City Creek Nature Notes – Salt Lake City

April 6, 2017

April 6th

Filed under: Arrowleaf balsamroot, Kingfisher — canopus56 @ 8:26 pm

It is enough. This is the Right [Natural] Place – Part III – Challenges for the Future

3:00 p.m. While going down canyon, a Kingfisher calls from the branch overlooking the stream below the red bridge. Then it flits downstream for a hundred feet, lands again, and starts calling. This repeats again and again for about one-third of mile down to picnic site 3. The Kingfisher is looking for dinner in the stream. Along the road, there is a six inch diameter circular clump of thin twigs suitable building a nest. I cannot tell if this is refuse from a prior season’s nest that the wind has released from the trees or if it is a cache dropped by a bird building a nest for this year. As I leave the canyon, the next storm front is rolling in from the west. On the drive out to the state capitol along Bonneville Drive, the first Arrowleaf balsamroot plant has bloomed with its small yellow sunflowers. In the upper canyon, these plants are barely forming.

* * * *

In Thoreau’s “Journal” on April 6th, 1853, he hears a robin, a lark, a bluebird, song-sparrows, and a Dark-eyed junco, and he sees a pigeon woodpecker. He watches honeybees feeding on skunk-cabbage flowers. April 6, 1854, he again sees honeybees feeding. He notes that white maples and alders are shedding pollen. On April 6thm, 1855, he sees blackbirds, ducks, and a goosander. He sees flies over decaying leaves.

* * * *

The Mormons have more choices to make regarding the canyons of Salt Lake valley, including City Creek Canyon. In other canyons not protected by planning similar to City Creek’s, development conflicts between elites seeking massive development and locals seeking to preserve all seven of the Salt Lake valley canyons continue today, principally in the form of proposals for high density ski area development and associated real estate expansion. Two new pressures for high-density development in the Salt Lake valley canyons have arisen since the Great Recession of 2008-2009. There has been a large expansion in hotels on the valley floor, and there are now over 20,000 hotel rooms in Salt Lake valley. Ski resorts in the Park City area have consolidated ownership under a large national company, and they have long sought to create the largest ski resort in the United States by interconnecting the Park City resorts by both developments and ski lifts that span ridge between the western Salt Lake valley canyons and the eastern Park City mega-ski resorts. The principal counter forces to those development pressures in the Salt Lake valley are Salt Lake City Corporation and the Metropolitan Water District (Feb. 24th) which seek to preserve the canyons as a watershed resource and the general Salt Lake County population that see its adjacent canyons as an outdoor recreation resource.

* * * *

Above, I say “the Mormons have more choices to make” because theodemocracy has again arisen in Utah. Although the non-LDS population in Salt Lake valley remains about thirty-three percent and is a slight majority in Salt Lake City limits, Brigham Young’s original vision of theodemocracy (March 16th) has combined with a larger Republican program of gerrymandering, the national Republican Redmap program (Daley 2016). The result of Redmap program has been the national gerrymandering of districts and the transformation of the country into more political groups with more divergent views. In Utah Redmap gerrymandering has resulted in odd wedge-shaped Utah federal congressional districts that stretch of hundreds of miles from Salt Lake City to rural areas in southern Utah and state level districts that minimize the probability of non-Mormon democrats being elected. On the federal level, the purpose of that gerrymandering is to dilute non-Mormon Democratic voters into larger pools of Mormon Republican voters and on the state level, the purpose of that gerrymandering is to result in the highest concentration and lowest number of non-Mormon Democratic legislative seats. The result over the last twenty years has been the increase the percentage of Republican Mormon state legislators from sixty-six percent to over eighty-five percent of legislators. Although Utah State legislators rank issues with similar priorities to the majority of Mormon Utah voters, the people who select Republican Utah legislators, Republican party delegates, have opinions that are far more right-wing leaning that the already conservative majority (Utah Foundation). The practical result of national gerrymandering in concert with Utah’s L.D.S. culture and a local political super-majority is the resurrection of Young’s theodemocracy (see Salt Lake City Tribune, March 28, 2012). Armed with political certainty that is amplified with underlying religious certainty, the Utah State legislature often implements policies that are disconnected from with the wishes of the local population. The scope of local community political options are always overshadowed and restricted by the questions of “What will the legislature allow?” or “Will the legislature override a local action when a compromise is reached?”. This is Young’s theodemocracy of religious elites in action. An example of theodemocracy in action was the Utah State Legislature deciding to allow Salt Lake County’s Mountainland Planning District (H.B. 293-S2) to sunset. This Salt Lake County planning commission included by legislative authorization, members drawn from all local municipalities and the unincorporated areas of the county instead of a small geographical unrepresentative region of the unincorporated county.

One choice and one task left undone in City Creek Canyon is the process of reforestation promised by the City in 1914 and 1934 in Public Law 63-199 and Public Law 73-259 (March 12th). Given the possibility that future peak flooding will be more extreme than the historical experience (Bekker et al. 2014; Feb. 9th), the lessons of Forsling (1931), the Utah Flood Commission (1931) and Cottam (1945) regarding reforestation learned during the floods of the 1920s and 1930s should be taken seriously. Even minor 12 percent removal of forests in the upper canyons can result in severe flooding in the valley, given an extreme storm event (Forsling). The Salt Lake canyons, including City Creek Canyon, should all be completely reforested as insurance against future flooding. Current cultural and political battles between theodemocratic elites favoring massive development of Salt Lake canyons and the general population that favors canyon preservation remain a continuing process that may never have an resolving endpoint. Again, these are choices to made by ordinary people, and which as shown in the history of City Creek Canyon can had good outcomes.

In his “Sound of Mountain Water” (Introduction, 38), Stegner, although disturbed by the changes in Salt Lake City since his boyhood (At Home in the Fields of the Lord), remained optimistic about the future of natural lands in the Western United States despite the broader historical conflict between the bravado of the West’s rugged individualism and the cooperative conservation that restored parts of the region from 1900 to the present. He noted that “cooperation, not rugged individualism, is the quality that most characterizes and preserves” the region (id). The individualistic approach historically gave way to the nature’s hand that forces cooperation during the regions’ and the canyon’s periodic aridity (id). That pattern of cooperation vs. competition is repeated in the history of City Creek Canyon as both a natural and an unnatural place.

* * * *

On April 6th, 2006, the snowpack at Lookout Peak is 173 percent of normal, prompting flooding concerns (Salt Lake Tribune, April 26, 2006). On April 6, 1919, a road going to the base of Ensign Peak, built with City funds, is nearly completed (Salt Lake Herald). On April 6, 1898, the Utah Forestry Association meets and plans to present a proposal to the City to plant trees in City Creek Canyon (Salt Lake Herald and Deseret News).

Advertisements

Leave a Comment »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.