DOCSLIB.ORG

United States Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
United States Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife United States Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 Phoenix, Arizona 85021 Telephone: (602) 242-0210 FAX: (602) 242-2513 AESO/SE 2-21-98-F-399 July 29, 1999 John McGee, Forest Supervisor Coronado National Forest 300 W. Congress Tucson, Arizona 85701 RE: On-going and Long-term Grazing Consultation Dear Mr. McGee: This document transmits the Fish and Wildlife Service's final biological opinion on the proposed On-going and Long-term Grazing on the Coronado National Forest (Forest) in New Mexico (Hidalgo County) and Arizona (Cochise, Santa Cruz, Pima, Pinal, and Graham Counties) following section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Your November 5, 1998, request for formal consultation was received on November 5, 1998. By letter of March 26, 1999, we extended the 90-day consultation period by 60 days. The draft biological opinion was delivered to you on April 16, 1999. We received your comments on the draft opinion and a summary of applicant comments and their original comments on June 21, 1999. We appreciate the cooperation and assistance of your staff and permittees during the consultation period. We look forward to assisting the Coronado National Forest with the implementation of this biological opinion. If you have any questions on the biological opinion please contact me or Doug Duncan (520/670-4860). Sincerely, /s/ David L. Harlow Field Supervisor 2 Enclosures: biological opinion zip disk 2 cc: Regional Director, Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, NM (GARD-AZ/NM, PARD-ES) Field Supervisor, New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office, Albuquerque, New Mexico DKD:finalbo.cnf BIOLOGICAL OPINION On-going and Long-term Grazing on the Coronado National Forest Arizona Ecological Services Field Office US Fish and Wildlife Service AESO/SE 2-21-98-F-399 July 29, 1999 Mr. John McGee i BIOLOGICAL OPINION AESO/SE 2-21-98-F-399 On-going and Long-term Grazing on the Coronado National Forest This biological opinion was prepared by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) based on our review of the proposed On-going and Long-term Grazing on the Coronado National Forest (Forest) in New Mexico (Hidalgo County) and Arizona (Cochise, Santa Cruz, Pima, Pinal, Graham counties), and its effects on the endangered Mexican long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris nivalis), endangered lesser long-nosed bat (L. curasoae yerbabuenae), threatened New Mexico ridge-nosed rattlesnake (Crotalus willardi obscurus), endangered American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum), endangered cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl (Glaucidium brasilianum cactorum) with critical habitat, endangered Huachuca water umbel (Lilaeopsis schaffneriana var. recurva) with critical habitat, endangered Gila topminnow (Poeciliopsis occidentalis occidentalis), endangered Yaqui chub (Gila purpurea) with critical habitat, and endangered Sonora tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum stebbensi) following section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The Forest also requested Service concurrence with your “not likely to adversely affect determinations. You made “not likely determinations on the following species: black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes), jaguar (Panthera onca), lesser long-nosed bat, American peregrine falcon, aplomado falcon (F. femoralis septentrionalis), Mexican spotted owl (Strix occidentalis lucida), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl, masked bobwhite quail (Colinus virginianus ridgeway), Southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus), Huachuca water umbel, Pima pineapple cactus (Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina), and Gila topminnow. There were about 400 of these determinations. The basis for our concurrences is found in the appendix. You also requested concurrence that the proposed threatened Chiricahua dock (Rumex orthoneurus) was not likely to be jeopardized. The Service concurs with all “not likely to adversely affect determinations for black-footed ferret, lesser long-nosed bat, American peregrine falcon, bald eagle, masked bobwhite quail, Southwestern willow flycatcher, Pima pineapple cactus, and Gila topminnow. The Service conditionally concurs with some not likely determinations for the Mexican spotted owl and jaguar. The Service did not concur with all allotments with not likely to adversely to affect determinations for the cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl, and for the Mescal and Lone Mountain/Parker Canyon allotments for the Mexican spotted owl. These allotments underwent formal consultation following personal communications with the Forest and your letters of April 7, and June 18, 1999. Mr. John McGee ii This biological opinion is based on information provided in the November 1998 biological assessment, correspondence between the Service and Forest Service, numerous telephone and personal conversations, field investigations, correspondence from, and meetings with, applicants and the Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD), and other sources of information. The proposed action was modified or clarified in letters from the Forest to the Service on March 12, April 2, April 7, and June 18, 1999. References cited in this biological opinion are not a complete bibliography of all literature available on the species of concern, livestock grazing and its effects, or on other subjects considered in this opinion. A complete administrative record of this consultation is on file at this office. After reviewing the status of the listed species, the environmental baseline for the action area, the effects of the proposed action, and the cumulative effects, it is the Service's biological opinion that the proposed action is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the endangered Mexican long-nosed bat, endangered lesser long-nosed bat, threatened New Mexico ridge-nosed rattlesnake, endangered American peregrine falcon, endangered cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl with designated critical habitat, endangered Huachuca water umbel with designated critical habitat, endangered Gila topminnow, endangered Yaqui chub with designated critical habitat, and endangered Sonora tiger salamander. The proposed project will not adversely modify or destroy any designated critical habitat. Because of the length of this biological opinion, we have included the following table of contents: Mr. John McGee iii TABLE OF CONTENTS CONSULTATION HISTORY ....................................................1 BIOLOGICAL OPINION .......................................................2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ...............................2 EFFECTS OF THE ACTION .............................................95 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE (FOREST-WIDE) ...........................97 SCOPE OF THE CONSULTATION .......................................121 LESSER LONG-NOSED BAT ...........................................122 MEXICAN LONG-NOSED BAT ........................................151 NEW MEXICO RIDGENOSE RATTLESNAKE .............................157 AMERICAN PEREGRINE FALCON .....................................172 CACTUS FERRUGINOUS PYGMY-OWL .................................182 MEXICAN SPOTTED OWL ............................................211 HUACHUCA WATER UMBEL ..........................................229 GILA TOPMINNOW ..................................................248 YAQUI CHUB ........................................................291 SONORA TIGER SALAMANDER .......................................299 CONCLUSION .............................................................316 REFERENCES CITED .......................................................318 APPENDIX - CONCURRENCES ..............................................358 BLACK-FOOTED FERRET .............................................358 JAGUAR ............................................................359 AMERICAN PEREGRINE FALCON .....................................363 APLOMADO FALCON ................................................365 BALD EAGLE ........................................................366 CACTUS FERRUGINOUS PYGMY-OWL .................................367 MASKED BOBWHITE QUAIL ..........................................368 MEXICAN SPOTTED OWL ............................................368 SOUTHWESTERN WILLOW FLYCATCHER ..............................371 CHIRICAHUA DOCK .................................................372 HUACHUCA WATER UMBEL ..........................................373 PIMA PINEAPPLE CACTUS ............................................373 GILA TOPMINNOW ..................................................375 Mr. John McGee 1 CONSULTATION HISTORY The Coronado National Forest Plan (USFS 1985) was the subject of a formal section 7 consultation, resulting in a biological opinion dated December 6, 1985 (2-21-83-F-012). Numerous grazing projects (i.e., pipelines, fences), grazing permits, and allotment management plans on the Coronado National Forest have undergone site-specific formal and informal consultation. Other actions on the Forest that might affect the environmental baseline have also been through consultation. The Coronado National Forest has been working toward compliance with the Endangered Species Act for the livestock grazing program since 1997. The Service has been involved during this process. Existing Forest Plans in the Forest Service’s Southwestern Region (which includes the Coronado) underwent formal consultation for their effects to Mexican spotted owl and designated critical habitat (November
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Abich, H., 35 Abichi, Subzone, 34 Abrupta Group
    INDEX* Abich, H., 35 Acanthohoplites (Cont'd.) abichi, subzone, 34 — Sinzow, 106 Abrupta group, 40, 56, 58 — sp., 150 Acanthoceras, 31, 96 subangulatus, 113 milletianum var. plesioiypica, 119 subpeltoceroiies, 121 "Acanthoceras," 5 ? subpeltoceroides, 37, 38 milletianum, 120 — suture of syntypes, 136 — var. elegans, 32 teres, 22, 36, 54, 107, 108, 114, 150; PI. 20, — var. plesioiypica, 32 fig. 7 Acanthohoplitan fauna, in Quajote, 21 — distribution, 13 Acanthohoplites, 32, 33, 37, 51, 52, 54, 95, 98, — group, 108 103, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 113, 119, 120, tobleri, 107, 111, 112 121, 149, 150, 155 trautscholdi, 155 abichi, 38, 107, 108, 111 — zone, 39, 56 aegis Anderson, 54 "A cantltohoplites'' aschiltaensis, 33, 36, 38, 107, 108, 112 jacobi, 32, 120 — genotype, 106 plesiotypicus, 32, 120 — subzone, 35 tobleri, 121 bergeroni, 38 — var. discoidalis, 111 berkeyi, 22, 36, 54, 111, 112, 149; PI. 19, Acanthohoplitinae, 22, 32, 33, 49, 51, 56, 95, figs. 14—16 116, 121 — group, 108 — subf. nov., 17, 103 bigoureti, 32, 106,107, 111 Acila, 1, 55, 56, 61, 62, 138 — abichi, group, 108 bivirgata, 61, 62 campichei, 106, 115, 116 castrensis, 63 — correct spelling, 96 conradi, 62 erraticus, 36, 113, 114, 149; PI. 19, figs. 21-23 demessa, 62 — distribution, 13 — oldest species described, 14 evolutus, 107, 108, 114 schencki, 10, 19, 56, 62, 63 hesper, 22, 33, 36, 54, 106, 109, 115, 116, — oldest species, 1 150; PI. 20, figs. 1-6 Acila {Truncacila), 10, 16, 61 — distribution, 13 bivirgata, 56 — group, 109 — in Folkestone Gault, 14 impetrabilis, 22, 54, 112, 113, 149; PI. 19, castrensis, 62, 63 figs.
    [Show full text]
  • Coronado National Forest Draft Land and Resource Management Plan I Contents
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Coronado National Forest Southwestern Region Draft Land and Resource MB-R3-05-7 October 2013 Management Plan Cochise, Graham, Pima, Pinal, and Santa Cruz Counties, Arizona, and Hidalgo County, New Mexico The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TTY). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Front cover photos (clockwise from upper left): Meadow Valley in the Huachuca Ecosystem Management Area; saguaros in the Galiuro Mountains; deer herd; aspen on Mt. Lemmon; Riggs Lake; Dragoon Mountains; Santa Rita Mountains “sky island”; San Rafael grasslands; historic building in Cave Creek Canyon; golden columbine flowers; and camping at Rose Canyon Campground. Printed on recycled paper • October 2013 Draft Land and Resource Management Plan Coronado National Forest Cochise, Graham, Pima, Pinal, and Santa Cruz Counties, Arizona Hidalgo County, New Mexico Responsible Official: Regional Forester Southwestern Region 333 Broadway Boulevard, SE Albuquerque, NM 87102 (505) 842-3292 For Information Contact: Forest Planner Coronado National Forest 300 West Congress, FB 42 Tucson, AZ 85701 (520) 388-8300 TTY 711 [email protected] Contents Chapter 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Galiuro Mountains Unit, Graham County, Arizona MLA 21
    I MI~A~J~L M)P~SAL OF CORONADO I NATIONAL FOREST, PART 9 I Galiuro Mountains Unit I Graham County, Arizona I Galiuro Muni~Untains I i A IZON I,' ' I BUREAU OF MINES UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR f United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF MINES INTERMOUNTAIN FIELD OPERATIONS CENTER "m II P.O. BOX 25086 II BUILDING 20, DENVER FEDERAL CENTER DENVER, COLORADO 80225 November 22, 1993 Nyal Niemuth Arizona Department of Mines and Mineral Resources 1502 West Washington Phoenix, AZ 85007 Dear Mr. Niemuth: Enclosed are two copies of the following U.S. Bureau of Mines Open File Report for your use: MLA 21-93 Mineral Appraisal of the Coronado National Forest, Part 9, Galiuro Mountains Unit, Graham County, Arizona If you would like additional copies, please notify Mark Chatman at 303-236-3400. Resource Evaluation Branch I i I MINERAL APPRAISAL OF THE CORONADO NATIONAL FOREST PART 9, GALIURO MOUNTAINS UNIT, I GRAHAM COUNTY, ARIZONA I I by. I S. Don Brown I MLA 21-93 I 1993 I I, i Intermountain Field Operations Center I Denver, Colorado I UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR I BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary BUREAU OF MINES I HERMANN ENZER, Acting Director I I I PREFACE I A January 1987 Interagency Agreement between the U.S. Bureau of Mines, U.S. Geological Survey, and U.S. Forest Service describes the purpose, authority, and I program operation for the forest-wide studies. The program is intended to assist the I Forest Service in incorporating mineral resource data in forest plans as specified by the National Forest Management Act (1976) and Title 36, Chapter 2, Part 219, Code of i Federal Regulations, and to augment the Bureau's mineral resource data base so that it can analyze and make available minerals information as required by the National I Materials and Minerals Policy, Research and Development Act (1980).
    [Show full text]
  • Saddlebrooke Hiking Club Hike Database 11-15-2020 Hike Location Hike Rating Hike Name Hike Description
    SaddleBrooke Hiking Club Hike Database 11-15-2020 Hike Location Hike Rating Hike Name Hike Description AZ Trail B Arizona Trail: Alamo Canyon This passage begins at a point west of the White Canyon Wilderness on the Tonto (Passage 17) National Forest boundary about 0.6 miles due east of Ajax Peak. From here the trail heads west and north for about 1.5 miles, eventually dropping into a two- track road and drainage. Follow the drainage north for about 100 feet until it turns left (west) via the rocky drainage and follow this rocky two-track for approximately 150 feet. At this point there is new signage installed leading north (uphill) to a saddle. This is a newly constructed trail which passes through the saddle and leads downhill across a rugged and lush hillside, eventually arriving at FR4. After crossing FR4, the trail continues west and turns north as you work your way toward Picketpost Mountain. The trail will continue north and eventually wraps around to the west side of Picketpost and somewhat paralleling Alamo Canyon drainage until reaching the Picketpost Trailhead. Hike 13.6 miles; trailhead elevations 3471 feet south and 2399 feet north; net elevation change 1371 feet; accumulated gains 1214 northward and 2707 feet southward; RTD __ miles (dirt). AZ Trail A Arizona Trail: Babbitt Ranch This passage begins just east of the Cedar Ranch area where FR 417 and FR (Passage 35) 9008A intersect. From here the route follows a pipeline road north to the Tub Ranch Camp. The route continues towards the corrals (east of the buildings).
    [Show full text]
  • A GUIDE to the GEOLOGY of the Santa Catalina Mountains, Arizona: the Geology and Life Zones of a Madrean Sky Island
    A GUIDE TO THE GEOLOGY OF THE SANTA CATALINA MOUNTAINS, ARIZONA: THE GEOLOGY AND LIFE ZONES OF A MADREAN SKY ISLAND ARIZONA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 22 JOHN V. BEZY Inside front cover. Sabino Canyon, 30 December 2010. (Megan McCormick, flickr.com (CC BY 2.0). A Guide to the Geology of the Santa Catalina Mountains, Arizona: The Geology and Life Zones of a Madrean Sky Island John V. Bezy Arizona Geological Survey Down-to-Earth 22 Copyright©2016, Arizona Geological Survey All rights reserved Book design: M. Conway & S. Mar Photos: Dr. Larry Fellows, Dr. Anthony Lux and Dr. John Bezy unless otherwise noted Printed in the United States of America Permission is granted for individuals to make single copies for their personal use in research, study or teaching, and to use short quotes, figures, or tables, from this publication for publication in scientific books and journals, provided that the source of the information is appropriately cited. This consent does not extend to other kinds of copying for general distribution, for advertising or promotional purposes, for creating new or collective works, or for resale. The reproduction of multiple copies and the use of articles or extracts for comer- cial purposes require specific permission from the Arizona Geological Survey. Published by the Arizona Geological Survey 416 W. Congress, #100, Tucson, AZ 85701 www.azgs.az.gov Cover photo: Pinnacles at Catalina State Park, Courtesy of Dr. Anthony Lux ISBN 978-0-9854798-2-4 Citation: Bezy, J.V., 2016, A Guide to the Geology of the Santa Catalina Mountains, Arizona: The Geology and Life Zones of a Madrean Sky Island.
    [Show full text]
  • Summits on the Air – ARM for the USA (W7A
    Summits on the Air – ARM for the U.S.A (W7A - Arizona) Summits on the Air U.S.A. (W7A - Arizona) Association Reference Manual Document Reference S53.1 Issue number 5.0 Date of issue 31-October 2020 Participation start date 01-Aug 2010 Authorized Date: 31-October 2020 Association Manager Pete Scola, WA7JTM Summits-on-the-Air an original concept by G3WGV and developed with G3CWI Notice “Summits on the Air” SOTA and the SOTA logo are trademarks of the Programme. This document is copyright of the Programme. All other trademarks and copyrights referenced herein are acknowledged. Document S53.1 Page 1 of 15 Summits on the Air – ARM for the U.S.A (W7A - Arizona) TABLE OF CONTENTS CHANGE CONTROL....................................................................................................................................... 3 DISCLAIMER................................................................................................................................................. 4 1 ASSOCIATION REFERENCE DATA ........................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Program Derivation ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 1.2 General Information ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 1.3 Final Ascent
    [Show full text]
  • Coronado National Forest
    CORONADO NATIONAL FOREST FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN Reviewed and Updated by _/s/ Chris Stetson ___________ Date __5/18/10 __________ Coronado Fire Management Plan Interagency Federal fire policy requires that every area with burnable vegetation must have a Fire Management Plan (FMP). This FMP provides information concerning the fire process for the Coronado National Forest and compiles guidance from existing sources such as but not limited to, the Coronado National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP), national policy, and national and regional directives. The potential consequences to firefighter and public safety and welfare, natural and cultural resources, and values to be protected help determine the management response to wildfire. Firefighter and public safety are the first consideration and are always the priority during every response to wildfire. The following chapters discuss broad forest and specific Fire Management Unit (FMU) characteristics and guidance. Chapter 1 introduces the area covered by the FMP, includes a map of the Coronado National Forest, addresses the agencies involved, and states why the forest is developing the FMP. Chapter 2 establishes the link between higher-level planning documents, legislation, and policies and the actions described in FMP. Chapter 3 articulates specific goals, objectives, standards, guidelines, and/or desired future condition(s), as established in the forest’s LRMP, which apply to all the forest’s FMUs and those that are unique to the forest’s individual FMUs. Page 1 of 30 Coronado Fire Management Plan Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION The Coronado National Forest developed this FMP as a decision support tool to help fire personnel and decision makers determine the response to an unplanned ignition.
    [Show full text]
  • Peak List Please Send Updates Or Corrections to Lat/Lon to Mike Heaton
    Operation On Target Arizona Peak List Please send updates or corrections to Lat/Lon to Mike Heaton Description Comment Latitude Longitude Elevation "A" Mountain (Tempe) ASU campus by Sun Devil Stadium 33.42801 -111.93565 1495 AAA Temp Temp Location 33.42234 -111.8227 1244 Agassiz Peak @ Snow Bowl Tram Stop (No access to peak) 35.32587 -111.67795 12353 Al Fulton Point 1 Near where SR260 tops the Rim 34.29558 -110.8956 7513 Al Fulton Point 2 Near where SR260 tops the rim 34.29558 -110.8956 7513 Alta Mesa Peak For Alta Mesa Sign-up 33.905 -111.40933 7128 Apache Maid Mountain South of Stoneman Lake - Hike/Drive? 34.72588 -111.55128 7305 Apache Peak, Whetstone Mountain Tallest Peak, Whetstone Mountain 31.824583 -110.429517 7711 Aspen Canyon Point Rim W. of Kehl Springs Point 34.422204 -111.337874 7600 Aztec Peak Sierra Ancha Mountains South of Young 33.8123 -110.90541 7692 Battleship Mountain High Point visible above the Flat Iron 33.43936 -111.44836 5024 Big Pine Flat South of Four Peaks on County Line 33.74931 -111.37304 6040 Black (Chocolate) Mountain, CA Drive up and park, near Yuma 33.055 -114.82833 2119 Black Butte, CA East of Palm Springs - Hike 33.56167 -115.345 4458 Black Mountain North of Oracle 32.77899 -110.96319 5586 Black Rock Mountain South of St. George 36.77305 -113.80802 7373 Blue Jay Ridge North end of Mount Graham 32.75872 -110.03344 8033 Blue Vista White Mtns. S. of Hannagan Medow 33.56667 -109.35 8000 Browns Peak (Four Peaks) North Peak of Four Peaks Range 33.68567 -111.32633 7650 Brunckow Hill NE of Sierra Vista, AZ 31.61736 -110.15788 4470 Bryce Mountain Northwest of Safford 33.02012 -109.67232 7298 Buckeye Mountain North of Globe 33.4262 -110.75763 4693 Burnt Point On the Rim East of Milk Ranch Point 34.40895 -111.20478 7758 Camelback Mountain North Phoenix Mountain - Hike 33.51463 -111.96164 2703 Carol Spring Mountain North of Globe East of Highway 77 33.66064 -110.56151 6629 Carr Peak S.
    [Show full text]
  • Coronado National Forest Plan Was Approved on August 4, 1986 Change Name Date Nature of Change
    Vicinity Map Reprinted with amendment pages — August 1988 CORONADO NATIONAL FOREST LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION Purpose of the Plan…………………………………………………………………………... 1 Organization of the Forest Plan Document…………………………………………………. 1 Changes to the Plan ………………………………………………………………………… 2 2. ISSUES, CONCERNS, AND MANAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES Overview…………………………………………………………………………………….. 3 Issues, Concerns, and Opportunities Addressed…………………………….………………. 3 Recreation and Visual Quality…………..………………………………….…………. 3 Wilderness……………………………………...…………..…………………………. 3 Cultural Resources………………………………...………..…………………………. 4 Wildlife and Fish………………………………………………………….………..…. 4 Range……………..………………………………………………………………….... 4 Timber and Forest Products………..………………………………………...……...… 4 Plant and Animal Diversity…………..……………………………………………….. 4 Soil and Water…….……………………………………………………………..….… 5 Minerals………………………………..……………………………………………… 5 Lands and Special Uses……………………………………………………………….. 5 Special Area Designations…………………………………..………………………… 5 Protection……..……………………………………………………………………..… 5 Facilities (Roads and Trails)…………………………………….………………..…… 6 Law Enforcement……………………………………………………………………… 6 3. SUMMARY OF THE ANALYSIS OF THE MANAGEMENT SITUATION Overview…………………………………………………………………………………..…. 7 4 MANAGEMENT DIRECTION Mission……………………………………………………….…………………………..…… 9 Goals……………………………………………………………………………………….…. 9 Region-wide Standards and Guidelines………………………..….………………………….. 15 Management Areas and Prescriptions………………………………………………………… 25 Forest-wide Management Area……………………………………………………………..…
    [Show full text]
  • CHA Final Report January 29-2013 (PDF)
    Graham County Community Health Assessment 2012 - 2013 Graham County Community Health Assessment 2012 1 Graham County Community Health Assessment 2012 - 2013 Table of Contents Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………………………..4 History and Regional Information……………………………………………………………….…….………5 Climate……………………………………………………………………………………………….…………..6 Population…………………..………………………………………………………………………….………..7 Economics……………………………………………………………………………………………………….8 Community Health Assessment……………………………………….…………………………….………...9 The Model……………….………………………………………………………………………………….……9 The Methodology…………………………………………………………………………………………...….10 Community Survey……………….………………………………………………………………...…….……11 The Findings…………………………………………………………….……………………………………..12 Secondary Data Analysis……………………………………………………………………………………..13 Stakeholder Group Discussions ……………………………………………………………………..………15 Post Survey Community Assessment Meeting…………………………………….………………….……21 Forces of Change…………………………………………………………………………………………...…21 Voices of the Community Meetings………………………………………………………………….………23 Photo Voice…………………………………………………………………………………………………….28 Community Vision and Values Statements...………………..……………………………………………..29 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………………………...30 Acknowledgements………………………………..…………………………………………………………..31 References....................................................................................................................................….. 31 Note: Contents of this report were compiled and written by: Laura Rogers, Health Program Coordinator GrahamCommunity County Health
    [Show full text]
  • Coronado National Forest Potential Wilderness Area Evaluation Report
    United States Department of Agriculture Coronado National Forest Potential Wilderness Area Evaluation Report Forest Service Southwestern Region Coronado National Forest July 2017 Potential Wilderness Area Evaluation Report In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 INTRODUCTION Area of Analysis This Project Area Incorporates
    POISON SPRINGS/ SIERRA ANCHA, DAGGER CHRYSOTILE, HAYSTACK BUTTE, SEDOW, and HICKS/PIKES PEAK ALLOTMENTS STREAM CHANNELS AND RIPARIAN AREAS EXISTING CONDITIONS Lynn Mason and Janet Grove July 2011, updated October 2012 Updated January 28, 2013 INTRODUCTION Area of Analysis This project area incorporates seven allotments from two districts. The Poison Springs and Sierra Ancha Allotments are being managed as one allotment. Those, along with the Dagger Allotment, are located on the Tonto Basin District. The remaining four allotments, Chrysotile, Haystack Butte, Sedow and Hicks-Pikes Peak, are located on the Globe District. All of the allotments are located along the Salt River, beginning at the eastern Forest boundary on the Chrysotile Allotment and ending at Roosevelt Lake on the Poison Springs Allotment. The project area lies within twenty-one 6th code watersheds. The watersheds and their condition are listed in Table 1. There are approximately 374 miles of named streams on the USGS 1:24,000 topographic quadrangles and unnamed streams that support riparian vegetation within the project area. There appear to be at least as many miles of unnamed streams delineated as blue lines on the USGS topographic quadrangles. These unnamed streams are the ephemeral and intermittent tributaries to the named streams. These channels are primarily headwater channels dominated by upland vegetation or ephemeral washes. They provide important functions relating to water quantity, water quality, the flood regime, hydrological connectivity, riparian vegetation and wildlife habitat within the watershed (Meyer et al. 2003, Levick et al. 2007). Historic Conditions The existing condition of watersheds, stream channels and riparian areas has been affected by many factors, both natural disturbances and human activities.
    [Show full text]