DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Study for the Gila River Below Painted Rock Dam

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Environmental Study for the Gila River Below Painted Rock Dam c/ ' » ; ' .-/ ¿¡feTT^/S'/'73 ;:i C^*i' 1 M ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY ■ -4 FOR THE M GILA RIVER M BELOW PAINTED ROCK DAM M ■ :s •J By '4 ■4 University of Arizona ■ it School of Earth Sciences Office of Arid Lands Studies TD 194.56 .A6 P356 1970 |ii,t i,Bjp j i i | M I .....-rr/M m i1 r . w 1 1 IMI "" t I -"ai ion vtKv A d V \ ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY FOR THE GILA RIVER BELOW PAINTED ROCK DAM Under Contract with Department of the Army Los Angeles District Corps of Engineers Contract Number DACW09-70-C-0079 by University of Arizona School of Earth Sciences Office of Arid Lands Studies Y ¡11 October 1970 Bureau 01 Ru:!s; nc it! on Derwui, Uolorao10 The Gila River at the Dome Gaging Station. Photograph taken December 23, 1930 by U.S.G.S. Matched photograph taken June 23, 1970 by Office of Arid Lands Studies. Significant changes include considerably more sur­ face water and heavy salt cedar growth, apparently a result of heavy irrigation runoff and perhaps the close proximity of bed­ rock to the surface. The line of young cottonwoods (center) has disappeared. CONTENTS «»•«»»••»»•••si« -«-wit* ilij ■_ j o*> ' r ■ .. \ t > . ' P FRONTISPIECE............... iSi FIGURES .... ... .................. • * i* TABLES ...................... ............ xi ABSTRACT ........................................... • • • xiii INTRODUCTION............................... 1 Location and Extent . .......... ............ 1 Authority ........ .................... 1 Object and Scope of Study ....•••••«••••»••» 1 General Organization and Procedures ............ ..... 2 SURVEY AND INVENTORY .......................... 2 Geology, Landforms, and Surficial Deposits ....... .... 2 Structure, Earthquakes, and Economic Geology ....... 4 Channel Characteristics of the Lower Gila River ....... 4 Characteristics of the Major Tributary Washes............ 5 CLIMATE .................................... 8 WATER FEATURES................................. 9 Surface Water ........................... 9 Irrigation....................... »,« 10 Groundwater ............ ....... .............. 11 Hydrology............... 12 VEGETATION.............................. 13 Important Species .. ............. ........... 13 v Page Subunits .................... 16 Plant Communities ....... ...................... ... 17 / ' Floodplain Plant C o m m u n i t i e s ............ ................. 17 Plant Communities of the Floodplain as ;7- .Designated for Impact Studies .......... ......... 18 Description of Communities ..................... ............ 22 Successional Changes .... .......... .......... 22 Upland Plant Communities ..... ........ ........ 23 Intermont Plains and Bajadas ........ ........... 25 Sandy Plains and Dunes ................................. 25 Malpais Fields and Volcanic Hills .......... .......... 26 Older Volcanics.............. 26 Granitic Mountains and Hills ............................... 26 Successional Changes . ........ ............ 27 ANIMAL LIFE ................ 27 B i r d s .............. 27 Other Animals.................. 29 Rare and Endangered Species ............................... 30 Insect Population........................ 31 ESTHETIC VALUES ........... ........ 31 Contemporary Recreational Use ........... ........ 31 Archaeologic and Historic Sites 32 LAND U S E ........................ 33 Land Status .......... .......... ................ 33 Farmlands . ................... 34 vi c INTERRELATIONSHIPS .............. ............ 36 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATE PROPOSALS .............. 38 CONCLUSIONS ..... ........................ 45 Impacts of No Program ..... ............ 45 Impacts of Proposed Program ......... 47 Adverse Environmental Effects ............ 49 Alternatives to the Proposed Action ........ 50 Relationships between Long and Short-Term Uses 52 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments 53 APPENDICES A. Individuals and Organizations Contacted * . 55 B. Scientific and Common Names of Plants .... 57 C. Birds . ..................... .. ............. 63 D. Other Animals ............ .................. 67 E. Flood Control Plans ........................ 69 F. Alternative Plans, 23 June 1970 ............ 77 6. Selected References ............ .......... 81 H. Project Personnel . ...................... 89 I. General Organization and Procedures ........ 91 vii LIST OF FIGURES Page Frontispiece - Matched photographs of the Gila River at the Dome Gaging Station 1930 and 1970 iii 1. Drainage Àrea for the Gila River below Painted Rock D a m ........ ...................... .. following 2 2. Generalized Geologic Map .......... .. following 3 3. Histograms of Sediment Sample Size . following 4 4. Historic and Prehistoric sites .................. following 32 5. Interrelations in the Ecosystem ........ .. following 36 6. Map below 5th Street . ............. .............. following 41 7. Ponded Area 30th Avenue .................. .. following 41 8. Ponded Area 39th Avenue .............. .. following 41 9. Ponded Area 42nd Avenue ......................... .. following 41 lx LIST OF TABLES Page 1. Summary of Stratigraphy of the Lower Gila River Watershed............ ............................ 3 2. Analysis of Soil Samples taken from Watersheds below Painted Rock Dam .......................... 6 3. Location of Soil Samples taken from Watersheds below Painted Rock Dam July 24, 1970 .................... .......................... 7 4. A Summary of the Soil Conditions as Indicated by the Principal Plant • Communities of the Southwestern Desert (After Shantz and Piemeisel, 1924) .......................... 19 5. Acreage of Ecological Types and Communities ........ 20 6. Acreage of Ecological Types by L o c a t i o n .................. .. 21 7. Historic and Prehistoric Sites .................... ..... 32a 8. Land Ownership Pattern, Yuma C o u n t y ................ .. 33 9. Farm Size Distribution Based on Irrigable Acres per Water Contract in 1960 ........ .......... 35 10. Acreage of Vegetation under Various Alternatives ............. 40 i xl ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY ON THE GILA RIVER BELOW PAINTED ROCK DAM c ABSTRACT An environmental impact study of the proposed U. S. Army Corps of Engineers flood control project, on the Gila River in Arizona down­ stream from Painted Rock Reservoir, was conducted by the University of Arizona School of Earth Sciences. Utilizing consultants from several university departments, a survey and inventory of the following elements were made: geology, landforms, climate, water features including sur­ face water, irrigation and groundwater; vegetation, animal life, land use and esthetics, including recreation and archaeology. For the purpose of this study three ecological subregions were recognized. These were: (1) farmland, (2) non-cultivated floodplain, and (3) upland. The geology of the watershed is typically characteristic of the Basin and Range Physiographic Province. Sandy soils are characteristic of several contributing watersheds, resulting in a lack of heavy runoff in the last several decades. Other watersheds contributing considerably less area, have fairly high runoff characteristics. There has been little use of the area for recreation other than hunting and significant archaeological sites have already been destroyed. Seven floodplain and 5 upland plant communities were recognized. The most valuable wildlife habitat includes salt cedar/mesquite which provides for excellent dove nesting and cattail marsh which is particu­ larly rare in southern Arizona and provides nesting and food for a dozen or so species of birds and other animals. The bird survey and inventory of 142 species includes 53 species which were not previously listed for the area. The impact of the authorized plan and several alternatives was evaluated. Although all flood control alternatives provide adequate flood protection, they vary in their detrimental effects on wildlife hab­ itat. If phreatophyte and cattail marsh habitats were maintained outside the proposed levees, the difference between alternatives is of somewhat less concern since almost two thirds of salt cedar/mesquite and over one half of cattail marsh habitat is outside the right-of-way; however, the wildlife habitats are not now preserved by any appropriate federal or state agency. The sale and clearing of several thousand acres of habitat, classified as irrigable lands and withdrawn for the original irrigation project, are planned in the near future. xiii ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY ON THE GILA RIVER BELOW PAINTED ROCK DAM INTRODUCTION Location and Extent The project area under study lies between Texas Hill (river mile 68.5) and the Gila Siphon (river mile 8.4) in the Gila River Basin which in­ cludes most of the southern part of Arizona and a part of southwestern New Mexico. The drainage basin comprises about 58,200 square miles, 5,600 of which are in New Mexico; 51,500 in Arizona and 1,100 in Sonora, Mexico. The Gila River Basin downstream from Painted Rock Dam comprises about 7,300 square miles of which 2,700 square miles are between the dam and Texas Hill. Painted Rock Reservoir is an integral part of the flood control program, but at the time'this report was written, no flood con­ trol was contemplated between Painted Rock Dam and Texas Hill and hence, this evaluation is on alternative flood control proposals for the chan­ nel between Texas Hill and the Gila Siphon but recognizing that upstream flood control by Painted Rock Dam is an essential part of the program. Authority This ecological impact evaluation was initiated in compliance with Title I of Public Law 91-190 entitled National Environmental
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]
  • Environmental Protection Agency Region 5 Electronic Data Deliverable Valid Values Reference Manual
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 5 ELECTRONIC DATA DELIVERABLE VALID VALUES REFERENCE MANUAL Appendix to EPA Electronic Data Deliverable (EDD) Comprehensive Specification Manual . March, 2019 ELECTRONIC DATA DELIVERABLE VALID VALUES REFERENCE MANUAL Appendix to EPA Electronic Data Deliverable (EDD) Comprehensive Specification Manual TABLE OF CONTENTS Table A-1 Matrix .......................................................................................................................................... 5 Table A-2 Coord Geometric type .................................................................................................................. 7 Table A-3 Horizontal Collection Method ..................................................................................................... 7 Table A-4 Horizontal Accuracy Units .......................................................................................................... 8 Table A-5 Horizontal Datum ........................................................................................................................ 8 Table A-6 Elevation Collection Method ....................................................................................................... 8 Table A-7 Elevation Datum .......................................................................................................................... 9 Table A-8 Material ........................................................................................................................................ 9 Table
    [Show full text]
  • Department of the Interior U.S
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE REGION 2 DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINANTS CONTAMINANTS IN BIGHORN SHEEP ON THE KOFA NATIONAL WIL DLIFE REFUGE, 2000-2001 By Carrie H. Marr, Anthony L. Velasco1, and Ron Kearns2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arizona Ecological Services Office 2321 W. Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 Phoenix, Arizona 85021 August 2004 2 ABSTRACT Soils of abandoned mines on the Kofa National Wildlife Refuge (KNWR) are contaminated with arsenic, barium, mercury, manganese, lead, and zinc. Previous studies have shown that trace element and metal concentrations in bats were elevated above threshold concentrations. High trace element and metal concentrations in bats suggested that bighorn sheep also may be exposed to these contaminants when using abandoned mines as resting areas. We found evidence of bighorn sheep use, bighorn sheep carcasses, and scat in several abandoned mines. To determine whether bighorn sheep are exposed to, and are accumulating hazardous levels of metals while using abandoned mines, we collected soil samples, as well as scat and bone samples when available. We compared mine soil concentrations to Arizona non-residential clean up levels. Hazard quotients were elevated in several mines and elevated for manganese in one Sheep Tank Mine sample. We analyzed bighorn sheep tissues for trace elements. We obtained blood, liver, and bone samples from hunter-harvested bighorn in 2000 and 2001. Arizona Game and Fish Department also collected blood from bighorn during a translocation operation in 2001. Iron and magnesium were elevated in tissues compared to reference literature concentrations in other species. Most often, domestic sheep baseline levels were used for comparison because of limited available data for bighorn sheep.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3. Affected Environment Lower Sonoran/SDNM Draft RMP/EIS 253
    Chapter 3. Affected Environment Lower Sonoran/SDNM Draft RMP/EIS 253 3.1. INTRODUCTION This chapter describes the environment within the Lower Sonoran Planning Area that would potentially be affected by actions proposed under the alternatives described in Chapter 2, Alternatives (p. 27). While the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is only responsible for managing BLM-administered public lands (public lands) within the Planning Area (i.e. the Lower Sonoran and Sonoran Desert National Monument [SDNM] Decision Areas), proposed decisions may affect environmental components outside the Decision Areas. Therefore, unless indicated otherwise, discussion and analysis in this section encompasses the Planning Area as a whole. The environmental components potentially impacted consist of resource and management activities listed below. The foreseeable environmental effects of the alternatives on these same resource and management activities are described in Chapter 4, Environmental Consequences (p. 371). Resources Resource Uses Air Quality Lands and Realty Cave Resources Livestock Grazing Management Climate Change Minerals Management Cultural and Heritage Resources Recreation Management Geology Travel Management Paleontological Resources Special Area Designations Priority Wildlife Species and Habitat Management National Landscape Conservation System Soil Resources Administrative Designations Vegetation Resources Other Special Designations Visual Resources Social and Economic Water Resources Tribal Interests Wild Horse & Burro Management Hazardous Materials and Public Safety Wilderness Characteristics Social and Economic Conditions Wildland Fire Management The data and descriptions of these categories are drawn from the Analysis of the Management Situation (AMS) (BLM 2005) and subsequent, completed resource assessments on several of the environmental components occurring within the Planning Area. The AMS is available for public review at the BLM’s Phoenix District Office.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of Cienega Mining District, Northwestern Yuma County, Arizona
    Scholars' Mine Masters Theses Student Theses and Dissertations 1965 Geology of Cienega Mining District, Northwestern Yuma County, Arizona Elias Zambrano Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/masters_theses Part of the Geology Commons Department: Recommended Citation Zambrano, Elias, "Geology of Cienega Mining District, Northwestern Yuma County, Arizona" (1965). Masters Theses. 7104. https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/masters_theses/7104 This thesis is brought to you by Scholars' Mine, a service of the Missouri S&T Library and Learning Resources. This work is protected by U. S. Copyright Law. Unauthorized use including reproduction for redistribution requires the permission of the copyright holder. For more information, please contact [email protected]. GEOLOGY OF CIENEGA MINING DISTRICT, NORTHWESTERN YUM.1\, COUNTY, ARIZONA BY ELIAS ZAMBRANO I J'i~& A THESIS submitted to the faculty of the UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI AT ROLLA in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN GEOLOGY Rolla, Missouri 1965 ~!'Approved by ~2/~advisor) ~ ~·-~~ ii ABSTRACT In the mapped area three metamorphic units crop out: calc-silicates and marble, gneiss, and a conglomerate- schist section. The first one consists of a series of intercalations of calc-silicate rocks, local marbles, and greenschist. Quartzite appears in the upper part of the section. This section passes transitionally to the gneiss, which is believed to be of sedimentary origin. Features indicative of sedimentary origin include inter­ calation with marble, relic bedding which can be observed locally, intercalation of greenschist clearly of sedimentary origin, lack of homogeneity in composition with both lateral and vertical variation occurring, roundness of zircon grains, and lack of zoning in the feldspars.
    [Show full text]
  • ARIZONA WATER ATLAS Volume 1 Executive Summary ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
    Arizona Department of Water Resources September 2010 ARIZONA WATER ATLAS Volume 1 Executive Summary ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Director, Arizona Department of Water Resources Herbert Guenther Deputy Director, Arizona Department of Water Resources Karen Smith Assistant Director, Hydrology Frank Corkhill Assistant Director, Water Management Sandra Fabritz-Whitney Atlas Team (Current and Former ADWR staff) Linda Stitzer, Rich Burtell – Project Managers Kelly Mott Lacroix - Asst. Project Manager Phyllis Andrews Carol Birks Joe Stuart Major Contributors (Current and Former ADWR staff) Tom Carr John Fortune Leslie Graser William H. Remick Saeid Tadayon-USGS Other Contributors (Current and Former ADWR staff) Matt Beversdorf Patrick Brand Roberto Chavez Jenna Gillis Laura Grignano (Volume 8) Sharon Morris Pam Nagel (Volume 8) Mark Preszler Kenneth Seasholes (Volume 8) Jeff Tannler (Volume 8) Larri Tearman Dianne Yunker Climate Gregg Garfin - CLIMAS, University of Arizona Ben Crawford - CLIMAS, University of Arizona Casey Thornbrugh - CLIMAS, University of Arizona Michael Crimmins – Department of Soil, Water and Environmental Science, University of Arizona The Atlas is wide in scope and it is not possible to mention all those who helped at some time in its production, both inside and outside the Department. Our sincere thanks to those who willingly provided data and information, editorial review, production support and other help during this multi-year project. Arizona Water Atlas Volume 1 CONTENTS SECTION 1.0 Atlas Purpose and Scope 1 SECTION 1.1 Atlas
    [Show full text]
  • Summits on the Air – ARM for the USA (W7A
    Summits on the Air – ARM for the U.S.A (W7A - Arizona) Summits on the Air U.S.A. (W7A - Arizona) Association Reference Manual Document Reference S53.1 Issue number 5.0 Date of issue 31-October 2020 Participation start date 01-Aug 2010 Authorized Date: 31-October 2020 Association Manager Pete Scola, WA7JTM Summits-on-the-Air an original concept by G3WGV and developed with G3CWI Notice “Summits on the Air” SOTA and the SOTA logo are trademarks of the Programme. This document is copyright of the Programme. All other trademarks and copyrights referenced herein are acknowledged. Document S53.1 Page 1 of 15 Summits on the Air – ARM for the U.S.A (W7A - Arizona) TABLE OF CONTENTS CHANGE CONTROL....................................................................................................................................... 3 DISCLAIMER................................................................................................................................................. 4 1 ASSOCIATION REFERENCE DATA ........................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Program Derivation ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 1.2 General Information ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 1.3 Final Ascent
    [Show full text]
  • Central Arizona Salinity Study --- Phase I
    CENTRAL ARIZONA SALINITY STUDY --- PHASE I Technical Appendix D HYDROLOGIC REPORT ON THE GILA BEND BASIN Prepared for: United States Department of Interior Bureau of Reclamation Prepared by: Brown and Caldwell 201 East Washington Street, Suite 500 Phoenix, Arizona 85004 D-1 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ 2 LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... 3 LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 4 2.0 PHYSICAL SETTING ....................................................................................................... 5 3.0 GENERALIZED GEOLOGY ............................................................................................ 6 3.1 BEDROCK GEOLOGY ......................................................................................... 6 3.2 BASIN GEOLOGY ................................................................................................ 6 4.0 HYDROGEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ................................................................................ 8 4.1 GROUNDWATER OCCURRENCE AND MOVEMENT ................................... 8 4.2 GROUNDWATER QUALITY .............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Precipitation, Runoff and Water Loss in the Lower Colorado River- Salton Sea Area by ALLEN G
    I Precipitation, Runoff and Water Loss in the Lower Colorado River- Salton Sea Area By ALLEN G. HELY and EUGENE L . PECK WATER RESOURCES OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER-SALTON SEA AREA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 486-B Prepared in collaboration with the U.S. Weather Bureau UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON :C '' ! I UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L . UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B . Nolan, Director The U.S. Geological Survey Library has cataloged this publication as follows Hely, Allen Grant, 1908- Precipitation, runoff and water loss in the lower Colorado River-Salton Sea area, by Allen G . Hely and Eugene L . Peck. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1964. ili, 17 p. maps (7 fold ., 4 col ., in pocket) diagrs., table. s0 cm . (U .S . Geological Survey. Professional Paper 486-B) Water resources of lower Colorado River-Salton Sea area . Prepared in collaboration with the U .S . Weather Bureau . Bibliography : p. 16. (Continued on next card) Hely, Allen Grant, 1908- Precipitation, runoff and water loss in the lower Colorado River-Salton Sea area. 1964. (Card 2) 1. Water-supply-The West. I. Peck, Eugene Lincoln, 1=- Joint author. II. U.S. Weather Bureau. III. Title. IV . Title Lower Colorado River-Salton Sea area . (Series) For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D .C. 20402 i CONTENTS Page Page 1 Abstract B1 Runoff B6 i I Introduction I Methods used in estimating runoff 11 General description of the area 1 Reliability 14 Precipitation 2 Waterloss 15 Isohyetal maps 3 Evaporation 15 Variations in time 4 Evapotranspiration 16 Temperature 6 References 16 ILLUSTRATIONS (Plates are in pocket] PLATES 1-3 .
    [Show full text]
  • Underseepage Control Measures at Painted Rock Dam
    Missouri University of Science and Technology Scholars' Mine International Conference on Case Histories in (1988) - Second International Conference on Geotechnical Engineering Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering 02 Jun 1988, 10:30 am - 3:00 pm Underseepage Control Measures at Painted Rock Dam L. Knuppel USACE, Cincinnati, Ohio F. McLean USBR, Denver, Colorado A. Roodsari USACE, Los Angeles, California Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/icchge Part of the Geotechnical Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Knuppel, L.; McLean, F.; and Roodsari, A., "Underseepage Control Measures at Painted Rock Dam" (1988). International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering. 55. https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/icchge/2icchge/2icchge-session3/55 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. This Article - Conference proceedings is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars' Mine. It has been accepted for inclusion in International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering by an authorized administrator of Scholars' Mine. This work is protected by U. S. Copyright Law. Unauthorized use including reproduction for redistribution requires the permission of the copyright holder. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Proceedings: Second International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering, June 1-5, 1988, St. Louis, Mo., Paper No. 3.10 Underseepage Control Measures at Painted Rock Dam
    [Show full text]
  • Final Environmental Assessment
    DOE/EA-1683 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY LOAN GUARANTEE TO ABENGOA SOLAR INC. FOR THE SOLANA THERMAL ELECTRIC POWER PROJECT NEAR GILA BEND, ARIZONA U.S. Department of Energy Loan Guarantee Program Office Washington, DC 20585 May 2010 DOE/EA-1683 CONTENTS Acronynms and Abbreviations ................................................................................................. viii SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................x 1 Purpose and Need for Agency Action .......................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Scope of the Environmental Assessment ................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Public Participation .................................................................................................... 1-2 1.3 Document Organization ............................................................................................. 1-5 1.4 Availability of the Environmental Assessment .......................................................... 1-6 2 Proposed Action and Alternatives ................................................................................ 2-7 2.1 Proposed Action ......................................................................................................... 2-7 2.2 Solana CSP Project Construction............................................................................. 2-13 2.3 Solana CSP Project Operations ...............................................................................
    [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]