DOCSLIB.ORG

Phase 1 Rehabilitation San Carlos Irrigation Project Facilities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Phase 1 Rehabilitation San Carlos Irrigation Project Facilities Draft Environmental Assessment Phase 1 Rehabilitation San Carlos Irrigation Project Facilities Pinal County, Arizona U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Phoenix Area Office June 2010 Draft Environmental Assessment Phase I Rehabilitation San Carlos Irrigation Project Pinal County, Arizona Prepared by EcoPlan Associates, Inc. 701 W. Southern Ave. Mesa, AZ 85210 (480-733-6666) and Bureau of Reclamation Phoenix Area Office 6150 W. Thunderbird Ave. Glendale, AZ 85306 (623-773-6256) June 2010 DISCLAIMER STATEMENT EcoPlan Associates, Inc., has been contracted by the Bureau of Reclamation to assist with the preparation of this Environmental Assessment. EcoPlan declares no financial or other interest in the outcome of the proposed project pursuant to the requirements of 40 CFR Section 1506.5. _____________________________________ __________________________________June16, 2010 F. Bruce Brown, Principal Date EcoPlan Associates, Inc. Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS...................................................................................... iv 1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED..........................................................................................................1 1.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................1 1.2 Background ..................................................................................................................1 1.3 Purpose and Need for Action .......................................................................................3 1.3.1 Ashurst-Hayden Diversion Dam and Headworks...........................................3 1.3.2 Sediment Management....................................................................................4 1.3.3 Bank Protection...............................................................................................4 1.4 Project Location...........................................................................................................4 1.5 Decisions to Be Made...................................................................................................5 1.6 Public Involvement.......................................................................................................5 1.6.1 Scoping............................................................................................................5 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES .................................................................................7 2.1 No Action.....................................................................................................................7 2.2 Proposed Action...........................................................................................................7 2.2.1 Rehabilitation of Ashurst-Hayden Diversion Dam and Headworks...............7 2.2.2 Armoring of the South Bank of the Gila River.............................................11 2.2.3 Construction and Operation of Sediment Removal and Storage Facility .....11 2.2.4 Additional Project-Related Actions ..............................................................14 2.2.5 Project Construction......................................................................................15 2.3 Alternatives Considered But Eliminated....................................................................16 2.3.1 Radial Gate Alternative.................................................................................16 2.3.2 Pilot Channel Alternative..............................................................................16 2.3.3 Slide Gate Alternatives.................................................................................16 2.3.4 Trash Management Alternatives ...................................................................17 2.3.5 Long-Term Sediment Storage Alternatives ..................................................17 3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ..............18 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................18 3.2 Land Ownership, Jurisdiction, and Land Use ............................................................18 3.2.1 Affected Environment...................................................................................18 3.2.2 Environmental Consequences.......................................................................22 3.3 Visual Resources........................................................................................................24 3.3.1 Affected Environment...................................................................................24 3.3.2 Environmental Consequences.......................................................................24 Draft Environmental Assessment i Phase 1 Rehabilitation San Carlos Irrigation Project Facilities 3.4 Environmental Justice................................................................................................26 3.4.1 Affected Environment...................................................................................26 3.4.2 Environmental Consequences.......................................................................26 3.5 Cultural Resources.....................................................................................................27 3.5.1 Affected Environment...................................................................................27 3.5.2 Environmental Consequences.......................................................................32 3.6 Indian Trust Assets.....................................................................................................33 3.6.1 Affected Environment...................................................................................33 3.6.2 Environmental Consequences.......................................................................33 3.7 Geology and Soils ......................................................................................................34 3.7.1 Affected Environment...................................................................................34 3.7.2 Environmental Consequences.......................................................................35 3.8 Water Resources and Water Quality ..........................................................................36 3.8.1 Affected Environment...................................................................................36 3.8.2 Environmental Consequences.......................................................................37 3.9 Floodplains and Flooding...........................................................................................38 3.9.1 Affected Environment...................................................................................38 3.9.2 Environmental Consequences.......................................................................40 3.10 Biological Resources..................................................................................................41 3.10.1 Affected Environment...................................................................................41 3.10.2 Environmental Consequences.......................................................................49 3.11 Riparian Zones and Wetlands.....................................................................................53 3.11.1 Affected Environment...................................................................................53 3.11.2 Environmental Consequences.......................................................................53 3.12 Noise...........................................................................................................................53 3.12.1 Affected Environment...................................................................................53 3.12.2 Environmental Consequences.......................................................................54 3.13 Air Quality..................................................................................................................54 3.13.1 Affected Environment...................................................................................54 3.13.2 Environmental Consequences.......................................................................55 3.14 Hazardous Materials...................................................................................................57 3.14.1 Affected Environment...................................................................................57 3.14.2 Environmental Consequences.......................................................................57 4.0 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION ......................................................................59 4.1 List of Agencies and Persons Contacted ....................................................................59 4.1.1 Indian Communities......................................................................................59 4.1.2 Congressional Delegation.............................................................................59 Draft Environmental
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arizona TIM PALMER FLICKR
    Arizona TIM PALMER FLICKR Colorado River at Mile 50. Cover: Salt River. Letter from the President ivers are the great treasury of noted scientists and other experts reviewed the survey design, and biological diversity in the western state-specific experts reviewed the results for each state. RUnited States. As evidence mounts The result is a state-by-state list of more than 250 of the West’s that climate is changing even faster than we outstanding streams, some protected, some still vulnerable. The feared, it becomes essential that we create Great Rivers of the West is a new type of inventory to serve the sanctuaries on our best, most natural rivers modern needs of river conservation—a list that Western Rivers that will harbor viable populations of at-risk Conservancy can use to strategically inform its work. species—not only charismatic species like salmon, but a broad range of aquatic and This is one of 11 state chapters in the report. Also available are a terrestrial species. summary of the entire report, as well as the full report text. That is what we do at Western Rivers Conservancy. We buy land With the right tools in hand, Western Rivers Conservancy is to create sanctuaries along the most outstanding rivers in the West seizing once-in-a-lifetime opportunities to acquire and protect – places where fish, wildlife and people can flourish. precious streamside lands on some of America’s finest rivers. With a talented team in place, combining more than 150 years This is a time when investment in conservation can yield huge of land acquisition experience and offices in Oregon, Colorado, dividends for the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Fishing Regulations 3 Fishing License Fees Getting Started
    2019 & 2020 Fishing Regulations for your boat for your boat See how much you could savegeico.com on boat | 1-800-865-4846insurance. | Local Offi ce geico.com | 1-800-865-4846 | Local Offi ce See how much you could save on boat insurance. Some discounts, coverages, payment plans and features are not available in all states or all GEICO companies. Boat and PWC coverages are underwritten by GEICO Marine Insurance Company. GEICO is a registered service mark of Government Employees Insurance Company, Washington, D.C. 20076; a Berkshire Hathaway Inc. subsidiary. TowBoatU.S. is the preferred towing service provider for GEICO Marine Insurance. The GEICO Gecko Image © 1999-2017. © 2017 GEICO AdPages2019.indd 2 12/4/2018 1:14:48 PM AdPages2019.indd 3 12/4/2018 1:17:19 PM Table of Contents Getting Started License Information and Fees ..........................................3 Douglas A. Ducey Governor Regulation Changes ...........................................................4 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH COMMISSION How to Use This Booklet ...................................................5 JAMES S. ZIELER, CHAIR — St. Johns ERIC S. SPARKS — Tucson General Statewide Fishing Regulations KURT R. DAVIS — Phoenix LELAND S. “BILL” BRAKE — Elgin Bag and Possession Limits ................................................6 JAMES R. AMMONS — Yuma Statewide Fishing Regulations ..........................................7 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT Common Violations ...........................................................8 5000 W. Carefree Highway Live Baitfish
    [Show full text]
  • Quality of Water of the Gila River Basin Above Coolidge Dam Arizona
    Quality of Water of the Gila River Basin Above Coolidge Dam Arizona By JOHN D. HEM GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1104 Prepared in cooperation with Defense Plant Corporation This copy is PUBLIC PROPERTY and is not to be removed from the official files. PRIVATE POSSESSION IS UNLAWFUL (R- S. Sup. Vol. 2. pp. 380; Seg. 749) UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1950 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Oscar L. Chapman, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. C. - Price $1.00 (paper cover) CONTENTS Page Abstract__ _ _ ____________________________________________________ 1 Introduction._____________________________________________________ 3 History, scope, and purpose of the investigation.__________________ 3 Acknowledgments. ___________________________________'_________ 4 Location and description of the area_________________________________ 4 Physiography.--___-_-________-__-__------___-_^--_-__--__-__- 4 Population. ___________________________________________________ 5 Transportation._______________________________________________ 6 History and development_____-___________-_-_-_-_--__-____-_. 6 Climate and vegetation____________-_-____________---_-_-__--_-_ 7 Rainfall and runoff,_______________-_-_--__-_---__-____-_-_____ 8 Land use.___-________-________-__-____--__-_--_-----___-_____ 8 Geologic structure.__-_________-___--__--___-_--_-__-____-__.-_ 8 Previous investigations.-_______-__-___-_-__-_-_-_-___-_-_--_-__-___
    [Show full text]
  • 1 (4310-W7-P) Department of The
    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 02/23/2012 and available online at http://federalregister.gov/a/2012-04200, and on FDsys.gov (4310-W7-P) DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs Rate Adjustments for Indian Irrigation Projects AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior. ACTION: Notice of Rate Adjustments. _____________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY: The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) owns, or has an interest in, irrigation projects located on or associated with various Indian reservations throughout the United States. We are required to establish irrigation assessment rates to recover the costs to administer, operate, maintain, and rehabilitate these projects. We are notifying you that we have adjusted the irrigation assessment rates at several of our irrigation projects and facilities to reflect current costs of administration, operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation. DATES: Effective Date: The irrigation assessment rates shown in the tables as final are effective as of January 1, 2012. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For details about a particular BIA irrigation project or facility, please use the tables in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section to contact the regional or local office where the project or facility is located. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A Notice of Proposed Rate Adjustment was published in the Federal Register on September 20, 2011 (76 FR 58293) to propose adjustments to the irrigation assessment rates at several BIA irrigation projects. The public and interested parties were provided an opportunity to submit written comments during the 60-day period that ended November 21, 2011. 1 Did the BIA defer or change any proposed rate increases? No.
    [Show full text]
  • Pinal Active Management Area Fourth Management Plan
    PINAL ACTIVE MANAGEMENT AREA FOURTH MANAGEMENT PLAN December 14, 2020 Fourth Management Plan Pinal Active Management Area ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Arizona Department of Water Resources Staff Thomas Buschatzke, Director Amanda Long- Kyle Miller Rodriguez Lori Cason Brian Conway Lisa Williams Caitlin Parker Maggie Martin Caleb Schrank Makenna Welsch Carol Ward Melissa Sikes Clint Chandler Natalie Mast David McKay Nolan Power Dianne Yunker Pam Muse Einav Henenson Ryan Jackisch Hugo Perea Saba Asefa Jeff Inwood Sharon Scantlebury Jeff Tannler Shauna Evans John Riggins Tracey Carpenter Kelly Brown Vineetha Kartha Ken Slowinski Significant Contributions Groundwater Users Advisory Council Members David Snider William Collings Jackie Guthrie Oliver Anderson Scott Riggins Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Wayne Harrison Arizona Water Banking Authority Virginia O’Connell 1110 W. Washington Street, Suite 310 Phoenix, AZ 85007 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1-1 SECTION 1.1: INTRODUCTION 1-1 SECTION 1.2: THE ASSURED WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM (AWS) 1-2 SECTION 1.3: THE UNDERGROUND WATER STORAGE, SAVINGS AND REPLENISHMENT (RECHARGE) PROGRAM 1-3 SECTION 1.4: GOVERNMENTAL AND INSTITUTIONAL SETTING 1-4 SECTION 1.5: PINAL AMA WATER MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES 1-4 SECTION 1.6: PINAL AMA 4MP PROGRAMS 1-6 SECTION 1.7: CONCLUSION 1-6 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1-7 CHAPTER 2: HYDROLOGY 2-1 SECTION 2.1: GEOGRAPHY 2-1 SECTION 2.2: CLIMATE 2-1 SECTION 2.3: SURFACE WATER RESOURCES 2-3 SECTION 2.4: HYDROLOGIC UNITS AND AQUIFER CHARACTERISTICS 2-5 2.4.1 : UPPER ALLUVIAL UNIT
    [Show full text]
  • The New Water Czars by Daniel Kraker
    The New Water Czars by Daniel Kraker A historic water deal could give an impoverished Indian community a path back to its roots — and turn it into one of the West’s next big power brokers Thirty miles south of downtown Phoenix, past the rugged South Mountains rising out of the city’s southern edge, past the acres of asphalt and the 10- lane highways, the city stops abruptly at the bone-dry bed of the Gila River. On the other side of the riverbed, where you might expect to find desert saguaro and cholla, emerald green farm fields blur into the horizon: perfectly flat rectangles laid out one after the other, separated by canals and irrigation Pima Indian Francis Jones irrigates cotton at ditches into a gigantic crossword puzzle-like grid. Gila River Farms. Mark Henle/The Arizona Republic Here, on the 375,000-acre Gila River Indian Community, Pima and Maricopa Related Articles Indians tend fields of alfalfa, cotton, wheat and vegetables, groves of citrus A tempered victory The Gila River Indian and olive trees, and even giant ponds full of tilapia and shrimp. The Community in Arizona is on the verge of a community’s 16,000-acre farm, and a handful of smaller farms operated by huge and historic water rights victory, but tribal members, are sustained by more than 200,000 acre-feet of water, even the most successful Indian crusades funneled every year from the Gila, Salt and Colorado rivers, or pumped from for water are always compromises. underground aquifers. (An acre-foot is one year’s worth of water for a family of four.) Tribe defeated a dam and won back its water The Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation, which defeated a dam that would have Already, the Gila River Indian Community is one of the largest agricultural flooded tribal farmland, uses water from operations in southern Arizona.
    [Show full text]
  • Background Report Prepared by Arizona State University NINETY-NINTH ARIZONA TOWN HALL
    Arizona’s Energy Future 99th Arizona Town Hall November 6 - 9, 2011 Background Report Prepared by Arizona State University NINETY-NINTH ARIZONA TOWN HALL PREMIER PARTNER CONTRIBUTING PARTNER COLLABORATING PARTNERS SUPPORTING PARTNERS CIVIC PARTNERS CORE Construction Kennedy Partners Ryley, Carlock & Applewhite Sundt Construction One East Camelback, Suite 530, Phoenix, Arizona 85012 Phone: 602.252.9600 Fax: 602.252.6189 Website: www.aztownhall.org Email: [email protected] ARIZONA’S ENERGY FUTURE September 2011 We thank you for making the commitment to participate in the 99th Arizona Town Hall to be held at the Grand Canyon on November 6-9, 2011. You will be discussing and developing consensus with fellow Arizonans on the future of energy in Arizona. An essential element to the success of these consensus-driven discussions is this background report that is provided to all participants before the Town Hall convenes. As they have so often done for past Arizona Town Halls, Arizona State University has prepared a detailed and informative report that will provide a unique and unparalleled resource for your Town Hall panel sessions. Special thanks go to editors Clark Miller and Sharlissa Moore of the Consortium for Science, Policy, and Outcomes at ASU for spearheading this effort and marshaling many talented professionals to write individual chapters. For sharing their wealth of knowledge and professional talents, our thanks go to the many authors who contributed to the report. Our deepest gratitude also goes to University Vice President and Dean of the College of Public Programs for ASU, Debra Friedman, and Director of the School of Public Affairs for ASU, Jonathan Koppell, who made great efforts to ensure that ASU could provide this type of resource to Arizona.
    [Show full text]
  • NIH Tribal Consultation Session
    National Institutes of Health Tribal Consultation Session 8th Annual Tribal Public Health Summit Session Date: June 6, 2017 Prepared by the National Indian Health Board On Tuesday, June 6, 2017, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) hosted a Tribal Consultation Session at the National Indian Health Board’s (NIHB) 8th Annual Tribal Public Health Summit in Anchorage, Alaska. During this Tribal Consultation Session, tribal leaders and other representatives learned more about the NIH programs relevant to tribes and tribal organizations, as well as NIH’s Tribal Consultation Policy. I. TRIBAL CONSULTATION SESSION PARTICIPANTS The following individuals attended the NIH Tribal Consultation Session: A. Tribal Leaders (at the table and on the phone) - Patrick Anderson, Tribal Health Director, Makah Nation - Brian Bainbridge, Chairman, Cliff Lake Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians - Lynn Malerba, Chief, Mohegan Tribe - Gloria Simeon, 1st Vice Chair, Yukon-Kuskokwim Health Corporation - Larry Wright Jr., Chairman, Ponca Tribe of Nebraska B. NIH Staff - Juliana Blome, Ph.D., M.P.H., Chief of Staff, Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) C. Tribal Moderators and Speakers - Andy Joseph Jr., Board Member, NIHB and Business Council Member, The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation - Walter Phelps, Council Member, Navajo Nation Council and Navajo Area Delegate, NIH Tribal Advisory Committee (TAC) - Denise Dillard, Ph.D., Director of Research, Southcentral Foundation (SCF) and Alaska Area Delegate, NIH TAC D. Attendees - See addendum for list of additional attendees TRIBAL CONSULTATION SESSION PROGRAM On June 6, 2017, the NIH held a Tribal Consultation Session at the NIHB National Tribal Public Health Summit from 10:00 a.m.
    [Show full text]
  • 105 STAT. 1722 PUBLIC LAW 102-231—DEC. 12, 1991 Public Law 102-231 102D Congress an Act Dec
    105 STAT. 1722 PUBLIC LAW 102-231—DEC. 12, 1991 Public Law 102-231 102d Congress An Act Dec. 12,1991 To provide for the divestiture of certain properties of the San Carlos Indian Irrigation [H.R. 1476] Project in the State of Arizona, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the San Carlos United States of America in Congress assembled, Indian Irrigation Project SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. Act of 1991. This Act may be cited as the "San Carlos Indian Irrigation Project Energy. Divestiture Act of 1991". SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE. (a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds the following: (1) To provide water for irrigating, first, land allotted to Pima Indians on the Gila River Reservation and, second, other lands in public or private ownership which, in the opinion of the Secretary of the Interior, could be served without diminishing the supply necessary for the Indian lands. Congress, by the Act of June 7, 1924, authorized construction of Coolidge Dam and creation of San Carlos Reservoir on the Gila River in Arizona. (2) The Secretary, through the San Carlos Irrigation Project administered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, operates Coolidge Dam and approximately one hundred irrigation wells to provide water to SCIP lands on the Gila River Reservation and to the SCIP lands outside the reservation which is within the San Carlos Irrigation and Drainage District. (3) A hydroelectric power system was developed at Coolidge Dam pursuant to the Act of March 7, 1928, as amended, to generate power incidental to the use of San Carlos Reservoir for storing irrigation water.
    [Show full text]
  • Roundtail Chub (Gila Robusta) Status Survey of the Lower Colorado River Basin
    ROUNDTAIL CHUB (GILA ROBUSTA) STATUS SURVEY OF THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN Jeremy B. Voeltz, Wildlife Technician Nongame Branch, Wildlife Management Division Final Report to The Central Arizona Project Native Fish Conservation and Nonnative Aquatic Species Management and Control Program U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Field Office Phoenix, Arizona and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Phoenix Area Office Phoenix, Arizona Technical Report 186 Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program Program Manager: Terry B. Johnson Arizona Game and Fish Department 2221 West Greenway Road Phoenix, Arizona 85023-4399 January 2002 CIVIL RIGHTS AND DIVERSITY COMPLIANCE The Arizona Game and Fish Commission receives federal financial assistance in Sport Fish and Wildlife Restoration. Under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the U.S. Department of the Interior prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex, or disability. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility as described above, or if you desire further information please write to: Arizona Game and Fish Department Office of the Deputy Director, DOHQ 2221 West Greenway Road Phoenix, Arizona 85023-4399 and The Office for Diversity and Civil Rights U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 4040 North Fairfax Drive, Room 300 Arlington, Virginia 22203 AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT COMPLIANCE The Arizona Game and Fish Department complies with all provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Department of the Interior FISH and WILDLIFE SERVICE P.O
    This is a facsimile of the final document. A true copy of the document is available by contacting 505-248-6920. United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE P.O. Box 1306 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103 In Reply Refer To: R2/ES-TE March 8, 2004 02-02-04-F-0001 02-21-04-F-0077 Memorandum To: Area Manager, Phoenix Area Office, Bureau of Reclamation, Phoenix, Arizona From: Assistant Regional Director, Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico /s/Bryan Arroyo Subject: Biological Opinion on the Bureau of Reclamation’s Approval of Water Exchange by the San Carlos Apache Tribe for Retention in San Carlos Reservoir This biological opinion responds to your request for consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) in accordance with the requirements of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (Act). Your request of October 24, 2003, was accompanied by your October 2003 Biological Assessment (BA) titled; Biological Assessment, Proposed Water Exchange by San Carlos Apache Tribe to Maintain Minimum Pool in San Carlos Reservoir, Gila and Pinal Counties, Arizona, received in our office on October 27, 2003. We, the Service, consider formal consultation initiated on October 27, 2003, the date we received your request and BA. At issue are effects that may result from the Bureau of Reclamation’s (Reclamation) sale of Central Arizona Project (CAP) water to the San Carlos Apache Tribe (Tribe) for exchange with the Gila River Indian Community (GRIC). The exchange of CAP water would allow the retention of up to 20,000 acre-feet behind Coolidge Dam on the Gila River in Pinal, Gila, and Graham counties, Arizona (proposed action).
    [Show full text]
  • Sonorensis 2014
    Sonorensis ARIZONA-SONORA DESERT MUSEUM 2014 REFLECTIONS Sonorensis ON OUR Desert Rivers ARIZONA-SONORA DESERT MUSEUM 2014 INTRODUCTION Linda M. Brewer ASDM Press Editor Volume 34, Number 1 Winter 2014 The Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum In the arid West, water wars and water negotiations are Co-founded in 1952 by both notorious and vitally consequential to people and Arthur N. Pack and William H. Carr wildlife. Water is tied to almost every resource we use or Craig Ivanyi reap—plumbing systems, crops, mineral extraction, electri- Executive Director cal generation, digital communications, etc.—as well as to Debra Colodner Director, Conservation Education trees and other vegetation that cleanse the air, organisms and Science Department that recycle dead organic matter into substrates for new Nancy Serensky Pierstorff Jay Brennan Tom life, and a full ecosystem that provides natural resources Production Manager for us and other living beings. Especially in arid lands, riv- Kim Franklin ers are veins of ecological gold, with an impact far beyond Managing Editor Contents the ground they cover. About half of all breeding birds in Linda Brewer the southwestern United States depend on the narrow Contributing Editor 1-2 Introduction ribbons that are riparian corridors, which represent just 1 Martina Clary Linda M. Brewer percent of the land. In the Sonoran Desert, 85 percent of Design and Production wildlife species depend on surface water or an associated Sonorensis is published as a benefit to the 3-8 The Colorado riparian habitat in some phase of their life cycle. Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum membership as Kerry Schwartz In this issue of Sonorensis, we tell the story of our a resource for furthering understanding of the rivers, because the story of rivers in the Sonoran Desert Sonoran Desert Region.
    [Show full text]