DOCSLIB.ORG

Red Tops Wilderness Character Unit Submission A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Red Tops Wilderness Character Unit Submission A Red Tops Wilderness Character Submission Submitted by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance August 19, 2016 Red Tops Wilderness Character Unit Submission A. Red Tops Wilderness Character Unit Boundary Maps and GIS Data The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA) submits this new information regarding the wilderness characteristics of the Red Tops wilderness character unit (Red Tops unit or unit), including a detailed map (Attachment A) to assist the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in meeting its mandates under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), 43 U.S.C. §§ 1711 - 1712, the Wilderness Act of 1964, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1131 et seq., and BLM Manual 6310 – Conducting Wilderness Characteristics Inventory on BLM Lands (Public) (March 15, 2012) (BLM Manual 6310). The attached narrative description, map (Attachment A), photographs (Attachments B and C), and analysis provides BLM with significant new information regarding the size, naturalness, outstanding opportunities for solitude or primitive recreation and supplemental values present within the unit. B. BLM’s Duty Under Manual 6310 to Act on the Significant New Information Presented in this Submission BLM’s wilderness character inventory for the Red Tops unit, as submitted, must comply with BLM Manual 6310 and Appendices A – D, which superseded all previous agency guidance on this topic. See BLM Manual 6310.01; id. § 6310.06(B)(4)(a) (stating that “in order to complete the inventory, District or Field Managers must document wilderness characteristics inventories according to attached Appendices A – D”) (emphasis added). BLM guidance specifically states, [r]egardless of past inventory, the BLM must maintain and update as necessary, its inventory of wilderness resources on public lands. In some circumstances conditions relating to wilderness may have changed over time, and an area that was once determined to lack wilderness characteristics may now possess them. BLM Manual 6310.06(A). 1 Red Tops Wilderness Character Submission Submitted by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance August 19, 2016 Based on BLM’s most recent wilderness inventories, it appears that the Red Tops unit, as submitted here, has never been inventoried for wilderness characteristics under the procedures contained in BLM Manual 6310 and Appendices A – D. See Attachment A. BLM guidance and the new information contained in this wilderness characteristics submission affirm that BLM must conduct an on-the-ground wilderness characteristics inventory that adheres to the boundaries and descriptions contained herein. See 43 U.S.C. § 1711(a) (requiring that BLM keep its inventories current to reflect changes in conditions and to identify new and emerging resources and other values); BLM Manual 6310.06(A). Additionally, BLM must base its wilderness characteristics inventory on the terms, procedures and definitions contained in Manual 6310, regardless of past inventories. C. Detailed Narrative – Red Tops Wilderness Character Unit 1. Area Description The Red Tops wilderness character unit is an area where the Earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. See 16 U.S.C. § 1131(c). The unit is located in central Millard County, Utah, approximately sixty miles from the Utah-Nevada border. It is part of the Great Basin geologic formation. The Red Tops unit is bounded by Steamboat Pass Road (3c Rd) to the south, Red Canyon to the east, Utah Highway 6 to the north, and Ibex Well Road to the west. The unit provides outstanding views of the Cricket Mountains, Sevier Lake, the House Range, Tule Valley, the Barn Hills, and some of the West Desert’s most brilliant Basin and Range landscapes uninhibited by human interference. See Attachment C. The overall impression created is one of a wild and rugged geologic region that has captured the hearts and minds of adventurers and explorers for hundreds of years. Id. 2. 2 Red Tops Wilderness Character Submission Submitted by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance August 19, 2016 Substantially noticeable human-made features and impacts have been excluded from the unit and are used to form the unit boundary. BLM cannot disqualify the unit for lack of naturalness or outstanding opportunities for primitive and unconfined types of recreation based on these or other excluded impacts. See BLM Manual 6310.06(C)(2)(b)(iii) (stating that “human impacts outside the area will not . be considered in assessing naturalness of the area.”). Similarly, human impacts outside of the unit boundary can only be considered in regards to their affect on opportunities for solitude if they are “pervasive and omnipresent.” Id. § 6310.06(C)(2)(c)(i)(1) (emphasis added). 2. Wilderness Characteristics The Wilderness Act established our nation’s policy “to secure for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness.” 16 U.S.C. § 1131(a). “Wilderness” is defined “as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain.” Id. § 1131(c). To qualify as wilderness, an area must: (1) have at least five thousand acres of land in an unimpaired condition; (2) generally appear to have been “affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man’s work substantially unnoticeable;” and (3) possess outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation. Id. An area may also contain “supplemental values” such as ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historic value. See id; BLM Manual 6310.06(C)(2)(d). Supplemental values are not required in order for an area to be identified as possessing wilderness characteristics, but the presence of supplemental values should be documented where they exist. As discussed below, the Red Tops unit easily satisfies the three wilderness requirements and also contains supplemental values. 3 Red Tops Wilderness Character Submission Submitted by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance August 19, 2016 a. Size The Red Tops unit meets the size requirement for lands with wilderness characteristics. Under BLM Manual 6310, one way for lands to meet the size requirement for lands with wilderness characteristics is where the land contains “[r]oadless areas with over 5,000 acres of contiguous BLM lands.” BLM Manual 6310(C)(2)(a)(1). The BLM Manual adopted language in defining “roadless” as “the absence of roads that have been improved and maintained by mechanical means to insure relatively regular and continuous use. A way maintained solely by the passage of vehicles does not constitute a road.” Natural features, “ways,” and manageability issues considerations do not factor into the boundary determination equation. In locating new wilderness character unit boundaries, Manual 6310 requires that BLM utilize the physical edge of substantially noticeable human-caused impacts. See BLM Manual 6310.06(C)(3). Here, the unit boundaries are composed of bladed or otherwise substantially noticeable maintained roads. The Red Tops unit contains approximately 27,912 acres of contiguous federal public land, thereby exceeding the minimum 5,000-acre requirement. The presence of state lands within the unit does not affect or diminish the wilderness characteristics present on BLM-managed lands. b. Naturalness The Red Tops unit clearly contains naturalness when viewed through the lens of BLM Manual 6310. According to the Manual, at all times, BLM must apply the “average visitor” standard to determine whether the unit contains “apparent naturalness.” See id. at 6310.06(C)(2)(b)(ii)(1). This means that when BLM is evaluating whether an area contains apparent naturalness, the agency cannot permit its expertise or particularized knowledge to cloud its judgment, but rather must view the unit as someone “who is not familiar with the biological composition of natural ecosystems versus human-affected ecosystems” would see it. See id. § 4 Red Tops Wilderness Character Submission Submitted by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance August 19, 2016 6310,06(C)(2)(b)(ii)(1)(b). Additionally, trails, historic properties, archaeological resources, fencing and stock ponds are specifically listed examples of human-made features that can be considered substantially unnoticeable and not defeat a finding of naturalness. See id. § 6310.06(C)(2)(b)(i)(1). BLM is instructed to use caution “in assessing the effect of relatively minor human impacts on naturalness” and to “[a]void an overly strict approach to assessing naturalness.” See id. § 6310.06(C)(2)(b)(ii)(2). To the average visitor, the Red Tops unit appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man’s work substantially unnoticeable. See Attachment C; 16 U.S.C. § 1131(a). This is the only requirement needed to satisfy the naturalness criteria. See BLM Manual 6310.06(C)(2)(b). It is a stark, beautiful landscape full of unique rock formations created by both sedimentary processes and ancient volcanism. The sagebrush hills and rocky slopes and outcrops are especially dramatic in changing weather, when clouds that can threaten either rain or snow cast great shadows across the stark landscape, which appears natural and unaffected by man. This area and its native vegetation provides habitat for many desert and range animals including pronghorn, mule deer, elk, mountain lions, coyotes, birds of prey, reptiles, jackrabbits, and other small mammals. Importantly, SUWA has specifically tailored this
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Water Resources of Millard County, Utah
    WATER RESOURCES OF MILLARD COUNTY, UTAH by Fitzhugh D. Davis Utah Geological Survey, retired OPEN-FILE REPORT 447 May 2005 UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY a division of UTAH DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Although this product represents the work of professional scientists, the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Utah Geological Survey, makes no warranty, stated or implied, regarding its suitability for a particular use. The Utah Department of Natural Resources, Utah Geological Survey, shall not be liable under any circumstances for any direct, indirect, special, incidental, or consequential damages with respect to claims by users of this product. This Open-File Report makes information available to the public in a timely manner. It may not conform to policy and editorial standards of the Utah Geological Survey. Thus it may be premature for an individual or group to take action based on its contents. WATER RESOURCES OF MILLARD COUNTY, UTAH by Fitzhugh D. Davis Utah Geological Survey, retired 2005 This open-file release makes information available to the public in a timely manner. It may not conform to policy and editorial standards of the Utah Geological Survey. Thus it may be premature for an individual or group to take action based on its contents. Although this product is the work of professional scientists, the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Utah Geological Survey, makes no warranty, expressed or implied, regarding its suitability for a particular use. The Utah Department of Natural Resources, Utah Geological Survey, shall not be liable under any circumstances for any direct, indirect, special, incidental, or consequential damages with respect to claims by users of this product.
    [Show full text]
  • Management Plan for the Great Basin National Heritage Area Approved April 30, 2013
    Management Plan for the Great Basin National Heritage Area Approved April 30, 2013 Prepared by the Great Basin Heritage Area Partnership Baker, Nevada i ii Great Basin National Heritage Area Management Plan September 23, 2011 Plans prepared previously by several National Heritage Areas provided inspiration for the framework and format for the Great Basin National Heritage Area Management Plan. National Park Service staff and documents provided guidance. We gratefully acknowledge these contributions. This Management Plan was made possible through funding provided by the National Park Service, the State of Nevada, the State of Utah and the generosity of local citizens. 2011 Great Basin National Heritage Area Disclaimer Restriction of Liability The Great Basin Heritage Area Partnership (GBHAP) and the authors of this document have made every reasonable effort to insur e accuracy and objectivity in preparing this plan. However, based on limitations of time, funding and references available, the parties involved make no claims, promises or guarantees about the absolute accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the contents of this document and expressly disclaim liability for errors and omissions in the contents of this plan. No warranty of any kind, implied, expressed or statutory, including but not limited to the warranties of non-infringement of third party rights, title, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, is given with respect to the contents of this document or its references. Reference in this document to any specific commercial products, processes, or services, or the use of any trade, firm or corporation name is for the inf ormation and convenience of the public, and does not constitute endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the GBHAP or the authors.
    [Show full text]
  • Pattern of Mesozoic Thrust Surfaces and Tertiary Normal Faults in the Sevier Desert Subsurface, West-Central Utah Stewart Wills*, Mark H
    [American Journal of Science, Vol. 305, January, 2005,P.42–100] PATTERN OF MESOZOIC THRUST SURFACES AND TERTIARY NORMAL FAULTS IN THE SEVIER DESERT SUBSURFACE, WEST-CENTRAL UTAH STEWART WILLS*, MARK H. ANDERS†, and NICHOLAS CHRISTIE-BLICK Department of Earthand Environmental Sciences and Lamont-DohertyEarth Observatory of Columbia University, Palisades, New York 10964-8000 ABSTRACT. Most tectonic models for the Sevier Desert basin, west-central Utah, envision it as the result of large-magnitude, normal-sense slip on a regional detachment fault. That interpretation, based principally on seismic reflection data, has helped shape views on the tectonics of the northeastern Great Basin area and, in a larger sense, the historical development of ideas about low-angle normal faulting. In recent years, however, several researchers have suggested, based on rock-mechanical, field, and subsurface evidence, that the hypothesized detachment fault does not exist and that the basin must have another explanation. Even among proponents of the detach- ment model, opinion has differed regarding the hypothesized extensional fault’s total displacement, estimates for which vary widely; the timing of detachment slip; and whether the hypothesized fault represents a “new” Tertiary extensional structure or an extensional reactivation of the Mesozoic Pavant thrust. A comprehensive reinterpreta- tion of available subsurface data for the basin, including several previously unpub- lished seismic profiles, suggests: (1) that slip on the hypothesized detachment must have ceased by the Miocene in the southern Sevier Desert; (2) that estimates of large-magnitude offset on the hypothesized detachment are essentially unconstrained by structural data and need to be reevaluated; and (3) that models that view the hypothesized detachment as a Tertiary extensional reactivation of a Mesozoic thrust are likely incorrect.
    [Show full text]
  • Millard County General Plan Federal and State Lands Element County Goals, Objectives and Implementation Strategies
    Millard County General Plan Federal and State Lands Element County Goals, Objectives and Implementation Strategies Federal and State Agency Managed Lands Over 87% of the land within Millard County is Federal or State land managed by government agencies. Approximately 78% is managed by Federal agencies including the Bureau of Land Management, BLM, (69.18%) and the United States Forest Service, USFS, (8.27%). The remaining ten percent is managed by State of Utah divisions and departments; specifically, the School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration, SITLA, (9.18%) and the Division of Wildlife Resources, DWR, (.81%). Tribal lands within the County account for 0.02%. The above totals leave slightly more than twelve percent of the County’s total land area as privately owned (12.5%). Millard County claims the powers, rights and authority given specifically to local governments and individuals to actively participate in Federal and State land management planning and decision- making processes. In order to more adequately and accurately articulate the County’s Federal and State land management priorities and objectives, the County has prepared this section as part of their General Plan. Specific elements addressed in this section include: County participation in Federal and State land management planning processes, multiple-use, Federal and State land resource use and development, wildlife management, water resources, Federal and State lands consolidation, Federal and State lands recreation, and Federal and State lands access. Millard County officials and relevant Federal and State land management agencies will become familiar with this section of the General Plan and work cooperatively to implement the policies and objectives as adopted.
    [Show full text]
  • Ground-Water Hydrology of the Sevier Desert Utah
    Ground-Water Hydrology of the Sevier Desert Utah GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1854 Prepared in cooperation with the Utah State Engineer round-Water Hydrology of the Sevier Desert Utah By R. W. MOWER and R. D. FELTIS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAFER 1854 Prepared in cooperation with the Utah State Engineer UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1968 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY William T. Pecora, Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. GS 68-190 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 CONTENTS Page Abstract. ________________________________________________________ 1 Introduction. _____________________________________________________ 2 Purpose and scope of the investigation..________________________ 2 Location and extent of the area-________________________________ 3 Previous investigations.________________________________________ 3 Acknowledgments. _____________________________________________ 3 Methods and procedures used in the investigation.________________ 5 Well-numbering system._______________________________________ 7 Geography.______________________________________________________ 8 Physiography and drainage._____________________________________ 8 Climate._____________________________________________________ 10 Native vegetation.____________________________________________ 12 Population, agriculture, and industry.___________________________ 14 Geology._________________________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Road Logs of Western Utah and Eastern Nevada
    Geologic Road Logs of Western Utah and Eastern Nevada Part 1 - Pm,U& tO Deak XJe, da N hi Part: d - Delta, Utah, to Hy, Meyda; via MopeSeng 'r rilokite Locality Pfss 3 Utah-Nd heto Saotaquim, Utah, via Tintic Minib&D&&t 4. ' and U. S. Highway 6-30 Brigham Young University Geology Studies Volume 20 - Part 2 - March 1973 Studies for Students No. 7 Geologic Road Logs of Western Utah and Eastern Nevada Part 1 - Provo, Utah, to Delta, Utah, via Nephi Part 2 -- Delta, Utah, to Ely, Nevada, via Antelope Spring Trilob~teLocal~ty Part 3 - Utah-Nevada Line to Santaquin, Utah, via T~nticMining District and U. S. Highway 6-50. With Illustrations by Ivan D. Sanderson A Publication of the Department of Geology Brigharn Young University Provo, Utah 84601 Studzes for Students supplements the regular issues of Brzgham You~zgU~zzuer- szty Geology Studies and is intended as a series of short papers of general in- terest which may serve as guides to the geology of Utah for beginning students and laymen. Distributed February, 1973 Frontispiece: Index map of central and western Utah and east-central Sevada .showing route of field trip. Geologic Road Logs of Western Utah and Eastern Nevada LEHIF. HINTZE Department of Geology, Brigham Young University CONTENTS TEXT House Range panorama ........ Page House Range stratigraphic Road log ............................................ 5 chart ........................................ Part 1-Provo to Delta, Utah .... 5 Trilobite assemblage at Ante- Side Trip: Oak Creek Canyon lope Spring .............................. in the Canyon Range ............ 18 House Range cross section .... Part 2-Delta, Utah to Ely, Ne- Marjum Canyon .....................
    [Show full text]
  • Shallow Thermal Anomalies in West-Central Utah
    GRC Transactions, Vol. 41, 2017 Shallow Thermal Anomalies in West-Central Utah Mark Gwynn, Rick Allis, and Stefan Kirby Utah Geological Survey Keywords geothermal, convective, conductive, heat flow, thermal conductivity, thermal gradient ABSTRACT Work in the Roosevelt Hot Springs and Cove Fort areas over the last two years forms the basis for an expanded examination of the shallow thermal regime in a large portion of west-central Utah. This area was extensively explored for geothermal resources in the 1970s and 1980s, but limited drilling has taken place since then. The previous research used data from over 300 wells. Most were temperature-gradient wells, but deep geothermal exploration or production wells, oil exploration wells, and water wells with thermal data were also used. This new study characterizes the shallow thermal regime over an area of 150 by 180 km, using thermal data from over 180 shallow (typically less than 150 m) wells with measured temperature depth profiles. The majority were temperature-gradient wells, although some were groundwater monitoring wells or mining-related drill holes. Reported temperatures from an additional 85 water supply wells were also used in this study. In addition, deep well data from 25 plugged and abandoned oil exploration wells and the 3.8-km-deep Acord 1 well in Milford Valley were used to characterize the deep thermal regime across the study area. These deep wells include all those in the study area that have any temperature data available. Previous work showed that temperatures greater than 20°C at a depth of 100 m are anomalous, and this study delineated three shallow (less than 700 m) hydrothermal anomalies in addition to those around Roosevelt Hot Springs and Cove Fort.
    [Show full text]
  • Sevier Playa Potash Project Resource Report Geology and Minerals
    Sevier Playa Potash Project Resource Report Geology and Minerals Prepared For: Bureau of Land Management Fillmore Field Office Prepared By: ENValue Castle Rock, Colorado October 2018 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Sevier Playa Potash Project Resource Report: Geology and Minerals Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives ................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Standard Mitigation Measures / Best Management Practices ................................................... 1 2.2 Supplemental Plans ................................................................................................................... 1 2.3 Proposed Action ........................................................................................................................ 2 2.3.1 Mining Project .................................................................................................................... 3 2.3.2 Rights-of-Way .................................................................................................................... 5 2.3.3 Mineral Materials ................................................................................................................ 7 2.3.4 Construction ........................................................................................................................ 7 2.3.5
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Potentiometric-Surface Map of the Great Basin Carbonate And
    U.S. Department of the Interior Scientific Investigations Map 3193 U.S. Geological Survey Sheet 1 of 2 Abstract sites, water levels were measured in several nested wells, including 8 sites where the nested as great. However, water levels in wells throughout Spring and Snake Valleys also appear 114°30' 114°00' 113°30' 113°00' TOOELE COUNTY wells are all in either consolidated rock or basin fill, and 4 sites where the nested wells are to respond to interannual climate variations. 0 0 -15 Water-level measurements from 190 wells were used to develop a potentiometric-surface screened in both basin fill and consolidated rock. Water-level data at nested well sites were USGS site number: 393814113522601 JUAB COUNTY Callao USGS site number: 395355112423601 125 Most water-level records in the study area show no distinct, long-term monotonic trends Deep Creek Fish Springs used to examine vertical differences in hydraulic head. While one location had an upward 5 Well depth: 158 feet 5 Valley -10 Well depth: 90 feet USGS site number: 395331113123901 map of the east-central portion of the regional Great Basin carbonate and alluvial aquifer (rises or declines). However, in the area north of Highway 50 in Snake Valley, water levels Well number: 190 National 130 Well depth: 157 feet Well number: 171 USGS site number: 394133113493901 253 Wildlife Refuge system in and around Snake Valley, eastern Nevada and western Utah. The map area covers vertical gradient of 0.3, vertical hydraulic gradients were generally less than 0.05. These Well number: 188 in five wells (108, 114, 120, 129, and 136) have been declining since about the mid- to late- 10 10 Well depth: Unknown -5 approximately 9,000 square miles in Juab, Millard, and Beaver Counties, Utah, and White small vertical gradients indicate a hydraulic connection between basin fill and consolidated 1980s.
    [Show full text]
  • Utah's Natural Resources
    UTAH’S NATURAL RESOURCES203 8 The state of Utah is endowed with an abundance of natural resources. It contains significant supplies of oil, natural gas, coal, uranium, and oil shale and oil sands; base metals such as copper, beryllium, magnesium and molybdenum; and industrial minerals such as potash, salt, magnesium chloride and gilsonite. Renewable resources in Utah include geothermal, wind and solar energy and timber. As of 2012 proved reserves of oil and natural gas in Utah stood at 613 million barrels of crude oil, 7.8 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 268 million barrels of natural gas liquids. As of 2013 there were an estimated 14.9 billion tons of recoverable coal remaining in the state. In addition, Utah hosts an estimated 1.3 trillion barrels of oil contained in the oil shale of the Green River Formation in the Uinta Basin (Johnson et al. 2010). Of this, approximately 77 billion barrels could be considered as a potential economic resource (Vanden Berg 2008). Total energy production in 2013 was valued at $5.2 billion, including almost $3.0 billion from crude oil production, $1.7 billion from natural gas production, and nearly $0.6 billion from coal production. In addition, $423.6 million of natural gas liquids were produced. Nonfuel mineral production was valued at $3.7 billion in 2012, including $2.1 billion from base metal production, $1.2 billion from industrial mineral production, and $0.4 billion from precious metal production. In 2012, copper was the largest contributor to the value of nonfuel minerals in Utah, having an estimated value of $1.4 billion, mostly produced from Rio Tinto’s Bingham Canyon mine.
    [Show full text]
  • Paleoseismic Patterns of Quaternary Tectonic and Magmatic Surface Deformation in the Eastern Basin and Range, USA
    Research Paper GEOSPHERE Paleoseismic patterns of Quaternary tectonic and magmatic surface deformation in the eastern Basin and Range, USA 1 2 3 3 3 GEOSPHERE, v. 16, no. 1 T.A. Stahl , N.A. Niemi , M.P. Bunds , J. Andreini , and J.D. Wells 1School of Earth and Environment, University of Canterbury, Christchurch 8140, New Zealand 2Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, USA https://doi.org/10.1130/GES02156.1 3Department of Earth Science, Utah Valley University, Orem, Utah 84058, USA 12 figures; 3 tables; 1 supplemental file CORRESPONDENCE: [email protected]; volcanic centers, have events temporally clustered for instance, a segment dominated by crustal or [email protected] ABSTRACT around the timing of Pleistocene volcanism in at lithospheric extension on normal faults can become CITATION: Stahl, T.A., Niemi, N.A., Bunds, M.P., The competing contributions of tectonic and least one instance, and have accommodated exten- dominated by magma-assisted rifting as melt pro- Andreini, J., and Wells, J.D., 2020, Paleoseismic pat- magmatic processes in accommodating continen- sion ~2×–10× above geodetic and long-term geologic duction and availability evolve (e.g., Bursik and Sieh, terns of Quaternary tectonic and magmatic surface tal extension are commonly obscured by a lack of rates. We propose a model whereby Pliocene to 1989; Parsons and Thompson, 1991; Ebinger and deformation in the eastern Basin and Range, USA: Geosphere, v. 16, no. 1, p. 435–455, https://doi .org on-fault paleoseismic information. This is especially recent extension in the Sevier Desert is spatially Casey, 2001; Muirhead et al., 2015, 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Millard County General Plan
    Millard County General Plan County Goals, Objectives and Action Steps Fall 1998 Last Update October 2013 Funding for this project has been provided by: Millard County, The Utah State Legislature and The Governor's Office of Planning and Budget Millard County Planning Project General Plan Update Fall 1998 The Millard County Planning Project and General Plan Update was a partnership effort including Millard County, the Governor's Office of Planning and Budget and the Utah Association of Counties. Special thanks to the citizens and local officials of Millard County who participated in this project. As part of this planning effort, it should be noted that Millard County recognizes and supports the rights, privileges and authorities given to individuals and local governments through the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The 1998 Millard County General Plan, as adopted, is an effort by County officials to uphold these principles and promote a balance between private and public interests. Millard County, as a political subdivision of the State of Utah, expressly acknowledges that numerous powers are reserved to the States as formalized in the Tenth Amendment and reiterated in several Supreme Court decisions. Millard County Commissioners Lana Moon Tony Dearden John Henry MILLARD COUNTY PLANNING PROJECT 1996-98 The Millard County Planning Project has been a partnership effort including Millard County, the Governor's Office of Planning and Budget and the Utah Association of Counties. A special thanks goes to the citizens of Millard County and the local officials who served as members of the Citizen Plan Advisory Committee: Lana Moon, Commissioner, Suzanne Kershisnik Comprehensive Plan Project Chair Don Knight Tony Dearden, Commissioner Carl Lyman John Henrie, Commissioner Shirley Lyman Leon Smith, County Planner Virginia Lyman Sheryl Dekker, Commission Assistant Don McMillian John L.
    [Show full text]