administrative processes, collaboration, education, and, when necessary, litigation. Wilderness Workshop (“WW”) is a non-profit organization engaged in research, education, legal advocacy and grassroots organizing to protect the ecological integrity of local landscapes and public lands. WW not only defends pristine public lands from new threats, but also strives to restore the functional wildness of a landscape fragmented by human activity. WW works to protect and preserve existing wilderness areas, advocate for expanding wilderness, defend roadless areas from development that would destroy their wilderness character, and safeguard the ecological integrity of all federal public lands in the vicinity of the White River National Forest. Wilderness Workshop has a long history of participation in forest planning on the White River National Forest, the Grand Mesa Uncompahgre and Gunnison National Forest, and adjacent Bureau of Land Management lands. WW has a long history of engagement with oil and gas issues in and around the Bull Mountain Unit. The Sierra Club’s members and supporters are more than 2.4 million of your friends and neighbors across the country; more than 50,000 here in Colorado. Inspired by nature, we work together to protect our communities and the planet. The Sierra Club is America's oldest, largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization. Our mission is to explore, enjoy, and protect the planet. WildEarth Guardians (“Guardians”) is a western U.S.-based organization dedicated to protecting and restoring the wildlife, wild places, wild rivers, and health of the American West. Headquartered in Santa Fe, Guardians was founded 26 years ago and has offices in Denver and other western states. With the support of more than 44,000 members, including more than 5,000 members in Colorado, Guardians works to defend our public lands from the impacts of climate change and fossil fuel development. Guardians has long been active in efforts to protect public lands in the North Fork Valley of Colorado from the impacts of fossil fuel development. Rocky Mountain Recreation Initiative (“RMRI”) is a small grassroots organization that strives to protect wilderness quality lands and maintain landscape integrity in Colorado by developing policies that promote sustainable development of recreational trails. I. National Environmental Policy Act A. The BLM is required to issue a moratorium on all oil and gas development in the Uncompahgre area for as long as the UFO RMP remains uncompleted. As identified in Citizen Groups’ earlier comments to BLM, a moratorium on all oil and gas development within the UFO is required, pending revision to the Resource Management Plan (“RMP”) and environmental impact statement (“EIS”). Proceeding with oil and gas development while the RMP revision is pending would prejudice the development of the RMP EIS. Moreover, the existing UFO RMP is completely out-of-date and can no longer serve as the foundation for decisions on oil and gas development within the UFO. See Scoping Comments at 11-14; EA Comments at 2-4. NEPA requires that, until an agency issues a Record of Decision for a pending NEPA Bull Mountain Master Development Plan DEIS 3 DOI-BLM-UT-G010-2009-0217-EIS document, “no action concerning the proposal shall be taken which would: (1) have an adverse environmental impact; or (2) limit the choice of reasonable alternatives.” 40 C.F.R. § 1506.1(a)(1), (2). NEPA prohibits agencies from making an “irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources.” 40 C.F.R. §§ 1502.2(f); Conner v. Burford, 848 F.2d 1441, 1446 (9th Cir. 1986); see also Pacific Rivers Council v. Thomas, 30 F.3d 1050, 1056-57 (9th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 1793 (1995) (interpreting identical language in ESA). “The purpose of an EIS is to apprise decisionmakers of the disruptive environmental effects that may flow from their decisions at a time when they ‘retain[] a maximum range of options.’” Conner, 848 F.2d at 1446.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Historical Information H.4 Pre-Event Reports Book 1 Project Rulison: Pre
    Historical Information H.4 Pre-Event Reports Book 1 Project Rulison: Pre-Shot Predictions of Structural Effects HPR .2 DISCLAIMER Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document. PROJECT RULISON: Pre - Shot Predictions of Structural Effects John A. -~lume& Associates Research Division San ~rancisco,California March 1969 Prepared under Contract AT(26-1)-99 for the Nevada Operations Office, USAEC This page intentionally left blank PROJECT RULISON: PRE-SHOT PREDICTIONS OF STRUCTURAL EFFECTS CONTENTS -Page ABSTRACT ......................../'. .... i i I SUMMARY ............................ v INTRODUCTION.......................... 1 SEISMICITY ........................... 2 STRUCTURAL HAZARD EVALUATION .................. 3 EARTH STRUCTURAL HAZARDS .................... 11 HYDRAULIC STRUCTURE AND WATER SUPPLY HAZARDS .......... 17 SAFETY PRECAUTIONS AND EVACUATION RECOMt4ENDATIONS ....... 22 DAMAGE COST PREDICTIONS .................... 24 CONDITION SURVEYS ....................... 26 MAP (In pocket inside back cover) This page intentionally left blank . ~ ABSTRACT This report includes results of pre-RULISON structural response investigations and a preliminary evaluation of hazards associated with ground motion effects on buildings, reservoirs, and earth structures. Total damage repair costs from an engineering judg- ment prediction are provided. Spectral Matrix Method calcula- tions are now in progress. Also included are general safety recommendations. A summary of predictions follows: Structural Response Damaging motions are probable in the region inside 25 kilometers. Structural hazards exist in Grand Valley, at the Anvil Points Research Station, and at various small ranches out to a distance of 14 ki lometers from Ground Zero (GZ) . The area is much more densely populated than would appear from initial project informa- tion. Earth Structure Hazards Rockfall and hazards to slope stability create major problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Coal Fields of Northwestern Colorado and Northeastern Utah
    COAL FIELDS OF NORTHWESTERN COLORADO AND NORTHEASTERN UTAH. By HOYT S. GALE. INTRODUCTION. NATURE OF THE PRESENT INVESTIGATION. This paper is a preliminary statement of the results of work in the coal fields of northwestern Colorado and northeastern Utah during the summer of 1907.° In 1905 a preliminary reconnaissance of the Yampa coal field, of Routt County, was made.6 In the summer of 1906 similar work was extended southwestward from the Yampa field, and the Danforth Hills and Grand Hogback coal fields, of Routt, Rio Blanco, and Garfield counties, were mapped.6 The work of the past season was a continuation of that of the two preceding years, extend­ ing the area studied westward through Routt and Rio Blanco counties, Colo., and including some less extensive coal fields in^Uinta County, Utah, and southern Uinta County, Wyo. ACCESSIBILITY. At present these fields have no_ railroad connection, although surveys for several projected lines have recently been made into the region. Of these lines, the Denver, Northwestern and Pacific Railway ("Moffat road") is under active construction in .the eastern part of Routt County and bids fair to push westward not far from the lower Yampa and White River fields in the near future. An extension of the Uintah Railway has been surveyed from Dragon to Vernal, Utah, crossing the projected route of the "MofFat road" near Green River. The Union Pacific Railroad has made a preliminary survey south from Rawlins, Wyo., intending to reach the Yampa Valley in the vicinity of Craig. a A more complete report combining the results of the preceding season's work in the Danforth Hills and Grand Hogback fields with those of last season's work as outlined here, together with detailed contour maps of the whole area, will be published as a (separate bulletin of the Survey.
    [Show full text]
  • ()Olorado Native Piant Society
    ()olorado Native PIant Society NEWSLETTER VOLLl'lE 4 NLmER 1 JANUARY - FEBRUARY 1980 llIEnlCATED TO lHE ApPRECIATIGl AND lDNSERVATION OF lHE CoLORADO FLORAII OFFICERS 1979-l9OO CORRESPONDENCE President: Lloyd Hayes Please direct all correspondence and inquiries Vice-President: Scott Peterson to the Secretary, Sue Martin, USDA Crops Secretary: Sue Martin Research Laboratory, Colorado State University Treasurer: ~Ia 1t Ruzzo Ft. Collins 80523 MEI>1BERSHIP RENEWALS & INFORfAATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS * Please direct all membership applications, Ann Armstrong (81) Boulder 494-0545 renewals and address changes to Myrna Miriam Denham (80) Boulder 442-1020 Steinkamp. USDA Crops Research Laboratory. Virginia Dionigi (80) Hygiene 776-2609 Colorado State University. Ft. Collins 80523 Tom Eamon (81) Golden 279-1076 Hugo Ferchau (80) Gunnison SCHEDULE OF ~1BERSHIP FEES Lloyd Hayes (80) Ft. Collins 226-5365 Bob Heapes (81) Parker 841-3978 LIFE $ 250.00 Sue Martin (81) Ft. Collins 226-3371 SUPPORTING 50.00 Scott Peterson (80) Ft. Collins 484-2884 SOCIETY 25.00 Mark Phillips (80) Lafayette 823-3021 FAMILY 12.00 Walt Ruzzo (81) Ft. Collins 493-0305 INDIVIDUAL 8.00 STUDENT &RETIRED 4.00 The CONPS Newsletter is sent to all other *Year when term expires is given in (). Native Plant Societies in exchange for Numbers following names are phones theirs. Nonmembers may subscribe to the where Directors can be reached. All of Newsletter for $ 4.00. Colorado is covered by the area code 303. Cct.f>1 ITTEES NEWSLETTER EDUCATION Virginia Oionig; EDITOR: Dieter H. Wilken, Dept. of Botany HORTICULTURE & &Plant Pathology, Colorado State Univ. REHABI UTATI ON f1ark Phi 11 ; ps Ft.
    [Show full text]
  • Glenwood Springs and Kremmling Field Offices RMP Revision Evaluation of Proposed Areas of Critical Environmental Concern
    Glenwood Springs and Kremmling Field Offices RMP Revision Evaluation of Proposed Areas of Critical Environmental Concern Glenwood Springs and Kremmling Field Offices RMP Revision Areas of Critical Environmental Concern Report on the Application of the Relevance and Importance Criteria November 2007 Prepared by: United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Glenwood Springs & Kremmling Field Offices Approval: /s/ Jamie Connell /s/ David Stout Jamie Connell David Stout Glenwood Springs Field Manager Kremmling Field Manager Glenwood Springs, Colorado Kremmling, Colorado 2 Table of Contents I. Executive Summary 4 II. Introduction 7 III. Requirements for ACEC Designation 7 IV. Evaluation Process 9 A. Glenwood Springs Relevant and Importance Criteria 11 Determinations B. Kremmling Relevant and Importance Criteria 36 Determinations V. List of Preparers 46 Appendices 1 – References 2 – Natural Heritage Program Definitions 3 – Maps of Proposed ACECs found to meet the relevance and importance criteria 3 I. Executive Summary As part of the Glenwood Springs and Kremmling Resource Management Plan (RMP) revisions, the BLM Interdisciplinary (ID) Team analyzed whether proposed Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) meet the relevance and importance criteria. The Glenwood Springs Field Office (GSFO) analyzed 91 proposed ACECs (existing, internally and externally proposed) and found that 17 met the relevance and importance criteria (total proposed acres = 66,497 acres): Blue Hill ACEC (existing) Bull Gulch ACEC (existing) Deep
    [Show full text]
  • Landscape Character Descriptions of the White River National Forest
    Final Environmental Impact Statement Volume 3 Landscape Character Descriptions of the White River National Forest Headwaters of the South Fork of the White River Jan Spencer – Landscape Architect Writer/Editor Ron Wright – Soil Scientist Bill Kight – Heritage Resource Manager Kit Buell – Wildlife Biologist Carolyn Upton – Social/Economics Specialist Marsha Raus – Fisheries Biologist Narrative and Photography Contributors: Ron Taussig, Beth Boyst, George Myser, Tom Kuekes, Al Grimshaw, Dan Mathews, Paula Johnston, Kathy Hardy, Angela Glenn, Gary Osier P-1 Appendix P White River National Forest Preface The word landscape evokes certain unique and special images and meanings to each of us as individuals. As children we may have attached a sense of place to some small parcel of ground, be it a backyard or an open meadow blooming with the rainbow color of wildflowers. The rest of our lives then build upon those early impressions, layer upon layer of geographic recognition. Year after year we go back to a stream, yet each time we fish there we read something new into the landscape. It may even be some picnic spot with a backdrop of mountain majesty we can still see in our mind even with our eyes closed. These places uplift our spirit, but we are hard-pressed to put into words exactly how or why we feel the way we do. The comforting sense of familiarity a prominent granite peak holds for us never quite gets communicated beyond the photo image. “Like all real treasures of the mind, perception can be split into infinitely small fractions without losing its quality.
    [Show full text]
  • Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National Forests Coal
    Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National Forests Coal Resource and Development Potential Report (2004, revised 2006) ii TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose and Scope .......................................................................................................... 1 Acknowledgments........................................................................................................... 1 II. Geologic Units............................................................................................................... 1 Description.................................................................................................................. 5 III. Coal Fields .................................................................................................................... 5 Carbondale Coal Field .................................................................................................... 6 Crested Butte Coal Field................................................................................................. 6 Grand Mesa Coal Field ................................................................................................... 8 Somerset Coal Field........................................................................................................ 8 Tongue Mesa Coal Field................................................................................................. 9 IV. Coal Characteristics
    [Show full text]
  • Access Status Recreation Potential
    Recreation BLM BLM Parcel Potential Potential State District/Field Project Area Name County Size (approx. Access Status 1 - Low Acquisition Office acres) 2 - Medium Tool 3 - High Colorado River CO Harris Gulch Garfield 2,500 Restricted Access 3 Easement, Fee Valley Colorado River CO Upper Grand Hogback Garfield 7,600 Restricted Access 3 Easement, Fee Valley Colorado River CO Consolidated Reservoir Garfield 1,950 Restricted Access 3 Easement, Fee Valley Colorado River CO South Canyon (2 parcels) Garfield 3,790 Restricted Access 3 Easement, Fee Valley CO Grand Junction Bangs Canyon Clarks Bench Mesa 831 Restricted Access 3 Easement, Fee CO Grand Junction Bangs Canyon East Creek Mesa 6,268 Restricted Access 3 Easement, Fee CO Grand Junction Bottle Rock Mesa 869 no legal access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction Bull Draw Mesa 2,480 Restricted Access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction Larsen Canyon Mesa 878 Restricted Access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction Mount Logan Garfield 760 Restricted Access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction Mud Spring Canyon Garfield 6,313 Restricted Access 3 Easement CO Grand Junction Pritchard Spring Garfield 1,278 no legal access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction Sink Creek Mesa 8,481 Restricted Access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction Snyder Creek Mesa 698 no legal access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction South Grand Mesa Slopes Mesa 6,113 Restricted Access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction The Breaks Mesa 2,543 no legal access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction The Palisade Fish Creek Mesa 2,026 Restricted Access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction The Palisade
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography of United States Landslide Maps and Reports Christopher S. Alger and Earl E. Brabb1 Open-File Report 85-585 This Re
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Bibliography of United States landslide maps and reports Christopher S. Alger and Earl E. Brabb 1 Open-File Report 85-585 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards and stratigraphic nomenclature. 1 Menlo Park, California Contents Page Introductlon......................................... 1 Text References...................................... 8 Bibliographies With Landslide References............. 8 Multi State-United States Landslide Maps and Reports. 8 Alabama.............................................. 9 Alaska............................................... 9 American Samoa....................................... 14 Arizona.............................................. 14 Arkansas............................................. 16 California........................................... 16 Colorado............................................. 41 Connecticut.......................................... 51 Delaware............................................. 51 District of Columbia................................. 51 Florida.............................................. 51 Georgi a.............................................. 51 Guam................................................. 51 Hawa i i............................................... 51 Idaho................................................ 52 II1i noi s............................................. 54 Indiana.............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Of Ground Water Compliance at the New Rifle, Colorado, UMTRA Project Site
    DOE/EA-1406 Final Environmental Assessment of Ground Water Compliance at the New Rifle, Colorado, UMTRA Project Site July 2003 Work Performed Under DOE Contract No. DE−AC13−02GJ79491 for the U.S. Department of Energy Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE/EA-1406 Rev. 0 Final Environmental Assessment of Ground Water Compliance at the New Rifle, Colorado, UMTRA Project Site July 2003 Prepared by U.S. Department of Energy Grand Junction Office Grand Junction, Colorado Work Performed Under DOE Contract No. DE-AC13-02GJ79491 U01341 This Page Intentionally Blank Contents Page Acronyms and Abbreviations ....................................................................................................... vii Executive Summary....................................................................................................................... ix 1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................................1 1.1 Background .....................................................................................................................1 1.2 Site Description...............................................................................................................3 1.3 Site History.....................................................................................................................4 1.4 Overview of Contaminant Sources .................................................................................6 2.0 Purpose and Need for Action..................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Joe Elliott, Councilor Cablecast Live on Comcast Channel 10 Ed Green, Councilor Sean Strode, Councilor Streamed Live at Riflenow.Org
    City of CITY COUNCIL Rifle AGENDA City Council City Hall Barbara Clifton, Mayor City Council Chambers Theresa Hamilton, Mayor Pro Tem 202 Railroad Avenue Joe Carpenter, Councilor Rifle, CO Brian Condie, Councilor Revised Joe Elliott, Councilor Cablecast Live on Comcast Channel 10 Ed Green, Councilor Sean Strode, Councilor Streamed Live at RifleNOW.org The City of Rifle will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call (970) 665-6405 for assistance. REGULAR MEETING May 20, 2020 WORKSHOP 6:00 P.M. CONFERENCE ROOM 6:00 p.m. Discuss leasing of City Vehicles through Enterprise Fleet Management (Brian Prunty) REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS The City Council may take action on any of the following agenda items as presented or modified prior to or during the meeting, and items necessary or convenient to effectuate the agenda items. 7:00 p.m. 1. Regular Meeting Call to Order, Pledge of Allegiance, and Roll Call 7:03 p.m. 2. Citizen Comments - for items not listed as public hearings on the agenda. Please limit comments to 3 minutes. Email comments prior to the meeting to: [email protected] or Electronic Meeting Participation: Please click the link below to join the webinar: Click here to join electronic meeting or (www.rifleco.org/ElectronicMeetings) Password: 929942 Participate by phone: Dial: 1 301 715 8592 or 1 312 626 6799 / Webinar ID: 416 406 740 7:10 p.m. 3. Consent Agenda – consider approving the following items: A.
    [Show full text]
  • September GSA Today 5883, E-Mail: [email protected]
    Vol. 6, No. 6 June 1996 GSA TODAY A Publication of the Geological Society of America 1996 Annual Meeting Denver, Colorado • October 28–31 Colorado Convention Center – Marriott City Center John Karachewski • Abstracts: Due July 9 For a paper copy of the abstract form: (303) 447-2020, ext.161 E-mail: [email protected] For the electronic form: http://www.geosociety.org • Preregistration: Due September 20—Registration and housing forms enclosed • Information: (303) 447-2020 or 1-800-472-1988; fax 303-447-0648 E-mail: [email protected] World Wide Web: http://www.geosociety.org Associated Societies Association for Women Geoscientists • Association of Engineering Geologists • Association of American State Geologists • Association of Geoscientists for International Development • Cushman Foundation • Geochemical Society • Geoscience Information Society • Mineralogical Society of America • National Association for Black Geologists and Geophysicists • National Association of Geoscience Teachers • National Earth Science Teachers Association • Paleonto- logical Research Institution • Paleontological Society • Sigma Gamma Epsilon • Society of Economic Geologists • Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Co-sponsors Colorado Scientific Society • Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists • Society for Sedimentary Geology (SEPM)—Rocky Mountain Section Graduate School GSA TODAY June Table of Contents Information Forum ................................... 27 Vol. 6, No. 6 1996 Abstracts with Programs .......................... 35 Guest Program ..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ways of Life Continuing Ways of Life
    BOUNDLESS LANDSCAPES & S P I R I T E D P E O P L E NORTHWEST COLORADO CULTURAL HERITAGE ways of life The remoteness of northwest Colorado has always attracted self-determined and resilient explorers. There is a legacy of connection here—between spirited people and boundless landscapes. SURVEYORS MINERS RANCHERS LOGGERS Photo courtesy of Library of Congress Photo courtesy of Tracks and Trails Museum Photo courtesy of Tread of Pioneers Museum Photo courtesy of U.S. Forest Service Vast and diverse, the region offered rich Fortieth Parallel The Miner’s Life Time Honored Life Gould, Colorado yet rugged ways of life. Here, people created John Wesley Powell: Argo Mine & Haybro Mine: Working the Land: Bockman Lumber Camp: strong traditions and cultures that were In 1869 the Powell Expedition ran the Green Mining booms—coal ore, gold, and silver— Abundant grasses and water lured early cattle One hundred men and their families once lived sustained by the land. River and camped at its convergence with the brought men and their families to the region to and sheep men to the region. Cowboys trailed in Colorado’s largest logging camp. Tie hacks Yampa River (Echo Park). Two years later, at the labor in the open cut and underground mines. large herds into the mountains during summer felled trees, cut them to length, and fattened top of Harpers Corner, the expedition penned, After the bust times, many stayed to ranch and back to the valleys before winter snowfall. four sides with a broadax to make railroad ties. “We could look over Echo Wall [Steamboat Rock] and build northwest Colorado communities.
    [Show full text]