DOCSLIB.ORG

49302 FSPLT1 028837.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
49302 FSPLT1 028837.Pdf ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ______________________________ RESOLUTION PRE-FEASIBILITY ACTIVITIES PLAN OF OPERATIONS May 2010 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Printed on recycled paper Digital copies are available for download from the Tonto National Forest website. If printing a copy, please consider the environment and use recycled paper. TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................... v 1. PROJECT SCOPE .............................................................................................................................1-1 1.1. Organization of the Environmental Assessment ....................................................................1-1 1.2. Project Background and History ............................................................................................1-2 1.3. Purpose and Need for Action .................................................................................................1-4 1.4. Scope of the Federal Action...................................................................................................1-5 1.5. Decision Framework............................................................................................................1-14 1.6. Public Involvement ..............................................................................................................1-15 1.7. Issue Development...............................................................................................................1-16 1.8. Changes Between the Pre-decisional EA and the Final EA.................................................1-18 2. COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................................2-1 2.1. Alternatives Considered in Detail in this EA.........................................................................2-1 2.1.1. Alternative 1 – No Action........................................................................................2-1 2.1.2. Alternative 2 – The Proposed Action.......................................................................2-2 2.1.3. Alternative 3 – North OF-2 Exploration Drill Site ................................................2-30 2.1.4. Alternative 4 – West Access Route 4a and Drill Site Locations 4E and 4W.........2-30 2.1.5. Alternative 5 – West Access Route 4b and Drill Site Locations 4E and 4W.........2-31 2.2. Alternatives Considered but Eliminated ..............................................................................2-32 2.3. Mitigation and Monitoring Measures...................................................................................2-34 2.4. Comparison of Alternatives .................................................................................................2-41 3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ...........................3-1 3.1. Air Quality (Issue 1)...............................................................................................................3-1 3.1.1. Affected Environment..............................................................................................3-1 3.1.2. Environmental Consequences: Direct and Indirect Effects......................................3-3 3.2. Erosion and Sedimentation (Issue 2)......................................................................................3-9 3.2.1. Affected Environment..............................................................................................3-9 3.2.2. Environmental Consequences: Direct and Indirect Effects....................................3-10 3.3. Wildlife (Issue 3) .................................................................................................................3-13 3.3.1. Affected Environment............................................................................................3-13 3.3.2. Environmental Consequences: Direct and Indirect Effects....................................3-17 3.4. Endangered Species and Arizona Hedgehog Cactus (Issue 4).............................................3-26 3.4.1. Affected Environment............................................................................................3-26 3.4.2. Environmental Consequences: Direct and Indirect Effects....................................3-29 3.5. Recreational Activities In and Around Oak Flat (Issue 5) ...................................................3-36 3.5.1. Affected Environment............................................................................................3-36 3.5.2. Environmental Consequences: Direct and Indirect Effects....................................3-41 3.6. Safety (Issue 6).....................................................................................................................3-49 3.6.1. Affected Environment............................................................................................3-49 3.6.2. Environmental Consequences: Direct and Indirect Effects....................................3-50 Tonto National Forest i Resolution Pre-feasibility Activities Plan of Operations Environmental Assessment 3.7. Conflicts with the Oak Flat Withdrawal Area (Issue 7).......................................................3-53 3.7.1. Affected Environment............................................................................................3-53 3.7.2. Environmental Consequences: Direct and Indirect Effects....................................3-54 3.8. Travel Management (Issue 8)...............................................................................................3-56 3.8.1. Affected Environment............................................................................................3-56 3.8.2. Environmental Consequences: Direct and Indirect Effects....................................3-56 3.9. Cultural Resources (Issue 9) ................................................................................................3-58 3.9.1. Affected Environment............................................................................................3-58 3.9.2. Environmental Consequences: Direct and Indirect Effects....................................3-62 3.10. Native American Religious Practices (Issue 10)..................................................................3-65 3.10.1. Affected Environment............................................................................................3-65 3.10.2. Environmental Consequences: Direct and Indirect Effects....................................3-65 3.11. Cumulative Effects...............................................................................................................3-68 3.11.1. Context: Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions .....................3-68 3.11.2. Air Quality (Issue 1) ..............................................................................................3-68 3.11.3. Erosion and Sedimentation (Issue 2)......................................................................3-77 3.11.4. Wildlife (Issue 3) ...................................................................................................3-78 3.11.5. Arizona Hedgehog Cactus (Issue 4).......................................................................3-80 3.11.6. Recreational Activities In and Around Oak Flat (Issue 5).....................................3-81 3.11.7. Safety (Issue 6) ......................................................................................................3-83 3.11.8. Conflicts with the Oak Flat Withdrawal Area (Issue 7).........................................3-84 3.11.9. Travel Management (Issue 8) ................................................................................3-85 3.11.10. Cultural Resources (Issue 9) ..................................................................................3-85 3.11.11. Native American Religious Practices (Issue 10)....................................................3-87 4. CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION...................................................................................4-1 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................... Ref-1 GLOSSARY OF TERMS.................................................................................................................... Glos-1 LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1 Estimated New Disturbance Area for Pre-feasibility Activities on National Forest System Lands...................................................................................................................2-3 Table 2-2 Pre-feasibility Activities Proposed Duration and Authorization Period..........................2-4 Table 2-3 Estimated Disturbance Area for New
Load more

Recommended publications
  • April 7, 2005 the Honorable Jim Kolbe United States House of Representatives 237 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC
    American Lands Alliance ♦ Access Fund ♦ Arizona Mountaineering Club ♦ Arizona Native Plant Society ♦ Arizona Wildlife Federation ♦ Center for Biological Diversity ♦ Chiricahua-Dragoon Conservation Alliance ♦ Citizens for the Preservation of Powers Gulch and Pinto Creek ♦ Citizens for Victor! ♦ EARTHWORKS ♦ Endangered Species Coalition ♦Friends of Queen Creek ♦ Gila Resources Information Project ♦ Grand Canyon Chapter of the Sierra Club ♦ Great Basin Mine Watch♦ The Lands Council ♦ Maricopa Audubon Society ♦ Mining Impact Coalition of Wisconsin ♦ Mount Graham Coalition ♦ National Wildlife Federation ♦ Rock Creek Alliance ♦Water More Precious Than Gold ♦ Western Land Exchange Project ♦ Yuma Audubon Society April 7, 2005 The Honorable Jim Kolbe United States House of Representatives 237 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 Dear Representative Kolbe, On behalf of the undersigned organizations and the thousands of members we represent in Arizona and nationwide, we urge you not to introduce the Southeastern Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2005 (the “land exchange bill”) that would, in part, revoke a mining prohibition on 760 acres of public lands in the Tonto National Forest in the area of the Oak Flat Campground 60 miles east of Phoenix. Resolution Copper Company (RCC), a foreign-owned mining company, is planning a massive block-cave mine and seeks to acquire Oak Flat Campground and the surrounding public lands for its use through this land exchange bill. If they succeed, the campground and an additional 2,300 acres of the Tonto National Forest will become private property and forever off limits to recreationists and other users. Privatization of this land would end public access to some of the most spectacular outdoor recreation and wildlife viewing areas in Arizona and cause massive surface subsidence leaving a permanent scar on the landscape and eliminating the possibility of a diversified economy for the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Get the Facts on Oak Flat
    Get the Facts on Oak Flat Background Oak Flat is a part of the Tonto National Forest in Arizona. In 2014 Congress passed the National Defense Authorization Act with a rider that would give 2,422 acres on Tonto National Forest to a mining Conglomerate of two of the world’s largest mining companies.1 These companies, BHP and the Rio Tinto Group, plan to create a massive mine in Oak Flat in order to remove the copper that lies 7,000 feet underground. They call this project “Resolution Copper.” 2 Effects ● Subsidence­ the mine will create a large sinkhole that is estimated to be 2­4 miles in diameter. When supporting rock underneath the surface is removed, it causes a gradual sinking on the surface, resulting in a crater­like depression in the earth.3 ● Waste products­ the mine is expected to produce 1.5 billion tons of tailings. Tailings are the materials left over after the process of separating the copper from the unusable part of the ore. 4 Even if tailings are properly stored, they can easily contaminate water and soil through acid drainage or other means. 5 ● Water­ Arizona already suffers from drought in many areas, and this mine will use an estimated 20,000 acre feet of water per year­ enough to provide water for 20,000 families or 80,000 people for an entire year. To function the mine requires the removal of water to keep the mine shafts dry.6 Water is a precious resource that must be protected. Why this land is important ● Sacred land­ Oak Flat is sacred to the San Carlos Apache people.
    [Show full text]
  • Vote on Hr 687 Delayed! Keep up the Pressure Bill Would
    Urgent Action Alert | VOTE ON H.R. 687 DELAYED! KEEP UP THE PRESSURE BILL WOULD TRANSFER APACHE AND YAVAPAI SACRED AREAS ON FOREST LANDS TO MINING COMPANY VOTE RESCHEDULED FOR FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2013 at 9:30 AM Today the U.S. House of Representatives debated, H.R. 687, the SE Arizona Land Exchange, which would direct the Secretary of Agriculture to convey over 2,400 acres of U.S. Forest Service land in an area known as Oak Flat to a foreign owned mining company (Resolution Copper). The lands have significant religious, cultural, historical, and archeological value to Apache, Yavapai and other tribes in the region. If H.R. 687 is enacted, the mining company will operate an unprecedented large-scale copper mine, which will destroy this place of worship. Because of Indian Country’s collective efforts to voice strong opposition to the bill, the House of Representatives conducted a robust debate today on the bill and three amendments sponsored by Reps. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM) and Grace Napolitano (D-CA) were offered, which included a passionate discussion of Congress’ obligation to protect Native sacred areas located on federal lands. The House voted on the amendments offered by Reps. Grijalva and Napolitano but then decided to delay the votes on the Lujan amendment and final passage of the bill. House leadership postponed the votes on the Lujan amendment to protect sacred and cultural areas and on the underlying bill due to the concern that the bill currently does not have enough votes for passage due to tribal opposition.
    [Show full text]
  • Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2013
    113TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! 1st Session HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 113–167 SOUTHEAST ARIZONA LAND EXCHANGE AND CONSERVATION ACT OF 2013 JULY 22, 2013.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed Mr. HASTINGS of Washington, from the Committee on Natural Resources, submitted the following R E P O R T together with DISSENTING VIEWS [To accompany H.R. 687] [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 687) to facilitate the efficient extraction of mineral re- sources in southeast Arizona by authorizing and directing an ex- change of Federal and non-Federal land, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. The amendment is as follows: Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. (a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Southeast Arizona Land Ex- change and Conservation Act of 2013’’. (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for this Act is as follows: Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. Sec. 2. Findings and purpose. Sec. 3. Definitions. Sec. 4. Land exchange. Sec. 5. Conveyance and management of non-Federal land. Sec. 6. Value adjustment payment to United States. Sec. 7. Withdrawal. Sec. 8. Apache leap. Sec. 9. Miscellaneous provisions. SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE. (a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds that— 29–006 VerDate Mar 15 2010 04:28 Jul 24, 2013 Jkt 029006 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\HR167.XXX HR167 tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS 2 (1) the land exchange furthers public objectives referenced in section 206 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Docketed 08-Afc-13C
    November 2, 2010 California Energy Commission Chris Otahal DOCKETED Wildlife Biologist 08-AFC-13C Bureau of Land Management TN # Barstow Field Office 66131 2601 Barstow Road JUL 06 2012 Barstow, CA 92311 Subject: Late Season 2010 Botanical Survey of the Calico Solar Project Site URS Project No. 27658189.70013 Dear Mr. Otahal: INTRODUCTION This letter report presents the results of the late season floristic surveys for the Calico Solar Project (Project), a proposed renewable solar energy facility located approximately 37 miles east of Barstow, California. The purpose of this study was to identify late season plant species that only respond to late summer/early fall monsoonal rains and to satisfy the California Energy Commission (CEC) Supplemental Staff Assessment BIO-12 Special-status Plant Impact Avoidance and Minimization, requirements B and C (CEC 2010). Botanical surveys were conducted for the Project site in 2007 and 2008. In response to above average rainfall events that have occurred during 2010, including a late season rainfall event on August 17, 2010 totaling 0.49 inch1, additional botanical surveys were conducted by URS Corporation (URS) for the Project site. These surveys incorporated survey protocols published by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) (BLM 1996a, BLM 1996b, BLM 2001, and BLM 2009). BLM and CEC staff were given the opportunity to comment on the survey protocol prior to the commencement of botanical surveys on the site. The 2010 late season survey was conducted from September 20 through September 24, 2010. The surveys encompassed the 1,876-acre Phase 1 portion of the Project site; select areas in the main, western area of Phase 2; a 250-foot buffer area outside the site perimeter; and a proposed transmission line, which begins at the Pisgah substation, heads northeast following the aerial transmission line, follows the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad on the north side, and ends in survey cell 24 (ID#24, Figure 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Kaktuszok Télállósága Magyarországon
    KAKTUSZOK TÉLÁLLÓSÁGA MAGYARORSZÁGON Doktori értekezés MOHÁCSINÉ SZABÓ KRISZTINA Budapest, 2007. A doktori iskola megnevezése: Kertészettudományi (Interdiszciplináris) tudományága : Növénytermesztési és kertészeti tudományok vezet ője: Dr. Papp János egyetemi tanár, DSc Budapesti Corvinus Egyetem, Kertészettudományi Kar Gyümölcsterm ő Növények Tanszék Témavezet ők: Dr. Schmidt Gábor tanszékvezető egyetemi tanár, DSc Budapesti Corvinus Egyetem Kertészettudományi Kar Dísznövénytermesztési és Dendrológiai Tanszék Dr. Mészáros Zoltán egyetemi tanár, DSc Budapesti Corvinus Egyetem A jelölt a Budapesti Corvinus Egyetem Doktori Szabályzatában el őírt valamennyi feltételnek eleget tett, az értekezés m űhelyvitájában elhangzott észrevételeket és javaslatokat az értekezés átdolgozásakor figyelembe vette, ezért az értekezés nyilvános vitára bocsátható. ........................................................... ........................................................................... Az iskolavezet ő jóváhagyása Témavezet ők jóváhagyása A Budapesti Corvinus Egyetem Élettudományi Területi Doktori Tanács 2007. december 11-i határozatában a nyilvános vita lefolytatására az alábbi bíráló Bizottságot jelölte ki: BÍRÁLÓ BIZOTTSÁG : Elnöke Rimóczi Imre DSc Tagjai Terbe István CSc Mihalik Erzsébet CSc Kiss Istvánné CSc Opponensek Isépy István CSc Neményi András PhD Titkár Nagy József PhD TARTALOMJEGYZÉK 1. Bevezetés……………………………………………………………………………..………1 2. Irodalmi áttekintés……………………………………………………………………..……..4 2. 1. A kaktuszok botanikai jellemzése……………...…………………………………..….4
    [Show full text]
  • FERNS and FERN ALLIES Dittmer, H.J., E.F
    FERNS AND FERN ALLIES Dittmer, H.J., E.F. Castetter, & O.M. Clark. 1954. The ferns and fern allies of New Mexico. Univ. New Mexico Publ. Biol. No. 6. Family ASPLENIACEAE [1/5/5] Asplenium spleenwort Bennert, W. & G. Fischer. 1993. Biosystematics and evolution of the Asplenium trichomanes complex. Webbia 48:743-760. Wagner, W.H. Jr., R.C. Moran, C.R. Werth. 1993. Aspleniaceae, pp. 228-245. IN: Flora of North America, vol.2. Oxford Univ. Press. palmeri Maxon [M&H; Wagner & Moran 1993] Palmer’s spleenwort platyneuron (Linnaeus) Britton, Sterns, & Poggenburg [M&H; Wagner & Moran 1993] ebony spleenwort resiliens Kunze [M&H; W&S; Wagner & Moran 1993] black-stem spleenwort septentrionale (Linnaeus) Hoffmann [M&H; W&S; Wagner & Moran 1993] forked spleenwort trichomanes Linnaeus [Bennert & Fischer 1993; M&H; W&S; Wagner & Moran 1993] maidenhair spleenwort Family AZOLLACEAE [1/1/1] Azolla mosquito-fern Lumpkin, T.A. 1993. Azollaceae, pp. 338-342. IN: Flora of North America, vol. 2. Oxford Univ. Press. caroliniana Willdenow : Reports in W&S apparently belong to Azolla mexicana Presl, though Azolla caroliniana is known adjacent to NM near the Texas State line [Lumpkin 1993]. mexicana Schlechtendal & Chamisso ex K. Presl [Lumpkin 1993; M&H] Mexican mosquito-fern Family DENNSTAEDTIACEAE [1/1/1] Pteridium bracken-fern Jacobs, C.A. & J.H. Peck. Pteridium, pp. 201-203. IN: Flora of North America, vol. 2. Oxford Univ. Press. aquilinum (Linnaeus) Kuhn var. pubescens Underwood [Jacobs & Peck 1993; M&H; W&S] bracken-fern Family DRYOPTERIDACEAE [6/13/13] Athyrium lady-fern Kato, M. 1993. Athyrium, pp.
    [Show full text]
  • Bikers, Bands and Barristers: Oak Flat Copper Mine Plan Draws a Wide Range of Opponents
    https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona/2021/03/07/oak-flat-copper-mine-inspires- support-from-lawyers-singers-catholic-brophy-prep-students/4549754001/ Bikers, bands and barristers: Oak Flat copper mine plan draws a wide range of opponents Debra Utacia Krol Arizona Republic Published 7:00 a.m. MT Mar 7, 2021 Mario Tsosie and more than two dozen other motorcycle riders rumbled into Oak Flat Campground last month with a mission and a message. "We had riders come from San Diego, Fresno, Orange County and Los Angeles," said Tsosie, a Navajo who rides with Redrum Motorcycle Club, the world's largest Indigenous-based biker group. "It was pretty exciting." Tsosie, a member of the Valley of the Sun Chapter of the club, said the Feb. 21 caravan to Oak Flat, about 70 miles east of Phoenix, was almost a last-minute affair. The club had just two weeks to plan the 41-mile ride from San Carlos, capital of the San Carlos Apache Tribe, to the campground. "We've been looking for the right time to do this," he said. Wendsler Nosie, head of the grassroots group Apache Stronghold, has been living at the campground since November 2019 to focus opposition on a plan by Resolution Copper to build a huge copper mine beneath the site, land considered sacred by many Apaches and other tribes in Arizona. He seemed surprised when a few dozen motorcycles arrived, said Tsosie. But once the club members explained that they were there to offer support and prayer, the meeting went well.
    [Show full text]
  • Apache Stronghold Complaint
    Case 2:21-cv-00050-CDB Document 1 Filed 01/12/21 Page 1 of 32 Michael V. Nixon (OR Bar # 893240) (pro hac vice application pending) 101 SW Madison Street # 9325 Portland, OR 97207 Telephone: 503.522.4257 Email: [email protected] Clifford Levenson (AZ Bar # 014523) 5119 North 19th Avenue, Suite K Phoenix, AZ 85015 Telephone: 602.258.8989 Fax: 602.544.1900 Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiff IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Phoenix Division Apache Stronghold, ) No. CV-21-______-PHX- a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, ) ) COMPLAINT Plaintiff, ) ) For violations of: v. ) ) Treaty Rights, Trust Responsibility and ) Fiduciary Duty; the Religious Freedom ) Restoration Act; First Amendment Rights to United States of America, ) Free Exercise of Religion, and to Petition ) and for Remedy; and Fifth Amendment Right Sonny Perdue, Secretary, U.S. Department ) to Due Process. of Agriculture (USDA), ) ) And to compel the performance of: Vicki Christensen, Chief, USDA Forest ) Service, ) Trust Obligations & To Provide A Full ) Accounting Neil Bosworth, Supervisor, USDA Forest ) Service, Tonto National Forest, ) ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED and ) ) Tom Torres, Acting Supervisor, USDA ) Forest Service, Tonto National ) Forest, ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) COMPLAINT 1 Case 2:21-cv-00050-CDB Document 1 Filed 01/12/21 Page 2 of 32 The Great Spirit made all things... So live your life that the fear of death can never enter your heart. Trouble no one about their religion; respect others in their view, and demand that they respect yours. Love your life, perfect your life, beautify all things in your life.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogeny in Echinocereus \(Cactaceae\) Based on Combined Morphological and Molecular Evidence: Taxonomic Implications
    Systematics and Biodiversity ISSN: 1477-2000 (Print) 1478-0933 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsab20 Phylogeny in Echinocereus (Cactaceae) based on combined morphological and molecular evidence: taxonomic implications Daniel Sánchez, Teresa Terrazas, Dalia Grego-Valencia & Salvador Arias To cite this article: Daniel Sánchez, Teresa Terrazas, Dalia Grego-Valencia & Salvador Arias (2017): Phylogeny in Echinocereus (Cactaceae) based on combined morphological and molecular evidence: taxonomic implications, Systematics and Biodiversity, DOI: 10.1080/14772000.2017.1343260 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14772000.2017.1343260 View supplementary material Published online: 25 Jul 2017. Submit your article to this journal View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tsab20 Download by: [187.207.71.157] Date: 25 July 2017, At: 14:18 Systematics and Biodiversity (2017), 1–17 Research Article Phylogeny in Echinocereus (Cactaceae) based on combined morphological and molecular evidence: taxonomic implications DANIEL SANCHEZ 1, TERESA TERRAZAS2, DALIA GREGO-VALENCIA3 & SALVADOR ARIAS4 1CONACYT - Laboratorio Nacional de Identificacion y Caracterizacion Vegetal, Centro Universitario de Ciencias Biologicas y Agropecuarias, Universidad de Guadalajara, Zapopan, Jalisco, Mexico 2Departamento de Botanica, Instituto de Biologıa, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Coyoacan, Ciudad de Mexico, Mexico 3Unidad de Morfologıa y Funcion, Facultad de Estudios Superiores Iztacala, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Tlalnepantla, Estado de Mexico, Mexico 4Jardın Botanico, Instituto de Biologıa, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Coyoacan, Ciudad de Mexico, Mexico (Received 8 October 2016; accepted 4 May 2017) Echinocereus is a morphologically diverse genus that includes 64 species grouped into eight taxonomic sections based on morphological traits.
    [Show full text]
  • Rio Tinto and BHP Battle Apache Tribes to Build North America's Biggest Copper Mine at Sacred Oak Flat Site
    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-27/rio-tinto-indigenous-mining-juukan-gorge-oak-flat- apache/13087514 Rio Tinto and BHP battle Apache tribes to build North America's biggest copper mine at sacred Oak Flat site By business reporter Sue Lannin Posted 5hhours ago, updated 19mminutes ago [Jasnuary 26, 2021] Apache elder Wendsler Nosie is one of those leading the campaign to save Oak Flat from mining.(Supplied: Wendsler Nosie) "This place is very holy and religious to us." Wendsler Nosie Senior, an elder of the San Carlos Apache Tribe, is describing his people's land, Oak Flat or Chi'chil Bildagoteel, in the Arizona desert in the US south-west. The site in the Tonto National Forest is a popular camping and hiking ground and contains sacred cultural heritage locations that include rock carvings, burial sites and the Apache Leap, where Apache warriors jumped to their death after being driven to the edge of the cliff by the US cavalry. But earlier this month, in the dying days of the Trump administration, the US Government handed over Oak Flat to two of the world's biggest mining companies, Rio Tinto and BHP. Through a joint venture named Resolution Copper, the global miners want to build North America's largest copper mine, on the Apache land, about 100 kilometres from Arizona's capital Phoenix. The San Carlos Apache tribe has been campaigning for years to prevent mining at Oak Flat.(Supplied) Resolution Copper says the planned underground mine, which will be 2 kilometres metres below ground, will bring nearly 4,000 jobs and tens of billions of dollars in economic benefits to the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Hedgehog Cactus Survey of Proposed Re-Alignment of Magma Mine Road
    ARIZONA HEDGEHOG CACTUS SURVEY OF PROPOSED RE-ALIGNMENT OF MAGMA MINE ROAD Prepared for: Resolution Copper Mining Prepared by: WestLand Resources, Inc. Date: February 15, 2013 Project No.: 807.73 A 347 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 2 2. METHODS ........................................................................................................................................... 2 3. RESULTS ............................................................................................................................................. 3 4. REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................... 3 FIGURES (follow text) Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Survey Results APPENDICES Appendix A. Arizona Hedgehog Cactus Detected During Magma Mine Road Survey Appendix B. Data Sheets of Arizona Hedgehog Cactus Observed in Survey Q:\jobs\800's\807 73\ENV\AHC Magma Mine Rd\FINAL AHC (MMR) MEMO 2 15 13 docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Engineering and Environmental Consultants Arizona Hedgehog Cactus Survey February 15, 2013 Of Proposed Re-Alignment of Magma Mine Road Page 2 1. INTRODUCTION WestLand Resources, Inc. (WestLand) was retained by Resolution Copper Company to conduct surveys for Arizona hedgehog cactus (AHC; Echinocereus arizonicus var. arizonicus) in the vicinity of East Plant (Figure 1), along portions of the existing Magma
    [Show full text]