DOCSLIB.ORG

Department of the Interior

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Department of the Interior Vol. 77 Tuesday, No. 54 March 20, 2012 Part II Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing and Designation of Critical Habitat for the Chiricahua Leopard Frog; Final Rule VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:12 Mar 19, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\20MRR2.SGM 20MRR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 16324 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 54 / Tuesday, March 20, 2012 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Background submitting the critical habitat rules to the Federal Register. Fish and Wildlife Service It is our intent to discuss in this final We published a proposed rule to rule only those topics directly relevant reassess the listing status and propose 50 CFR Part 17 to the listing and development and critical habitat for the Chiricahua designation of critical habitat for the leopard frog in the Federal Register on [Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2010– Chiricahua leopard frog under the Act 0085;4500030114] March 15, 2011 (76 FR 14126) with a (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). For more request for public comments. On RIN 1018–AX12 information on the biology and ecology September 21, 2011, we made available of the Chiricahua leopard frog refer to the draft environmental assessment and Endangered and Threatened Wildlife the final listing rule (67 FR 40790; June draft economic analysis for the and Plants; Listing and Designation of 13, 2002) or our April 2007 final proposed designation of critical habitat Critical Habitat for the Chiricahua recovery plan, which are available from and reopened the public comment on Leopard Frog the Arizona Ecological Services Field the proposed rule (76 FR 58441). AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Office (see ADDRESSES section). For information on Chiricahua leopard frog Summary of Comments and Interior. Recommendations ACTION: Final rule. critical habitat, refer to the proposed rule to reassess the listing status and We requested written comments from SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and propose critical habitat for the the public on the reassessment of listing Wildlife Service (Service), are Chiricahua leopard frog published in status and proposed designation of designating critical habitat for the the Federal Register on March 15, 2011 critical habitat for the Chiricahua Chiricahua leopard frog (Lithobates (76 FR 14126). Information on the leopard frog during two comment chiricahuensis) under the Endangered associated draft economic analysis for periods. The first comment period Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). the proposed rule to designate critical associated with the publication of the In total, we are designating habitat was published in the Federal proposed rule (76 FR 14126) opened on approximately 10,346 acres (4,187 Register on September 21, 2011 (76 FR March 15, 2011, and closed on May 16, hectares) as critical habitat for the 58441). 2011. We also requested comments on Chiricahua leopard frog in Apache, the reassessment of listing status, Previous Federal Actions Cochise, Gila, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, proposed critical habitat designation, Santa Cruz, and Yavapai Counties, We published a proposed rule to list associated draft economic analysis, and Arizona; and Catron, Grant, Hidalgo, the Chiricahua leopard frog as associated draft environmental Sierra, and Socorro Counties, New threatened in the Federal Register on assessement during a comment period Mexico. In addition, because of a June 14, 2000 (65 FR 37343). We that opened September 21, 2011, and taxonomic revision of the Chiricahua published a final rule listing the species closed on October 21, 2011 (76 FR leopard frog, we reassessed the status of as threatened on June 13, 2002 (67 FR 58441). We did not receive any requests and threats to the currently described 40790). Included in the final rule was a for a public hearing. We also contacted species Lithobates chiricahuensis and special rule (see 50 CFR 17.43(b)) to appropriate Federal, Tribal, State, and are listing the currently described exempt operation and maintenance of local agencies; scientific organizations; species as threatened. livestock tanks on non-Federal lands and other interested parties and invited DATES: This rule is effective on April 19, from the section 9 take prohibitions of them to comment on the proposed rule, 2012. the Act. The special rule remains in draft economic analysis, and draft environmental assessment during these ADDRESSES: This final rule and the place and is not affected by this final rule, except that we are making an comment periods. associated final economic analysis and During the first comment period, we editorial change to revise the heading of final environmental assessment are received 48 submissions from the 50 CFR 17.43(b) to reflect the currently available on the Internet at http:// public. During the second comment described species Lithobates www.regulations.gov. Comments and period, we received 14 submissions. chiricahuensis. For further information materials received, as well as supporting Most submissions addressed the on actions associated with listing the documentation used in preparing this proposed critical habitat designation, species, please see the final listing rule final rule, are available for public the draft environmental assessment, or (67 FR 40790; June 13, 2002). inspection, by appointment, during the draft economic analysis, while normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish In a May 6, 2009, order from the others provided no substantive and Wildlife Service, Arizona Ecological Arizona District Court, the Secretary of information useful to the development Services Field Office, 2321 West Royal the Interior was required to publish a of this final rule. All substantive Palm Road, Suite 103, Phoenix, AZ critical habitat prudency determination information provided during comment 85021; telephone 602–242–0210; for the Chiricahua leopard frog and, if periods has either been incorporated facsimile 602–242–2513. found prudent, a proposed rule to directly into this final rule or is FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: designate critical habitat by December 8, addressed below. Comments we Steve Spangle, Field Supervisor, U.S. 2010. Because of unforeseen delays received were grouped into six general Fish and Wildlife Service, Arizona related to species taxonomic issues, issues specifically relating to the Ecological Services Field Office, 2321 which required an inclusion of a threats proposed critical habitat designation for West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103, analysis, we requested a 3-month the Chiricahua leopard frog, and are Phoenix, AZ 85021; by telephone (602/ extension to the court-ordered deadlines addressed in the following summary 242–0210); or by facsimile (602/242– for both the proposed and final rules. and incorporated into the final rule as 2513). If you use a telecommunications On November 24, 2010, the extension appropriate. device for the deaf (TDD), call the was granted and new deadlines of Federal Information Relay Service March 8, 2011, for the proposed rule Peer Review (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. and March 8, 2012, for the final rule In accordance with our peer review SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: were established for completing and policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:12 Mar 19, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MRR2.SGM 20MRR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 54 / Tuesday, March 20, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 16325 34270), we solicited expert opinions history, and in particular, its dispersal the site from another occupied site from four knowledgeable individuals capabilities. This rationale is provided within the metapopulation. with scientific expertise that included in our discussion of the ‘‘1–3–5 rule’’ in Our Response: We exercised caution familiarity with the species or taxa, the the Dispersal section below. in expressing our understanding of the geographic region in which the species Comment 4: The peer reviewer stated Chiricahua leopard frogs’ ability to occurs, and conservation biology that the rationale for each primary withstand drought by amending this principles. We received responses from constituent element (PCE) is clear, but passage to state, ‘‘Because of their one of the peer reviewers. requiring critical habitat units to meet evolutionary history, southwestern We reviewed all comments we all of these relatively narrow criteria leopard frogs may be able to withstand received from the peer reviewer for may be too restrictive. The peer drying of stock tanks for a longer period substantive issues and new information reviewer also stated that other areas that of time than nonnative species that regarding critical habitat for the contain most of the elements and have evolved in wetter climates in the eastern Chiricahua leopard frog. The peer high restoration potential for ‘‘missing’’ United States, which could provide reviewer generally concurred with our elements should also be considered. southwestern leopard frog a selective methods and conclusions, and provided Our Response: We used the best advantage.’’ additional suggestions to improve the scientific information available in Comment 7: Under PCE 1(h), the final critical habitat rule. Peer reviewer determining the PCEs for the Chiricahua absence of the organism comments are addressed in the leopard frog. The PCEs are the elements Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis following summary and incorporated of physical or biological features that (chytrid fungus) is impossible to know into the final rule as appropriate. together provide for a species’ life- with certainty. history processes and are essential to Our Response: We amended the PCEs Peer Reviewer Comments the conservation of the species. We after the publication of the proposed Comment 1: The peer reviewer amended the PCEs after the publication rule and included the amended PCEs in suggested we provide clarification on of the proposed rule, and included the our September 21, 2011, publication (76 the geographic range and distribution of amended PCEs in our September 21, FR 58441). The amended PCEs, while the species by defining what is meant by 2011, publication (76 FR 58441).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chiricahua Leopard Frog (Rana Chiricahuensis)
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Chiricahua Leopard Frog (Rana chiricahuensis) Final Recovery Plan April 2007 CHIRICAHUA LEOPARD FROG (Rana chiricahuensis) RECOVERY PLAN Southwest Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Albuquerque, New Mexico DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed to be required to recover and/or protect listed species. Plans are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and are sometimes prepared with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, state agencies, and others. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions or approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. They represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director, or Director, as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. Literature citation of this document should read as follows: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. Chiricahua Leopard Frog (Rana chiricahuensis) Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southwest Region, Albuquerque, NM. 149 pp. + Appendices A-M. Additional copies may be obtained from: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arizona Ecological Services Field Office Southwest Region 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 500 Gold Avenue, S.W.
    [Show full text]
  • Petition to List the Relict Leopard Frog (Rana Onca) As an Endangered Species Under the Endangered Species Act
    BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR PETITION TO LIST THE RELICT LEOPARD FROG (RANA ONCA) AS AN ENDANGERED SPECIES UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY SOUTHERN UTAH WILDERNESS ALLIANCE PETITIONERS May 8, 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The relict leopard frog (Rana onca) has the dubious distinction of being one of the first North American amphibians thought to have become extinct. Although known to have inhabited at least 64 separate locations, the last historical collections of the species were in the 1950s and this frog was only recently rediscovered at 8 (of the original 64) locations in the early 1990s. This extremely endangered amphibian is now restricted to only 6 localities (a 91% reduction from the original 64 locations) in two disjunct areas within the Lake Mead National Recreation Area in Nevada. The relict leopard frog historically occurred in springs, seeps, and wetlands within the Virgin, Muddy, and Colorado River drainages, in Utah, Nevada, and Arizona. The Vegas Valley leopard frog, which once inhabited springs in the Las Vegas, Nevada area (and is probably now extinct), may eventually prove to be synonymous with R. onca. Relict leopard frogs were recently discovered in eight springs in the early 1990s near Lake Mead and along the Virgin River. The species has subsequently disappeared from two of these localities. Only about 500 to 1,000 adult frogs remain in the population and none of the extant locations are secure from anthropomorphic events, thus putting the species at an almost guaranteed risk of extinction. The relict leopard frog has likely been extirpated from Utah, Arizona, and from the Muddy River drainage in Nevada, and persists in only 9% of its known historical range.
    [Show full text]
  • The Chiricahua Apache from 1886-1914, 35 Am
    American Indian Law Review Volume 35 | Number 1 1-1-2010 Values in Transition: The hirC icahua Apache from 1886-1914 John W. Ragsdale Jr. Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/ailr Part of the Indian and Aboriginal Law Commons, Indigenous Studies Commons, Other History Commons, Other Languages, Societies, and Cultures Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation John W. Ragsdale Jr., Values in Transition: The Chiricahua Apache from 1886-1914, 35 Am. Indian L. Rev. (2010), https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/ailr/vol35/iss1/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in American Indian Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. VALUES IN TRANSITION: THE CHIRICAHUA APACHE FROM 1886-1914 John W Ragsdale, Jr.* Abstract Law confirms but seldom determines the course of a society. Values and beliefs, instead, are the true polestars, incrementally implemented by the laws, customs, and policies. The Chiricahua Apache, a tribal society of hunters, gatherers, and raiders in the mountains and deserts of the Southwest, were squeezed between the growing populations and economies of the United States and Mexico. Raiding brought response, reprisal, and ultimately confinement at the loathsome San Carlos Reservation. Though most Chiricahua submitted to the beginnings of assimilation, a number of the hardiest and least malleable did not. Periodic breakouts, wild raids through New Mexico and Arizona, and a labyrinthian, nearly impenetrable sanctuary in the Sierra Madre led the United States to an extraordinary and unprincipled overreaction.
    [Show full text]
  • Froglog95 New Version Draft1.Indd
    March 2011 Vol. 95 FrogLogwww.amphibians.org News from the herpetological community The new face of the ASG “Lost” Frogs Red List The global search Updating South comes to an end. Africas Red Where next? Lists. Page 1 FrogLog Vol. 95 | March 2011 | 1 2 | FrogLog Vol. 95 | March 2011 CONTENTS The Sierra Caral of Guatemala a refuge for endemic amphibians page 5 The Search for “Lost” Frogs page 12 Recent diversifi cation in old habitats: Molecules and morphology in the endangered frog, Craugastor uno page 17 Updating the IUCN Red List status of South African amphibians 6 Amphibians on the IUCN Red List: Developments and changes since the Global Amphibian Assessment 7 The forced closure of conservation work on Seychelles Sooglossidae 8 Alien amphibians challenge Darwin’s naturalization hypothesis 9 Is there a decline of amphibian richness in Bellanwila-Attidiya Sanctuary? 10 High prevalence of the amphibian chytrid pathogen in Gabon 11 Breeding-site selection by red-belly toads, Melanophryniscus stelzneri (Anura: Bufonidae), in Sierras of Córdoba, Argentina 11 Upcoming meetings 20 | Recent Publications 20 | Internships & Jobs 23 Funding Opportunities 22 | Author Instructions 24 | Current Authors 25 FrogLog Vol. 95 | March 2011 | 3 FrogLog Editorial elcome to the new-look FrogLog. It has been a busy few months Wfor the ASG! We have redesigned the look and feel of FrogLog ASG & EDITORIAL COMMITTEE along with our other media tools to better serve the needs of the ASG community. We hope that FrogLog will become a regular addition to James P. Collins your reading and a platform for sharing research, conservation stories, events, and opportunities.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology and Habitat Requirements of Lowland Leopard Frogs and Colorado River Toads
    Ecology and Habitat Requirements of Lowland Leopard Frogs and Colorado River Toads 2015 Annual Report April 2017 Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program Steering Committee Members Federal Participant Group California Participant Group Bureau of Reclamation California Department of Fish and Wildlife U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service City of Needles National Park Service Coachella Valley Water District Bureau of Land Management Colorado River Board of California Bureau of Indian Affairs Bard Water District Western Area Power Administration Imperial Irrigation District Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Palo Verde Irrigation District Arizona Participant Group San Diego County Water Authority Southern California Edison Company Arizona Department of Water Resources Southern California Public Power Authority Arizona Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern Arizona Game and Fish Department California Arizona Power Authority Central Arizona Water Conservation District Cibola Valley Irrigation and Drainage District Nevada Participant Group City of Bullhead City City of Lake Havasu City Colorado River Commission of Nevada City of Mesa Nevada Department of Wildlife City of Somerton Southern Nevada Water Authority City of Yuma Colorado River Commission Power Users Electrical District No. 3, Pinal County, Arizona Basic Water Company Golden Shores Water Conservation District Mohave County Water Authority Mohave Valley Irrigation and Drainage District Native American Participant Group Mohave Water Conservation District North Gila Valley Irrigation and Drainage District Hualapai Tribe Town of Fredonia Colorado River Indian Tribes Town of Thatcher Chemehuevi Indian Tribe Town of Wickenburg Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District Unit “B” Irrigation and Drainage District Conservation Participant Group Wellton-Mohawk Irrigation and Drainage District Yuma County Water Users’ Association Ducks Unlimited Yuma Irrigation District Lower Colorado River RC&D Area, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Geochemistry of Ground Water in Avra Valley, Pima County, Arizona
    Geochemistry of ground water in Avra Valley, Pima County, Arizona Item Type Thesis-Reproduction (electronic); text Authors Conner, Leslee Lynn,1957- Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 01/10/2021 12:48:22 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/191892 GEOCHEMISTRY OF GROUND WATER IN AVRA VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA by Leslee Lynn Conner A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF HYDROLOGY AND WATER RESOURCES In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE WITH A MAJOR IN HYDROLOGY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 1986 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of re- quirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his or her judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained by the author.
    [Show full text]
  • CHIRICAHUA LEOPARD FROG (Lithobates [Rana] Chiricahuensis)
    CHIRICAHUA LEOPARD FROG (Lithobates [Rana] chiricahuensis) Chiricahua Leopard Frog from Sycamore Canyon, Coronado National Forest, Arizona Photograph by Jim Rorabaugh, USFWS CONSIDERATIONS FOR MAKING EFFECTS DETERMINATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REDUCING AND AVOIDING ADVERSE EFFECTS Developed by the Southwest Endangered Species Act Team, an affiliate of the Southwest Strategy Funded by U.S. Department of Defense Legacy Resource Management Program December 2008 (Updated August 31, 2009) ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This document was developed by members of the Southwest Endangered Species Act (SWESA) Team comprised of representatives from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BoR), Department of Defense (DoD), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Forest Service (USFS), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), National Park Service (NPS) and U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Dr. Terry L. Myers gathered and synthesized much of the information for this document. The SWESA Team would especially like to thank Mr. Steve Sekscienski, U.S. Army Environmental Center, DoD, for obtaining the funds needed for this project, and Dr. Patricia Zenone, USFWS, New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office, for serving as the Contracting Officer’s Representative for this grant. Overall guidance, review, and editing of the document was provided by the CMED Subgroup of the SWESA Team, consisting of: Art Coykendall (BoR), John Nystedt (USFWS), Patricia Zenone (USFWS), Robert L. Palmer (DoD, U.S. Navy), Vicki Herren (BLM), Wade Eakle (USACE), and Ronnie Maes (USFS). The cooperation of many individuals facilitated this effort, including: USFWS: Jim Rorabaugh, Jennifer Graves, Debra Bills, Shaula Hedwall, Melissa Kreutzian, Marilyn Myers, Michelle Christman, Joel Lusk, Harold Namminga; USFS: Mike Rotonda, Susan Lee, Bryce Rickel, Linda WhiteTrifaro; USACE: Ron Fowler, Robert Dummer; BLM: Ted Cordery, Marikay Ramsey; BoR: Robert Clarkson; DoD, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • A STRUCTURAL and GEOCHEMICAL STUDY of the SIERRITA PORPHYRY COPPER SYSTEM, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA Paul William Jensen a Thesis
    A STRUCTURAL AND GEOCHEMICAL STUDY OF THE SIERRITA PORPHYRY COPPER SYSTEM, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA by Paul William Jensen A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 1998 2 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his or her judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances however, permission must be obtained from the author. SIGNED: APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR This thesis has been approved on the date shown below: -1 ., ./lG+ .. /lf j^.S/ /`¡ÿ FÇ Spencer R. Titley Date// Professor of Geosciences 2 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirementsfor an advanced degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited inthe University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without specialpermission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requestsfor permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole orin part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the GraduateCollege when in his or her judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests ofscholarship.
    [Show full text]
  • Canoa Ranch Groundwater Evaluation
    Canoa Ranch Groundwater Evaluation Hydrologic Evaluation of the Occurrence and Nature of Groundwater, and Water Level Trends and Water Balance Related to Future Water Resource Use in the Canoa Ranch Area, Upper Santa Cruz Basin, Pima County, Arizona By Frank G. Postillion, C.G.W.P. Chief Hydrologist David Scalero, Principal Hydrologist Mark Krieski, P.E. Engineering Manager Pima County Regional Flood Control District Executive Summary The Water Resources Division of the Pima County Regional Flood Control District has conducted a hydrologic evaluation of the Canoa Ranch and vicinity, with a focus on the historical and current water balance and how it has affected local groundwater- level conditions, and the potential impacts on the hydro- and meso-riparian vegetation of the Ranch. Numerous data sources were evaluated during the study, including the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR), Pima County, Pima Association of Governments, and consulting reports. The Canoa Ranch hydrologic study area is centered along the Santa Cruz River (SCR) from the Santa Cruz/Pima County Line in Pima County, Arizona to about 7.5 miles downstream along the River (Figure 1-1). Large portions of the study area along the SCR (4,800 acres) are owned by Pima County as part of the old Canoa Ranch; Elephant Head Road from the South to Santa Rita Springs Development and the Farmers Investment Company (FICO) on the north; from Interstate 19 on the west to the floodplain pediments on the east. The historic Canoa Ranch is undergoing building restoration and is slated for riparian restoration in some targeted areas.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management
    U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Keystone Peak Prescribed Burn Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-AZ-G020-2015-0009-EA 1 Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 8 1.1 Background ............................................................................................................................................. 8 1.2 Purpose and Need .................................................................................................................................... 9 1.3 Decision to be Made .............................................................................................................................. 11 1.4 Conformance with Land Use Plan .......................................................................................................... 11 1.5 Scoping and Issues ................................................................................................................................ 12 1.5.1 Internal Scoping ................................................................................................................................ 12 1.5.2 External Scoping ............................................................................................................................... 12 1.5.3 Issues Identified ................................................................................................................................ 12 2 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • THE ARCHAIC OCCUPATION of the ROSEMONT AREA, NORTHERN SANTA RITA MOUNTAINS, SOUTHEASTERN ARIZONA by Bruce B. Huckell K with Cont
    THE ARCHAIC OCCUPATION OF THE ROSEMONT AREA, NORTHERN SANTA RITA MOUNTAINS, SOUTHEASTERN ARIZONA by Bruce B. Huckell K with contributions by Lisa W. Huckell Robert S. Thompson Cultural Resource Management Division Arizona State Museum University of Arizona Archaeological Series No. 147, Vol. I THE ARCHAIC OCCUPATION OF THE ROSEMONT AREA, NORTHERN SANTA RITA MOUNTAINS, SOUTHEASTERN ARIZONA by Bruce B. Huckell Contributions by Lisa W. Huckell Robert S. Thompson Submitted by Cultural Resource Management Division Arizona State Museum University of Arizona Prepared for ANAMAX Mining Company 1984 Archaeological Series No. 147, Vol. I CONTENTS FIGURES vii TABLES PREFACE xiii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xvi ABSTRACT xviii Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION 1 The Archaic Period 2 Previous Research 5 2. THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE ROSEMONT AREA AND SURROUNDING REGIONS 11 General Geography 11 Geology 13 Climate 17 Vegetation 19 Fauna 28 The Paleoenvironment 29 Recent Changes in the Local Biotic Communities 30 Long-Term Changes in the Environment 32 3. A FRAMEWORK FOR RESEARCH AT THE ROSEMONT ARCHAIC SITES 35 Hunter-Gatherer Organization 35 Research Domains 38 Problem Domain I: Subsistence-Settlement Systems 38 Problem Domain II: Cultural and Temporal Affinities 40 Site Selection 41 4. INVESTIGATIONS AT AND DESCRIPTIONS OF THE SITES 43 Field Methods 43 Results of Excavations: Site Descriptions 46 AZ EE:2:62--The Wasp Canyon Site 48 Investigation 50 Features 52 Structures 52 Rock Clusters 56 Artifacts 58 iii iv Contents AZ EE:2:65 59 Investigation 59
    [Show full text]
  • Taxonkill Biolcons2009.Pdf
    This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues. Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors requiring further information regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit: http://www.elsevier.com/copyright Author's personal copy Biological Conservation 142 (2009) 3201–3206 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biological Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon Short communication The impact of taxonomic change on conservation: Does it kill, can it save, or is it just irrelevant? W.R. Morrison III a,1, J.L. Lohr a,1, P. Duchen a,1, R. Wilches a,1, D. Trujillo a,1, M. Mair a,1, S.S. Renner b,* a Department of Biology, University of Munich, Großhaderner Str. 2, D-82152 Planegg-Martinsried, Germany b Department of Biology, University of Munich, Menzinger Str. 67, D-80638 Munich, Germany article info abstract Article history: The important question of taxonomy and its impact on conservation efforts was brought to general atten- Received 10 April 2009 tion by Robert May in 1990 with a News and Views article in Nature entitled ‘‘Taxonomy as destiny.” Received in revised form 18 July 2009 Taxonomy, however, has built-in instabilities that result in name changes, raising the question of Accepted 23 July 2009 whether name changes have a consistent impact on conservation efforts.
    [Show full text]