Chapter 3. Affected Environment Lower Sonoran/SDNM Draft RMP/EIS 253

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

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. Chapter 3 Affected Environment August 2011 Introduction 254 Lower Sonoran/SDNM Draft RMP/EIS 3.2. RESOURCES 3.2.1. AIR QUALITY 3.2.1.1. Clean Air Act Land Classifications The BLM’s role in air-resource management is to ensure that agency activities comply with applicable air-quality standards and that BLM-authorized leases and permits include conditions and stipulations that require compliance with applicable air quality rules and standards. This is done through interagency coordination, participation in State implementation plans, environmental impact analyses as required by NEPA, and adaptive management practices as outlined in BLM Handbook H-1601-1. Under the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), national parks 6,000 acres or larger and wilderness areas 5,000 acres or larger existing in 1977 were designated as Class I. The class 1 designation gives Federal land managers the opportunity to impose the strictest rules protecting air quality. The Planning Area includes one wilderness area with a Class I air quality designation, Superstition Wilderness, located east of Phoenix. Undeveloped, remote areas deserving of natural or scenic resource preservation could be designated as Class II. Other wilderness areas and national parks, including those designated after 1977, are classified as Class II, and land managers are limited to less strict protection of air quality. State and local air quality planning and permitting agencies give such places special consideration under the CAA through Prevention of Significant Deterioration criteria even though they do not qualify as Class I. Within the Planning Area, nine wilderness areas have been designated Class II for air quality. These include three areas containing designated wilderness outside the Decision Areas (Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), and Four Peaks wildernesses), three within the Lower Sonoran (Woolsey Peak, Signal Mountain, and Sierra Estrella wildernesses), and three within the SDNM (Table Top, North Maricopa Mountains, and South Maricopa Mountains wildernesses). The CAA requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for pollutants harmful to public health or the environment. It also establishes two types of national standards: primary standards to protect health and secondary standards to protect welfare. The EPA sets NAAQS for six principal or “criteria” pollutants. The pollutants are carbon monoxide (CO), lead, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), one-hour ozone (O3), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and particulate matter smaller than 10 micrometers in effective diameter (PM10). Geographic areas are designated as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassified for each of the criteria pollutants with respect to NAAQS. An area is designated as “attainment” if pollutant concentrations meet the NAAQS, “nonattainment” if pollutant concentrations exceed the NAAQS, or “unclassified” if the status of attainment has not been verified through data collection. For planning and permitting purposes, unclassified areas are treated as attainment areas. All counties making up portions of the Planning Areas, with the exception of Yuma County, contain some areas that are designated as nonattainment with respect to specific criteria pollutants that include PM10, SO2, CO, and O3 (Arizona Department of Environmental Quality [ADEQ] 2006). The air-pollution nonattainment areas are shown in Map 3-1: Air Pollutant Nonattainment Areas. Chapter 3 Affected Environment Resources August 2011 Lower Sonoran/SDNM Draft RMP/EIS 255 3.2.1.2. Emission Sources Diverse emission sources within the Planning Area collectively affect air quality on a local and regional scale, including major, minor, non-permitted, mobile, and fugitive emission sources. For permitting purposes, a major source is defined as an emission that has the potential to emit100 tons or more per year of any single criteria pollutant, 10 tons per year of any single hazardous air pollutant, or 25 tons per year of any combined hazardous air pollutants. Major sources include industrial facilities such as gas-fired power plants, natural gas pipeline compressor stations, landfills, mineral processing facilities, and various manufacturing plants with largefuel combustion equipment or use substantial quantities of volatile organic materials, typically in application of finishes and coatings. A minor source is defined as an emission that has the potential to emit pollutants at a levelgreater than the “significance” threshold, but less than a major source. The significance threshold provides an emission baseline for criteria pollutants that determines which facilities must obtain permits. Minor sources include industrial and commercial facilities of many kinds, especially in the more developed portions of the Planning Area. Although minor emission sources vary outside the metropolitan Phoenix area, common sources are rock-product plants that produce crushed and screened materials, and hot-mix asphalt and concrete plants. These plants can be found in the Lower Sonoran and are often portable, which means that they can be moved as the local demand for their product moves. The primary emissions from these sources are particulate matter; however, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) can also be significant if any equipment operates using fuel-fired generators. Many small, stationary emission sources, such as agricultural operations and large-scale construction projects, do not produce air pollution levels that would substantially affect regional air quality, and are not required to have an operating permit. Such sources may occur in the Decision Areas on occasion. However, emissions from these facilities, mostly in the form of particulates, can affect local air quality due to the arid soil conditions. While non-permitted sources are not tracked as closely as permitted sources, these must also comply with applicable Federal, State, and local regulations. Vehicle travel on paved roads, especially in the metropolitan Phoenix area, represents the largest single emission source in and surrounding the Planning Area. When CO from vehicle emissions combines with the extreme desert heat, O3 is created. Other major contributors in the Planning Area include traffic on interstates and other major thoroughfares, including Interstates 10,17, and 8 (I-10, I-17, and I-8); U.S. Highways 60 and 89 (U.S. 60 and U.S. 89); and State Highway 87 (SR 87). In a similar fashion, railroad corridors can be significant emissions contributors in the Planning Area’s central portions. Particulate matter carried onto paved roadways from wind and rain events and soil tracked onto highways by vehicles entering from unpaved roads are common sources of PM10 pollution. Most vehicle routes in the Decision Areas are unpaved. Travel on unpaved routes results in particulate emissions, or fugitive dust. Although fugitive dust is not included in air quality evaluations, it can affect local air quality, especially in areas of concentrated travel on unpaved roads and during periods of high winds. The largest source of particulate matter emissions in the Planning Area is surface-disturbing activities, including construction, mining, and off-highway (recreation-related) travel, all of which occur in the Decision Areas. State and local nonpoint-source rules guide these activities. Chapter 3 Affected Environment August 2011 Air Quality 256 Lower Sonoran/SDNM Draft RMP/EIS Maricopa County recommends best management practices (BMPs) such as applying water or chemical dust suppressants to
Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • Department of the Interior U.S
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE REGION 2 DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINANTS EFFECT S OF MILITARY AIRCRAFT CHAFF ON WATER SOURCES AVAILABLE TO SONORAN PRONGHORN Carrie H. Marr Anthony L. Velasco April 2005 Prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arizona Ecological Services Office 2321 W. Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 Phoenix, Arizona 85021 Under Cooperative Agreement N68711-02-LT-00030 For the U.S. Department of Navy Southwest Division Naval Facilities Engineering Command 1220 Pacific Highway San Diego, CA 92132-5190 W:\Carrie Marr\Chaff StudyContract\Final chaff report.doc ABSTRACT While the federally endangered Sonoran pronghorn (Antilocapra americana sonoriensis) population has plummeted on the Barry M. Goldwater Range in southwestern Arizona, biologists have questioned some range activities that may increase risk potential to the pronghorn. Sonoran pronghorn on the Barry M. Goldwater Range in southwestern Arizona are exposed to military radio-frequency chaff that is used by aircraft during training exercises. Chaff are fibrous, glass strands coated with metallic aluminum that disrupt an enemy’s radar; strands also were coated (historically) with a strip of lead to increase flutter [performance]. Considering the amount of chaff released over the last 50+ years, and the metals used on the chaff fibers, the risk potential to Sonoran pronghorn was high enough to warrant investigation. Sonoran pronghorn population levels are so low that the any additional stress placed upon species could be detrimental to the existence of the species. As a result, we studied Sonoran pronghorn oral exposure to chaff on the Barry M. Goldwater Range, Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge, Organ Pipe National Monument, and Luke Air Force Range (herein these properties are referred to collectively as BMGR), and Kofa National Wildlife Refuge (KNWR) as a reference site.
    [Show 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...........
    [Show full text]
  • Index of Surface-Water Records to September 30, 1967 Part 9 .-Colorado River Basin
    Index of Surface-Water Records to September 30, 1967 Part 9 .-Colorado River Basin Index of Surface-Water Records to September 30, 1967 Part 9 .-Colorado River Basin By H. P. Eisenhuth GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 579 Washington J 968 United States Department of the Interior STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary Geological Survey William T. Pecora, Director Free on application to the U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. 20242 Index of Surface-Water Records to September 30, 1967 Part 9 .-Colorado River Basin By H. P. Eisenhuth INTRODUCTION This report lists the streamflow and reservoir stations in the Colorado River basin for which records have been or are to bepublishedinreportsoftheGeological Survey for periods through September 30, 1967. It supersedes Geobgical Survey Circular 509. Basic data on surface-water supply have been published in an annual series of water-supply papers consisting of several volumes, including one each for the States of Alaska and Hawaii. The area of the other 48 States is divided into 14 parts whose boundaries coincide with certain natural drainage lines. Prior to 1951, the records for the 48 States were published in 14 volumes, one for each of the parts. From 1951 to 1960, the records for the 48 States were pub~.ished annually in 18 volumes, there being 2 volumes each for Parts 1, 2, 3, and 6. The boundaries of the various parts are shown on the map in figure 1. Beginning in 1961, the annual series ofwater-supplypapers on surface-water supply was changed to a 5-year S<~ries. Records for the period 1961-65 will bepublishedin a series of water-supply papers using the same 14-part division for the 48 States, but most parts will be further subdivided into two or more volumes.
    [Show full text]
  • Codes for the Identification of Hydrologic Units in the United States and the Caribbean Outlying Areas Date of Approval: July 1981 Maintenance Organization: U.S
    A U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DATA STANDARD This report describes one of a series of data standards adopted and im¬ plemented by the U.S. Geological Survey for the standardization of data elements and representations used in automated Earth-science systems. Earth sciences are those scientific disciplines especially required to carry out the mission of the Geological Survey and are concerned with the material and morphology of the Earth and physical forces relating to the Earth. These disciplines include geology, topography, geography, and hydrology. The Geological Survey has assumed the leadership in developing and main¬ taining Earth-science data element and representation standards for use in the Federal establishment under the terms of a Memorandum of Understand¬ ing signed in February 1980 by the National Bureau of Standards of the Department of Commerce and the Geological Survey, a Bureau of the Depart¬ ment of the Interior. As such, in addition to developing and maintaining standards, the Geological Survey reviews and processes all requests referred by the National Bureau of Standards for exceptions, deferments, and revi¬ sion of standards applicable to Federal Earth-science information systems; assists the National Bureau of Standards in assessing the need, impact, benefits, and problems related to the implementation of standards being con¬ sidered for development, or developed, for use in the Earth sciences; and works with other agencies in developing new data standards in the Earth sciences. The standard described in this report has been specifically approved for use within the U.S. Geological Survey. If the standard has been approved for use throughout the Federal establishment, it is also published by the National Bureau of Standards as a Federal Information Processing Standard.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix to EPA Electronic Data Deliverable (EDD) Comprehensive Specification 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]
  • Environmental Assessment Addressing Proposed Tactical Infrastructure Maintenance and Repair Along the U.S./Mexico International Border in Arizona
    FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ADDRESSING PROPOSED TACTICAL INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR ALONG THE U.S./MEXICO INTERNATIONAL BORDER IN ARIZONA Department of Homeland Security U.S. Customs and Border Protection U.S. Border Patrol DECEMBER 2012 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS µg/m3 micrograms per cubic meter DOI U.S. Department of the Interior ACHP Advisory Council on Historic DVD digital video disc Preservation EA Environmental Assessment ACM asbestos-containing material EIS Environmental Impact ADEQ Arizona Department of Statement Environmental Quality EO Executive Order AIRFA American Indian Religious ESA Endangered Species Act Freedom Act ESCP erosion-and-sediment control- AMA Active Management Area plan AQCR air quality control region ESP Environmental Stewardship ARHA Archeological and Historic Plan Preservation Act FEMA Federal Emergency ARPA Archaeological Resources Management Agency Protection Act FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, AST aboveground storage tank and Rodenticide Act AZ Arizona highway FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map AZGFD Arizona Game and Fish FM&E Facilities Management and Department Engineering BLM Bureau of Land Management FONSI Finding of No Significant BMP Best Management Practice Impact BMTF Borderland Management Task FPPA Farmland Protection Policy Act Force FR Federal Register CAA Clean Air Act GHG greenhouse gas CBP U.S. Customs and Border HAP hazardous air pollutant Protection I Interstate CEQ Council on Environmental IIRIRA Illegal Immigration Reform Quality and Immigrant Responsibility CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Act Response, Compensation, and LBP lead-based paint Liability Act mg/m3 milligrams per cubic meter CFR Code of Federal Regulations mi2 square mile CO carbon monoxide mph miles per hour CO carbon dioxide 2 MYIAQCR Mojave-Yuma Interstate CWA Clean Water Act AQCR dBA a-weighted decibel NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality DHS Department of Homeland Standards Security continued on inside of back cover DOD U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Colorado River/Lower Gila Watershed
    NEMO Watershed-Based Plan Photo: http://www.herpindiego.com/YumaTripReport.html Colorado-Lower Gila Watershed Photo: http://www.pbase.com/merriwolf Photo: open.salon.com Acknowledgments Arizona NEMO acknowledges the University of Arizona Cooperative Extension Service, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) Water Quality Division, the Water Resources Research Center, and the University of Arizona Advanced Resource Technology Lab (ART) for their technical support in producing the Watershed-Based Plans. Funding is provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under the Clean Water Act and the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, Water Protection Division. Additional financial support is provided by the University of Arizona, Technology and Research Initiative Fund (TRIF), Water Sustainability Program through the Water Resources Research Center. The NEMO website is www.ArizonaNEMO.org Written and prepared by: Steven S. Amesbury, Jonathan Burnett, Hui Chen, D. Phillip Guertin, Renee Johns, Tasha Krecek, Terry Spouse, James C. Summerset, Kristine Uhlman, and Erin Westfall University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona February 2010 Water Resources Research Center University of Arizona 350 N. Campbell Avenue Tucson, Arizona 85721 www.cals.arizona.edu/azwater NEMO and Nonpoint Source Pollution the United States and is the water quality issue that NEMO, the Nonpoint Education The Southwestern United States, including for Municipal Officials program, and this the state of Arizona, is the fastest growing watershed-based plan will address. region in the country. Because the region is undergoing rapid development, there is The National NEMO Network, which now a need to address health and quality of life includes 32 educational programs in 31 issues that result from degradation of its states, was created in 2000 to educate water resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Boundary Descriptions and Names of Regions, Subregions, Accounting Units and Cataloging Units
    Boundary Descriptions and Names of Regions, Subregions, Accounting Units and Cataloging Units Region 01 New England Region -- The drainage within the United States that ultimately discharges into: (a) the Bay of Fundy; (b) the Atlantic Ocean within and between the states of Maine and Connecticut; (c) Long Island Sound north of the New York-Connecticut state line; and (d) the Riviere St. Francois, a tributary of the St. Lawrence River. Includes all of Maine, New Hampshire and Rhode Island and parts of Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, and Vermont. Subregion 0101 -- St. John: The St. John River Basin within the United States. Maine. Area = 7330 sq.mi. Accounting Unit 010100 -- St. John. Maine. Area = 7330 sq.mi. Cataloging Units 01010001 -- Upper St. John. Maine. Area = 2120 sq.mi. 01010002 -- Allagash. Maine. Area = 1250 sq.mi. 01010003 -- Fish. Maine. Area = 908 sq.mi. 01010004 -- Aroostook. Maine. Area = 2420 sq.mi. 01010005 -- Meduxnekeag. Maine. Area = 634 sq.mi. Subregion 0102 -- Penobscot: The Penobscot River Basin. Maine. Area = 8610 sq.mi. Accounting Unit 010200 -- Penobscot. Maine. Area = 8610 sq.mi. Cataloging Units 01020001 -- West Branch Penobscot. Maine. Area = 2150 sq.mi. 01020002 -- East Branch Penobscot. Maine. Area = 1130 sq.mi. 01020003 -- Mattawamkeag. Maine. Area = 1510 sq.mi. 01020004 -- Piscataquis. Maine. Area = 1460 sq.mi. 01020005 -- Lower Penobscot. Maine. Area = 2360 sq.mi. Subregion 0103 -- Kennebec: The Kennebec River Basin, including part of Merrymeeting Bay. Maine. Area = 5900 sq.mi. Accounting Unit 010300 -- Kennebec. Maine. Area = 5900 sq.mi. Cataloging Units 01030001 -- Upper Kennebec. Maine. Area = 1570 sq.mi. 01030002 -- Dead. Maine. Area = 878 sq.mi.
    [Show full text]
  • Section VII Potential Linkage Zones SECTION VII POTENTIAL LINKAGE ZONES
    2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT 41 Section VII Potential Linkage Zones SECTION VII POTENTIAL LINKAGE ZONES Linkage 1 Linkage 2 Beaver Dam Slope – Virgin Slope Beaver Dam – Virgin Mountains Mohave Desert Ecoregion Mohave Desert Ecoregion County: Mohave (Linkage 1: Identified Species continued) County: Mohave Kit Fox Vulpes macrotis ADOT Engineering District: Flagstaff and Kingman Mohave Desert Tortoise Gopherus agassizii ADOT Engineering District: Flagstaff ADOT Maintenance: Fredonia and Kingman Mountain Lion Felis concolor ADOT Maintenance: Fredonia ADOT Natural Resources Management Section: Flagstaff Mule Deer Odocoileus hemionus ADOT Natural Resources Management Section: Flagstaff Speckled Dace Rhinichthys osculus Spotted Bat Euderma maculatum AGFD: Region II AGFD: Region II Virgin Chub Gila seminuda Virgin Spinedace Lepidomeda mollispinis mollispinis BLM: Arizona Strip District Woundfin Plagopterus argentissimus BLM: Arizona Strip District Congressional District: 2 Threats: Congressional District: 2 Highway (I 15) Council of Government: Western Arizona Council of Governments Urbanization Council of Government: Western Arizona Council of Governments FHWA Engineering: A2 and A4 Hydrology: FHWA Engineering: A2 Big Bend Wash Legislative District: 3 Coon Creek Legislative District: 3 Virgin River Biotic Communities (Vegetation Types): Biotic Communities (Vegetation Types): Mohave Desertscrub 100% Mohave Desertscrub 100% Land Ownership: Land Ownership: Bureau of Land Management 59% Bureau of Land Management 93% Private 27% Private
    [Show full text]