Leslie Creek in Leslie Canyon

Leslie Canyon National Wildlife Refuge In Stream Flow Request for Leslie Creek in Leslie Canyon

A request made by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to the State of Arizona Department of Water Resources

By: Paul Tashjian USFWS Division of Water Management, Region 2 \

Yaqui Topminnow (Poeciliopsis occidentalis sonoriensis)

Yaqui Chub (Gila purpurae) Abstract

The Leslie Canyon National Wildlife Refuge is located in Southeastern Arizona 17 miles north of Douglas, along the Southwestern flank of the Chiricahua Mountains. The refuge is one of two remaining habitats within the United States (including the San Bernardino NWR) for the nationally endangered Yaqui Topmimiow and Yaqui Chub. These fish once dominated habitats within the streams and cienegas of the south draining Yaqui Watershed, including Whitewater Draw and Black Draw within the U.S.A.. These habitats have deteriorated throughout Arizona and Mexico due to agricultural and groundwater development. Leslie Creek supplies this unique and pristine desert ecosystem with both vital baseflow and flushing flow waters. Insuring in stream flow rights within the Leslie Canyon NWR is essential for the survival of the endangered Yaqui Topmitmow and Yaqui Chub, and the conservation of this threatened and unique wildlife habitat. Leslie Creek in Leslie Canyon is a flashy, desert fluvial system. Though storm events create very large flow events, the base flow of the stream is very low. The Yaqui Fishes and surrounding ecosystem rely on the base flow for survival. In order to gaurd against anthropogenic depletion of this flow, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is requesting the following in stream flow rights for Leslie Creek within Leslie Canyon National Wildlife Refuge:

Discharge (cfs) Acre Feet/month January .62 38.3 February .54 33.0 March .53 32.6 April .52 32.2 May .45 27.5 June .35 21.8 July .34 21.0 August .59 36.4 September .63 38.7 October .74 45.3 November .81 49.9 December .70 43.3 Acre Feet/year= 419.9

The above numbers were derived from an analysis of the mean daily discharge record from a U.S. Geologic Survey gage within the refuge that has been operational from 1970-1977, and 1982 to present. A mean of the median monthly daily flow analysis was used to derive the baseflow requirements for the Wildlife Refuge. Table of Contents

I. Introduction ...... 1 A. History of Procurement and Current Water Use ...... 1

II. Site Overview ...... 6 A. Geology ...... 9 B. Climate ...... 10 C. Geomorphology ...... 17

HI. Resources ...... 23 A. Endangerd Desert Fishes ...... 23 B. Riparian Habitat and Surrounding Ecosystems ...... 30 C. Desert Wildlife ...... 31

IV. Beneficial Use Statement ...... 32 V. Hydrologic Data Collection Technique ...... 32 VI. Streamflow Analysis ...... 42 VII. Possible Impacts on the Leslie Creek Hydrosytem ...... 43 VIII. In Stream Flow Request ...... 45

References ...... 46

Appendices I. Geomorphology Survey ...... 48 IL USGS Gage Information ...... 52 List of Figures

Figure 1: p.2, Overview photograph of Leslie Creek, Swisshelm Mountains and Chiricahua Mountains.

Figure 2: p.4, Map of the Leslie Creek Watershed.

Figure 3: p.7, Map of the Yaqui Drainage.

Figure 4: p. 11, Annual Precipitation Record (inches per year), Douglas, AZ. figure 5: p.13, Daily Precipitation Record of Douglas, AZ for selected years.

Figure 6: p.15, Monthy Average minimum and maximum temperature (F), Douglas, AZ.

Figure 7: p.18, Map of the Perrenial stretch of Leslie Creek within Leslie Canyon.

Figure 8: p. 21, Photograph of a riffle in the upper section of the Perrenial stretch of Leslie Creek.

Figure 9: p.26, Range and illustration of Yaqui Topminnow.

Figure 10: p.28, Range and illustration of Yaqui Chub.

Figure 11a,b: p.34, Daily Mean Discharge Record, Leslie Creek in Leslie Canyon, high flows (a) and low flows (b).

Figure 12: p.36, Mean of the median monthly flows (taken from average daily discharge records) for Leslie Creek, 1970-1977, 1982-1989.

Figure 13: p.38, Median monthly flows for the period of record.

Figure 14: p.40, Daily mean flow duration curve, Leslie Creek. Acknowledgements

I wish to thank the following individuals for their assistance with this report: Greg BusImer (Dept. of Water Resources, AZ), Kevin Cobble (San Bernardino NWR, refuge manager), Steve Cullinan (Division Of Water Mngt., USFWS Region 2), Les Cunningham (Division of Water Rights, USFWS Region 2), Debbie Davies (Division of Engineering, USFWS Region 2), Nita Fuller (associate manager for Refuges, USFWS Region 2), Tom Harbor (Dept. of Water Resources, AZ), and Dick Steinbach (associate manager for Refuges, USFWS Region 2). It was through the assistance of the above individuals that this application was able to be filed in a timely and informed manner. 1

I. Introduction

The Leslie Canyon National Wildlife Refuge (LCNWR) is located in Southeastern Arizona 17 miles north of Douglas, along the Southwestern flank of the Chiricahua Mountains (see Figure 1). The refuge is one of two remaining habitats within the United States (including the San Bernardino NWR) for the nationally endangered Yaqui Topmilmow and Yaqui Chub. These fish once dominated habitats within the streams and cienegas of the south draining Yaqui Watershed, including Whitewater Draw and Black Draw within the U.S.A. (Cobble, 1992a). These habitats have deteriorated throughout Arizona and Mexico due to agricultural and groundwater development (Hendrickson and Kuickley, 1984). Additionally, the refuge is home to the native fish Longfin Dace, native trees (including Velvet Ash, Fremont Cottonwood), a large assortment of native cactae, native birds, and native mammals (Smith and Bender, 1974). Leslie Creek supplies this unique and pristine desert ecosystem with both vital baseflow and flushing flow waters. Insuring in stream flow rights within the LCNWR is essential for the survival of the endangered Yaqui Topminnow and Yaqui Chub, and the conservation of this threatened and unique wildlife habitat.

A. History of Procurement and Current Water Use The LCNWR was purchased by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) from the Arizona Nature Conservancy (ANC) in 1988, and consisted of a total allotment of 1240 acres (see Figure 2). The ANC, recognizing the uniqueness of Leslie Canyon and the necessity for conservation of the endangered Yaqui Fishes, purchased the 1240 acres in 1986 with an agreement for future purchase by the USFWS. Prior to 1986, the 1240 acres of the LCNWR were part of the 99 bar ranch. There are no pre-existing surface water rights on Leslie Creek within Leslie Canyon. We are requesting water rights for the perennial stretch of Leslie Creek that runs through the Leslie Canyon NWR. Since Leslie Creek runs perennial only within the confines of the refuge, there are no other interests within the region that rely on the baseflow of the creek. Above the 2

Figure 1: Overview photograph of Leslie Creek, Swisshelm Mountains and the Chiricahua Mountains. The groundwater basin separating the Swisshelm Mountains and the Chiricahua Mountains supplies Leslie Creek its' vital base flow water. , 4

Figure 2: Map of the Leslie Creek Watershed, including boundaries of the Refuge and outlines of the watershed. The watershed above the refuge has a total area of 79.1 square miles. Each grid on this map is 5 miles by 5 miles, or 25 square miles. 5 6 refuge, two ranches (99 Bar and Bar Boot, see Figure 2), have constructed check dams and windmill pumped wells within the Leslie Creek Watershed (LCW). These ranches rely on this storm and ground water for cattle. Below the refuge, Leslie Creek enters the Sulphur Springs Valley. This valley contains a large aquifer from which the towns of McNeal and Douglas draw their water. However, the aquifer is not directly linked to the flow of water in Leslie Canyon.

II. Site Overview

Leslie Canyon is located in the southern end of the Swisshelm Mountains, a remote and rugged ridge located along the southwestern flank of the larger Chiricahua Mountain Range (Figure 1). The Swisshelm Mountains are low and jagged with a maximum elevation of 7000 feet. The headwaters of Leslie Canyon consist of small springs within the Southwestern portion of the Chiricahuas. The elevation of Leslie Creek ranges from 6500 feet in the Chiricahuas to 4600 feet within Leslie Creek (Swisshelm mountains) to 4120 feet within the Sulfur Springs Valley. Leslie Creek is located in the northern portion of the Yaqui River Basin. Within the United States, Guadalupe Canyon, San Bernardino Valley, and Sulfur Springs Valley comprise the northern sub basins of this drainage system. These three basins join in Sonora and pass south to the Rio de Bavispe, which flows into the Rio Yaqui (Figure 3). Within the United States, perennial flow within the Yaqui Drainage currently exists only within Rucker Canyon, Leslie Canyon, and a .75 mile stretch within the San Bernardino Valley (Black Draw).

The LCNWR was described by the ANC as being in excellent condition (ANC, 1985). Although the canyon is part of an active cattle ranch, the canyon has not been heavily grazed and maintains a dense understory of herbaceous plants near the stream. The riparian trees, including cottonwood willow, and ash, are reproducing vigorously as evidence from the healthy stock of seedlings and saplings (ANC, 1985). Leslie Canyon is an outstanding example of ash-willow-cottonwood riparian woodland. This community 7

Figure 3: Map of the Yaqui River Drainage. The majority of Yaqui native fish habitats have deteriorated in the United States of America and in Mexico due to ground water depletion and agricultural development. 8 9 has declined seriously in Arizona due to dewatering of streams, groundwater withdrawals, and habitat destruction (Hendrickson and Minckley, 1984).

The condition of the watershed feeding Leslie Creek is of vital importance to the maintenance of flows within the refuge. Currently the use of this area is for cattle grazing and has minor impact on the flow of Leslie Creek. The majority of this watershed is a mesa that lies directly east of Leslie Canyon (see Figure 2) that is comprised of valley fill sediments containing a relatively good supply of groundwater. This groundwater supplies Leslie Creek with base flow water. If this area were developed and groundwater depletion occurred, it is extremely likely that the base flow of Leslie Creek would be severely impacted.

A. Geology Physiographically, the LCW is part of the Mexican Highland section of the Basin and Range province. The basin and range province is characterized by alternating mountain ranges and alluvial valleys and extends from northern Utah and Oregon into the Chihauhaun deserts of Mexico. This type of topography is the result of extensional (pull apart) tension on the western United States. Locally, the Geology of Leslie Canyon consists of deformed Paleozoic sedimentary rocks (including Cambrian quartzites, Devonian Limestones/sandstones/shales, and Permian Limestones) which are intruded by Tertiary age volcanic Rhyolite. The basins of the region are comprised of Tertiary through present highly permeable, alluvial sediments. Leslie Canyon is located in the heart of a small range (Swisshelm Mountains) and dissects the Paleozoic sedimentary strata and Tertiary Rhyolite of the area. Between the Swisshelm Mountain Range (Leslie Canyon) and the eastern Chiricahua range lies a basin that has been active since early Tertiary times (Arizona Bureau of Mines, 1959). This southwestern dipping basin is filled with thick permeable, alluvial sediments and is an excellent aquifer which acts as a catch basin for water that ultimately ends up as base flow in Leslie Creek. Tertiary volcanic events within the Cochise County region are responsible for hydrothermal emplacement of ore deposits which include gold (Cooper, 1959). Gold 10 prospecting and mining has occurred in the region since the late 1800's. Gold prospecting has occurred within the Leslie Creek watershed but no significant deposits have been found thus far. Gold mining within the watershed is a direct threat to the fish of Leslie Creek since miners use mercury and cyanide in extraction procedures both of which are highly toxic to biota and are extremely difficult to remediate.

B. Climate Leslie Canyon lies within a semi arid region and receives a mean annual precipitation of 12.5 inches. The Chiricahua mountains receive a greater annual precipitation due to their higher topography (mean annual=19.96 inches). Data from annual precipitation records of Douglas, AZ (Figure 4) reveal annual precipitation variations from 10 inches to 22 inches with a mean of 14 inches for the years 1965-1989. Precipitation occurs in two distinct seasons of the year, a summer rainy seasons through the months of July, August, and September and a winter rainy seasons from December through March (Figure 5). The precipitation during the summer rainy season is the most dependable and equals or exceeds the precipitation during the remaining year. These summer rains are comprised almost entirely of monsoonal, late afternoon, convective thunderstorms. Less frequently, a tropical storm or Hurricane enters the region from the gulf of Cortez or Gulf of Texas. These storms usually arrive in late summer or early fall and are responsible for large amounts of precipitation. Winter precipitation originates from the southern displacement of cyclonic storm centers originating from the Eastern Pacific. These storms usually follow a jet stream track across mid latitudes but enter Southern Arizona when the jet stream gets deflected southward (Wigel et al., 1976). Temperatures within the watershed ranges from lows in the upper 20's to 30's from November to March and 40's and 50's from April to October. Highs range from the upper 50's and 60's from November to March and in the 70's through 90's from April to October (see Figure 6 for details). There is a diurnal variation of roughly 30 degrees that is consistent throughout the year. Evaporation in Douglas, AZ averages 10.6 feet a year (EarthInfo, 1992a). 11

Figure 4: Annual Precipitation Record (inches per year), Douglas AZ. The mean annual precipitation for the period of record is 12.5 inches. Douglas is the closest weather sation to Leslie Canyon. It sits at 4100 ft. above sea level, 600 feet below Leslie Canyon, and lies 17 miles due south of the Wildlife Refuge. Douglas AZ, Annual Precipitation (inches) 24

20 2

16 a

8 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 13

Figure 5: Daily Precipitation Record of Douglas, AZ for 1983 (wet year), 1973 (thy year) and an average of the period of record (1965-1990). Note that the majority of the precipitation occurs during two periods, February through March and July through October and that the major difference between the wet and the dry year is that the wet year received autumn rains.

2.5

Douglas, Arizona 2 Daily Precipitation (inches)

0.5

Feb Apr May Jn J1 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec / /7/ avg. rainfall • 1983 1973 15

Figure 6: Monthly Average minimum and maximum temperature (F) for Douglas, AZ. Note the diurnal variation of roughly 30 degrees. Since Leslie Canyon NWR is roughly 600 feet above Douglas, its' temperatures are slightly cooler. Monthly Average Min-Max Daily Temp. (F), Douglas, AZ 110

100

20 Ian 15 Feb 15 Mar 15 Apr 15 May 15 June 15 July 15 Aug 15 Sep 15 Oct 15 Nov IS Dec These readings were derived by averaging daily max and min Temp values for 1963-81, 1983-1990 17

C. Geomorphology The Leslie Creek Watershed drains the southwestern slopes of the Chiricahuas, then flows through a broad, flat mesa before entering Leslie Canyon. Above the refuge, Leslie Creek is an intermittent, semi incised, river system. Within the refuge, Leslie Creek is, and has been historically, perennial (see Streamflow Analysis). Below the refuge, the Creek becomes intermittent once again, and loses its' surface discharge to the unconsolidated sediments of the Sulphur Spring Valley fill (Meinzer and Kelton, 1913). The drainage area above the refuge is 79.1 square miles. Within the refuge, Leslie Creek is a Stratiler third order stream (Strahler, 1946). Like most southwestern fluvial systems, Leslie Creek is very flashy. Baseflows on the creek are very low, averaging .57 efs (average of the average median monthly flows; see Figure 12). Flood flows range from 4 to 700 cfs. The base flow of the stream is entirely fed through groundwater from the eastern Tertiary aged basin.

Leslie Creek runs perennial for roughly 3/4 of a mile within Leslie Canyon. The perennial stretch begins below a check dam that is constructed of stone gabions (built by the Civilian Conservation Corp in the 1930's) and continues to just above the road bridge within the refuge (Figure 7). The source of base flow water throughout this stretch is groundwater. Surface water contributions occur only during storm events. The morphology of the perennial stretch can be divided into two distinct stretches: an upper stretch that is characterized by alternating pool and riffle sequences with braided sections, deep pools (1.5 to 6 feet deep), fine substrate materials, and a maintenance of stream flow; and a lower stretch characterized by pool and riffle sequences and braided stretches, shallow pools (.5 to 2 feet deep), coarse substrate materials, and a losing of stream flow (see Appendix 1 for details of geomorphology survey). The best fish habitat occurs in the upper stretch. The Upper Section (from check dam to 2248 river feet) of the perennial section of Leslie Creek alternates between straight and braided stretches. The straight stretches are characterized by mean pool spacings of 66.8 feet (ranging from 40 to 202 feet). There are sand/silt substrate in the pools and pebble/silt substrate in the riffles. The riffle sections within the straight stretches contain a large amount of watercress. The braided 18

Figure 7: Map of the Leslie Canyon NWR. Note the location of the gage and the division of the perennial stretch into an upper stretch (US on map), characterized by maintenance of flow and a fine grained substrate, and a lower stretch (IS), characterized by a loosing of flow and a coarse grained substrate. The division between the two stretches occurs where an arroyo enters from the south (labeled "ARROYO" on map). The perrenial stretch is approximately .65 river miles long. M.71171 /MACKWAVEMINSSNIak." 20 stretches irregularly alternate with the straight sections, and contain pebble/sand/silt substrate with large amounts of watercress (see Figure 8). The braided stretches are characterized by shallow riffles braiding into 2-5 channels and deeper pools (.5-1.5 feet) occurring intermittently between the riffles. The upper section maintains instream flow and may even be a gaining reach. The densest.riparian vegatation occurs in this stretch as well as the best fish habitat. At the very end of the upper section, an arroyo enters from the south and dramatically alters the morphology and behavior of the stream. The arroyo on the south side of the stream enters Leslie Creek at 2248' below the check dam and marks the beginning of the Lower Section (2248-3364 river feet, see Figure 4). This arroyo is intermittent and discharges very coarse bedload material into Leslie Creek. This bedload change abruptly alters the morphology of Leslie Creek from a deep pool and riffle/braided stream to a very straight and shallow pool and riffle stream, with occasional shallow braiding. The morphology of the stream within the Lower Section consists of shallow pool and riffle sequences with a mean pool spacing of 38 feet. Substrate in the riffles consists of cobble/pebble/sand size particles, and in the pool consists of sand/cobble/pebble/silt particles. The substrate is coarsest just below the arroyo entrance and decreases in size downstream. The cobble sized particles are poorly rounded, suggesting that they are derived from very local sources. Coupled with the bedload size increase is a sharp streamflow loss that eventually (at 3364 river feet, 6/18/92) leads to an intermittent of flow in Leslie Creek. Streamflow loss may be due to; 1) the increased conductivity of the substrate, causing an increase in subsurface flow; 2) local structural geology that juxtaposes porous limestone abruptly against impermeable crystalline rocks, or 3) a combination of these two. Below the perennial stretch, the creek bed contains a coarse, sub rounded substrate. The creek channel remains confmed for roughly 1 mile below the end of the perennial stretch. Below this confined section, the creek leaves the restriction of the canyon (caused by the bisecting of the Swisshelm Mountains), and enters the Sulfur Springs Valley where it splays out and eventually loses a distinct channel. 21

Figure 8: Photograph of a riffle in the upper section of the Perrenial stretch of Leslie Creek taken during the winter. The riparian plants in this stretch are dense and healthy.

III. Resources

Valuable resources within the LCNVVR include endangered and native fish, riparian wildlife, and desert wildlife. Each of these resources is completely dependent upon Leslie Creek for baseflow water as well as flushing flows.

A. Endangered and Native Fish The native fish of Leslie Creek are adapted to the semi arid and desert hydrology/climate of the Southwestern North America. Native fish within the refuge include the Yaqui Topminnow, Yaqui Chub, and the Longfin Dace. Of these, the Yaqui Topminnow and Yaqui Chub are listed as nationally endangered species. These fish were introduced from Astin Spring into Leslie Creek in 1969 by Minckley in order to insure their survival (Minckley, 1973). Leslie Creek is condisered historic habitat for these Yaqui Fishes (Kevin Cobble, 1992b). The following is a summary of what is known about the historic and modern range, habitat preferences and population of each of these fishes. Unless otherwise noted, the following information is obtained from the Atlas of • North American Freshwater Fishes edited by Lee et al. (1980).

Yaqui Topminnow (Listed Nationally Endangered, March 11, 1967, see Figure 9): Scientific Name: Poeciliopsis occidentalis sonoriensis Family: Poeciliidae Size: Females no more than 50mm, males no more than 30mm Biology: Feeds on detritus, algae, and aquatic invertebrates. Prolonged spring and summer reproduction influenced by predation (which increases brood size) and nutrition (reproduction drops in food limited populations). Introduced mosquito fish (Gambusia affinis) typically replace this species when they come into contact (Minckley et al., 1977).

Habitat: Lowland and some upland streams and cienegas of deserts and grasslands environments of the Yaqui drainage of Southeast Arizona and Sonora, Mexico. Inhabits the shallow waters of streams and the upper waters in deeper pools.

Range: At the time of listing, the Yaqui Topminnow was found within the U.S. only at the San Bernardino Ranch, Cochise County AZ. In 1969 it was introduced into Leslie Creek from Astin Spring (now intermittent due to agricultural development) and has flourished. The Yaqui Topminnow is currently found in two places within the U.S., San Bernardino NWR and Leslie Canyon NWR, and in limited places within the Yaqui drainage of Mexico. Historically, the Fish was very widespread and dominated all cienega habitats of the Yaqui drainage (Minckley, 1985).

Stream Flow Requirements: The Yaqui Topminnow can survive in warm, shallow waters. It requires a minimal stream flow (Schoenherr, 1974).

Yaqui Chub (Listed Nationally Endangered August 31, 1984, see Figure 10):

Scientific Name: Gila putpurae Family: Cyprinithe, minnow family. Size: Rarely exceeds 100 mm. Biology: Foods consist of algae, terrestrial insects, and arachnids in springheads habitats, but aquatic insects and small fishes are eaten when available. Spawns in March and young grow to 40-50 mm by beginning of year. Males are stealy blue during most of the year. Females are drab, yellow brown most of the year.

Habitat: Smaller streams of Rios Matape, Sonora, and Yaqui drainages of Sonora Mexico and southeast Arizona. Lives in deeper pools of small streams near undercut banks or debris, and often in association with higher aquatic plants.

Range: At the time of listing the only locations of the fish in the U.S.A. were the Leslie Canyon NWR and the San Bernardino NWR. The Yaqui Chub was introduced to Leslie Canyon in 1969 from Astin Spring. A population of Yaqui Chub were introduced into Turkey Creek (Chiricahua Mountains) and appears to be surviving (Cobble, 1992b).

Stream Flow Requirements: Stream habitat ranges from isolated pools to faster ripples. The Yaqui Chub requires deeper pools with at least some minimal velocity (Hendrickson et al., 1980). Studies of the chub in the Rio Sonora Basin showed that the Fish only resides in perennial stretches and requires a permanence of surface discharge (Hendrickson et al., 1980; 25

Minckley, 1985).

Longfin Dace (Yaqui form):

Scientific Name: Agosia chrysogaster (?) Family: Cyprinidae Size: Rarely exceeds 100 mm. Biology: Feeds on algae, aquatic insects, and detritus, and plays role of opportunistic omnivore in desert stream habitats. Spawns throughout year in saucer-shaped depressions in fine sand. Young hatch in less than four days in summer.

Habitat: Streams of desert and grassland, through chaparral and into lower montane forests, generally below 2000 m in elevation. Found in shallow runs over sand bottom and in eddys and shallow pools near overhanging banks or other cover. Typically in moderate current; rarely in backwaters or deep pools.

Range: The Longfin dace is common in Gila and Yaqui drainage. Recent investigations by the Arizona Game and Fish suggest that the Yaqui Longfm Dace is distinct from the Gila Longfin Dace.

Stream Flow Requirements: The Longfin Dace requires a minimal stream flow velocity for survival (Fischer et al., 1981).

Additionally, it has been reported that the Mexican Stoner°ller (Campostoma ornatum) has inhabited Leslie Creek in the past and may be part of the current fish inhabitants (Cobble, 1992b). This fish is currently a category 2 for Federal Listing as endangered. The Mexican Stoneroller is located within the Rio Grande and Chihuahua drainages and is found within the U.S. at a few locations within the Big Bend Region (Texas) and within the Yaqui drainages (Leslie Creek and Black Draw). This fish inhabits the clear, fast, coarse grained riffles of streams and is known for making nests in the substrate by rolling pebbles and sand. Since Leslie Creek is a pristine desert creek environment, it is a likely site for the reintroduction of other threatened and endangered Yaqui Fishes including the beautiful shiner (nationally listed as threatened), Yaqui catfish (nationally endangered), Yaqui Sucker (candidate for listing as endangered), and the previously mentioned Mexican Stoner°ller. Few suitable sites presently exist in U.S .where these fish could be recovered 26

Figure 9: Illustration and range of the Yaqui Toprninnow. N cv 28

Figure 10: Illustration and range of the Yaqui Chub. 29 30 in a natural environment. The majority of the original habitats, including cienegas and creeks, have dried up within the past 30 years. Astin Spring, the source of the broad stock for the majority of the SE Arizona Yaqui Fishes, went dry in 1967. Whitewater Creek, the major Yaqui drainage in U.S., has been drained for agriculture and now is dry 80% of the time (EarthInfo, 1992b). The Yaqui Fishes Recovery Plan (Cobble, 1992a) recognizes Leslie Creek as being one of three possible reintroduction sites for Yaqui Fishes within the U.S.A., including Black Draw and Turkey Creek (which is currently populated by non native trout and bass).

In addition to depletion of water resources caused by agricultural/municipal development, the sustainability of the Yaqui Fish is threatened by the introduction of non native fish, mining waste, and excessive sediment loading caused by overgrazing and forestry. Within the Leslie Creek drainage all three of these threats are of concern. Kevin Cobble, refuge manager, has recently reported finding sunfish within the creek. Mine tailings, as discussed within the geology overview, are a threat to the Leslie Canyon watershed since gold miner's often use cyanide and mercury for extraction processes. Sediment loading would be a problem if the ranches above the refuge started grazing heavily or if the Forest Service land within the eastern part of the watershed was excessively harvested.

B. Riparian Habitat and Surrounding Ecosystems The riparian corridor within Leslie Canyon averages 20 to 30 yards wide and lines the creek bed for approximately two miles. The riparian is densest along the perennial stretch (approx. to .75 miles below checkdam) and thins out as the creek runs west. Velvet ash, Goodding Willow, Arizona Walnut, and Fremont Cottonwood dominate the deciduous riparian woodland. These deciduous trees lie within the current flood plain and up on a terrace (abandoned floodplain) that sits 1-2 meters above the modern creek level. A dense understory of mimosa, net-leaf hackberry, wild grape, acacia, salt brush, and seepwillow lines the floor of the corridor within the canyon (ANC, 1985). This understory is densest along the perennial stretch. The desert ecosystem surrounding the creek within the refuge consists of a mixed 31 shrub-grass community with Chihuahuan affinities. The dominant shrubs include mesquite, ocotillo, mimosa, little-leaf sumac, cane chollo, and snakeweed. The grasses consist primarily of grama species including side-oats, spruce-top, tree-awn, dropseed, fluff, and rothrock grama. The mesa to the east of the canyon consists of an open grassland and oak savannah (ANC, 1985) . The condition of the riparian habitat within the Leslie Creek corridor is excellent. Prior to purchase of the land by the nature conservancy, the land was part of the larger 99 Bar Ranch. It is reported that the ranch did not graze within the canyon, accounting for its pristine condition. Evidence for a healthy riparian, in this case, include the dense understory of herbaceous plants, vigorously reproducing deciduous trees, and abundant seedlings of cottonwood and willow. In the early 1980's John Browning, a botanist from New Mexico, inspected roughly 200 stands of riparian woodland in the Southwest and felt that Leslie Canyon was in nearly the best condition of all these sites (ANC, 1985).

C. Desert Wildlife The diverse and unique fauna of the Leslie Creek watershed are dependent upon the riparian corridor for survival. The following is a check list of known fauna within the watershed (Cobble, 1992b). Mammals of the watershed include white-tailed deer, coati mundi, cougar, mule, javelina, kangaroo rats, woodrats, jackrabbits, cottontails, coyote, bobcat, and possibly the endangered lesser long-nosed bat. Raptors include golden eagle, great horned owl, redtail hawks, Swainson hawks, turkey vultures, Harris hawks, and kestrals. Neotropical birds include the yellow-billed cuckoo, blue grosbeaks, cardinals, summer tanagers, and the vermillion fly catcher. Birds include gila woodpeckers, northern beardless tyrannulet, black phoebe, and mockingbirds. Amphibians including possibly a new species of Leopord Frog, and desert toads. Reptiles include mexican garter snake (candidate species for National Endangered Species Listing), common garter snakes, western diamondback, black tailed rattlesnake, red racer snakes (coach wip), Gila Monsters, and an array of lizards. An incredible diversity of insects resides on the refuge, most of which have yet to be studied and identified. Maintaining a base flow within Leslie Creek is essential for the survival of the surrounding ecosystems. 32

IV. Beneficial Use Statement

Maintaining in stream flow within Leslie Creek serves the following beneficial uses; 1) preserving critical habitat for endangered Yaqui Fishes, 2) maintaining a hydrologic-riparian system that the surrounding desert ecosystems/wildlife are reliant upon, 3) preserving a scenic and unique wilderness that is easily accessible to tourists and provides enjoyment for both local people and visitors. In order to accomplish these goals it is necessary to insure base flow rights for Leslie Creek year round.

V. Hydrologic Data Collection Technique

• Fluvial hydrologic data for this in-stream flow application was derived from daily mean flow records for Leslie Creek from U.S.G.S. gage #09537200 (taken from Earthinfo, 1992b). For the sake of this study, it is very fortunate that a gage exists on Leslie Creek in the middle of the Wildlife Refuge and has been in operation for a total of 15 years (1970 through 1977 and 1983 through present). This gage is located 1576 river feet downstream from the check dam (see Figure 4) within the upper section of the perennial stretch. The daily mean records from this gage are the basis of all analysis for determining the instream flow needs for the endangered Yaqui Fishes. The assumption is made that is since the Fishes are surviving well under the current conditions, these conditions should provide the baseline for instream flow requirements. As will become self evident from the following analysis, any flows less than these would result in the seasonal intermittency of flow within the current perennial stretch, and a loss of fish habitat. The gage consists of a data collection platform (DCP) equipped with a digital continuous water-stage recorder and an integral float-tape gage (installed Feb. 23, 1988). Prior to the installation of the DCP, the Leslie Creek gage was an hourly reading staff gage recorder. The control structure for the stage is a concrete shallow sharp-crested v- 33

notch weir. This control structure allows for very accurate measurements of low flows within the creek. Higher discharges that flow above the weir are calculated based on a set of cross sections from the creek and are less accurate than the low flow weir based measurements. Included in Appendix 2 is a diagram of the cross sections used by the USGS for the flow calibration, a stage-flow curve based on baseflow and flood studies, and a photograph of the gage. The records from the gage were analyzed to determine the instream flow requirements for the Yaqui Fishes. This data are presented in water years (ie. water year 1970= Oct. 1, 1969- Sep. 30, 1970). Streamflow analysis is graphically presented and consists of the following 4 Figures. Full explanations of how to read each graph is presented in each figure caption. Figure 11a, 11b: Average Daily Discharge records for Leslie Creek. ha represents the high flows of the period of record (0-800 cubic feet per second: cfs). lib represents the low flows of the period of record (0-5 cfs).

Figure 12: Mean of the Median Monthly flows for the period of record.

Figure 13: Median Monthly Flows, period of record

Figure 14: Flow Duration Curve for the period of record. 34

Figure 11a,b: Daily Mean Discharge Record, Leslie Creek in Leslie Canyon; high flows (a) and low flows (b). The y-axis represents discharge in cubic feet per second (cfs) and the x-axis represents time in daily increments. These graphs shows the flashy nature of Leslie Creek. The base flow of the stream is at a maximum 2 cfs (b), where storm events create discharges up to 750 cfs (a). Leslie Creek in Leslie Canyon, NWR USGS Gague 1109537200 800

700

600

■••••■ a 500 p 400 .4 300

200

100

I. .Missina Data .1 AII I I. . 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Water Year (ie. 1970= Oct. 1969- Sep. 30 1970)

Missing Data

1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Water Year 36

Figure 12: Mean of the median monthly flows (taken from USGS average daily discharge records) for Leslie Creek, 1970-1977, 1982-1989. These monthly values are the basis of our In Stream Flow Request. Median values are used as a value for the base flow of the stream since storm events make mean values above what the stream is actually flowing on average. Leslie Creek In Leslie Canyon NWR Monthy Flows: mean of the mean vs. mean of the median 1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 38

Figure 13: Median monthly flows for the period of record. Leslie Creek in Leslie Canyon Median monthly flows for period of record 3

2.5

0.5 Missing Data At 0 h iiii m”I 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 40

Figure 14: Daily mean flow duration curve for the period of record at Leslie Creek. This graph is a semi log since the y-axis is in a logarithmic scale. The data is presented this way in order to accentuate the low flow values. The y-axis represents flow values (cfs). The x-axis represents the percent of time a certain flow value was equaled or exceeded. For instance, .7 cfs was equaled or exceeded in the channel 50% of the days of the period of record. The important components of this graph are the storm events (Toughly 4% of the time), base flow (roughly 96% of the time), and zero flows (5% of the time; a component of base flow). 10 Daily Mean Flow Duration Curve Leslie Creek in Leslie Canyon A ------197049771 1q82-74989 SP Plow orm Events low"

0.001 , , I , I I , I , 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percent of Time Q was Equaled or Exceeded 42

VI. Streamflow Analysis

This report is primarily concerned with maintaining the base flow of Leslie Creek within the perennial stretch. Base flow is defined as the water within the stream channel that originates from groundwater (Dunn and Leopold, 1978). Thus, all water that enters the stream as a result of storm events, called "overland flow", is not considered as being a part of the stream's baseflow. We are primarily concerned with the baseflow of Leslie Creek since this is the component of stream flow that is more predictable and regular through time. One cannot predict nor count on flow contributions by storm events. In Leslie Creek, overland flow occurs during both summer storm events and more extensive winter rains. During these times, the flow of the creek has ranged from 4 to 720 cfs (see Figure 11, 14). Within the Leslie Creek system, these events typically raise the flow of the stream for 12 hours to, at most, 4 days, depending on the duration of the storm. The typical shape of these storm events is a sharp ascending limb and a more gradual descending limb. Overland flow is an essential part of the Leslie Creek hydro- ecosystem for it provides flushing flows to the riparian system. It has been shown that flushing flows are an essential component of maintaining healthy riparian corridors for they sweep salts out of the system and contribute a fresh supply of nutrients. These higher velocity flows are also an important feature of channel forming processes for they scour pools and set pool and riffle spacing (Wolman et al., 1960). Since we are concerned with maintaining a minimum baseflow, further analysis of the overland flow is interesting but irrelevant. In order to determine the baseflow instream requirements for Leslie Creek, a mean of the median monthly flow analysis was executed on the period record from 1970- 1977 and 1983-4990 (Figure 12). For the Leslie Creek system median monthly flows are the best statistical indicator of base flow since mean monthly flows are skewed by flood events. Median values represent the middle value of a list, and so short lived high flow values (storm events) are discarded as are lower flows. Though the lower flows of the record represent baseflow, they are discarded in order to characterize the average base flow. The mean of the median monthly flow is used to derive an average base flow for a given month from the period of record. 43

The USGS stream flow record within Leslie Creek spans a total of 15 years. Median monthly flow values for this period (Figure 13) show that the variation of baseflow within Leslie Creek is significant. The flow duration curve for the stream reveals that 5% of the daily mean flows for the period were 0 (Figure 14). The majority of these flows occurred during a drought from 1976-1977 (see Figure 11, 13). The highest monthly median base flow for the period of record was 2.5 cfs. The average monthly median flow for the period of record is .57 cfs. The mean of the median monthly flow values for the period of record of Leslie Creek range from a minimum of .34 cfs (July) to a maximum of .81 cfs (November). These values are presented in our final section, In Stream Flow Request. In order to properly characterize seasonal variation, monthly values are used as the basis for our request. As one can see, these values are not excessive and represent what the USFWS believes is the minimal flow requirement that will insure the well being of the Yaqui Fishes. Flows less than these will result in no velocity zones within the creek. As discussed in the Resources section, flow is an important component of the Yaqui Fishes habitat. In particular, the Yaqui Chub and the Mexican Stoneroller (if introduced) rely on flows as critical aspects of habitat. If the flow rights were less than those requested, impacts would pose a serious threat to the health of the Yaqui Fishes and to the appearance and maintenance of this rare and unique wildlife ecosystem.

VII. Possible Impacts on the Leslie Creek Hydrosytem

The Leslie Creek Hydrosystem is defined for this report as the entire basin area (see Figure 2) feeding into the perennial and non perennial stretch within the Wildlife Refuge. Any groundwater or surface water depletions within this area will have a direct impact on the base flow of Leslie Creek. It is especially important to recognize the significance of the basin feeding into the wildlife refuge. Though Leslie Creek in this basin is intermittent, sub surface water in this basin supplies the crucial groundwater inflow for the perennial stretch of Leslie Creek. Any excessive development and/or 44

groundwater pumping in this area would pose a significant threat to LCNWR. Presently this basin is owned by two ranches (99 Bar, Bar Boot) that appear to have little or no effect on the base flow of the Creek. Any additional groundwater depletions within the defined region would impact the Leslie Canyon National Wildlife Refuge. In 1976, the Arizona Department of Game and Fish (Wigal and Olding, 1976) proposed building a reservoir in the basin feeding the perennial stretch of Leslie Creek. Though this project appears not to be under consideration at present, any reservoir project would be devastating to the Leslie Creek hydro-ecosystem. If such a project is placed under consideration again, this In Stream Flow Request would have to be amended to request additional rights for flushing flows. This request would be based on a statistical analysis of the volume and frequency of overland flow events read at the USGS gage within the LCNWR. The records indicate that the monthly in stream flow rights requested are available under normal conditions. Deviations, both drought and wet years, will naturally occur from these requested mean of the median monthly values. Drought conditions cannot be avoided and should have minimal impact on the survival of the Fishes if they are not long lasting. Nothing can be done to prevent a drought or maintain requested in stream flow during these times, however anthropogenic depletions on the system during these times will have a severe impact on the Leslie Creek ecosystems. 45

VIII. In Stream Flow Request

Leslie Creek in Leslie Canyon is a flashy, desert fluvial system. Though storm events create very large flow events, the base flow of the stream is very low. The Yaqui Fishes and surrounding ecosystem rely on the base flow for survival. In order to gaurd against anthropogenic depletion of base flow, the USFWS is requesting the following in stream flow rights for Leslie Creek within Leslie Canyon National Wildlife Refuge:

Discharge (cis) Acre Feet/month January .62 38.3 February .54 33.0 March .53 32.6 April .52 32.2 May .45 27.5 June .35 21.8 July .34 21.0 August .59 36.4 September .63 38.7 October .74 45.3 November .81 49.9 December .70 43.3 Acre Feet/year= 419.9 46

References

Arizona Bureau of Mines, 1959, Geologic Map of Cochise County, AZ. available through the Arizona Bureau of Mines, Tuscon AZ

Arizona Nature Conservancy (ANC), 1985, Arizona Preserve Design Package. Arizona Nature Conservancy, Tuscon, AZ

Cobble, Kevin, 1992a (in draught), Yaqui Fishes Recovery Plan. USFWS- Endangered Species, ABQ, NM

Cobble, Kevin, 1992b, personal communication. Refuge Manager, San Bernardino and Leslie Canyon National WildlifeRefuges, USFWS, Douglas AZ

Cooper, J.R., 1959. Reconnaissance Geologic Map of Southeastern Cochise County, AZ. Mineral Investigations Field Studies Map- MF .213, USGS, Washington, D.C.

Dunn, T., and Leopold, L., 1978, Water in Environmental Planning. W.H. Freeman and Co., NY,NY

EarthInfo, 1992a, Summary of the Day (climate) CD ROM package. Boulder, CO

EarthInfo, 1992b, USGS Daily Values CD ROM package. Boulder, CO

Fischer, S. G. , Busch, D.E. , and Grimm, N.B. , 1981, Diel Feeding. Chronologies in two Sonoran Desert Stream Fishes, Agosia chrysogaster, and Pantosteus clarld. SW Naturalist, 26: 31-36

Hendrickson, D.A. ,Mincldey, W.L.,Miller,R.R., Siebert, D.J., and Minckley, P.H., 1980, Fishes of the Rio Yaqui basin, Mexico and United States. Journal of the Arizona-Nevada Academy of Sciences, 15: 65-196

Hendrickson, D.A., and Minckley, W.L., 1984, Cienegas- Vanishing Climax Communities of the American Southwest. Desert Plants, 6: 131-175

Lee, D.S., Gilbert, C.R., Hocutt, C.H., Jenkins, R.E., McAllister, D.E., and Stauffer Jr., J.R., 1980, Atlas of North American Freshwater Fishes. North Carolina Biological Survey, Publication #1980-12

Meinzer, 0.E., and Kelton, F.C.,1913, Geology and Water Resources of the Sulfur Springs Valley, AZ. USGS Water Supply Papers, 320:9-213

Minckley, W.L.,and Brooks, J.E., 1986, Transplantations of Native Arizona Fishes.: Records through 1980. Journal of Arizona- Nevada Academy of Science, #20: 73-89 47

Minckley, W.L., Riffle, J.N., and Johnson, J.E., 1977, Status of the Gila Topminnow and its co-occurence with mosquitofish. U.S.D.A.Forest Service Re. Pap. RM-198: 1-8

Minckley, W.L.,1985, Native Fishes and Natural Aquatic Habitats in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 2 west of the Continental Divide. Endangered Species Division, USFWS Region -2, ABQ,NM

Minckley, W.L.,1973, Fishes of Arizona. Arizona Game and Fish Dept., Phoenix, AZ

Schoenher, 1977, Density Dependent and Density Independent Regulation of Reproduction in the Gila Topminnow, Poeciliopsis occidentalis (Baird and Girard). Ecology, #58: 438-444

Smith, E.L.,and Bender, G.L.,1974, Leslie Canyon. Arizona Academy of Sciences Proposed Natural Areas Report, 66: p 10

Strahler, A.N.,1946, Geomorphic Terminology and Classification of Land Masses. Journal of Geology, #54: 32-42

Wolman, M.G., and Miller,J.P., 1960, Magnitude and Frequency, of forces in Geomorphic Processes. Journal of Geology: 68, 54-74

Wigal, D.D., and Olding, R.J., 1976, Environmental Assesment of the proposed Leslie Canyon Lake. Arizona Game and Fish Department 48

AJIDIEDIENDIUK nrni© 49

Leslie Creek in Leslie Canyon Stream Morphology Description

Geomorphology Overview: Leslie Creek runs perennial for roughly 3/4 of a mile within Leslie Canyon. The perennial stretch begins below a check dam that is constructed of stone gabbions and continues to just above the road bridge within the refuge (see Figure ). The source of base flow water throughout this stretch is groundwater and surface water contributions occur only during storm events. The morphology of the perennial stretch can be divided into two distinct stretches: an upper stretch that is characterized by pool and riffle sequences and braided stretches, deep pools (1.5 to 6 feet deep), finer substrate materials, and a maintenance of stream flow; and a lower stretch characterized by pool and riffle sequences and braided stretches, shallow pools (.5 to 2 feet deep), coarse substrate, and a loosing of stream flow.

Upper Section: (0-2248') The Upper Section of the perennial section of Leslie Creek alternates between straight and braided stretches. The straight stretches are characterized by pool spacings of 66.8 feet (ranging from 40 to 202 feet) and have a sand/silt substrate in the pools and a pebble/silt substrate in the riffles. The riffle sections within the straight stretches contain a large amount of watercress (see Photo). The braided stretches alternate with the straight sections irregularly, contain a pebble/sand/silt substrate, and contain a large amount of watercress. The braided stretches are characterized by shallow riffles braiding into 2-5 channels and deeper pools (.5-1.5 feet) occurring intermittently amongst the riffles.

The upper section maintains instream flow and may even be a gaining reach. The densest riparian occurs in this stretch as well as the best fish habitat. At the very end of the upper section, an arroyo enters from the south and dramatically alters the morphology and behavior of the stream.

Stream Description Feet

0 feet Check Dam 0-15' Deep pool , 4.5' deep, watercress 15-65' Riffle 65-115' Pool, 3' deep 115-132' Riffle 50

132-168 Pool, 2' deep 168-177' Riffle 177-202' Pool, 1.5' deep 202-302' Braided, shallow braids with lots of water cress 302-347' Riffle, confined 347-377' Pool, 1.5' deep 377-425' Braided 425-443' Pool 443-553' Pool and riffle sequence, Straight 553-606' Braided 606-736' Pool and riffle sequence, Straight 736-811' Meandering, pool and riffle, some braiding 811-1211' Very Dense Riparian, pool and riffle, some braiding?, difficult access 1211-1273' Pool, 5.5' deep, outcrop on North side of creek 1273-1314' Riffle 1314-1576' Pool, 4' deep, gage pool, cement wall and v-notch weir at end, straight 1576-1641' Riffle 1641-1691' Pool, 2.5' deep 1691-1716' Riffle 1716-1891' Pool, 1.5-2' deep, pinches out at 100', outcrop on south 1891-1916' Riffle 1916-1956' Pool 1956-2091' Braided 2091-2166' Pool 2166-2366' Braided, two distinct channels, some big pools 2366-2248' Pool, 3' deep, wide

Lower Section: (2248-3364') An arroyo enters on South side of stream at 2248' (see Map ). This arroyo is intermittent and discharges very coarse bedload material into Leslie Creek. This bedload change abruptly alters the morphology of Leslie Creek from a deep pool and riffle/braided stream to a very straight and shallow pool and riffle stream, with occasional shallow braiding. The morphology of the stream within the Lower Section consists of shallow pool and riffle sequences with a mean pool spacing of 38 feet. Substrate in the riffles consists of cobble/pebble/sand size particles, and in the pool consists of sand/cobble/pebble/silt particles. The substrate is coarsest just below the arroyo entrance and decreases downstream. The cobble sized particles are poorly rounded, suggesting that they are derived from very local sources. 51

Coupled with the bedload increase is a sharp streamflow loss that eventually (at 3364') leads to the intermittency of flow in Leslie Creek. Streamflow loss may be due to; 1) the increased conductivity of the substrate, causing an increase in subsurface flow; 2) local structural geology that juxtaposes porous limestone abruptly against impermeable crystalize rocks, or 3) a combination of these two.

2248-2323' Riffle 2323-2345' Pool, .5' deep, Straight 2345-2355' Riffle 2355-2372' Pool, .5' deep 2372-2384' Riffle 2384-2404' Pool, .5' deep 2404-2419' Riffle 2419-2467' Pool, l' deep 2467-2484' Riffle, watercress filled 2484-2511' Pool, l' deep 2511-2526' Riffle 2526-2539' Pool, l' deep 2539-2646' Braided, shallow channels, two distinct channels 2646-2666' Riffle 2666-2746' Pool, l' deep, very straight 2746-2786' Riffle 2786-2799' Pool, l' deep 2799-2809' Riffle 2809-2866' Pool, 2' deep, outcrop on North side 2866-2936' Riffle, almost braided 2936-2958' Pool, l' deep 2958-2975' Riffle 2975-3005' Pool, .25' deep, boulder substrate 3005-3100' Riffle, very straight 3100-3243' Pool, very shallow and straight 3243-3270' Riffle 3270-3307' Pool, shallow, straight 3307-3324' Riffle, shallow 3324-3364' Pool, stagnant, all water lost to groundwater by the end of this pool 52

AIFFEHIEDIa III UMB afforatnttilem 53

USGS Gage Information

This section contains the following information about the USGS stream gage within Leslie Creek: 1) a closeup photograph of the gage, 2) a photograph taken down stream of the gage, 3) USGS station description, 4) stage-flow curves, 5) USGS stage-flow data, 6) USGS data about a flood on October 2, 1983. The flood data contains cross sections that are a bit vague as to location. It was felt that it was still useful to include this data. Additional inquiries about the gage should be addressed to; USGS, AZ District Office, Water Resources Division, 375 South Euclid Ave., Tucson, AZ, 85719, (602)-670-6671. .Al+kkWill I 55

09537200 LESLIE CREEK NEAR McNEAL, ARIZONA STATION DESCRIPTION

0 1 Location.--Lat 31 3525 t, long 109°30'30", in SE 1/4, NE 1/4 sec. 20, T 21 S, R 28 E, on right bank 12 miles east of town of McNeal, Arizona and site of Lewis Monument.

Drainage Area.--79.1 mi2 (measured October 1969 on the Swisshelm Mt., 15 and Pedregosa Mt. topographic maps).

Establishment.--Oct. 1, 1969 (effective date, continuous recorder installed 10-16-69) by U.S. Geological Survey. Discontinued end of WY 1977, but reactivated June 15, 1982, with cooperation of Arizona Department Water Resources.

Gage.--A data collection platform and a digital continuous water-stage recorder, equipped with integral float-tape gage, are housed in a metal half shelter, mounted on a 24-in corrugated metal pipe stilling well 12 ft high. Inside staff gage of standard enamel sections reads from 0 ft near bottom of well to 10.14 ft gage height. Gage details: gage height of shelter floor, 12.25 ft; gage height of walkway 4 ft from front of shelter, 8.80 ft.

History.--No previous records near this site.

Reference Marks. --RN No. 1, elevation 8.41 ft gage datum, (levels of 10- 13-69), is black paint on rock outcrop about 65 ft southeast from gage, RN No. 2, elevation 3.71 ft gage datum (levels of 5-12-70), is black paint on concrete right side of control, 10.4 ft right of aluminum T beam. RN No. 3, elevation 3.31 ft gage datum, is standard brass marker 3.4 ft right of aluminum T beam. Zero gage datum is 4,620 ft above mean sea level (from topographic map). RN No. 4, elevation 2.256 ft (9/22/89) is a chiseled "x" painted oragne LS. 30 ft from Alt-beam. RN No. 5, elevation 5.986 ft (9/22/89) high point on face of rock outcrop 1 ft above ground 45 ft upstream of gage.

Channel and Control.--Channel is straight 150 ft upstream and 100 ft downstream from gage. The left bank is sloping dirt lined with trees upstream from control and steep dirt bank lined with trees downstream and the right bank is steep dirt and rock lined with trees upstream from control and gentle sloping almost bare dirt and gravel. The streambed is composed of sand, gravel, and rock. The low, medium and high water control is a low concrete dam with 2, 8-inch high aluminum T beams bolted to the top. A low flow notch 4 ft wide and 7 inches deep (150 angle) is cut in the center of the right 22 ft long beam, that has a slight slope from both ends to the center. The left 11 ft long beam is almost level. High flows may be obstructed by evenly spaced, fairly mature trees in channel, starting about 150 ft downstream. 56

Discharge Measurements.--Made by wading 100 ft below gage well. Wade below gage height of ft. High-water measurements made from truss bridge 1,000 ft below the gage. A tributary comes into main channel 600 ft below gage. No equipment is stored at the site.

Indirect Measurement Site.--Starts at gage and extends about 400 ft downstream just below bend in channel.

Floods.--4,600 fts, July 21, 1984.

Point of Zero Flow.--2.84 ft (by level of 9-22-89)

Winter Flow.--May be affected by ice. Regulation.--

Diversions.--

Accuracy.--Good

Land Ownership.--private

Cooperation.--Arizona State Game and Fish Department. Classification.--

Justification.--

Sketch and Photographs.--

132Adaag.--See file.

Prepared by: S. C. Jones, 11/80 Updated by: G. L. Pope, 2/90

2 57

STATION HISTORY

09537200 Leslie Creek near McNeal, Az

Date Report

1970 Established Cage Oct 1, 1969.

Oct 15 Installed Fischer/Porter ADR water stage recorder.

1971-1974 No changes.

1975

Aug 27 Installed outside staff gage.

1976 No changes.

1977 Station discontinued Sept. 30, but shelter and control remain.

1982 Station reactivated June 15, 1982; levels ran.

1983 No changes.

1984

June 2 V-notch altered slightly, raised PZF about 0.2 ft.

1985 No changes.

1986 No changes.

1987 No changes.'

1988

Feb. 23 Installed Data Collection Platform

1989

Sept. 22 Levels run from RM-3 to check gage datum.

1990 No changes.

1991

Oct. 26 Removed plate fastened across weir notch. USGS Gage Stage-Flow Curve, Leslie Creek Gage # 09537200

1500 Discharge (c(s)

Low Flows

0 1 2 4 5 Discharge (cfs) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR - GEOLOGICAL SURVEY - WATER RESOURCES DIVISION PAGE 1 EXPANDED RATING TABLE TYPE: LOG 59 09537200 DATE PROCESSED: 12-20-1990 2 14:43 BY ONUFKES LESLIE CREEK NEAR MCNEAL, ARIZ. DD: 3 TYPE: 001 RATING NO: 0006 OFFSET: .00 BREAK,OFFSET: (4.20,4.00) START DATE/TIME: 10-01-83 (0015) BAF ON DISCHARGE MEASUREMENTS, NOS AND , AND IS WELL DEFINED BETCJEEN AND CFS COMP BY DATE CHK. BY DATE

GAGE DIFF IN 0 HEIGHT DISCHARGE IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (EXPANDED PRECISION) PER (FEET) .00 .01 .02 .03 .04 .05 .06 .07 .os .09 TENTH FT 2.80 .000* .015 .030 .045 .060 .150 2.90 .075 .090 .105 .120 .135 .150 .165 .18o .195 .210 .150 - 3.00 .225 .240 .255 .276 .285 , .300* .332 .368 .408 .452 .275 3.10 .500* .537 .577 .619 .665 .714 .766 .822 .881 .945 .513 3.20 1.013 1.086 1.164 1.247 1.336 1.431 1.532 1.640 1.755 1.878 .996 3.30 2.009 2.149 2.298 2.457 2.627 2.808 3.000* 3.143 3.293 3.450 1.604 3.40 3.613 3.784 3.962 4.148 4.342 4.545 4.756 4.977 5.207 5.447 2.085 3.50 5.698 5.959 6.232 6.516 6.812 7.121 7.442 7.778 8.127 8.492 3.173 3.60 8.871 9.266 9.678 10.11 10.55 11.02 11.50 12.01 12.53 13.08 4.769 3.70 13.64 14.24 14.85 15.49 16.16 16.85 17.57 18.32 19.10 19.91 7.110 3.80 20.75 21.62 22.53 23.48 24.46 25.48 26.54 27.64 28.78 29.97 10.46 3.90 31.21 32.49 33.82 35.20 36.63 38.12 39.67 41.27 42.94 44.66 15.24 4.00 46.45 48.31 50.24 52.24 54.32 56.47 58.70 61.01 63.41 65.90 22.03 4.10 68.48 71.15 73.92 76.79 79.76 82.84 86.04 89.35 92.77 96.32 31.52 4.20 100.0* 106.0 112.1 118.2 124.4 130.7 137.0 143.3 149.7 156.1 62.60 4.30 162.6 169.1 175.7 182.3 188.9 195.6 202.3 209.1 215.9 222.7 67.00 4.40 229.6 236.5 243.4 250.4 257.4 264.4 271.5 278.5 285.7 292.8 70.40 4.50 300.0* 307.3 314.7 322.1 329.6 337.1 344.6 352.1 359.7 367.3 74.90 4.60 374.9 382.5 390.2 397.9 405.7 413.4 421.2 429.0 436.9 444.7 77.70 4.70 452.6 460.5 468.5 476.5 484.4 492.5 500.5 508.6 516.6 524.8 80.30 4.80 532.9 541.0 549.2 557.4 565.6 573.9 582.1 590.4 598.7 607.1 82.50 4.90 615.4 623.8 632.2 640.6 649.0 657.5 665.9 674.4 682.9 691.5 84.60

5.00 700.0* 708.7 717.5 726.2 735.0 743.8 752.6 761.5 770.4 779.2 88.10 788.1 797.1 806.0 815.0 824.0 833.0 842.0 851.0 860.1 869.2 90.20 b.-, 878.3 887.4 896.5 905.7 914.9 924.0 933.3 942.5 951.7 961.0 92.00 5.30 970.3 979.6 988.9 998.2 1008 1017 1026 1036 1045 1055 93.70 5.40 1064 1073 1083 1092 1102 1111 1121 1131 1140 1150 95.00 5.50 1159 1169 1179 1188 1198 1208 1217 1227 1237 1247 97.00 5.60 1256 1266 1276 1286 1296 1305 1315 1325 1335 1345 99.00 5.70 1355 1365 1375 1385 1395 1405 1415 1425 1435 1445 100.0 5.80 1455 1465 1475 1485 1495 1505 1515 1525 1536 1546 101.0 5.90 1556 1566 1576 1587 1597 1607 1617 1628 1638 1648 102.0

6.00 1658 1669 1679 1689 1700 1710 1721 1731 1741 1752 104.0 6.10 1762 1773 1713 1794 1804 1815 1825 1836 1846 1857 105.0 6.20 1867 1878 1888 1899 1910 1920 1931 1942 1952 1963 107.0 6.30 1974 1984 1995 2006 2016 2027 2038 2049 2059 2070 107.0 6.40 2081 2092 2102 2113 2124 2135 2146 2157 2168 2178 108.0 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR - GEOLOGICAL SURVEY - WATER RESOURCES DIVISION PAGE 2 EXPANDED RATING TABLE TYPE: LOG 09537200 DATE PROCESSED: 12-20-1990 B 14:43 BY DNUFKES 60 LESLIE CREEK NEAR MCNEAL, ARIZ. DD: 3 TYPE: 001 RATING NO: 0006 OFFSET: .00 BREAK,OFFSET: (4.20,4.00) START DATE/TIME: 10-01-83 (0015) S"E DIFF IN 0 H T DISCHARGE IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (EXPANDED PRECISION) PER (Fcc() .00 .01 .02 .03 .04 .05 .06 .07 .08 .09 TENTH FT 6.50 2189 2200 2211 2222 2233 2244 2255 2266 2277 2288 110.0 6.60 2299 2310 2321 2332 2343 2354 2365 2376 2387 2398 110.0 6.70 2409 2420 2432 2443 2454 2465 2476 2487 2499 2510 112.0 6.80 2521 2532 2543 2555 2566 2577 2588 2600 2611 2622 112.0 6.90 2633 2645 2656 2667 2679 2690 2701 2713 2724 2735 114.0 7.00 2747 2758 2770 2781 2793 2804 2815 2827 2838 2850 114.0 7.10 2861 2873 2884 2896 2907 2919 2930 2942 2953 2965 116.0 7.20 2977 2988 3000 3011 3023 3035 3046 3058 3069 3081 116.0 7.30 3093 3104 3116 3128 3140 3151 3163 3175 3186 3198 117.0 7.40 3210 3222 3233 3245 3257 3269 3280 3292 3304 3316 118.0

7.50 3328 3340 3351 3363 3375 3387 3399 3411 3423 3435 118.0 7.60 3446 3458 3470 3482 3494 3506 3518 3530 3542 3554 120.0 7.70 3566 3578 3590 3602 3614 3626 3638 3650 3662 3674 120.0 7.80 3686 3698 3711 3723 3735 3747 3759 3771 3783 3795 121.0 7.90 3807 3820 3832 3844 3856 3868 3880 3893 3905 3917 122.0 8.00 3929 3942 3954 3966 3978 3991 4003 4015 4027 4040 123.0 8.10 4052 4064 4077 4089 4101 4114 4126 4138 4151 4163 123.0 8.20 4175 4188 4200 4212 4225 4237 4250 4262 4274 4287 124.0 8.30 4299 4312 4324 4337 4349 4362 4374 4387 4399 4412 125.0 8.40 4424 4437 4449 4462 4474 4487 4499 4512 4524 4537 126.0 8.50 4550 4562 4575 4587 4600* 09537200 Leslie Creek near McNeal, AZ 61 Whitewater Draw Basin

Part (9) - 1983 - Regular Station

Flood of October 2, 1983

Measurement #113

Type of measurement: Five section slope-area.

Location: Slope-area reach begins about 250 ft downstream from gage located in SE4NE4, sec. 20,T.21S, R.28E, on right bank and at the site of "Lewis Monument" on Swisshelm Mt. 15 min. topographic map.

Discharge and gage height: 3,090 ft3/s; recorded peak gage height, 7.33 ft. Poor HWM in well at 7.2 ft, average outside HWM 8.1 ft, and peak indicator at 7.46 ft.

Survey of the site: Site was selected and HWM's were flagged by S.C. Jones on October 12, 1983. High-water profiles were surveyed on October 25 by J.H. Eychaner, J. Doughman, and J. Bagby. •Survey was run to gage datum plus 20 ft and refer- enced to RM-3. No record of surveying instrument was made. Instrument was checked as part of the survey.

Drainage area: 79.1 sq mi.

Unit discharge: 39.1 csm.

Nature of flood: A Pacific tropical storm followed by hurricane Octave had its effect felt for a period of 5 days (Sept. 28- Oct. 3) in southern and eastern Arizona. Total rainfall recorded at Douglas was 5.98 inches. Leslie Creek ran high for 2 days previously and peaked around 1700 hours on October 2 with a rapid recession.

Field condition: The reach begins about 250 ft downstream from the gage and weir. Cross-section 1 is located just downstream from a large bend in the channel below the gage. The main channel is straight from section 1 to just below cross-section 4 where it bends slightly to the right. A tributary enters from the left bank about 250 ft downstream from cross-section 5. Through- out the slope-area reach the right bank is a terrace vegetated in thin grass hummocks with a few shrubs; the left bank is a sheer rock wall. The low-water channel is divided into two or three parts separated by coarse sand and gravel bars that have a growth of mature trees. The upper cross-sections have, in addition to this, more mature growth-saplings, water willow, and small debris dams. The lower cross-sections are more open and have larger, more evenly spaced trees. As evidenced from the survey, water flowed in a tight, continuous bend, but the effect of the mid-channel trees and debris dam is unknown. r- 9-2134 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (March 1919) CrowSection—Doubk OROLOGICAL never File WAND 1111101111011 DIVISION 09 .5 3 2,3 0 Le 1 1 I 1 11111 111111111111 111IIII III 1 I 11 III! I 111.110111111111. 111111111 . II 1111111 1111111111111111 ill 1 1 111i 11 . 1 1 1111.111.1siir, 11111 -1 1 . . I - ii, iniliiii:illii ii1111111111

1.1 toilligiolor„ IL 1111 1 T; II iiiinill11111111ilimut, • Ii1 iiiiii 1.11§Ini 1 1 . 1 Ili .. ii, misti,91111111111 irmsiimmililI II .1 1 ' II-- li ,iii ilhiirt iiriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiili lit 'Hill IIII III 1 liii II IIII1Ii till iiiiitilq!!`n,ilp )„,,,itiiir Oil', ij-.311101 !ill ii 1 Itili 11111 -I iiigl),1111111, fi, :1 illiin I H 1 ill iii NI ii ilirIllilloNtlitilli di , . ill 11 in II 1 Ira Ili . lilt ii torliiiiiiiiiiinoiliiiiii ii 1 rtnifiiiiiii Illiii ..11.11111 Hilli to isititilifilillimmull Insi § oroldwittli III Hi gum oliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiimillori 1 mu I 0 1 1 ' i 1:_kt ill 1 ill 1111 nimiiiminillootl I 1 . 4,, toil itEmommilloo 1 II 1111 Joimilltimilim Ili , 1 1 ti h olirailimiiiiiii Ilif 1 11111 1111 I lilli11111111111111111111111110111 I I II. II -.111' I"' 1111 1;11'1111i 11111i 1 1.1 .1. It' 1. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY FILE W TIR 1111 S ODIC'S DIVISION ------Z-Td_212.0_a_ _42TP.1_,LeSZa II II . 1 I; 4 Ii 11111111 11 'Ili 1 i ii I 1 iiVi uiiiliiiiiii hhill0 I fi 1 1 ; Ili. 1 II III' ; I 11 ; 1111101 I I I II 111111 I 1111111 1 11 111111 [ 1100 1 Milli I 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 t' * ! 4 1 11111. 1 1111.1,1.1111 111110 tillIs 11 11111 11111111111111111111111111111 11,!1 11101111011111 111101illill 1111 1011 011111 1 111111111111111111111111111 1 111 11 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 I ' 1 1111111 I 1 1111i1 1111 1i 1 111 1 """"11"11111111 K.111111 1111 111111"11111111111111 V111111111111 111111j ii1H111111 111111 iiiiiili11111111 L 1 1 1111 1 1 1111 1 1 1 111 1 11 l 1 111i11111111111111 I1 111111 11111111N 111111ill 111111101111111 11111111Hill I I II"II 111111111111 1111 11111111 illiiii11111 1 101 111110111111 I 1 11 1 1 19111111 111111 1 1 lin1101111111 11111 IRMO! Ili 111 ii111 1 111111111 1i I liti 41 11, II I III!!! Oil 1111111 111111111 11111111111111111, 1111 1 1111pH 1111/ill II It 1 11 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 11 1111 1; IJJ ""yhjii"1 1"111"111 01 011111111111"1'1 111011111d III II I II 511 1 1 1I II 1 1 1 1 1111 11 1111 .111 1 1' 1 1 11111 I11 h"" 11111111111111 III1111111111 i ,. II 111111 111119111111111 : K 11in_111"111110 1111. 111111'9II 111119 mu1 1111 11i , imhin Rik., I • ,1 1 11 :II l 1 inhlp pi ill lump iiii mom II i 1 iimm t ili ii fr ii li i11 11 I 111111 1111 i1111 1111., 111 1 11 1011 Ili!OMNI! 8111111.1111194111111 i illlyi 111111i1 111111111111i1111111111n I, I 1 1 1 1,1r.1 i! l II 1111111111 III 11111 IIIII1 I 11111 111111111 II0II1111T1 III 11111 1111111111 11111111101111140111111 11111111 1 1 1 1 1 11 11 iii I 11 I II 1 . 1 1.1 U I1I . 111 1111111111111111111111 111111111111111111111111111111111111 1 11 rill II I 1110kill 111100 110 1011101111 ; 1 It II III, It 11; i Iih 11 1 / ; 1 : T If , : I II 111111111111111111111111111111111 I II 11111111111 11111i1111111111v1111111111111111 11 11 l i1 II II I I! Ii II I 11 11:1 I U il 11 II III" 11111111 111111 1111111 1 11 111111 111 111111111111 1111I1111111 1 1 Ii I 11 tII 1; I 1111 Hill I 16111 !Willi 11 II 111111111111111"11111 A11111 11 iI h4irIIil I. I; III 11111111111111 111111111111 III I 11111iii III II 111111111111111111i 01111111111k II II ;111 I I t i 1.. lii 1 ill I 1 1 1 1 Ii I f,1II 11 0 ; I 1 4,1 li uloii ii 1:11 I 111111111011111111111111111111od11111111111111111111111o11101111111111111111111101 1111 T till I I It I II 11 II 1 1 I I 1 ' Ill Ir IIIIIIIIIIIII1j111111" ,j 11 1111 t !I 1; 1 111111 1 II it, !.! •

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THI INTERIOR • 10100/CAL swim .26.AL,4 JZ za:la Ilmuleas Muud L OS.AZ,L11.5 - - - -ailYtT SA Da =ASA oll II g i lijgim i Ho iiil iiiihl diiiiiihiii III I I WU iiipipippillum miipii i11 0 4ifili .1 ii:Pliithimillillifillitilli11:11 .1 1 1 i I EIM111111111 111111511/1111M111111 1111 illy!lipili.: hi 1 MIL imilli llifiiiiiiiiiii ii 1 iiiiiiimiiii iiiii iiiii.11 mmimiiii rilin um iiiiTiiiiiiiimiiimiiillo ' IN Ili giniillimiiiii1 11101111111 1! !hi Illiii: 1111111111 I Ai 1 i tiiii . 111.1I iii P0:11111 11111i:it i '11. L hi.1 Hill !hi 11111 hilli 1 F 'IIi 111111111111111x 1 41111111111 r-1 • ""rhriiiiii l: 11:11.411111 iiii * -14•::.:'.:Ti 11 111111111111111111 ...... gillF1111H111111IP li II/41111W 1 diiiiIIIIIIIN 1111111 4:11111P4i 111111111 II Tiililigglitib iiillih i Pri ... ji.. .Iit ...... 'till !IPLii flU mPP-iihfill giii.l.iiir:144. 311 t- IlL • :itrhi liT : ...riiiiilliii Jai'd1 ill :...: r .-hi . i l'i II irg litii!Irm; 1 i... 11111: 1111111111 !.: : :it ....r::411111 1 lipil'i .iir' n1111111 I il'illiliiiiiiiii ' grill:miiiliir ; n iiilli IIP

▪ . , - , 1$ ' • ' 0 5 0 0 0 ; 0S. • 0o0S

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER DIVISION FILE ...... - fJoic V3I002 Cr-. PP 04 0 S 'tiovir 3IO 2 S M hh, 411 , / 1•6 0

i :. I 1 0 ,47I-TV ■ I , (..0,1„:. I ‘ ..• P . 6 8 CV' ° I °..0 . 01

, s%% ti 3/151 ci. -'" V. - • — 1 - ... ,- T; RC -) 19 ------(0 ' • -- ..„,,, 22.1 :.i.% . 1 . . 10 4. tl, - , I . . -t '4-40 A6%, ■ 4.) 1 , - •.5 -'''' y ,pc. A C , 4''. • — -- - Ic , 1,...... - A "" ...... ;,. - • I - '' ... ___:„ - ' • / I , 4 .---t-w•t• 1 -T • y -:' .:11-.*- .0 JO L • 1 - 1 • I,. i • R .. C ,°-• - ® I /•• . • • 4 ...--ET, R .. ) ! - , ! ' i . . - - , .4 01 . . 'itT; - , ; . \..; 4 - 1 -11 I c RI ....T.,. • : - . " 11 •Pa . •I A IT ft...1.-..." :_i.ls 4._-•.• toi--• u- - - 1-A.:• t ':&..* ; " ..14., -, , a- •••:.., . • 1.- C. # : TI, . .. 'A - , II/ , L ,.„,,,, . V , ‘: T.; .1 :, , : : : 7... . LIL:-..., , ... Z,.3:LE A . - (.4V P)O 2S15 RIT ..\, L . , ; „1.:.4,„', e . - . ! \ Q:E rEf, I r • R; , ..-,,E, TA TA I .• „ ? ,,,, • .. Y"..I. • ST • A , I•N ..6) ..2 • • i _,..:"I'W , • ELAII -1 / ( Li. • .41 • ISA , EPY ..e 2; I •/.. ir■P 1 , • •••••••1 .0,.. - c .6. E1 ITT•VII MGT 11. 36, SS 21.101 ,S •. $ 4,.. t:• .. 1/4 al ••• OTT.I•O ,1 4 1 •. ' ... °‘ - ,, e. , • RT., -').• 1,43- 141 , 4r ,. , . I I . 5 .

O•

O. ) Ci.,) OP AND, d

OF B 742-SBOOKK POmONA BY DOM " 1' ":""'4 JD.,.4145 CMOBOD BY DOTS t•• I • '.-t4 e 4.1 : :1 — IIP •••••• October 29, 2000

To: Dr. W. Minckley From: Paul Tashjian RE: Leslie Creek info

Dr. Minckley- Enclosed please find 3 copies of a Technical Memorandum addressing Leslie Creek plu a copy of the In Stream Flow report I did for Leslie Creek way back in 1992. Talk to you soon,