DOCSLIB.ORG

Water Quality Standards

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Water Quality Standards 18 A.A.C. 11 Supp. 19-3 This Chapter contains rule Sections that were filed to be codified in the Arizona Administrative Code between the dates of July 1, 2019 through September 30, 2019 Title 18 TITLE 18. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CHAPTER 11. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY - WATER QUALITY STANDARDS The table of contents on the first page contains quick links to the referenced page numbers in this Chapter. Refer to the notes at the end of a Section to learn about the history of a rule as it was published in the Arizona Administrative Register. Sections, Parts, Exhibits, Tables or Appendices codified in this supplement. The list provided contains quick links to the updated rules. R18-11-101. Definitions ............................................................ 3 Table 11. Acute Standards for Total Ammonia (in mg/L, as R18-11-107.01. Antidegradation Criteria ...................................... 6 N) for Aquatic and Wildlife coldwater, Unionid R18-11-109. Numeric Water Quality Standards .......................9 Mussels Present ..................................................22 R18-11-114. Mixing Zones ..................................................... 12 Table 12. Acute Standards for Total Ammonia (in mg/L, as R18-11-115. Site-Specific Standards ...................................... 13 N) for Aquatic and Wildlife warmwater, Unionid R18-11-120. Enforcement of Non-permitted Discharges ....... 14 Mussels Present ..................................................23 R18-11-122. Variances ............................................................ 14 Table 13. Chronic Criteria for Total Ammonia (in mg/L, as Appendix A. Numeric Water Quality Standards .....................17 N) for Aquatic and Wildlife coldwater and Table 1. Water Quality Criteria By Designated Use (see f) warmwater, Unionid Mussels Present ................24 ............................................................................. 17 Table 14. Acute Standards for Total Ammonia (in mg/L, as Table 2. Acute Water Quality Standards for Dissolved N) for Aquatic and Wildlife Coldwater, Unionid Cadmium ............................................................ 20 Mussels Absent ..................................................25 Table 3. Chronic Water Quality Standards for Dissolved Table 15. Acute Standards for Total Ammonia (in mg/L, as Cadmium ............................................................ 20 N) for Aquatic and Wildlife Warmwater and Table 4. Water Quality Standards for Dissolved Chromium Effluent Dependent, Unionid Mussels Absent ...26 III ....................................................................... 20 Table 16. Chronic Standards for Total Ammonia (in mg/L, as Table 5. Water Quality Standards for Dissolved Copper . 20 N) for Aquatic and Wildlife Warmwater and Table 6. Water Quality Standards for Dissolved Lead ..... 21 Effluent Dependent, Unionid Mussels Absent ...27 Table 7. Water Quality Standards for Dissolved Nickel .. 21 Table 17. Chronic Criteria for Total Ammonia (in mg/L, as Table 8. Water Quality Standards for Dissolved Silver ... 21 N) for Aquatic and Wildlife coldwater, Unionid Table 9. Water Quality Standards for Dissolved Zinc ..... 21 Mussels Absent ..................................................28 Table 10. Water Quality Standards for Pentachlorophenol 22 Appendix B. Surface Waters and Designated Uses .................30 Appendix C. Site-Specific Standards ......................................56 Questions about these rules? Contact: Name: Benjamin Bryce, Legal Specialist Address: Department of Environmental Quality 1110 W. Washington St. Phoenix, AZ 85007 Telephone: (602) 771-4689 E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.azdeq.gov/draft-and-proposed-rule- water-quality-division http://www.azdeq.gov/node/3934 The release of this Chapter in Supp. 19-3 replaces Supp. 16-4, 1-63 pages Please note that the Chapter you are about to replace may have rules still in effect after the publication date of this supplement. Therefore, all superseded material should be retained in a separate binder and archived for future reference. i PREFACE Under Arizona law, the Department of State, Office of the Secretary of State (Office), accepts state agency rule filings and is the publisher of Arizona rules. The Office of the Secretary of State does not interpret or enforce rules in the Administrative Code. Questions about rules should be directed to the state agency responsible for the promulgation of the rule. Scott Cancelosi, Director ADMINISTRATIVE RULES DIVISION note to make rules is often included at the beginning of a chapter. RULES Other Arizona statutes may be referenced in rule under the A.R.S. The definition for a rule is provided for under A.R.S. § 41-1001. acronym. “‘Rule’ means an agency statement of general applicability that implements, interprets, or prescribes law or policy, or describes SESSION LAW REFERENCES the procedures or practice requirements of an agency.” Arizona Session Law references in a chapter can be found at the Secretary of State’s website, under Services-> Legislative Fil- THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE ings. The Arizona Administrative Code is where the official rules of the state of Arizona are published. The Code is the official codifica- EXEMPTIONS FROM THE APA tion of rules that govern state agencies, boards, and commissions. It is not uncommon for an agency to be exempt from the steps outlined in the rulemaking process as specified in the Arizona The Code is separated by subject into titles. Titles are divided into Administrative Procedures Act, also known as the APA (Arizona chapters. A chapter includes state agency rules. Rules in chapters Revised Statutes, Title 41, Chapter 6, Articles 1 through 10). are divided into Articles, then Sections. The “R” stands for “rule” Other agencies may be given an exemption to certain provisions with a sequential numbering and lettering outline separated into of the Act. subsections. An agency’s exemption is written in law by the Arizona State Rules are codified quarterly in the Code. Supplement release Legislature or under a referendum or initiative passed into law by dates are printed on the footers of each chapter. Arizona voters. First Quarter: January 1 - March 31 Second Quarter: April 1 - June 30 When an agency files an exempt rulemaking package with our Third Quarter: July 1 - September 30 Office it specifies the law exemption in what is called the pre- Fourth Quarter: October 1 - December 31 amble of rulemaking. The preamble is published in the Register For example, the first supplement for the first quarter of 2019 is online at www.azsos.gov/rules, click on the Administrative Reg- cited as Supp. 19-1. ister link. Please note: The Office publishes by chapter, not by individual Editor’s notes at the beginning of a chapter provide information rule section. Therefore there might be only a few sections codi- about rulemaking sections made by exempt rulemaking. Exempt fied in each chapter released in a supplement. Historical notes at rulemaking notes are also included in the historical note at the end the end of a section provide an effective date and information of a rulemaking Section. when a rule was last updated. The Office makes a distinction to certain exemptions because AUTHENTICATION OF PDF CODE CHAPTERS some rules are made without receiving input from stakeholders or The Office began to authenticate chapters of the Administrative the public. Other exemptions may require an agency to propose Code in Supp. 18-1 to comply with A.R.S. § 41-1012(B) and exempt rules at a public hearing. A.R.S. § 5302(1), (2)(d) through (e), and (3)(d) through (e). EXEMPTIONS AND PAPER COLOR A certification verifies the authenticity of each Code chapter At one time the office published exempt rules on either blue or posted as it is released by the Office of the Secretary of State. The green paper. Blue meant the authority of the exemption was given authenticated pdf of the Code includes an integrity mark with a by the Legislature; green meant the authority was determined by a certificate ID. Users should check the validity of the signature, court order. In 2001 the Office discontinued publishing rules especially if the pdf has been downloaded. If the digital signature using these paper colors. is invalid it means the document’s content has been compro- mised. PERSONAL USE/COMMERCIAL USE This chapter is posted as a public courtesy online, and is for HOW TO USE THE CODE private use only. Those who wish to use the contents for resale or Rules may be in effect before a supplement is released by the profit should contact the Office about Commercial Use fees. For Office. Therefore, the user should refer to issues of the Arizona information on commercial use fees review A.R.S. § 39-121.03 Administrative Register for recent updates to rule Sections. and 1 A.A.C. 1, R1-1-113. ARIZONA REVISED STATUTE REFERENCES Rhonda Paschal, managing rules editor, assisted with the editing The Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) are available online at the of this chapter. Legislature’s website, www.azleg.gov. An agency’s authority ii Arizona Administrative Code 18 A.A.C. 11 Administrative Rules Division The Arizona Secretary of State electronically publishes each A.A.C. Chapter with a digital certificate. The certificate-based signature displays the date and time the document was signed and can be validated in Adobe Acrobat Reader. TITLE 18. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CHAPTER 11. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY - WATER QUALITY STANDARDS ARTICLE 1. WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arizona TIM PALMER FLICKR
    Arizona TIM PALMER FLICKR Colorado River at Mile 50. Cover: Salt River. Letter from the President ivers are the great treasury of noted scientists and other experts reviewed the survey design, and biological diversity in the western state-specific experts reviewed the results for each state. RUnited States. As evidence mounts The result is a state-by-state list of more than 250 of the West’s that climate is changing even faster than we outstanding streams, some protected, some still vulnerable. The feared, it becomes essential that we create Great Rivers of the West is a new type of inventory to serve the sanctuaries on our best, most natural rivers modern needs of river conservation—a list that Western Rivers that will harbor viable populations of at-risk Conservancy can use to strategically inform its work. species—not only charismatic species like salmon, but a broad range of aquatic and This is one of 11 state chapters in the report. Also available are a terrestrial species. summary of the entire report, as well as the full report text. That is what we do at Western Rivers Conservancy. We buy land With the right tools in hand, Western Rivers Conservancy is to create sanctuaries along the most outstanding rivers in the West seizing once-in-a-lifetime opportunities to acquire and protect – places where fish, wildlife and people can flourish. precious streamside lands on some of America’s finest rivers. With a talented team in place, combining more than 150 years This is a time when investment in conservation can yield huge of land acquisition experience and offices in Oregon, Colorado, dividends for the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Use by the Fishes of a Southwestern Desert Stream: Cherry Creek, Arizona
    ARIZONA COOPERATIVE FISH AND WILDLIFE RESEARCH UNIT SEPTEMBER 2010 Habitat use by the fishes of a southwestern desert stream: Cherry Creek, Arizona By: Scott A. Bonar, Norman Mercado-Silva, and David Rogowski Fisheries Research Report 02-10 Support Provided by: 1 Habitat use by the fishes of a southwestern desert stream: Cherry Creek, Arizona By Scott A. Bonar, Norman Mercado-Silva, and David Rogowski USGS Arizona Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit School of Natural Resources and the Environment 325 Biological Sciences East University of Arizona Tucson AZ 85721 USGS Arizona Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Unit Fisheries Research Report 02-10 Funding provided by: United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service With additional support from: School of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of Arizona Arizona Department of Game and Fish United States Geological Survey 2 Executive Summary Fish communities in the Southwest U.S. face numerous threats of anthropogenic origin. Most importantly, declining instream flows have impacted southwestern stream fish assemblages. Maintenance of water flows that sustain viable fish communities is key in maintaining the ecological function of river ecosystems in arid regions. Efforts to calculate the optimal amount of water that will ensure long-term viability of species in a stream community require that the specific habitat requirements for all species in the community be known. Habitat suitability criteria (HSC) are used to translate structural and hydraulic characteristics of streams into indices of habitat quality for fishes. Habitat suitability criteria summarize the preference of fishes for numerous habitat variables. We estimated HSC for water depth, water velocity, substrate, and water temperature for the fishes of Cherry Creek, Arizona, a perennial desert stream.
    [Show full text]
  • Phase I Environmental Assessment, East Clear Creek, Coconino County
    PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EAST CLEAR CREEK, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA Resolution Copper Prepared for: Attn: Mary Morissette 102 Magma Heights Superior, Arizona 85173-2523 Project Number: 807.211 September 4, 2020 Date WestLand Resources, Inc. 4001 E. Paradise Falls Drive Tucson, Arizona 85712 5202069585 East Clear Creek, Coconino County, Arizona Phase 1 Environmental Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................................... ES-1 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Purpose ............................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Scope of Services .............................................................................................................................. 2 1.3. Limitations and Exceptions ............................................................................................................ 2 1.4. Special Terms and Conditions ........................................................................................................ 3 1.5. User Reliance ..................................................................................................................................... 3 1.6. Continued Viability ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Area Land Use Plan
    DETAIL VIEW #1 RIM TRAIL ESTATES DETAIL VIEW #2 GIRL SCOUT CAMP 260 KOHL'S RANCH VERDE GLEN FR 199 TONTO CREEK 5 THOMPSON THOMPSON DRAW I E. VERDE RIVER DRAW II BOY SCOUT CAMP FR 64 FR 64 WHISPERING PINES PINE MEADOWS BEAR FLATS FR 199 DETAIL VIEW #3 FLOWING SPRINGS DETAIL VIEW #4 DETAIL VIEW #5 DIAMOND POINT FOREST HOMES & 87 FR 29 COLLINS RANCH E. VERDE RIVER COCONINO COUNTY EAST VERDE PARK FR 64 260 FR 64 TONTO VILLAGE GILA COUNTYLION SPRINGS DETAIL VIEW #6 DETAIL VIEW #7 DETAIL VIEW #8 FR 200 FR FR 291 PONDEROSA SPRINGS CHRISTOPHER CREEK 260 HAIGLER CREEK HAIGLER CREEK (HIGHWAY 260 REALIGNMENT) COLCORD MOUNTAIN HOMESITES HUNTER CREEK FR 200 DETAIL VIEW #9 DETAIL VIEW #10 DETAIL VIEW #11 ROOSEVELT LAKE ESTATES 87 FR 184 188 OXBOW ESTATES SPRING CREEK 188 JAKES CORNER KEY MAP: LEGEND Residential - 3.5 to 5 du/ac Residential - 5 to 10 du/ac Regional Highways and Significant Roadways NORTHWEST NORTHEAST Major Rivers or Streams Residential - 10+ du/ac Gila County Boundary Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial WEST EAST Federal/Incorporated Area Lands CENTRAL CENTRAL Light Industrial LAND USE CLASSIFICATIONS Heavy Industrial SOUTH Residential - 0 to 0.1 du/ac Public Facilities AREA LAND USE PLAN Residential - 0.1 to 0.4 du/ac DETAILED VIEWS Multi-Functional Corridor FIGURE 2.F Residential - 0.4 to 1.0 du/ac Mixed Use Residential - 1 to 2 du/ac Resource Conservation 0' NOVEMBER, 2003 3 Mi Residential - 2 to 3.5 du/ac GILA COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2012 Potential Resort/Lodging Use 1 1/2 Mi GILA COUNTY, ARIZONA DETAIL VIEW #1 RIM TRAIL ESTATES DETAIL VIEW #2 GIRL SCOUT CAMP 260 KOHL'S RANCH VERDE GLEN FR 199 TONTO CREEK 5 THOMPSON THOMPSON DRAW I E.
    [Show full text]
  • Quarterly Magazine 12/31/09 11:02 AM Page 1 4Thqtr-2009 V6:Quarterly Magazine 12/31/09 11:02 AM Page 2
    4thqtr-2009 v6:Quarterly Magazine 12/31/09 11:02 AM Page 1 4thqtr-2009 v6:Quarterly Magazine 12/31/09 11:02 AM Page 2 Move mountains. Reshape the cruising landscape. We’re ready. Call Carlos Buqueras or Alan Hill at 800-421-0188, 954-523-3404 or visit www.broward.org/port FLORIDA 4thqtr-2009 v6:Quarterly Magazine 12/31/09 11:03 AM Page 1 9 4thqtr-2009 v6:Quarterly Magazine 12/31/09 11:03 AM Page 2 The Hidden Treasure of the Caribbean R APPROVED _________________________________________ T R APPROVED _________________________________________ S R APPROVED _________________________________________ C R APPROVED _________________________________________ P R APPROVED _________________________________________ A R APPROVED _________________________________________ A R APPROVED _________________________________________ C R APPROVED _________________________________________ C R APPROVED _________________________________________ C R APPROVED _________________________________________ 4thqtr-2009 v6:Quarterly Magazine 12/31/09 11:03 AM Page 3 opportunity t mak friends wit whal shark o a early-mornin div is’ th only reaso yo’l visi onduras. u i’s on of th many reasons yo’l neve forge i. -- . R APPROVED _________________________________________ T R APPROVED _________________________________________ S R APPROVED _________________________________________ C R APPROVED _________________________________________ P R APPROVED _________________________________________ A R APPROVED _________________________________________ A R APPROVED _________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Fishing Regulations 3 Fishing License Fees Getting Started
    2019 & 2020 Fishing Regulations for your boat for your boat See how much you could savegeico.com on boat | 1-800-865-4846insurance. | Local Offi ce geico.com | 1-800-865-4846 | Local Offi ce See how much you could save on boat insurance. Some discounts, coverages, payment plans and features are not available in all states or all GEICO companies. Boat and PWC coverages are underwritten by GEICO Marine Insurance Company. GEICO is a registered service mark of Government Employees Insurance Company, Washington, D.C. 20076; a Berkshire Hathaway Inc. subsidiary. TowBoatU.S. is the preferred towing service provider for GEICO Marine Insurance. The GEICO Gecko Image © 1999-2017. © 2017 GEICO AdPages2019.indd 2 12/4/2018 1:14:48 PM AdPages2019.indd 3 12/4/2018 1:17:19 PM Table of Contents Getting Started License Information and Fees ..........................................3 Douglas A. Ducey Governor Regulation Changes ...........................................................4 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH COMMISSION How to Use This Booklet ...................................................5 JAMES S. ZIELER, CHAIR — St. Johns ERIC S. SPARKS — Tucson General Statewide Fishing Regulations KURT R. DAVIS — Phoenix LELAND S. “BILL” BRAKE — Elgin Bag and Possession Limits ................................................6 JAMES R. AMMONS — Yuma Statewide Fishing Regulations ..........................................7 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT Common Violations ...........................................................8 5000 W. Carefree Highway Live Baitfish
    [Show full text]
  • The Trail Inventory of U.S
    The Trail Inventory of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Stations in Arizona Prepared By: Federal Highway Administration Central Federal Lands Highway Division March 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1. AZ STATE SUMMARY Table of Contents 1-1 List of Refuges 1-2 Mileage by Trail Class, Condition, and Surface 1-3 2-9. REFUGE SUMMARIES Mileage by Trail Class, Condition, and Surface X-1 Trail Location Map X-2 Trail Identification X-3 Condition and Deficiency Sheets X-4 Photographic Sheets X-5 10. APPENDIX Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations 10-1 Trail Classification System 10-4 1-1 FWS Stations in Arizona with Trails Station Name Trail Miles Chapter Bill Williams River NWR 0.27 2 Buenos Aires NWR 6.62 3 Cabeza Prieta NWR 0.16 4 Cibola NWR 0.91 5 Havasu NWR 0.22 6 Imperial NWR 1.31 7 Leslie Canyon NWR 1.47 8 San Bernardino NWR 2.39 9 1-2 Arizona NWR Trail and Summaries Trail Miles and Percentages by Surface Type and Condition Mileage by Trail Condition Total Trail Surface Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor Not Rated* Miles Type MILES % MILES % MILES % MILES % MILES % MILES % Native 7.91 59% 0.20 2% 0.32 2% 0% 0% 0% 8.43 Gravel 0.96 7% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.96 Asphalt 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.00 Concrete 0.27 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.27 Turnpike 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.00 Boardwalk 0.26 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.26 Puncheon 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.00 Woodchips 0.05 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.05 Admin Road 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3.36 25% 3.36 Other 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.00 Totals 9.45 71% 0.20 2% 0.32 2% 0.00 0% 0.00 0% 3.36 25% 13.33 Trail Miles and Percentages by Trail Classification and Condition Mileage by Trail Condition Total Trail Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor Not Rated* Miles Classification MILES % MILES % MILES % MILES % MILES % MILES % TC1 2.60 20% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2.60 TC2 1.88 14% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1.88 TC3 1.04 8% 0% 0.32 2% 0% 0% 0.97 7% 2.33 TC4 3.61 27% 0.20 2% 0% 0% 0% 2.39 18% 6.20 TC5 0.32 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.32 Totals 9.45 71% 0.20 2% 0.32 2% 0.00 0% 0.00 0% 3.36 25% 13.33 * Admin Roads are included in the inventory but are not rated for condition.
    [Show full text]
  • 5-Yr Review LEVI
    Little Colorado Spinedace (Lepidomeda vittata) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation Photo by Arizona Game and Fish Department U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arizona Ecological Services Office Phoenix, Arizona 5-YEAR REVIEW Little Colorado Spinedace/Lepidomeda vittata 1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION 1.1 Reviewers Lead Regional Office: Southwest (Region 2), Wendy Brown, Endangered Species Recovery Coordinator, (505) 248-6664; Brady McGee, Endangered Species Recovery Biologist, (505) 248-6657. Lead Field Office: Arizona Ecological Services Office, Shaula Hedwall, Senior Fish and Wildlife Biologist, (928) 226-0614 x103; Steven L. Spangle, Field Supervisor, (602) 242-0210 x244. Cooperating Field Office: Arizona Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office, Stewart Jacks, Project Leader, (928) 338-4288 x20. 1.2 Methodology used to complete the review: This review was conducted by Arizona Ecological Services Office (AESO) staff using information from species survey and monitoring reports, the 1998 Little Colorado River Spinedace (Lepidomeda vittata) Recovery Plan (Recovery Plan) (USFWS 1998), peer-reviewed journal articles, and documents generated as part of section 7 and section 10 consultations. We discussed potential recommendations to assist in recovery of the species with recognized spinedace experts. 1.3 Background: 1.3.1 FR Notice citation announcing initiation of this review: The FR notice initiating this review was published on January 11, 2006 (71 FR 1765). This notice opened a 90-day request for information period, which closed on April 11, 2006. We received comments from the Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD) and from Mr. Jim Crosswhite, owner of the EC Bar Ranch on Nutrioso Creek. 1 1.3.2 Listing history Original Listing FR notice: 32 FR 2001 (USFWS 1967) Date listed: March 11, 1967 Entity listed: Species, Lepidomeda vittata Classification: Threatened.
    [Show full text]
  • USGS Open-File Report 2009-1269, Appendix 1
    Appendix 1. Summary of location, basin, and hydrological-regime characteristics for U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging stations in Arizona and parts of adjacent states that were used to calibrate hydrological-regime models [Hydrologic provinces: 1, Plateau Uplands; 2, Central Highlands; 3, Basin and Range Lowlands; e, value not present in database and was estimated for the purpose of model development] Average percent of Latitude, Longitude, Site Complete Number of Percent of year with Hydrologic decimal decimal Hydrologic altitude, Drainage area, years of perennial years no flow, Identifier Name unit code degrees degrees province feet square miles record years perennial 1950-2005 09379050 LUKACHUKAI CREEK NEAR 14080204 36.47750 109.35010 1 5,750 160e 5 1 20% 2% LUKACHUKAI, AZ 09379180 LAGUNA CREEK AT DENNEHOTSO, 14080204 36.85389 109.84595 1 4,985 414.0 9 0 0% 39% AZ 09379200 CHINLE CREEK NEAR MEXICAN 14080204 36.94389 109.71067 1 4,720 3,650.0 41 0 0% 15% WATER, AZ 09382000 PARIA RIVER AT LEES FERRY, AZ 14070007 36.87221 111.59461 1 3,124 1,410.0 56 56 100% 0% 09383200 LEE VALLEY CR AB LEE VALLEY RES 15020001 33.94172 109.50204 1 9,440e 1.3 6 6 100% 0% NR GREER, AZ. 09383220 LEE VALLEY CREEK TRIBUTARY 15020001 33.93894 109.50204 1 9,440e 0.5 6 0 0% 49% NEAR GREER, ARIZ. 09383250 LEE VALLEY CR BL LEE VALLEY RES 15020001 33.94172 109.49787 1 9,400e 1.9 6 6 100% 0% NR GREER, AZ. 09383400 LITTLE COLORADO RIVER AT GREER, 15020001 34.01671 109.45731 1 8,283 29.1 22 22 100% 0% ARIZ.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement by Author
    Maya Wetlands: Ecology and Pre-Hispanic Utilization of Wetlands in Northwestern Belize Item Type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Baker, Jeffrey Lee Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 07/10/2021 10:39:16 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/237812 MAYA WETLANDS ECOLOGY AND PRE-HISPANIC UTILIZATION OF WETLANDS IN NORTHWESTERN BELIZE by Jeffrey Lee Baker _______________________ Copyright © Jeffrey Lee Baker 2003 A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the Department of Anthropology In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In the Graduate College The University of Arizona 2 0 0 3 2 3 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This endeavor would not have been possible with the assistance and advice of a number of individuals. My committee members, Pat Culbert, John Olsen and Owen Davis, who took the time to read and comment on this work Vernon Scarborough and Tom Guderjan also commented on this dissertation and provided additional support during the work. Vernon Scarborough invited me to northwestern Belize to assist in his work examining water management practices at La Milpa. An offer that ultimately led to the current dissertation. Without Tom Guderjan’s offer to work at Blue Creek in 1996, it is unlikely that I would ever have completed my dissertation, and it is possible that I might no longer be in archaeology, a decision I would have deeply regretted.
    [Show full text]
  • December 2012 Number 1
    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig ([email protected]), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • Gila Topminnow Revised Recovery Plan December 1998
    GILA TOPMINNOW, Poeciliopsis occidentalis occidentalis, REVISED RECOVERY PLAN (Original Approval: March 15, 1984) Prepared by David A. Weedman Arizona Game and Fish Department Phoenix, Arizona for Region 2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Albuquerque, New Mexico December 1998 Approved: Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date: Gila Topminnow Revised Recovery Plan December 1998 DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions required to recover and protect the species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) prepares the plans, sometimes with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State and Federal Agencies, and others. Objectives are attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Time and costs provided for individual tasks are estimates only, and not to be taken as actual or budgeted expenditures. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor official positions or approval of any persons or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the Service. They represent the official position of the Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director or Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. ii Gila Topminnow Revised Recovery Plan December 1998 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Original preparation of the revised Gila topminnow Recovery Plan (1994) was done by Francisco J. Abarca 1, Brian E. Bagley, Dean A. Hendrickson 1 and Jeffrey R. Simms 1. That document was modified to this current version and the work conducted by those individuals is greatly appreciated and now acknowledged.
    [Show full text]