ARIZONAARIZONA’’SS WILDLIFEWILDLIFE LINKAGESLINKAGES ASSESSMENTASSESSMENT

Workgroup Prepared by: Prepared The Arizona Wildlife Linkages The Arizona

ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT

2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT

Arizona’s Wildlife Linkages Assessment

Prepared by:

The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup

Siobhan E. Nordhaugen, Arizona Department of Transportation, Natural Resources Management Group Evelyn Erlandsen, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Habitat Branch Paul Beier, Northern Arizona University, School of Forestry Bruce D. Eilerts, Arizona Department of Transportation, Natural Resources Management Group Ray Schweinsburg, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Research Branch Terry Brennan, USDA Forest Service, Tonto National Forest Ted Cordery, Bureau of Land Management Norris Dodd, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Research Branch Melissa Maiefski, Arizona Department of Transportation, Environmental Planning Group Janice Przybyl, The Sky Island Alliance Steve Thomas, Federal Highway Administration Kim Vacariu, The Wildlands Project Stuart Wells, US Fish and Wildlife Service

2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT

First Printing Date: December, 2006 Copyright © 2006 The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup

Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written consent from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged.

Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written consent of the copyright holder.

Additional copies may be obtained by submitting a request to: The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup E-mail: [email protected]

2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT

The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup Mission Statement

“To identify and promote wildlife habitat connectivity using a collaborative, science based effort to provide safe passage for people and wildlife”

2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT

Primary Contacts:

Bruce D. Eilerts Siobhan E. Nordhaugen Arizona Department of Transportation Office of Environmental Services Statewide Natural Resources Management Group

Ray Schweinsburg Arizona Game and Fish Department Research Branch

E-mail: [email protected]

Photo by Kelly Roberts

1 1 0 22 4 430 470 1 1 0 610 4 550 450 20 30 510 440 600 Page 300 410 460 10 Mexican 1 10 Fredonia 420 Water 1 Littlefield 3 20 590 540 3 540 310 400 500 570 Kayenta 410 560 550 400 580 580 530 490 66 530 320 390 5 380 3807 5 590 520 340 7 480 330 350 370 470 600 360 510 360 88 350 460 610 500 9 340 9 North Rim Tuba 450 490 City Chinle 330 Grand Canyon 440 260 480 320 250 240 270 330 10 280 340 360 430 290 470 11 00 230 11 33 350 400 20 Cameron 370 430 420 380 390 410 420 Window 460 450 Rock 220 440 30 400 Ganado 410 460 260 450 470 40 Peach Springs 210 250 110 390 400 100 120 1 1 11 22 90 1 1 440 50 200 240 390 80 380 70 Seligman 11 88 430 60 120 140 230 110 190 380 60 130 1 4 370 Williams 1 4 1 7 70 350 20 100 140 220 1 7 11 99 10 50 60 150 420 90 170 180 210 330 340 22 00 70 80 160 220 Bullhead Ash Fork 190 11 66 200 60 Kingman 360 1 5 Flagstaff 230 360 320 360 City 40 22 11 1 5 240 240 Winslow 310 430 100 390 350 400 350 330 250 300 2 8 340 290 2 8 350 3022 99 2 2 2 3 260 230 2 2 380 2 3 270 Holbrook 420 110 340 Sedona 320 330 280 320 370 310 340 20 30 30 Clarkdale 310 320 10 330 360 330 120 2 5 310 380 33 00 340 2 4 2 5 20 Wikieup 3 5 350 2 4 310 330 200 3 5 330 300 22 77 340 320 30022 66 130 210 300 370 350 190 33 33 33 66 290 10 320 Prescott 290 Snowflake Lake Havasu City 140 290 10 Camp Verde 350 3 1 10 44 00 St. Johns 3 1 180 150 310 220 360 20 280 280 Heber 310 370 380 370 11 11 11 3 7 230 240 250 330 3 7 300 320 170 300 280 350 160 270 270 33 99 44 22 360 380 270 3 2 3 4 290 270 290 310 Show 3 2 1 1 3 3 4 Cordes Junction 280 320 1 1 3 260 Low 160 170 260 260 330 390 280 350 360 4 1 340 370 400 150 33 88 Payson 4 1 380 390 180 250 350 Parker 11 11 44 270 250 Young 310 330 390 1 1 2 360 410 1 1 2 100 240 380 140 370 390 190 260 5 2 410 44 33 20 90 5 2 300 320 55 88 Wickenburg 240 130 230 5 7 350 380 400 44 44 44 66 80 55 11 270 310 5 7 420 30 11 11 55 110 5 3 55 55 290 390 70 90 100 230 220 5 3 430 55 00 10 320 120 60 20 260 300 340 44 55 40 120 30 250 280 290 11 11 66 50 210 44 99 250 55 66 330 110 40 130 11 55 22 220 240 20 30 Hope 4 7 10 11 22 11 20 30 270 280 4 7 40 11 22 22 140 240 50 200 240 230 100 Quartzsite 60 260 270 44 88 70 150 210 40 190 230 80 10 220 66 44 90 10 10 210 55 44 230 220 11 11 88 100 6 5 180 260 6 5 160 20 220 901 1 9 110 130 50 200 210 55 99 6 3 1 1 9 140 250 1 1 7 6 3 120 10 Globe 200 1 1 7 200 200 240 150 190 30 11 22 00 11 55 11 Phoenix 180 230 170 60 80 66 88 160 40 210 220 260 190 50 66 66 270 11 22 33 11 22 44 140 280 160 160 290 180 70 190 77 33 180 170 220 160 7 4 150 150 300 130 7 4 40 140 170 170 1 2 7 30 150 11 22 55 1 2 7 10 160 60 11 22 66 180 Clifton 140 140 Florence 140 310 Gila Bend 170 160 11 22 88 10 130 140 11 33 00 110 66 77 100 120 190 330 130 130 130 150 50 90 170 140 6 2 390 11 33 11 80 140 160 120 Safford 6 2 77 22 70 120 6 0 77 66 120 6 0 60 10 7 8 120 40 150 160 170 7 8 340 6 1 380 66 99 50 1 4 8 200 120 110 350 6 1 1 2 9 30 40 1 4 8 360 370 1 2 9 20 20 30 380 20 210 100 110 10 140 120 Yuma 77 11 11 55 00 110 220 130 100 8 4 10 11 44 99 88 33 120 8 4 30 110 100 11 33 88 11 44 33 230 90 77 00 88 11 88 22 77 99 1 3 3 11 44 66 90 1 3 3 40 240 88 00 11 44 11 Ajo 80 350 11 33 99 11 33 55 11 44 44 50 88 99 99 00 11 33 22 11 33 66 250 340 360 7 5 70 370 7 5 60 Tucson Willcox 330 380 1 3 4 70 8 5 340 390 1 3 4 11 44 00 80 8 5 170 88 88 11 44 22 90 260 330 1 4 7 60 7 7 160 1 4 7 7 7 K1080 7 350 8 7 270 60 11 33 77 150 K90 320 100 140 280 130 Benson 11 44 55 70 290 310 50 50 300 60 110 120 40 K80 9 4 50 1 0 2 88 66 K70 9 4 40 1 0 2 80 10 290 40 Lukeville Green Valley 50 300 50 30 40 99 22 K60 300 310 40 9 7 30 410 40 9 7 60 Tombstone 20 30 K50 99 55 50 99 99 320 30 310 400 K40 20 30 99 88 99 11 10 20 320 20 99 33 99 66 1 0 0 330 330 390 K30 20 1 0 0 380 Sierra 10 10 340 Bisbee 11 00 11 K20 Vista 1 0 3 10 330 350 370 1 0 3 10 350 10 K10 340 360 Nogales Douglas 1 0 8 11 00 99 11 00 44 11 00 55 11 00 66 11 00 77 1 0 8

2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT i Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The phenomenal growth of Arizona’s human population, economy, with biologists, engineers, planners and land managers from state document have been created at the same scale so that the and federal agencies, universities, consulting firms and private transparency of the Arizona’s Wildlife Linkages Map included in the and infrastructure present challenges to maintaining natural sector conservation organizations. Individuals were divided into front of this document may be used as an overlay. Furthermore, the ecosystems and wildlife populations that constitute an important part groups to address specific geographic regions. They used map report was drafted in a manner to allow each individual chapter to be of Arizona’s wealth. In particular, roads, urbanization, canals, transparencies and tailored questionnaires to assist in the used as a stand-alone tool. For that reason, terminology common railways, energy corridors and activities of illegal migrants and identification of habitats, wildlife species, wildlife behavior and throughout the entire document is defined in each section. All border security operations not only destroy habitat, but create needs, potential linkage zones (see Table 4-1) as well as present technical terms are also collectively defined in the glossary. barriers that isolate wildlife populations and disrupt ecological and future threats or opportunities for conservation. One of the functions such as gene flow, predator-prey interactions, and many products resulting from this process was a computerized Important to taking the next step in preserving or restoring habitat migration. Addressing each of these potential barriers one-at-a-time geographic information system (GIS) projection graphically connectivity is the physical design and construction of linkages. To is expensive and inefficient. In each landscape, we must address all displaying the compiled information. There are over 150 potential help facilitate these applications, this report outlines the methodology these factors concurrently to successfully maintain or restore linkage zones included in the Arizona’s Wildlife Linkages Map. used to create specific linkage designs within potential linkage linkages between habitats and conserve the wildlife and natural zones. In the coming years, the AWLW intends to develop linkage ecosystems that Arizona’s residents and visitors rely on and benefit designs for each potential linkage zone through a combination of from. The potential linkage zones represent areas that are important to GIS analysis and fieldwork. This analysis coupled with a feasibility Arizona’s wildlife and natural ecosystems. If integrated into regional study on linkage protection will further define the present potential Conspicuous evidence of habitat fragmentation is wildlife road kill - a planning frameworks, these areas have the potential to be linkage zones into smaller, more site-specific delineations and is far too common sight along many Arizona roadways. These often maintained or preserved during this time of prosperity, growth and intended to aid in conservation and planning efforts. Linkages fatal encounters have far-reaching effects. Wildlife-vehicle collisions development. As such, for each potential linkage zone, the AWLW ranking highest in our prioritization will be addressed first. Future can result in human deaths and injuries, millions of dollars in built on information collected from the workshops to further define assessments will identify additional potential linkage zones. property damage, loss of game and non-game animals, and existing conditions, recording biotic communities, listing species that sometimes expose the State to liability. Working together, federal, depend on particular linkages, identifying land ownership within This report represents the results of the first statewide wildlife state, county and private stakeholders can minimize these social those linkages, and detailing known and anticipated threats. linkages assessment. We hope to elevate the current level of costs while enhancing opportunities for movement of wildlife awareness of wildlife connectivity areas and issues in Arizona. The between Arizona’s habitat areas. For further refinement, potential linkage zones were prioritized based tools in this report will allow land managers to incorporate the on biological importance threats - existing and anticipated - and identified wildlife linkage zones into their management planning The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup (AWLW) has taken the opportunities for preservation and/or restoration purposes. processes to address habitat fragmentation due to highways and first step in that process. The AWLW is a collaborative effort Biological importance scores depended on the size and habitat other human development. We expect to facilitate the integration of between public and private sector organizations formed to address quality of the habitat blocks (see Table 4-1) and on the ability of the the potential linkage zones presented in this report and those habitat fragmentation through a comprehensive, systematic potential linkage zones to support special status species, aquatic identified in the future into early project planning efforts. We approach. Through this partnership and commitment, a statewide ecosystems, or seasonal migrations. Threat scores reflect the acknowledge that this is only the first step in a continuing process of assessment was conducted to identify large blocks of protected barrier effect of canals, roads, urbanization and railroads. defining critical habitat connectivity areas. habitat, the potential wildlife movement corridors between as well as Opportunity scores indicate ongoing and proposed conservation through them, and the factors threatening to disrupt these linkage efforts in the areas, and whether impending major road projects Now more than ever, decision makers have a responsibility to zones. After four successful workshops and many hours spent provide an opportunity to increase the permeability of roads. As protect and maintain wildlife linkages to sustain Arizona’s diverse coordinating, meeting, mapping and writing, we present our initial road construction programs are updated and development in the wildlife species and wild landscapes. We firmly believe that findings, methodology and recommendations – a product that is State progresses, this evaluation and resulting prioritization will need government agencies and citizens working together with a intended to evolve and ultimately be used as a planning instrument. revision. comprehensive, landscape-scale approach can achieve these

conservation goals while accommodating the growth of Arizona’s The Arizona’s Missing Linkages Workshop held in April 2004 and the Our intention in this report is to provide a starting point for detailed consultation and coordination among the organizations and agencies population, an expanding economy, and associated infrastructure. follow-up workshops that ensued are the basis for this report and mapping tool. Attendance at the workshops was well represented that have a major role to play in maintaining habitat connectivity. To offer flexibility in the use of this report, all the maps within this - The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup

2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT ii Disclaimer

DISCLAIMER

Nothing in this report obligates the Arizona Department of Transportation, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Bureau of Land Management, Federal Highway Administration, Northern Arizona University, Sky Island Alliance, USDA Forest Service, US Fish and Wildlife Service or the Wildlands Project to commit or transfer any funds. Specific work projects or activities that involve the transfer of funds, services, or property among the various agencies and

organizations referred to in this report will require separate agreements and be contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds. Appropriate statutory authority must independently authorize such activities. This report does not provide such authority. Negotiation, execution, and administration of each such agreement must comply with all applicable statutes and regulations.

In addition, this report is not intended to, and does not create, any right, benefit, or trust responsibility, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity, by a party against the United States, the State of Arizona, their agencies, their officers, or any person.

This assessment should not be construed as a compliance document. Information provided in this assessment should be used as a guide only and should not be relied upon as the sole source of information relating to its content. While the information contained herein is believed to be accurate, it is supplied for informative purposes only and should not be considered certified or as a guarantee of satisfactory results by reliance thereon. Nothing contained herein is to be construed as a warranty or guarantee, express or implied, regarding any matter with respect to this product.

Because the AWLW is continually improving and upgrading its product design, the information contained herein is subject to change.

2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT iii Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i Threat and Opportunity Value Weighting 20 Top Priority Linkages 20

DISCLAIMER ii SECTION VI ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES 21

TABLE OF CONTENTS iii Potential Linkage Zone Information 21

LIST OF FIGURES vii SECTION VII POTENTIAL LINKAGE ZONES 41

Linkage 1 Beaver Dam Slope – Virgin Slope 41 LIST OF TABLES viii Linkage 2 Beaver Dam – Virgin Mountains 41

Linkage 3 Cedar Rim/Fredonia Pronghorn Crossing 42 LIST OF ACRONYMS ix Linkage 4 Kaibab – Paunsaugunt Plateau 43

GLOSSARY x Linkage 5 Kaibab Plateau – North Rim 43 Linkage 6 Paria Plateau – Kaibab Plateau 44 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS xi Linkage 7 Skeleton Mesa – Black Mesa 44 Linkage 8 Chinle Valley – Chuska Mountains 45

SECTION I INTRODUCTION 1 Linkage 9 Chuska Mountains – New Mexico 45 The Challenge 1 Linkage 10 Mount Tipton – Mount Perkins 46 Legal Environment 3 Linkage 11 Grand Canyon – Prescott National Forest 47 Providing Solutions 4 Linkage 12 Coconino Plateau – Kaibab National Forest 47

Linkage 13 South Rim Grand Canyon 48 SECTION II ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES WORKGROUP 5 49 Linkage 14 Valle – Bellemont Forming Partnerships 5 49 Linkage 15 Garland – Arizona Divide AWLW Mission Statement 5 50 Linkage 16 Flagstaff Primary Goals 5 51 Linkage 17 Deadman Mesa – Gray Mountain Founding Individuals 6 Linkage 18 Black Mountains – Cerbat Mountains 51

Linkage 19 Mount Perkins – Warm Springs 52 SECTION III ARIZONA’S MISSING LINKAGES WORKSHOP 7 Linkage 20 Hualapai Mountains – Cerbat Mountains 53 Breakout Sessions 7 Linkage 21 I-40 and US 93 – Kingman 53 Follow-up Workshops (November 2004) 9 Linkage 22 Big Black Mesa – Hell Canyon 54 Arizona’s Missing Linkages Workshop Agenda (April 13 – 14, 2004) 10 Linkage 23 Oak Creek Canyon – Munds Park 55

SECTION IV ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES MAPPING 15 Linkage 24 Cottonwood – Sedona 56

Layers 15 Linkage 25 State Route 179 56

Mapping Generalities 16 Linkage 26 Northern I-17 Corridor 57

Habitat Block Mapping Decision Rules 16 Linkage 27 Mogollon Rim – Navajo Nation 58

Potential Linkage Zone Mapping Decision Rules 16 Linkage 28 North – South Petrified Forest 59

Linkage 29 Warm Springs – Hualapai Mountains 60

SECTION V ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES PRIORITIZATION 17 Linkage 30 Warm Springs – Aubrey Peak 60 Biological Value 17 Linkage 31 The Needles – Mohave Mountains 61 Biological Value Weighting 19 Linkage 32 Bill Williams – Aubrey Hills 62 Threat and Opportunity Value 19 Linkage 33 Hualapai Mountains – Bagdad 62

2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT iv Table of Contents

Linkage 34 Tres Alamos Wilderness – Prescott National Forest 63 Linkage 80 Saguaro – Tortolita 96 Linkage 35 East – West Prescott National Forest 64 Linkage 81 Santa Catalina – Tortolita 97 Linkage 36 Yeager Canyon – Camp Verde 65 Linkage 82 Santa Catalina – Galliuro 97 Linkage 37 North – South Black Hills 66 Linkage 83 Galliuro – Pinaleno 98 Linkage 38 Bradshaw Mountains – Agua Fria National Monument 67 Linkage 84 Pinaleno – San Simon Valley 99 Linkage 39 SR 260 West from I-17 to SR 87 67 Linkage 85 Avra Valley 100 Linkage 40 East – West Mogollon Plateau 68 Linkage 86 Kitt Peak 100 Linkage 41 SR 260 Payson – Heber 69 Linkage 87 Tucson Mountains – San Xavier (San Robles Pass) 101 Linkage 42 Aripine – Cibecue 69 Linkage 88 Galliuro – Winchester – Dragoon 102 Linkage 43 Parker Valley – Cactus Plain 70 Linkage 89 Wilcox Playa – Winchester – Pinaleno – Dos Cabezas 102 Linkage 44 Cactus Plain – Plomosa Mountains 71 Linkage 90 Pinaleno – Dos Cabezas – San Simon Valley 103 Linkage 45 La Posa Plain 71 Linkage 91 Baboquivari – San Luis Mountains 104 Linkage 46 Buckskin Mountains – Harcuvar Mountains 72 Linkage 92 San Xavier – Sierrita – Santa Rita 104 Linkage 47 Dome Rock Mountains 73 Linkage 93 Tumacacori – Santa Rita 105 Linkage 48 Ranegras Plain 73 Linkage 94 Rincons – Whetstone – Santa Rita 106 Linkage 49 Granite Wash – Little Harquahala Mountains 74 Linkage 95 Santa Rita – Empire Complex 106 Linkage 50 Harcuvar Mountains – Harquahala Mountains 75 Linkage 96 Patagonia – Santa Rita 107 Linkage 51 Wickenburg 75 Linkage 97 Whetstone – San Pedro River 108 Linkage 52 Hassayampa River – Red Picacho 76 Linkage 98 Las Cienegas – Huachuca 108 Linkage 53 North – South Mazatzal Mountains 77 Linkage 99 Dragoon – San Pedro River 109 Linkage 54 Sierra Ancha – Superstition Mountains 78 Linkage 100 Fort Huachuca – San Pedro River 110 Linkage 55 East – West Sierra Ancha SR 288 78 Linkage 101 Chiricahuas– Peloncillos 110 Linkage 56 Sevenmile – Sevenmile East US 60 79 Linkage 102 Western International Border 111 Linkage 57 Faught Ridge – Baldy SR 73 80 Linkage 103 Altar Valley – Mexico 112 Linkage 58 State Route 260 East 81 Linkage 104 Tumacacori – Mexico 112 Linkage 59 Correjo Crossing – Clifton US 191 81 Linkage 105 Santa Cruz – Mexico 113 Linkage 60 Black Hills – Tollgate Canyon 83 Linkage 106 Patagonia/Huachuca – Mexico 114 Linkage 61 Black Hills – Peloncillo Mountains 83 Linkage 107 San Pedro River – Mexico 114 Linkage 62 State Route 75 83 Linkage 108 San Bernadino – Mexico 115 Linkage 63 Trigo Mountains – Kofa Mountains 84 Linkage 109 Peloncillo – Mexico 116 Linkage 64 Bighorn Belmont – Saddle Mountain 85 Linkage 110 Beaver Dam Slope East – West 116 Linkage 65 White Tanks – Hassayampa River 85 Linkage 111 Mohave Mountains – Castaneda Hills 117 Linkage 66 Superior – Miami US 60 86 Linkage 112 Gibraltar Mountain – Cactus Plain 118 Linkage 67 Gila River – El Capitan 87 Linkage 113 Poachie Range – Black Mountains 118 Linkage 68 Saddle Mountain – Gila Bend Mountains 87 Linkage 114 Harcuvar Mountains – Black Mountains 119 Linkage 69 Laguna Mountains – Muggins Mountains 88 Linkage 115 Cunningham Pass 120 Linkage 70 Arizona Service Highway (ASH) 89 Linkage 116 North – South Plumosa Mountains 120 Linkage 71 North – South Gila Mountains 89 Linkage 117 South Trigo Peaks – Trigo Mountains 121 Linkage 72 Sentinel Plain 90 Linkage 118 Indian Well – Livingston Hills 122 Linkage 73 Gila Bend Mountains – North Maricopa Mountains 91 Linkage 119 Livingston Hills – Kofa Mountains 122 Linkage 74 North Maricopa Mountains – Sierra Estrella Mountains 92 Linkage 120 Eagletail Mountains – Clanton Hills – Little Horn Mountains 123 Linkage 75 State Route 85 92 Linkage 121 Harquahala Mountains – Little Harquahala Mountains 124 Linkage 76 South Maricopa Mountains – Sand Tanks 93 Linkage 122 Harquahala Mountains – Belmont Mountains – Big Horn Mountains 124 Linkage 77 Quijotoa Valley 94 Linkage 123 Mohave Peak – Chocolate Mountains 125 Linkage 78 State Route 79 95 Linkage 124 Kofa Mountains – Castle Dome 126 Linkage 79 Ironwood – Tortolita 95 Linkage 125 Tank Mountains – Palomas Mountains 126 Linkage 126 Bunyan Peak – Painted Rock Mountains 127

2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT v Table of Contents

Linkage 127 Margies Peak – Sheep Mountain 128 Road Kill Database 174 Linkage 128 North Maricopa – South Maricopa Mountains 128

Linkage 129 Southern Colorado River 129 SECTION XI CONTRIBUTOR’S CONNECTIVITY EFFORTS 175

Linkage 130 Chocolate Mountains – Trigo Mountains – Laguna Mountains 130 Arizona Department of Transportation 175

Linkage 131 Castle Dome Mountains – Red Bluff Mountains – Muggins Mountains 131 Arizona Game and Fish Department 175

Linkage 132 Tinajas Altas Mountains – Cabeza Prieta Mountains 131 Bureau of Land Management 176

Linkage 133 Copper Mountains – Cabeza Prieta Mountains 132 Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy 176

Linkage 134 Cabeza Prieta Mountains – Tule Mountains 133 The Federal Highway Administration 176

Linkage 135 Sierra Pinta – Cabeza Prieta Mountains 133 The Nature Conservancy 177

Linkage 136 Mohawk Mountains/Bryan Mountains – North Sierra Pinta 134 Northern Arizona University 177

Linkage 137 South Sierra Pinta – Papago Well 135 The Sky Island Alliance 177

Linkage 138 Northern Mohawk Mountains 135 USDA Forest Service 177

Linkage 139 Mohawk Mountains – Bryan Mountains 136 The Wildlands Project 178

Linkage 140 Bryan Mountains – Antelope Hills 137 SECTION XII SOURCES FOR CONNECTIVITY RESOLUTION 179 Linkage 141 Granite Mountains – Mohawk Mountains/Bryan Mountains 137 Acres for America 179 Linkage 142 Granite Mountains – Antelope Hills 138 Arizona Game and Fish Commission Heritage Fund 179 Linkage 143 Aguila Mountains – Granite Mountains 139 Arizona Growing Smarter Grant Program 180 Linkage 144 Growler Mountains – Granite Mountains 139 Arizona Wildlife Conservation Fund 181 Linkage 145 Bates Mountains/Cipriano Hills – Agua Dulce Mountains/Quitobaquito Hills 140 Arizona Partners in Amphibian and Reptile Conservation 181 Linkage 146 Childs Mountains – Growler Mountains 141 Arizona Water Protection Fund 181 Linkage 147 Growler Mountains – Bates Mountains 141 Bring Back the Natives 181 Linkage 148 Round Butte – Javelina Mountain 142 Candidate Conservation Agreements with Assurances 182 Linkage 149 Sand Tank Mountains – Sauceda Mountains 143 Conservation Innovation Grants 182 Linkage 150 Little Table Top – Vekol Mountains 143 Conservation Reserve Program 182 Linkage 151 Gila/Salt River Corridor Granite Reef Dam – Gillespie Dam 144 Conservation Banking 182 Linkage 152 Central Arizona Project Canal 145 Conservation Security Program 183

SECTION VIII RIPARIAN HABITAT/LINKAGE ZONES 147 Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund 183

Arizona Riparian Areas 147 Doris Duke Charitable Foundation 184

Arizona Hydrological Classifications 150 Environmental Quality Incentives Program 184

Unique Waters 152 Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program 184

Wild and Scenic Rivers 152 FishAmerica Foundation 184

Impaired Waters 162 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Improvement Grants 185

Potential Impacts 162 Five-Star Restoration Matching Grants Program 185

Overview of Spatial and Temporal Impacts of Road or Other Construction Projects 162 Grassland Reserve Program 185

Phase Descriptions 164 Healthy Forests Reserve Program 186

Ecological Components Consideration 164 Land and Water Conservation Fund 186

General Recommendations 165 Landowner Incentive Program 186 Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation 186 Section IX FUTURE DIRECTIONS 167 Local, Regional and State Parks Heritage Fund 187 Additional Potential Linkage Zone Identification 167 More Fish Partnership Fund 187 Linkage Designs 167 Multistate Conservation Grants Program 187 Interactive Linkage Map Tool 168 National Fish Passage Program 188 Integrated Planning and Interagency Coordination 169 National Fish and Wildlife Foundation General Matching Grants Program 188 Outreach 169 National Fish and Wildlife Foundation in Partnership with the NRCS 188 National Scenic Byways Grants Program 189

Section X CONNECTIVITY RELATED PROJECTS 171 Native Plant Conservation Initiative 189 Wildlife Research 171 Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act Grants Program 189

2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT vi Table of Contents

North American Wetlands Conservation Act Grants Program 189 North American Bat Conservation Fund 189

Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program 189 Private Stewardship Grant 190 Pulling Together Initiative 190

Resource Conservation and Development Program 190

Riparian Trust Fund 190 Rockefeller Brothers Fund 191 Safe Harbor Agreements 191

State Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Support Program 191 State Lake Improvement Fund Grant Program 192 Surdna Foundation 192 192 Transportation Enhancement Grants

Tribal Landowner Incentive Program 192 Tribal Wildlife Grants 192 United States Golf Association Wildlife Links 192

Wetlands Reserve Program 193

Wilburforce Foundation 193 Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program 193 Wildlife Action Opportunities Fund 193

Wildlife Habitat Policy Research Program 193 Excerpts from the Highway Transportation Bill SAFETEA-LU 194

APPENDIX A LINKAGE DATA SHEET 197

APPENDIX B WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS 199

REFERENCES 203

2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT vii List of Figures LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 6-13. Arizona Game and Fish Department Regions 34

Figure 3-1. Arizona’s Ecoregions 8 Figure 6-14. Bureau of Land Management Districts 35

Figure 3-2. Workshop Resource Maps 7 Figure 6-15. Bureau of Land Management Field Offices 36

Figure 3-3. Flowchart of Project Development 9 Figure 6-16. Congressional Districts 37 Figure 3-4. Priority Conservation Areas Identified by The Nature Conservancy through Ecoregional Assessments 12 Figure 6-17. Council of Governments 38

Figure 4-1. Diagram of Refinement Progression 16 Figure 6-18. Federal Highway Administration Engineering Districts 39

Figure 5-1. Prioritization Graph 17 Figure 6-19. Legislative Districts 40

Figure 5-2. Upper Right Quadrant of Prioritization 20 Figure 8-1. Classification of Rivers and Streams 147

Figure 6-1. Arizona’s Wildlife Linkages 22 Figure 8-2. Riparian Habitat/Linkage Zones 148

Figure 6-2. Arizona’s Wildlife Linkages Across Habitat Blocks 23 Figure 8-3. Perennial Rivers, Stream and Selected Washes 149

Figure 6-3. Fracture Zones 24 Figure 8-4. Major Pathways of Exchanges of Materials, Energy and Organisms in the Longitudinal,

Lateral and Vertical Dimensions of a Riverine System (From Ward and Wiens 2001 Figure 6-4. Arizona’s Biotic Communities 25 and Wiens 2002) 147

Figure 6-5. Landownership 26 Figure 8-5. Hierarchical Classification of Stream Habitats (Wiens 2002) 150

Figure 6-6. Tribal Nations 27 Figure 8-6. Arizona Department of Water Resources Surface Water Basins 151

Figure 6-7. USDA Forest Service 28 Figure 8-7. Unique Waters 153

Figure 6-8. Department of Defense 29 Figure 8-8. Wild and Scenic Rivers 154

Figure 6-9. Arizona Highway System 30 Figure 8-10. Impaired Waters 163

Figure 6-10. ADOT Engineering Districts 31 Figure 8-11. Temporal and Spatial Extent of Ecological Impacts on Riparian Areas Due to Three

Phases of Road Development (Angermeier et al. 2004) 163 32 Figure 6-11. ADOT Maintenance Boundaries

Figure 6-12. ADOT Natural Resources Management Section 33

2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT viii List of Tables

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4-1. Important Terms 15

Table 5-1. HB1 Size of Habitat Blocks 17

Table 5-2. HB2 Habitat Quality of the Smaller Block 18

Table 5-3. HB3 Presence of Linkage Dependent Species 18

Table 5-4. L1 Facilitates Seasonal Migration 18

Table 5-5. L2 Riparian Area 18

Table 5-6. L3 Conservation Ownership 18

Table 5-7. L4 Special Status Species WITHIN the Linkage Zone 19

Table 5-8. L5 Other Linkages Depend on This One 19

Table 5-9. Weighting for Biological Values 19

Table 5-10. T1 – T5 Development Threats 19

Table 5-11. O1 Linkage to Other State or Mexico 19

Table 5-12. O2A ADOT 5-Year Plan 19

Table 5-13. O2B ADOT Long Range (20-Year) Plan 19

Table 5-14. O3 Active Conservation Efforts 20

Table 5-15. Weighting for Threats and Opportunities 20

Table 8-1. Arizona’s Designated Unique Waters 152

Table 8-2. Arizona Waters Potential Candidates for Wild and Scenic Designations 155

2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT ix List of Acronyms LIST OF ACRONYMS

AASHTO American Association of State Highway and DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane NEPA National Environmental Policy Act Transportation Officials DOD Department of Defense NFWF National Fish and Wildlife Foundation ADEQ Arizona Department of Environmental Quality DPS Department of Public Safety NMBCA Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act ADOT Arizona Department of Transportation NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service EDTM Efficient Transportation Decision Making ADWR Arizona Department of Water Resources NPS National Park Service EIS Environmental Impact Statement AG Attorney General NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service AGFD Arizona Game and Fish Department EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency AHR Americans for Our Heritage and Recreation EQIP Environmental Quality Incentives Program PAG Pima Association of Governments AHS Arizona Highway System ESA Endangered Species Act PARC Partners in Amphibian and Reptile Conservation PCA Patch Configuration Analysis ALRIS Arizona Land Resource Information System FHWA Federal Highway Administration Arizona Outdoor Recreation Coordinating PTI Pulling Together Initiative AORCC FMPO Flagstaff Metropolitan Planning Organization Commission FRPP Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program RMP Resource Management Plan A.R.S. Arizona Revised Statutes FSA USDA Farm Service Agency SEAGO South Eastern Arizona Governments Organization ASH Arizona Service Highway FWCA Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act ASLD Arizona State Land Department SEPM Spatially Explicit Population Model ASP Arizona State Parks GIS Geographic Information System SCWCs State Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy ATIS Arizona Transportation Information System GPS Global Positioning System SLIF State Lake Improvement Fund AWLW Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup GRP Grassland Reserve Program SR State Route AZ Arizona SWG State Wildlife Grant HCP Habitat Conservation Plan BBN Bring Back the Natives HFRP Healthy Forests Reserve Program TDML Total Maximum Daily Load BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs TNC The Nature Conservancy I Interstate BLM Bureau of Land Management TU Trout Unlimited BOR Bureau of Reclamation km Kilometer U.S. United States

CAB Conservation Acquisition Board LCCA Least Cost Corridor Analysis USAF U.S. Air Force CACOG Central Arizona Council of Governments LIP Landowner Incentive Program USC United States Code CAP Central Arizona Project LRSP Local, Regional and State Parks USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture CCAA Candidate Conservation Agreements with Assurances LWCF Land and Water Conservation Fund USDOI U.S. Department of Interior CCC Commodity Cooperation Corporation USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service CERI Craighead Environmental Research Institute MAG Maricopa Association of Governments USGS U.S. Geological Service CFR Code of Federal Regulations MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act WACOG Western Arizona Council of Governments CIG Conservation Innovation Grants MFP Management Framework Plan WCS Wildlife Conservation Society Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers MOU Memo of Understanding WHIP Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program CRP Conservation Reserve Program MP Milepost WHPRP Wildlife Habitat Policy Research Program CSP Conservation Security Program MSCGP Multistate Conservation Grant Program WMA Weed Management Area CWA Clean Water Act NACOG Northern Arizona Council of Governments CWCS Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy NAU Northern Arizona University YMPO Yuma Metropolitan Planning Organization

CYMPO Central Yavapai Metropolitan Planning Organization NAWCA North American Wetlands Conservation Act

2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT x Glossary

GLOSSARY

HABITAT BLOCK: an area of land that consists of important wildlife habitat and can reasonably be expected to remain wild for at least 50 years. Habitat blocks are primarily comprised of lands within National Forests, National Parks, National Wildlife Refuges, large military reservations, tribal lands and lands managed by Bureau of Land Management or Bureau of Reclamation. Although some of these lands contain bombing ranges, barracks, reservoirs, and other non-natural elements, they still have a long- term prospect of serving as wildlife habitat. We recognize that tribal

sovereignty retains the right to develop those lands. Habitat blocks also include private lands that are managed for conservation, such as Nature Conservancy preserves and some large ranches whose owners are committed to long-term conservation. All other private lands and land owned by Arizona State Land Department (which has no conservation mandate under current law) have for the most part been excluded. (Note: To keep maps readable, some habitat block polygons include small private and state inholdings that may not be conserved).

FRACTURE ZONE: areas of reduced permeability between habitat blocks. These regions are largely State Land, private holdings and transportation corridors. Roads, canals, urban areas, railroads, or border security operations limit or prevent animal movement, or threaten to do so in the foreseeable future in these zones. Most fracture zones need significant restoration to function as reliable linkages. Portions of the fracture zone are designated as potential linkage zones (see definition below). Resource agencies and conservation groups should continue to protect and enhance washes, streams, and rivers as major corridors in all areas of the fracture zone, including improvements to culverts and bridges to promote wildlife permeability.

POTENTIAL LINKAGE ZONE: a portion or subset of the fracture zone or habitat block identified as an area critical to wildlife movement. Threats

must be managed if connectivity is to be maintained or restored. We emphasize that these polygons depict planning areas within which a functional linkage(s) must be designed and conserved. In most cases, only a small fraction of the proposed potential linkage zone will be included in the linkage design (Section X), which will be developed in future detailed analyses.

RIPARIAN HABITAT/LINKAGE ZONE: streams that historically supported riparian communities and perennial water flow (in some cases pools linked by subsurface flow for much of the year). Each potentially provides essential habitat for aquatic species, and critical landscape connectivity for both aquatic and terrestrial animals (Section VIII).

2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT xi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Special thanks to: Mark Endries, Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission; Thanks to all of our workshop sponsors: Arizona Department of Paul Garrett, Federal Highway Administration; Gratitude and appreciation to the Arizona Department of Transportation, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Bureau of Land Bob Hollis, Federal Highway Administration; Transportation’s Jessica Gonzales of for ceaselessly printing, sorting Management, Federal Highway Administration, Northern Arizona Alex Levy, Federal Highway Administration; and stacking; Mike Mingo for supplying running commentary through University, Sky Island Alliance, USDA Forest Service, US Fish and Rob Marshall, The Nature Conservancy; this process; and to Nicole Carpenter for editing above and beyond Wildlife Service, the Wildlands Project, Earth Friends Wildlife Victor Mendez, Arizona Department of Transportation; the call of duty. Many thanks for the patience of ADOT’s Foundation, National Park Service, the Appleton-Whittell Audubon Bill Ruediger; Maintenance Permits. Research Ranch and the Phoenix Zoo. Duane Shroufe, Arizona Game and Fish Department; Dale Turner, The Nature Conservancy; and We would like to recognize the efforts of Jiray Du, Jaclyn Srynoski Trish White, Defenders of Wildlife Thanks to The Nature Conservancy for contributing the use of their and Tyson Kelsey. conservation plans for each ecoregion. We would like to acknowledge all of the photographers whose Thanks and appreciation to Kristian Nordhaugen for his support and photos are displayed in this document. Every attempt was made to Thanks to Sue Boe, Joyce Francis, Chuck Paradzick and Sabra coming to the rescue on several occasions. identify the credits associated with each photo but the nevertheless Schwartz of the Arizona Game and Fish Department for their some sources were not found. The striking cover photo of the mule substantial contributions to bring our efforts together. And many thanks to Stuart Wells, wherever you are. deer is the generous contribution of Shawn Olson (http://www.shawnolson.net/). The chuckwalla is one of the wonderful photos from Ron Horloff’s beautiful collection

(http://www.pbase.com/ronhrl). The magnificent Swainson’s hawk is the work of E. J. Peiker.

2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT xii