DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Environmental Impact Statement MX: Buried Trench Construction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Environmental Impact Statement MX: Buried Trench Construction ADV-AI0 352 AIR FORCE SYSTEMS COMMAND WASHINGTON OC F/G 13/2 NOV 77ENVIRONMENTALIMPACT STATEMENT MX: BURIED TRENCH CONSTRUCTION A--ETCttI) UNCLASSIF IED AFSC-TP-81-50 1 EIIIIlNL *IMENMONEEl IIIIiiiiii EIIhIhIhIoE- Unclassified SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Dal. Enftered) REPORT DOCUMENTATIDN PAPE RFAD INSTRUCTIONS 'EFORFCOMPILETING FORM It REPORT 64UMaER " 2 GOVT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER // AFSC-TR-81-50 . TIT.LE (and Subtitle) 5. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED Fina"l_ Environmental Impact Statement Final 1977-78 MX: Buried Trench Construction and Test Project- 6 PERFORMING O1G. REPORT NUMBER 7 AUTHOR(s) / B. CONTRACT 0R GRANT NUBER(s) Henningson, Durham & Richardson -- Santa Barbara CA 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS AREAQRK UNIT NUMBERS 63305 6,_, 1 CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE Deputy for Environment and Safety N// Office of the Secretary of the AF(SAF/MIQ) 50- Washington DC 20330 14 MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADDRESS(,f different fron (,o-troIiing Office) 15. SECURITY CLASS. (of this report) ICBM System Program office Unclassified Space & Missile Systems Organization (SAMS),. DECLASSI FCATON DOWNGRADING Norton AFB California SCHEDULE 16. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of thi, Report) Unclassified Unlimited J 17 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the abstract entered ,, Block 20, if different from Report) IS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 19. KEY WORDS (Continue on reverse side if necessary and Identify by block number) Environmental Impact Statements Air Force MX Buried Trench Concept 20. ABSTRACT (Continue on reverse side If necessary and Identify by block number) The United States Air Force proposes to construct two sections of underground tunnel in the San Cristobal Valley on the Luke Air Force Range in Yuma County, Arizona. The proposed construction project will provide essential cost and construction data to analyzD conceptual protective structures for the mobile, land-based Inter- continental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) known as MX. The trench will also serve as a test bed for mechanisms designed to punch through the tunnel roof and erec- A ctimmu misqilp +- _im,,1I l.,.h DD FOR73 1473% EITOO oV6S ISOBSOLETE Unclassified.1 ' JSCRTAN tC UnclassifiATONeFd '- SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (*%on Date e .fi *.14 Envionmetal mpac Anlssrcs F0A NIOMNA FINAENVIRONMNTA IMPACSTAEMEN Djstrjiutiofl Un~izited FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTSTATEMENT for the MX:BURIED TRENCHCONSTRUCTION ANDTESTPROJECT DEPARTMENTOFTHEAIR FORCE November, 1977 I-Acce< ~tl FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE MX BURIED TRENCH CONSTRUCTION AND TEST PROJECT (ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION) SUMMARY CONTACT FOR INQUIRIES This statement was prepared by the United States Air Force. Any inquiries concerning this proposed action should be addressed to the Deputy for Environment and Safety, Office of the Secretary of the Air Force (SAF,'MIQ), Washington, D.C., 20330. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION The United States Air Force proposes to construct two sections of under- ground tunnel in the San Cristobal Valley on the Luke Air Force Range in Yuma County, Arizona. The proposed construction project will provide essential cost and construction data to analyze conceptual protective str'.ctures for the mobile, land-based Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) System known as MX. The trench will also serve as a test bed for mechanisms designed to punch through the tunnel roof and erect a dummy missile to simulate launch position. Both tunnels will involve trench excavations approximately 22 ft (6.7 m) deep by 17 ft (5.2 m) wide to allow continuous slip-form placement of two concrete tunnels with dimensions of 13 ft (4 m) and 16.5 ft (5 m) inside and outside diameter, reipectively. The two tunnels would total approximately 21,500 ft (6,553 m): a 1,500 ft (457 r) section providing procedure and equipment shakedown and the breakout test bed; and a 20,000 ft (6,096 m) section providing cost and construction data.AThe construction project, known as MX: Buried Trench Construction and Test Project, would span eight months from February through September 1978. The MX program was established in 1973 and is an ICBM technology program. The FY78 budget request is for $134.4 million. The results of the MX: Buried Trench Construction Test Project will provide baseline data for future decisions regarding tl-!eMX system. Deployment of a force of MX missiles will not be determined until arnroved by the U.S. Congress. iV_ S-was The major environmental impact of the proposed action will be long-term aesthetic degradation caused by removal of vegetation and disruption of varnished desert pavement for tunnel construction. This impact will occur within the 200 acre test site, less than 0., percent of the bajada's total land area. Other temporary impacts during the term of the project could include intermittent disturbance to desert bighorn sheep in the Mohawk Moun-ains, the loss of some reptiles and burrowing rodents along the trench alignments, and increased wind and water erosion of disturbed soils within the project area. These temporary impacts are, however, not expected to be significant due to scheduling of project events, fugitive dust control measures, and final grading procedures. Total cost of the construction project is estimated to be $20 million. 'ost of the construction work force is expected to come from Yuma and Maricopa counties in Arizona. The labor force will peak in April 1978 with approximately 238 employees. The MX program is being managed by the ICBM System Program Office, Space and Missile Systems Organization (SAMSO), located at Norton Air Force Base, California. Alternatives to the proposed action are: " No Action " Project Postponement " Construction of the Project at a Different Scale " Alternative Siting * Alternati 'e Construction Methods The Final EnvLronmental :mpact Statement was made available to the =o~nzi Dn Environmental Q.ality and the public in November 1977. COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Written :omments were received from the following sources. All written -omments are reproduced Ln the appendices. FEDERAL AGENCIES United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service 3008 Federal BuiLding Phoenix, Arizona, 37025 United States Department of Defense Defense Nuclear Agency Washington, D.C. 2J305 -vi- United States Department of the Interior Office of the Secretary Washington, D.C. 20240 United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service P.O. Box 1306 Albuquerque, New Mexico 37103 United States Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Western Region P.O. Box 92007, Worldway Postal Center Los Angeles, California 90009 United States Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Region Nine Two Embarcadero Center, Suite 530 San Francisco, California 94111 United States Environmental Protection Agency Region IX 100 California Street San Francisco, California 94111 STATE AND LOCAL AGENCIES Arizona Atomic Energy Commission Donald C. Gilbert, Exc-utive Director 2929 West Indian School Road Phoenix, Arizona 8501- Arizona Bureau of Geology and Mineral Technology Dr. Richard T. Moore University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona 35721 Arizona Commission of Agriculture and Horticulture Mr. James R. Carter, Director 1668 West Adams Phoenix, Arizona a5007 Arizona Department of Transportation Highways Division 206 South Seventeenth Avenue Phoenix, Arizona 85007 -vii- Arizona Game and Fish Department 2222 West Greenway Road Phoenix, Arizona 85023 Arizona State Clearinghouse 1700 West Washington Street Room 505 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Arizona State Land Department 1624 West Adams Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Arizona State Museum Dr. R. Gwinn Vivian Arizona State Archaeologist Tucson, Arizona 85721 Arizona State Park's Board Michael A. Ramnes, Director 1688 W. Adams, Room 109 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Arizona State University Dr. James Becker Center for Public Affairs Tempe, Arizona 85281 Arizona State University Bert M. Fireman, Curator University Library Tempe, Arizona 85281 Department of Health Services Dr. Suzanne Dandoy, Director 1740 West Adams Street Phoenix, Arizona 35007 Department of Library Archives Marguerite B. Cooley, Director Capitol Building, Third Floor Phoenix, Arizona 85007 District IV Council of Governments Mr. Frank Servin, Executive Director 377 South Main St., Room 202 Yuma, Arizona 85364 Division of Emergency Services Col. 3eorge B. Jordan, Director 5636 East McDowell Road Phoenix, Arizona 85008 -viii- I Game and Fish Department Mr. Robert Jantzen, Director 2222 W. Greenway Phoenix, Arizona 85023 Maricopa County Planning Department 300 County Administration Bldg. Ill S. 3rd Avenue Phoenix, Arizona 85003 Office of Planning Mr. Roger Root, Acting Chief Department of Economic Security 1717 W. Jefferson St. Phoenix, Arizona 35007 Mr. Roland H. Sharer State Liaison Officer, AORCC 4433 N. 19th Ave., Suite 203 Phoenix, Arizona 35015 State Water Commission Mr. Wesley E. Steiner 222 N. Central Ave., Suite 800 Phoenix, Arizona 35004 OTHER SOURCES Allen W. Hatheway One Tyler Road Belmont, Massachusetts 02178 The Ralph M. Parsons Company Engineers-Constructors A Pasadena, California 91124 PUBLIC HEARING A Piblic Hearing was held at Wellton, Arizona on 19 September 1977, dith Col. Allan C. Smith, Fifth Judiciary Circuit, Travis AFB, CA, presiding (Complete transcript in Appendix 3). x_ -ix- LOCATION OF REFERENCE COPIES Copies of the Final Environmental Impact Statement have been sent to the following libraries for the convenience of the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Lower Gila Region, Arizona
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR HUBERT WORK, Secretary UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, Director Water-Supply Paper 498 THE LOWER GILA REGION, ARIZONA A GEOGBAPHIC, GEOLOGIC, AND HTDBOLOGIC BECONNAISSANCE WITH A GUIDE TO DESEET WATEEING PIACES BY CLYDE P. ROSS WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1923 ADDITIONAL COPIES OF THIS PUBLICATION MAT BE PROCURED FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON, D. C. AT 50 CENTS PEE COPY PURCHASER AGREES NOT TO RESELL OR DISTRIBUTE THIS COPT FOR PROFIT. PUB. RES. 57, APPROVED MAT 11, 1822 CONTENTS. I Page. Preface, by O. E. Melnzer_____________ __ xr Introduction_ _ ___ __ _ 1 Location and extent of the region_____._________ _ J. Scope of the report- 1 Plan _________________________________ 1 General chapters _ __ ___ _ '. , 1 ' Route'descriptions and logs ___ __ _ 2 Chapter on watering places _ , 3 Maps_____________,_______,_______._____ 3 Acknowledgments ______________'- __________,______ 4 General features of the region___ _ ______ _ ., _ _ 4 Climate__,_______________________________ 4 History _____'_____________________________,_ 7 Industrial development___ ____ _ _ _ __ _ 12 Mining __________________________________ 12 Agriculture__-_______'.____________________ 13 Stock raising __ 15 Flora _____________________________________ 15 Fauna _________________________ ,_________ 16 Topography . _ ___ _, 17 Geology_____________ _ _ '. ___ 19 Bock formations. _ _ '. __ '_ ----,----- 20 Basal complex___________, _____ 1 L __. 20 Tertiary lavas ___________________ _____ 21 Tertiary sedimentary formations___T_____1___,r 23 Quaternary sedimentary formations _'__ _ r- 24 > Quaternary basalt ______________._________ 27 Structure _______________________ ______ 27 Geologic history _____ _____________ _ _____ 28 Early pre-Cambrian time______________________ .
    [Show full text]
  • United States Department of the Interior U.S
    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 2-21-96-F-094-R2 August 6, 2003 Colonel James Uken Director 56 Range Management Office Luke Air Force Base 7224 North 139th Drive Luke Air Force Base, Arizona 85309-1420 Dear Colonel Uken: This document constitutes the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) biological opinion based on our review of the proposed military training administered by the U.S. Air Force (USAF) on the Barry M. Goldwater Range (BMGR) located in Maricopa, Pima, and Yuma counties, Arizona, and its effects on the Sonoran pronghorn (Antilocapra americana sonoriensis)(SOPH) in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (ESA). This revised biological opinion is provided in response to a Memorandum Opinion and Order dated January 7, 2003, from Judge Huvelle of the United States District Court (Court) for the District of Columbia in the case of Defenders of Wildlife, et al., v. Bruce Babbitt, et al. (Civil Action No. 99-927 [ESH]). This biological opinion is based on information supplied in your letter of May 15, 2003, information provided in previous consultation on this action, updated information on the proposed action provided by your agency, new information on the status of the Sonoran pronghorn, telephone conversations, field investigations, and other sources of information as detailed herein. A complete administrative record of this consultation is on file in the Phoenix, Arizona, Ecological Services Field Office.
    [Show full text]
  • YUMA COUNTY MULTI- JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN March 2019
    YUMA COUNTY MULTI- JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN March 2019 YUMA COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1: JURISDICTIONAL ADOPTION AND FEMA APPROVAL...................................................... 6 1.1 DMA 2000 Requirements ............................................................................................................................ 6 1.1.1 General Requirements............................................................................................................................. 6 1.1.2 Tribal Government Assurances ............................................................................................................. 6 1.2 Official Record of Adoption........................................................................................................................ 6 SECTION 2: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 8 2.1 Plan History..................................................................................................................................................... 8 2.2 Plan Purpose and Authority ....................................................................................................................... 8 2.3 General Plan Description............................................................................................................................. 8 SECTION 3: COMMUNITY DESCRIPTIONS .........................................................................................
    [Show 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 2-21-94-F-192R2 September 30, 2002 Memorandum To: Field Manager, Phoenix Field Office, Bureau of Land Management From: Acting Field Supervisor Subject: Biological Opinion for Five Livestock Grazing Allotments in the Vicinity of Ajo, Arizona This biological opinion responds to your request for consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531- 1544), as amended (Act). Your request for formal consultation was dated April 19, 2002, and received by us on April 23, 2002. At issue are impacts that may result from the proposed reauthorization of livestock grazing on the Sentinel, Cameron, Childs, Coyote Flat, and Why allotments located in Maricopa and Pima counties, Arizona. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has determined that the proposed action for the five allotments may adversely affect the endangered Sonoran pronghorn (Antilocapra americana sonoriensis), and the proposed action for the Cameron and Childs allotments may adversely affect the endangered cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl (Glaucidium brasilianum cactorum). In your letter, you also requested our concurrence that the proposed action on the Cameron, Childs, Coyote Flat, and Why allotments may affect, but will not likely adversely affect, the endangered lesser long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris curasoae yerbabuena). We concur with that determination, which is based on sound analysis and guidance criteria for the species mutually agreed upon by our agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Abstracts of the Symposium of the Geology and Mineral Deposits Of
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Abstracts of the Symposium of the geology and mineral deposits of the Ajo and Lukeville 1° by 2° quadrangle, Arizona Presented at Tucson, Arizona February 26, 1988 Compiled by Floyd Grayl Open-File Report 88-217 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standard and stratigraphic nomenclature ^Menlo Park, California 1988 CONTENTS Page 1. The Cusmap Program in the Ajo and Lukeville 1° by 2° quadrangles, by Floyd Gray .................................................................... 1 2. Mineral occurrences in the Ajo and Lukeville 1° by 2° quadrangles, Arizona, by R.M. Tosdal and J.A. Peterson............. 3 3. Thermo-tectonic terranes of the Ajo and Lukeville ro by 2° quadrangle K-Ar geochronology of early Tertiary and older rocks, by R. M. Tosdal and RJ. Miller ............................. 5 4. Trace-element systematic of peraluminous leuco-granites, Baboquivari Mountains Range, south-central Arizona, by G.B. Haxel ........................................................................................................ 9 5. Geological, geochemical, and geophysical studies in the central portion of the Mohawk Mountains, southwestern Arizona, USA, by R.G. Eppinger, P.K. Theobald, D.P. Klein, and G.L. Raines ............................................................................................. 1 0 6. Stratigraphy, geochronology, and geochemistry of a calc- alkaline volcanic field near Ajo, southwestern Arizona, by Floyd Gray and RJ. Miller...................................!.................................... 1 4 7. K-Ar ages of volcanic rocks near Ajo, Pima, and Maricopa Counties southwestern Arizona, by RJ. Miller, Floyd Gray, R.M. Tosdal, and E.H. McKee .................................................................... 1 5 8. Structural reinterpretation of the Ajo Mining District, Pima County, Arizona, by D.P. Cox, J.T.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona's Wildlife Linkages Assessment
    ARIZONAARIZONA’’SS WILDLIFEWILDLIFE LINKAGESLINKAGES ASSESSMENTASSESSMENT Workgroup Prepared by: The Arizona Wildlife Linkages ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT 2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT Arizona’s Wildlife Linkages Assessment Prepared by: The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup Siobhan E. Nordhaugen, Arizona Department of Transportation, Natural Resources Management Group Evelyn Erlandsen, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Habitat Branch Paul Beier, Northern Arizona University, School of Forestry Bruce D. Eilerts, Arizona Department of Transportation, Natural Resources Management Group Ray Schweinsburg, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Research Branch Terry Brennan, USDA Forest Service, Tonto National Forest Ted Cordery, Bureau of Land Management Norris Dodd, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Research Branch Melissa Maiefski, Arizona Department of Transportation, Environmental Planning Group Janice Przybyl, The Sky Island Alliance Steve Thomas, Federal Highway Administration Kim Vacariu, The Wildlands Project Stuart Wells, US Fish and Wildlife Service 2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT First Printing Date: December, 2006 Copyright © 2006 The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written consent from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written consent of the copyright holder. Additional copies may be obtained by submitting a request to: The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup E-mail: [email protected] 2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup Mission Statement “To identify and promote wildlife habitat connectivity using a collaborative, science based effort to provide safe passage for people and wildlife” 2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT Primary Contacts: Bruce D.
    [Show full text]
  • Section Four—Open Space Element
    Open Space Element Section Four—Open Space Element 4.1 Introduction There are many ways that open space can be defined, but the following definition of open space is the one used in the Yuma County 2020 Comprehensive Plan. Open space is defined as any publicly owned and publicly accessible space or area characterized by great natural scenic beauty or whose existing openness, natural condition or present state of use, if retained, would maintain or enhance the conservation of natural or scenic resources. Arizona Revised Statutes §11-821(D)(1) requires that an open space element contained in a comprehensive plan have the following components: A comprehensive inventory of open space areas, recreational resources and designation of access points to open space areas and resources; an analysis of forecasted needs, policies for managing and protecting open space areas and re- sources and implementation strategies to acquire open space areas and further establish recrea- tional resources; and policies and implementation strategies designed to promote a regional sys- tem of integrated open space and recreational resources and a consideration of any existing re- gional open space plan. A rich variety of open spaces exists within Yuma County. Only a very small portion of the County is urbanized and over 91% of the unincorporated Yuma County is publicly owned. Much of the federally owned land and a small portion of state owned land in Yuma County is specifically designated and managed as open space areas. A comprehensive inventory of these designated open space areas as required under ARS §11-821(D)(1)(a) is contained in this ele- ment.
    [Show full text]
  • Tectonic Geomorphology of the Luke Air Force Range, Arizona
    Arizona Geological Society Digest, Volume XII, 1980 63 Tectonic Geomorphology of the Luke Air Force Range, Arizona by William C. Tucker, Jr.1 Abstract In arid and semiarid regions the relative rates of tectonic activity and the approximate age of the last major tectonic pulse can be ascertained by analyzing the landforms of the mountain fronts and their adjacent piedmonts. Tectonic activity triggers a change in the base level of fluvial systems that causes the development of a characteristic suite of land­ forms. It is these landform characteristics that are examined in making a tectonic geomor­ phic analysis of an area. The Luke Air Force Range, an Air Force missile and gunnery training range in south­ western Arizona, is an area of typical basin-and-range topography of generally linear mountain ranges separated by broad, flat valleys. While overall the ranges are quite linear, the mountain fronts are, for the most part, highly sinuous, pedimented, and lacking a thick accumulation of recent alluvial material on the piedmont. A tectonic geomorphic analysis of the Luke Air Force Range shows that the area has been almost entirely free of tectonic activity for at least the Holocene and Pleistocene epochs and probably for part of the Pliocene. A few mountain-front segments show signs of slight tec­ tonic activity during the Pleistocene. One mountain- front segment displays landforms indica­ tive of tectonism continuing into the Holocene. Introduction The major portion of the basin-and- range tectonism can be dated with fair reliability us­ Southwestern Arizona has had a long history ing the volcanic rocks and their relationship to of tectonic and igneous activity .
    [Show full text]
  • Massachusetts Massachusetts Office of Travel and Tourism, 10 Park Plaza, Suite 4510, Boston, MA 02116
    dventure Guide to the Champlain & Hudson River Valleys Robert & Patricia Foulke HUNTER PUBLISHING, INC. 130 Campus Drive Edison, NJ 08818-7816 % 732-225-1900 / 800-255-0343 / fax 732-417-1744 E-mail [email protected] IN CANADA: Ulysses Travel Publications 4176 Saint-Denis, Montréal, Québec Canada H2W 2M5 % 514-843-9882 ext. 2232 / fax 514-843-9448 IN THE UNITED KINGDOM: Windsor Books International The Boundary, Wheatley Road, Garsington Oxford, OX44 9EJ England % 01865-361122 / fax 01865-361133 ISBN 1-58843-345-5 © 2003 Patricia and Robert Foulke This and other Hunter travel guides are also available as e-books in a variety of digital formats through our online partners, including Amazon.com, netLibrary.com, BarnesandNoble.com, and eBooks.com. For complete information about the hundreds of other travel guides offered by Hunter Publishing, visit us at: www.hunterpublishing.com All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a re- trieval system, or transmitted in any form, or by any means, electronic, mechani- cal, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the written permission of the publisher. Brief extracts to be included in reviews or articles are permitted. This guide focuses on recreational activities. As all such activities contain ele- ments of risk, the publisher, author, affiliated individuals and companies disclaim any responsibility for any injury, harm, or illness that may occur to anyone through, or by use of, the information in this book. Every effort was made to in- sure the accuracy of information in this book, but the publisher and author do not assume, and hereby disclaim, any liability for loss or damage caused by errors, omissions, misleading information or potential travel problems caused by this guide, even if such errors or omissions result from negligence, accident or any other cause.
    [Show full text]
  • Mineral Resources of the Muggins Mountains Wilderness Study Area, Yuma County, Arizona
    Mineral Resources of the Muggins Mountains Wilderness Study Area, Yuma County, Arizona ARIZONA AVAILABILITY OF BOOKS AND MAP~ OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Instructions on ordering publications of the U.S. Geological Survey, along with prices of the last offerings, are given in the cur­ rent-year issues of the monthly catalog "New Publications of the U.S. Geological Survey." Prices of available U.S. Geological Sur­ vey publications released prior to the current year are listed in the most recent annual "Price and Availability LisL" Publications that are listed in various U.S. Geological Survey catalogs (see back inside cover) but not listed in the most recent annual "Price and Availability List" are no longer available. Prices of reports released to the open files are given in the listing "U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Reports," updated month­ ly, which is for sale in microfiche from the U.S. Geological Survey, Books and Open-File Reports Section, Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225. Reports released through the NTIS may be obtained by writing to the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, VA 22161; please include NTIS report number with inquiry. Order U.S. Geological Survey publications by mail or over the counter from the offices given below. BY MAIL Books OVER THE COUNTER Books Professional Papers, Bulletins, Water-Supply Papers, Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, Circulars, publications of general in­ , Books of the U.S. Geological Survey are available over the terest (such as leaflets, pamphlets, booklets}, single copies of Earthquakes counter at the following Geological Survey Public Inquiries Offices, all & Volcanoes, Preliminary Determination of Epicenters, and some mis­ of which are authorized agents of the Superintendent of Documents: cellaneous reports, including some of the foregoing series that have gone out of print at the Superintendent of Documents, are obtainable by mail from • WASHINGTON, D.C.--Main Interior Bldg., 2600 corridor, 18th and C Sts., NW.
    [Show full text]
  • AHS-Rio Colorado Ephemera Collection, Arizona Historical Society- Rio Colorado Division, Yuma
    TITLE: AHS–Rio Colorado Ephemera Collection DATE RANGE: 1870’s - current PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: 89 Linear Feet (176 boxes) PROVENANCE: In 2013 all ephemeral and vertical file materials from multiple donors and locations were evaluated and consolidated to form a unified ephemera collection that could grow into the future. Recognition should be given to the thousands of donors and thousands of volunteer hours who collected and organized these materials since 1965. RESTRICTIONS: None CREDIT LINE: AHS-Rio Colorado Ephemera Collection, Arizona Historical Society- Rio Colorado Division, Yuma PROCESSSED BY: John Irwin, 2013-2014 SCOPE AND CONTENT NOTE: This is the largest archival collection in the AHS-Rio Colorado holdings. It represents a wide range of social, economic, cultural and ethnic communities reflecting the spectrum of human activity, past and present. The Yuma County Historical Society began collecting archival materials in 1965. This effort continued after it became a branch of the Arizona Historical Society in 1971, and later the AHS-Rio Colorado Division. Over the decades various methods were employed by staff and volunteers to organize segments of the materials. The bulk of this collection is based on the organizational structure adopted in the 1980s. Subheadings have been added to make this large body of material more accessible to researchers. Between 1993 and 2012 volunteers also assembled and organized twelve linear feet of newspaper articles primarily from the Yuma Daily Sun. These contemporary articles have been added within the appropriate headings. It is arranged alphabetically both by geographic place names and subject headings that range from broad to more specific. Its scope covers the breadth of human activities and knowledge of the Lower Colorado River area of Arizona, especially Yuma and La Paz Counties, from the Spanish period to the present.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Re-Analysis of Cumulative Impacts on the Sonoran Pronghorn ORGAN PIPE CACTUS National Monument • Arizona U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Re-Analysis of Cumulative Effects on the Sonoran Pronghorn Supplement to the Environmental Impact Statement For the 1997 General Management Plan/ Development Concept Plans For Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument Summary At Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, the National Park Service (NPS) is re-analyzing the cumulative impact of actions on the Sonoran pronghorn (Antilocapra americana sonoriense). The “cumulative impact” is the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of an action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such actions. The Sonoran pronghorn is an endangered species that inhabits Sonoran desert habitats found primarily on federally-managed lands in southwestern Arizona, and in northern Sonora, Mexico. Current estimates indicate that approximately 100 pronghorn exist in the United States today. Factors threatening the continued survival of the pronghorn include lack of recruitment (survival of fawns), insufficient forage and/or water, drought coupled with predation, physical manmade barriers to historical habitat, illegal hunting, degradation of habitat from livestock grazing, diminishing size of the Gila and Sonoyta rivers, and human encroachment. The NPS is re-analyzing cumulative impacts on the pronghorn in response to a court order ruling (civil action No. 99-927) that found the environmental impact statement (EIS) on the 1997 Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument General Management Plan/Development Concept Plans/Environmental Impact Statement (GMP/DCP/EIS) failed to address the cumulative impacts of activities on the pronghorn.
    [Show full text]