Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDiscouragement of Recreation Content-Length: 00000000264 Content-type: text 12/29 18:29 page 2 ~ Gr~.Jf ~ ' ~ ~tl ~f'e.- tlSFS Chronology of recreafional topics from a historical standpoint and the Ashland Creek Watershed. Needs to be updated. Pam please forward to forest Commission if you deem informative. Kristi,- please place in analysis file for IRA. Note footnotes for references. Content-Length: 00000006642 Content-type: text HISTORICAL CHRONOLOGY OF CITY OF ASHLANDS DISCOURAGEMENT OF RECREATION In the Ashland Creek watershed 1900- FIRST SURVEY OF THE ASHLAND RESERVE. Survey by John R~ Leibig of the U. S. Geological Survey. Stated Leibig, "If the purity and stability of the water volume in Ashland Creek is worthy of consideration the prohibition of sheep grazing within the reserve should be absolute." He further stated, "...whether easy or difficult of access, it is obvious that the maintenance of the Ashland Creek water volume is prohibitive to lumbering operations in the reserve." 1 1906- ASHLAND RESERVE CLOSED TO CAMPING. Implemented,to prevent sanitation problems due to human activity. 1907- ASHLAND RESERVE CLOSED TO GRAZING. Previous to closure, sheep grazed the higher slopes of the watershed... 1922- JESSE WINBURN ESTABLISHES LODGE. Jesse Winburn establishes a lodge located up the west fork of Ashland Creek. Received support from City Council intially. After sanitation and water quality became a concern due to activities at the lodge- City support for the Winburn activities is withdrawn. 1955- FOREST SERVICE, reports that the watershed has been traditionally closed for recreational use because of access limitations and sanitation concerns of the City of Ashland.2 1969- ASHLAND WATERSHED INTENSIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN. Forest Supervisor and Ashland District Ranger meet Al AIsing (public works director) and Gary Boshears (City Administrator). City officials express concerns of public use of the watershed. They state that public use should not take place because of erosion and fire danger. Supervisor and Ranger agree that the watershed should receive a low priority in developing or encouraging public recreation. 3 --, 1973- DEQ INPUTS TO CITY ABOUT ASHLAND WATERSHED MANAGEMENT. Watershed is the only practical water source. Sediment accumulations now have to be removed. Past recreational and timber management activities cause increasE in sediment yield. Multiple use not valid for the watershed. No further recreational development.4 1977- CITY CONSULTANTS REPORT CONCERNING ASHLAND WATERSHED. No further roae construction should occur except by mutual consent. Mining should not be allowed. Access and recreational activities should be tightly regulated. \11 such uses should be consistent with water quality protection. The "T 12/29 18:29 page 3 Forest Service should seek additional funding for more intensive fire protection.S 1979- INTERIM WATERSHED PLAN. Forest Supervisor starts plannihg process to provide interim management direction for the watershed' until the Forest -. - r 12/29 lS:29 page 4 Plan is completed. City part of the planning process. City conditionally approves plan. City approval dependent upon following (in part) conditions: Request by City for the Forest Service to complete a detailed Fire Management Pla~ for the Ashland Watershed. Plan to address prescribed burning, shaded fuel breaks and fire prevention to help prevent a catastrophic fire in the watershed. Increase recreation would not be consistent with watershed management.6 1980- MONTGOMERY, CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. Input the Cities Environmental Iimpact Statement for the Reeder Reservoir Maintenance Operations, "...high levels of human activity... would be expected to increase the likelihood of a large problem fire."7 19S0- DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS, CITY OF ASHLAND. Public hearing for input into the Cities Environmental Impact" Statement for Reeder Reservoir Maintenance Operations, the director stated, "...minimizing human activities within the 1Natershed and maximizing fire observations and quick control is not only the most logical but backed by the history of fires within the Rogue River area. liS 1985- CITY OFFICIALS CRITIZE FOREST SERVICE. City Fire Chief and Public Works Director express concern that the Ashland Ranger District did not restrict public acces~ to the Ashland Watershed during July of 1985 due to extreme fire danger. The district restricts access mid-August. Criticism was based on not closing watershed soon enough... - 1986- MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING APPROVED. City Mayor and Forest Supervisor approve Memorandum of Understanding. Memorandum outlines the conditions which the watershed would be closed due to extreme fire danger. Palmer drought index, 1000 hour timelag fuel moisture, and woody fuel moisture key indices to determine fire danger. Also the memorandum deals with the training the City volunteer fire prevention personnel receive relevant to procedures while making public contact. 1987- CITY HIRES ENVIRONMENTAL LAWYER TO CHALLENGE DRAFT EIS FOR MT. ASHLAND SKI AREA EXPANSION. City states that development of a septic drainfield at the Ski Area in the watershed is unacceptable. That the DEIS doesn't specifically define what the mitigation measures are for the various ski area expansion recommendations. - iT 12/29 18:29 page 5 REFERENCES ---- 1/ Anthony Nethoy, "A Report on Legislation, Official Policy and Direction in Management of Mun~cipal Watersheds by the Forest Service with Special Reference to the Ashland Creek Watershed", appendix to: Interim Plan for the Ashland Creek Watershed, Rogue River National Forest, U. S. Forest Service, 1979, p. 75, citing John R. Leibig, The Cascade Range and Ashland Forest Reserve and Adjacent Regions, p. 473. Area '1 Ashland Creek Watershed, Rough Draft. Feh. 11, 1959, p. 33. Refers to letter written in 1955. 3/ Forest Service Letter, March 5, 1969, filed under 3500, Cooperative Watershed Management, Ashland Watershed Intensive Management Plans. Ashland Creek Watershed, Sept. 1979, appendix p. 7-19, .citing DEQ letter to City: An Evaluation of the Ashland Creek Drainage Basin Relative to the City of Ashland's Municipal Water Supply by the Department of Environmental Quality, August, 1973. . Ashland Creek Watershed, Sept. 1979, appendix, p. 21-27, citing Summary, J. M. Montgomery Report, 10/20/77 Ashland Creek Watershed, Sept. 1979, Letter from City of Ashland Conditionally Approving. Plan. An Element of the Rogue Valley Water Quality Management Plan, August 1980, p~e 154. Input into the draft EIS, James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Ir An Element of the Rogue Valley Water Quality Management Plan. August 1980, page 151. ---- r