DOCSLIB.ORG

United States Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 Phoenix, Arizona 85

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
United States Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 Phoenix, Arizona 85 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 January 31, 2003 AESO/SE 2-21-95-F-441 2-21-01-F-211 2-21-95-F-442 2-21-01-F-300 2-21-95-F-443 2-21-01-F-302 2-21-95-F-446 2-21-01-F-303 2-21-95-F-447 2-21-01-F-306 2-21-01-F-105 2-21-01-F-307 Mr. John C. Bedell Forest Supervisor Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest P.O. Box 640 Springerville, Arizona 85938-0640 RE: Blue and San Francisco Rivers Consultation Dear Mr. Bedell: This biological opinion (BO) 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 May 14, 2001, and received by us on May 15, 2001. At issue are impacts that may result from the proposed authorization or re- authorization of livestock grazing on multiple allotments along the Blue and San Francisco rivers within the Apache National Forest, located in Apache and Greenlee counties, Arizona, and their effects to spikedace (Meda fulgida), loach minnow (Tiaroga cobitis), critical habitat for spikedace and loach minnow, Mexican spotted owl (Strix occidentalis lucida), and Chiricahua leopard frog (Rana chiricahuensis). Additionally, you requested our concurrence that the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus), southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii Mr. John C. Bedell 2 extimus), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), jaguar (Panthera onca), lesser long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris curasoae yerbabuenae), and Arizona hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. arizonicus). The FWS concurs that the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect these species. Details for these concurrences are provided in Appendix A. This biological opinion is based on information provided in multiple biological assessments (BA), addenda to those BAs, draft and final environmental assessments, project proposals, Decision Notices (DNs), Term Permits and modifications, allotment maps, and other supporting documents; telephone conversations with Forest Service staff, field investigations, and other sources of information. Specific sources of information will be listed under each allotment in the project description below. Literature cited in this biological opinion is not a complete bibliography of all literature available on the species of concern, livestock grazing and its effects, or on other subjects considered in this opinion. A complete administrative record of this consultation is on file at this office. Mr. John C. Bedell 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS BIOLOGICAL OPINION .......................................................8 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ...............................8 Stone Creek Allotment ...............................................9 Upper Campbell Blue Allotment .......................................11 Turkey Creek Allotment .............................................12 Bobcat-Johnson Allotment ...........................................13 Foote Creek Allotment ..............................................15 Red Hill Allotment .................................................17 Bush Creek Allotment ..............................................18 Fishhook-Steeple Mesa Allotments ....................................19 Cow Flat Allotment ................................................20 KP and Raspberry Allotments ........................................22 Pigeon Allotment ..................................................24 Wildbunch Allotment ...............................................26 Sardine Allotment ..................................................27 Hickey Allotment ..................................................28 STATUS OF THE SPECIES [rangewide and/or recovery unit] .....................29 Spikedace .......................................................29 Loach Minnow ....................................................31 Mexican Spotted Owl ..............................................34 Chiricahua Leopard Frog ............................................39 Arizona Hedgehog Cactus ...........................................44 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE ..........................................44 Status of the Species and Critical Habitat Within the Action Area ..............45 Stone Creek Allotment ........................................46 Upper Campbell Blue Allotment .................................47 Turkey Creek Allotment .......................................47 Bobcat-Johnson Allotment .....................................48 Foote Creek Allotment ........................................49 Red Hill Allotment ...........................................49 Bush Creek Allotment ........................................49 Fishhook - Steeple Mesa Allotments .............................50 Cow Flat Allotment ..........................................50 Pigeon Allotment ............................................51 Wildbunch Allotment .........................................53 Factors Affecting Species Environment Within the Action Area ................55 Blue River .................................................55 San Francisco River ..........................................59 Past Actions ................................................60 Mr. John C. Bedell 4 Climatic Conditions ..........................................62 Allotment Conditions .........................................63 Stone Creek Allotment ..................................64 Upper Campbell Blue Allotment ...........................66 Turkey Creek Allotment .................................68 Bobcat-Johnson Allotment ...............................69 Foote Creek Allotment ..................................71 Red Hill Allotment .....................................72 Bush Creek Allotment ............................75 Fishhook-Steeple Mesa Allotments ........................76 Cow Flat Allotment ....................................78 KP and Raspberry Allotments ............................80 Pigeon Allotment ......................................83 Wildbunch Allotment ...................................85 Sardine Allotment ......................................88 Hickey Allotment ......................................90 EFFECTS OF THE ACTION ........................................95 Watershed Alteration ...............................................95 Aquatic and Riparian Habitats ........................................97 Downstream Effects of Grazing .......................................101 Faunal Alteration .................................................101 Summary of Effects ...............................................101 Species Specific Effects ............................................102 Spikedace ................................................104 Loach Minnow .............................................104 Mexican Spotted Owl .......................................105 Chiricahua Leopard Frog .....................................107 Allotment-Specific Effects ..........................................110 Stone Creek Allotment .......................................110 Upper Campbell Blue Allotment ................................110 Turkey Creek Allotment ......................................111 Bobcat-Johnson Allotment ....................................112 Foote Creek Allotment .......................................113 Red Hill Allotment ..........................................114 Bush Creek Allotment .......................................116 Fishhook-Steeple Mesa Allotment ..............................117 Cow Flat Allotment .........................................118 KP and Raspberry Allotments .................................119 Pigeon Allotment ...........................................120 Mr. John C. Bedell 5 Wildbunch Allotment ........................................121 Sardine Allotment ...........................................123 Hickey Allotment ...........................................123 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ...............................................124 CONCLUSION .......................................................125 Spikedace ......................................................125 Loach Minnow ...................................................127 Mexican Spotted Owl .............................................128 Chiricahua Leopard Frog ...........................................128 INCIDENTAL TAKE STATEMENT .............................................129 AMOUNT OR EXTENT OF TAKE ........................................129 Spikedace ......................................................129 Loach Minnow ...................................................130 Mexican Spotted Owl .............................................131 Chiricahua Leopard Frog ...........................................131 EFFECT OF THE TAKE ................................................133 Loach Minnow ...................................................133 Chiricahua Leopard Frog ...........................................133 REASONABLE AND PRUDENT MEASURES ..............................133 Loach Minnow ...................................................133 Chiricahua Leopard Frog ...........................................135 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................138 LITERATURE CITED ........................................................140 APPENDIX A - Concurrences ..................................................157
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • ECOLOGICAL OVERVIEW EAST CLEAR CREEK PARCEL COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA Resolution Copper
    ECOLOGICAL OVERVIEW EAST CLEAR CREEK PARCEL COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA Resolution Copper Prepared for: 102 Magma Heights – Superior, Arizona 85173 Project Number: 807.98 13 06 January 2017 WestLand Resources, Inc. 4001 E. Paradise Falls Drive Tucson, Arizona 85712 5202069585 East Clear Creek Parcel - Coconino County, Arizona Ecological Overview TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................................... ES-1 1. INTRODUCTION AND METHODS ................................................................................................ 1 1.1. Purpose and Organization of Report ............................................................................................ 1 1.2. Methods and Approach ................................................................................................................... 1 2. REGIONAL SETTING .......................................................................................................................... 3 3. PROPERTY AND ADJACENT LAND USES .................................................................................. 5 4. PHYSICAL RESOURCES ...................................................................................................................... 7 4.1. Landform and Topography ............................................................................................................. 7 4.2. Geology and Geomorphology .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • THE WATER QUALITY of the LITTLE COLORADO RIVER WATERSHED Fiscal Year 2007
    THE WATER QUALITY OF THE LITTLE COLORADO RIVER WATERSHED Fiscal Year 2007 Prepared by the Surface Water Section March 2009 Publication Number OFR 09-11 LCR REPORT FY 2007 THE WATER QUALITY OF THE LITTLE COLORADO RIVER WATERSHED Fiscal Year 2007 By The Monitoring and Assessments Units Edited by Jason Jones and Meghan Smart Arizona Department of Environmental Quality ADEQ Water Quality Division Surface Water Section Monitoring Unit, Standards & Assessment Unit 1110 West Washington St. Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2935 ii LCR REPORT FY 2007 THANKS: Field Assistance: Anel Avila, Justin Bern, Aiko Condon, Kurt Ehrenburg, Karyn Hanson, Lee Johnson, Jason Jones, Lin Lawson, Sam Rector, Patti Spindler, Meghan Smart, and John Woods. Report Review: Kurt Ehrenburg, Lin Lawson, and Patti Spindler. Report Cover: From left to right: EMAP team including ADEQ, AZGF, and USGS; Rainbow over the Round Valley in the White Mountains; Measuring Tape, and Clear Creek located east of Payson. iii LCR REPORT FY 2007 ABBREVIATIONS Abbreviation Name Abbreviation Name ALKCACO3 Total Alkalinity SO4-T Sulfate Total ALKPHEN Phenolphthalein Alkalinity SPCOND Specific Conductivity Arizona Department of Suspended Sediment AQEQ Environmental Quality SSC Concentration AS-D Arsenic Dissolved su Standard pH Units AS-T Arsenic Total TDS Total Dissolved Solids Arizona Game and Fish AZGF Department TEMP-AIR Air Temperature Arizona Pollutant Discharge TEMP- AZPDES Elimination System WATER Water Temperature BA-D Barium Dissolved TKN Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen B-T Boron Total TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load CA-T Calcium Total USGS U.S. Geological Survey CFS Cubic Feet per Second ZN-D Zinc Dissolved CO3 Carbonate ZN-T Zinc Total CU-TRACE Copper Trace Metal CWA Clean Water Act DO-MGL Dissolved Oxygen in mg/l DO- PERCENT Dissolved Oxygen in Percent E.
    [Show full text]
  • The Adjudication That Ate Arizona Water Law
    THE ADJUDICATION THAT ATE ARIZONA WATER LAW Joseph M. Feller* [O]ne does not “get out” of the Gila adjudication. It is a sort of judicial black hole into which light, sound, lawyers, water—even Judge Goodfarb—indeed, whole forests of paper, will disappear. The only way out is out the other end.1 INTRODUCTION On April 26, 2004, the thirtieth anniversary of the initiation of the Gila River water adjudication (“the Adjudication”),2 the Salt River Project (“SRP”) filed five motions with the clerk of the Maricopa County Superior Court. Each styled “APPLICATION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND REQUEST FOR INJUNCTION,” the motions requested that the court order five different respondents to cease and desist from water uses that were allegedly depleting water flows in Arizona’s Verde River.3 According to the motions and an accompanying Memorandum of Points and Authorities, these depletions of the Verde River were depriving SRP and its members of water to which they are entitled as senior appropriators on the Salt River, to which the Verde is tributary. SRP’s attempts to restrain water uses in the Verde Valley actually go back much farther than the initiation of the Adjudication in 1974. Over a century * Professor of Law, Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law, Arizona State University. This Article appears in Volume 49 Number 2 of the Arizona Law Review, which collects papers originally presented at the Water Law and Policy Conference hosted by the University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law in Tucson, Arizona, on October 6–7, 2006.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Works Director for General Community Information
    NAVAJO COUNTY, ARIZONA AND INCORPORATED AREAS VOLUME 1 OF 3 Community Community Name Number NAVAJO COUNTY, UNINCORPORATED AREAS 040066 HOLBROOK, CITY OF 040067 PINETOP-LAKESIDE, TOWN OF 040127 SHOW LOW, CITY OF 040069 SNOWFLAKE, TOWN OF 040070 TAYLOR, TOWN OF 040071 WINSLOW, CITY OF 040072 Navajo County September 26, 2008 Federal Emergency Management Agency FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 04017CV001A NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) may not contain all data available within the repository. It is advisable to contact the community repository for any additional data. Selected Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) panels for the community contain information that was previously shown separately on the corresponding Flood Boundary and Floodway Map (FBFM) panels (e.g. floodways, cross sections). In addition, former flood hazard zone designations have been changed as follows: Old Zone New Zone A1 through A30 AE B X (Shaded) C X (Unshaded) Part or all of this FIS may be revised and republished at any time. In addition, part of this FIS may be revised by the Letter of Map Revision process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the user to consult with community officials and to check the community repository to obtain the most current FIS components. Initial Countywide FIS Effective Date: September 26, 2008 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents - Volume 1 Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Purpose of Study......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • In Northeastern Arizona Has B
    Introduction and Background For the past 70 years, the middle Little Colorado River valley (MLCRV) in northeastern Arizona has been viewed as a major boundary to archaeological cultural traditions (Colton 1939; Gumerman 1969; Reid and Doyel 1986:map on inside cover ; Solometo 2004; Wendorf 1953; Wilson 1967, 1969) (Figure 1). Differences in material culture, specifically pottery, show that within the MLCRV there is enormous diversity of material culture, associated with strong boundaries. I have worked in this region for 35 years and have contributed to a growing knowledge base (Adams 2002; Lange 1998). There is no lack of studies providing examples of the diversity, although much of this research remains unpublished (Colton 1939; Douglass 1990; Gumerman 1988; Gumerman and Skinner 1968; Herr 2001; Lange 1998; Plog and Hill 1976; Solometo 2004; Wilson 1969). NSF is being asked to fund a research project whose goals are to conduct an archaeological survey of 16,000 acres in an area where no previous archaeological work has been done, with the exception of the documentation of a major rock art site in Chevelon Canyon (Malotki 2007; Weaver 1993). Research will be conducted on two adjacent ranches: Rock Art Ranch (RAR) and property to the south of RAR owned by Aztec Land and Cattle Company (Aztec). The objectives of the research are to document the archaeological record of the area and to place it within the context of the broader archaeological record of the region. The last synthesis of the MLCRV by Gumerman and Skinner (1968) covered the area where Little Colorado White Ware was predominant, or north of the Little Colorado River, and a new synthesis is long overdue.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Geological Survey DIGITAL MAP DM-RM-03
    DIGITAL MAP DM-RM-03 Arizona Geological Survey 416 W. Congress St., Ste. 100, Tucson, AZ 85701 www.azgs.az.gov MAPPING OF HOLOCENE RIVER ALLUVIUM ALONG OAK CREEK, WET BEAVER CREEK, WEST CLEAR CREEK, FOSSIL CREEK, AND THE EAST VERDE RIVER, CENTRAL ARIZONA J.P. Cook, P.A. Pearthree, J.A. Onken, E.R. Bigio 2010 Mapping of Holocene River Alluvium along Oak Creek, Wet Beaver Creek, West Clear Creek, Fossil Creek, and the East Verde River, Central Arizona by Joseph P. Cook, Philip A. Pearthree, Jill A. Onken, Erica R. Bigio Report to the Adjudication and Technical Support Unit Surface Water Division Arizona Department of Water Resources Map Scale 1:24,000 (12 sheets), 40 p. October 2010 Arizona Geological Survey 416 W Congress St., #100, Tucson, AZ 85701 Table of Contents Introduction 1 Surficial geologic mapping methods 1 Mapping criteria 1 Development of the Verde River, major tributaries, and ages of river deposits 3 Mapping the extent of Holocene floodplain alluvium 5 Field data collection and access 5 Geologic contacts 6 Extent of Holocene river floodplain alluvium 14 Geology and geomorphology of Oak Creek, Wet Beaver Creek, West Clear Creek, Fossil Creek, and the East Verde River 16 Oak Creek 16 Wet Beaver Creek 17 West Clear Creek 17 Fossil Creek 18 East Verde River 18 Fluvial geomorphology 19 Modern channel conditions 21 Geoarchaeological Evaluation of Verde River Tributaries 22 Methods 22 Results 23 Discussion 26 Map units 28 Surficial deposits 28 o Other units 28 Oak Creek, Wet Beaver Creek, West Clear Creek, Fossil
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 6 Little Colorado River Watershed
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arizona Game and Fish Department Little Colorado River Watershed Chapter 6 Little Colorado River Watershed This chapter is broken up into three separate documents due to file size. The Upper Little Colorado River Sub-Watershed, The Middle Little Colorado River Sub-Watershed and the Lower Little Colorado River Sub-Watershed. Chapter 6 Little Colorado River Watershed ................................................................................ 6-8 Upper Little Colorado River Sub-Watershed .......................................................................... 6-8 Little Colorado River above Lyman Complex ..................................................................... 6-8 Pratt Lake .......................................................................................................................... 6-9 Hulsey Lake .................................................................................................................... 6-16 Nelson Reservoir ............................................................................................................. 6-27 Becker Lake .................................................................................................................... 6-45 Lyman Lake .................................................................................................................... 6-55 Carnero Lake ................................................................................................................... 6-68 Little Colorado River above Lyman Complex
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona's 2006 Impaired and Not Attaining Waters (Draft)
    Arizona’s 2012/14 Not Attaining Waters The list below contains water bodies that were assessed as Not Attaining (Category 4). Category 4 waters have available data and/or information which indicate that at least one designated use is not being supported but a TMDL is not required because either a TMDL has already been completed (4a) or a plan is in place to attain water quality standards within the next assessment cycle (4b). The year the TMDL was completed is noted next to 4a. Category Assessment Unit (year TMDL Cause(s) of Impairment completed) Bill Williams Watershed Boulder Creek Arsenic Butte Creek - Copper Creek 4a (2004) AZ15030202-005B Boulder Creek Arsenic, copper, zinc, beryllium, manganese, low Wilder Creek - Butte Creek 4a (2004) pH AZ15030202-005A Colorado-Grand Canyon Watershed No Category 4 Waters Colorado-Lower Gila Watershed No Category 4 Waters Little Colorado Watershed Lake Mary (Upper) 4a (2011) Mercury in fish tissue 15020015-0900 Lake Mary (Lower) 4a (2011) Mercury in fish tissue 15020015-0890 Long Lake (Lower) 4a (2011) Mercury in fish tissue 15020008-0820 Soldier Annex Lake 4a (2011) Mercury in fish tissue 15020008-1430 Soldier Lake 4a (2011) Mercury in fish tissue 15020008-1440 Little Colorado River West Fork Little Colorado River to Water 4a (2002) Turbidity Canyon 15020001-011 Little Colorado River Water Canyon to Nutrioso Creek 4a (2002) Turbidity 15020001-010 Little Colorado River Nutrioso Creek to Carnero Creek 4a (2002) Turbidity 15020001-009 Little Colorado River Coyote Creek to Lyman Lake 4a (2002) Turbidity
    [Show full text]
  • President's Drift
    AUGUST DESERT FLY CASTERS A BARBLESS CLUB President’s Drift Notes from Cinda Howard August is one of the slower fishing months of the year but it should really pick up next month and be in full swing in October when the browns begin to spawn in the high country. This month I thought I would print a list of streams that offer some of the best fishing in the state. Each of these is located in the White Mountains. Black River (West Fork) Length: 8 miles. Elev. 6,520 to 7,525 ft. Access from same as the East Fork, continuing on FR 25 to Wildcat Point. This section of the Black River is more difficult to reach but offers an excellent exam- ple of Arizona's beauty with grassy meadows and tall pines. The area to the reservation border is brushy and weedy, but there's always the possibility of catching lunker browns in hiding pools. Black River (East Fork): Length: 8 miles. Elev. 7,525 to 7,900 ft. Access north of Hannagan AUGUST MEETING: Meadow at Beaver Creek; and from U.S. 191 and FR 26 along Beaver Creek; or from U.S. 191 to Wednesday, FR 249 and FR 276 to the Black River. This is one of the most beautiful stretches of the Black River August 8, 2007 with the high elevation vegetation and wildlife including: elk, bear, and turkey. The river is stocked PIZZA and Chit-Chat at 6:00 PM weekly in the summer with rainbow trout, but watch out for beaver dams.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishing Forecast – White Mountains Fishing Rating: Hot Good Fair Poor
    Fishing Forecast – White Mountains Fishing Rating: Hot Good Fair Poor Carnero Lake – Rating: Fishing from the shoreline or using spinners or lures is difficult at this lake because of the weeds. The best way to fish is from a small boat, canoe or float tube. Fly fish for rainbow trout and tiger trout with wooly buggers, prince nymphs or light-colored nymphs in open areas. The water is deepest near the islands on the north end of the lake. Water levels are still low this year. However there are fewer weeds than normal and more open water. Water quality will only improve throughout the fall as cooler daytime temperatures and afternoon monsoons cool things down. Access is still difficult and requires a slog out into the mud to get a float tube or kayak in. Carnero won’t fill back up until winter storms, so put your chest waders on and fish! Concho Lake -- Rating: As water temperatures warm throughout the summer and water is used for irrigation, this lake becomes inhospitable to trout and tolerable for warmwater species. By fall, only kayaking and shore fishing may be possible due to low water. Use corn to catch common carp. Try chicken liver or worms on bottom in the evening and night for channel catfish. Crescent Lake -- Rating: Bait and shore fishermen can try nightcrawlers and PowerBait. Rocky points on the west side are good for shore anglers when the lake is weedy. Boat anglers consistently do better at Crescent than shore fishermen. Boaters can try trolling with flies, such as wooly buggers, prince nymphs or peacock ladies, or use spinners like Panther Martins, small Mepps or Rooster Tails.
    [Show full text]
  • Copper Creek Allotment Grazing Authorization Preliminary Environmental Assessment
    United States Department of Agriculture Copper Creek Allotment Grazing Authorization Preliminary Environmental Assessment Forest Service Tonto National Forest, Cave Creek Ranger District February 2017 For More Information Contact: Tyna Yost, South Zone NEPA Coordinator Mesa Ranger District 5140 E. Ingram Street Mesa, AZ 85205 480-610-3100 [email protected] In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720- 2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form.
    [Show full text]