DOCSLIB.ORG

YPG Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) 2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
YPG Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) 2017 -+ INTEGRATED NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN U.S. ARMY YUMA PROVING GROUND YUMA AND LA PAZ COUNTIES, ARIZONA Update for: Fiscal Years 2017-2022 September 2017 Prepared by U.S. Army Garrison Yuma Proving Ground Environmental Sciences Division 301 C Street Yuma Proving Ground Yuma, Arizona Distribution Statement A: Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. INTEGRATED NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN U.S. Army Garrison Yuma Proving Ground Update for: FY 2017–2022 Reviewed by: Reviewed by: Digitally signed by GLOVER.JOHN.A.1284210391 Digitally signed by GLOVER.JOHN.A.1 DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI, DRISCOLL.PATRICK. DRISCOLL.PATRICK.JOSEPH.1231990557 DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI, ou=USA, ou=USA, cn=GLOVER.JOHN.A.1284210391 cn=DRISCOLL.PATRICK.JOSEPH.1231990557 284210391 Date: 2017.08.09 14:50:51 -07'00' JOSEPH.1231990557 Date: 2017.08.15 15:09:26 -07'00' JOHN GLOVER PATRICK J. DRIS&OLL Acting Chief, Environmental Director, Public Works Sciences Division Reviewed by: Reviewed by: Digitally signed by Digitally signed by GONZALES.FRANCISCO.E.JR.1155703560 GONZALES.FRANCIS DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI, ou=USA, HALLAHAN.ROBER HALLAHAN.ROBERT.J.1229262730 cn=GONZALES.FRANCISCO.E.JR.1155703560 DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI, CO.E.JR.1155703560 Date: 2017.08.17 11:34:42 -07'00' ou=USA, cn=HALLAHAN.ROBERT.J.1229262730 T.J.1229262730 Date: 2017.08.22 09:26:13 -07'00' FRANCISCO E. GONZALES, JR. ROBERT J. HALLAHAN Attorney Advisor, Office of Installation OPSEC Officer Command Judge Advocate Approved By: Digitally signed by ROGERS.GORDON. ROGERS.GORDON.KEITH.1150031717 DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI, ou=USA, cn=ROGERS.GORDON.KEITH.1150031717 KEITH.1150031717 Date: 2017.08.30 06:42:51 -07'00' GORDON K. ROGERS Garrison Manager U.S. Army Garrison Yuma Proving Ground Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan Update: FY 2017 - 2022 The Yuma Army Proving Ground’s Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) meets the Sikes Act and Department of Defense Instruction (DODI) 4715.03 requirements as detailed in Appendix C, INRMP Implementation Summary Report. The following table provides a summary of substantive updates to this plan. Section Summary of Updates 1.5 Responsibilities Provide additional clarification and detail on the role of the Directorate of Emergency Service. Table 4. Updated Special Status species list 3.2.3 Potential Sensitive Added section 3.2.3.1 for Eagles and provided species Animal Species information on Golden Eagle 3.2.3.2 Threatened or Provided update on the status of Sonoran pronghorn, yellow Endangered Species billed cuckoo, Ridgeway’s rail, SWFL 3.2.3.3 Species of Added a section to describe Species of Greatest Conservation Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN). Provided update and additional information for Need Sonoran desert Tortoise 3.5 Health and Safety Provided information on Wildland Fire, Pest Management, and Wildlife Aircraft Strike Hazards. 5.3 Public Use (Hunting) Updated with the latest YPG hunting regs and hunt areas 5.4 Added additional detail for Management Actions: 2a added inspections; 2e included construction of new waters; 2h emergency response support; 4a promoting pollinator conservation; 4c additional detail for pronghorn management; 4e Migratory Bird Conservation; 5a implementing better fence designs 6.2 Staffing Provide additional detail on the roles of Conservation Staff, Conservation Law Enforcement, Wildland Fire Program Manager 6.3 Table 8 Anticipated Updated the project list and funding requirement for the next 5 projects years. 7.2.2 Biological Mitigation Update mitigation measures to include reporting pronghorn death and coordination with recovery team for investigation. Preventing wildlife entrapment in vertical pipes and open pits. U.S. Army Garrison Yuma Proving Ground Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan Update: FY 2017 ‐ 2022 7.2.5 Health and Safety Provides info on the Wildland Fire Management Plan References Included updated references to include new studies etc.. Updated Appendix Included new Appendix C for INRMP Implementation Report and Appendix D for Integrated Wildland Fire Management Plan U.S. Army Garrison Yuma Proving Ground Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan Update: FY 2017 ‐ 2022 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... i Acronyms and Abbreviations ...................................................................................................... v Chapter 1 Introduction................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Goals and Objectives ...................................................................................................... 1 1.2.1 Guiding Principles ...................................................................................................... 2 1.2.2 Screening Criteria ....................................................................................................... 4 1.3 Background ..................................................................................................................... 4 1.3.1 Location ...................................................................................................................... 4 1.3.2 Installation Acreage, Ownership, and Airspace .......................................................... 6 1.3.3 History......................................................................................................................... 6 1.3.4 Philosophy of Land Management ............................................................................... 8 1.4 National Environmental Policy Act Compliance ............................................................ 8 1.4.1 NEPA and INRMP Integration ................................................................................... 8 1.4.2 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action .............................................................. 10 1.4.3 Description of the Proposed Action and Alternatives............................................... 10 1.4.4 Scope of Analysis ..................................................................................................... 10 1.4.5 Interagency Administration, Coordination, and Review .......................................... 11 1.5 Responsibilities ............................................................................................................. 13 1.5.1 U.S. Army Yuma Proving Ground ........................................................................... 13 1.5.2 Other Federal and State Agencies ............................................................................. 15 1.5.3 Other Agencies, Academia, and Non-Governmental Organizations ........................ 16 Chapter 2 YPG MISSION.......................................................................................................... 17 2.1 Military Mission............................................................................................................ 17 2.1.1 Yuma Test Center ..................................................................................................... 17 2.1.2 Other Military Users ................................................................................................. 19 2.2 YPG Garrison................................................................................................................ 19 2.2.1 Support Facilities ...................................................................................................... 19 2.2.2 YPG Tenant Organizations ....................................................................................... 20 2.2.3 Integration with Master Planning .............................................................................. 20 Chapter 3 Affected Environment .............................................................................................. 21 3.1 Air Resources ................................................................................................................ 23 3.1.1 Nonattainment of NAAQS and Conformity Determination ..................................... 24 3.1.2 Construction and Operating Permits ......................................................................... 24 3.2 Biological Resources .................................................................................................... 27 3.2.1 Ecosystems, Natural Communities, Flora, and Fauna .............................................. 30 3.2.2 Potential Sensitive Plant Species at YPG ................................................................. 33 3.2.3 Potential Sensitive Animal Species at YPG .............................................................. 34 3.2.4 Migratory and Breeding Birds at YPG ..................................................................... 44 3.2.5 Non-Native or Invasive Species ................................................................................ 45 3.2.6 General Wildlife ........................................................................................................ 48 3.3 Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................ 53 U.S. Army Garrison Yuma Proving Ground i Integrated Natural Resources
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Economic Impact of Arizona's Principal Military Operations
    Economic Impact Of Arizona’s Principal Military Operations 2008 Prepared by In collaboration with Final Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Chapter One INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND STUDY 1 METHODOLOGY Chapter Two DESCRIPTIONS OF ARIZONA’S PRINCIPAL 11 MILITARY OPERATIONS Chapter Three EMPLOYMENT AND SPENDING AT ARIZONA’S 27 PRINCIPAL MILITARY OPERATIONS Chapter Four ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF ARIZONA’S PRINCIPAL 32 MILITARY OPERATIONS Chapter Five STATE AND LOCAL TAX REVENUES DERIVED FROM 36 ARIZONA’S PRINCIPAL MILITARY OPERATIONS Chapter Six COMPARISONS TO THE MILITARY INDUSTRY IN 38 ARIZONA Chapter Seven COMPARISONS OF THE MILITARY INDUSTRY IN FY 43 2000 AND FY 2005 APPENDICES Appendix One HOW IMPLAN WORKS A-1 Appendix Two RETIREE METHODOLOGY A-6 Appendix Three ECONOMETRIC MODEL INPUTS A-7 Appendix Four DETAILED STATEWIDE MODEL OUTPUT A-19 Appendix Five REGIONAL IMPACT INFORMATION A-22 The Maguire Company ESI Corporation LIST OF TABLES Page Table 3-1 Summary of Basic Personnel Statistics 27 Arizona’s Major Military Operations Table 3-2 Summary of Military Retiree Statistics 28 Arizona Principal Military Operations Table 3-3 Summary of Payroll and Retirement Benefits 30 Arizona’s Major Military Operations Table 3-4 Summary of Spending Statistics 31 Arizona’s Major Military Operations Table 4-1 Summary of Statewide Economic Impacts 34 Arizona’s Major Military Operations Table 5-1 Summary of Statewide Fiscal Impacts 37 Arizona’s Military Industry Table 5-2 Statewide Fiscal Impacts 37 Arizona’s Military Industry Table 6-1 Comparison of Major Industries / Employers in Arizona 41 Table 7-1 Comparison of Military Industry Employment in 43 FY 2000 and FY 2005 Table 7-2 Comparison of Military Industry Economic Output in 43 FY 2000 and FY 2005 The Maguire Company ESI Corporation Arizona’s Principal Military Operations Acknowledgements We wish to acknowledge and thank the leadership and personnel of the various military operations included within this study.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Pima County Multi-Species Conservation Plan, Arizona
    United States Department of the Interior Fish and ,Vildlife Service Arizona Ecological Services Office 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 Phoenix, Arizona 85021-4951 Telephone: (602) 242-0210 Fax: (602) 242-2513 In reply refer to: AESO/SE 22410-2006-F-0459 April 13, 2016 Memorandum To: Regional Director, Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico (ARD-ES) (Attn: Michelle Shaughnessy) Chief, Arizona Branch, Re.. gul 7/to . D'vision, Army Corps of Engineers, Phoenix, Arizona From: Acting Field Supervisor~ Subject: Biological and Conference Opinion on the Pima County Multi-Species Conservation Plan, Arizona This biological and conference opinion (BCO) responds to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) requirement for intra-Service consultation on the proposed issuance of a section lO(a)(l)(B) incidental take permit (TE-84356A-O) to Pima County and Pima County Regional Flood Control District (both herein referenced as Pima County), pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (U.S.C. 1531-1544), as amended (ESA), authorizing the incidental take of 44 species (4 plants, 7 mammals, 8 birds, 5 fishes, 2 amphibians, 6 reptiles, and 12 invertebrates). Along with the permit application, Pima County submitted a draft Pima County Multi-Species Conservation Plan (MSCP). On June 10, 2015, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) requested programmatic section 7 consultation for actions under section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CW A), including two Regional General Permits and 16 Nationwide Permits, that are also covered activities in the MSCP. This is an action under section 7 of the ESA that is separate from the section 10 permit issuance to Pima Couny.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Arizona History Index, M
    Index to the Journal of Arizona History, M Arizona Historical Society, [email protected] 480-387-5355 NOTE: the index includes two citation formats. The format for Volumes 1-5 is: volume (issue): page number(s) The format for Volumes 6 -54 is: volume: page number(s) M McAdams, Cliff, book by, reviewed 26:242 McAdoo, Ellen W. 43:225 McAdoo, W. C. 18:194 McAdoo, William 36:52; 39:225; 43:225 McAhren, Ben 19:353 McAlister, M. J. 26:430 McAllester, David E., book coedited by, reviewed 20:144-46 McAllester, David P., book coedited by, reviewed 45:120 McAllister, James P. 49:4-6 McAllister, R. Burnell 43:51 McAllister, R. S. 43:47 McAllister, S. W. 8:171 n. 2 McAlpine, Tom 10:190 McAndrew, John “Boots”, photo of 36:288 McAnich, Fred, book reviewed by 49:74-75 books reviewed by 43:95-97 1 Index to the Journal of Arizona History, M Arizona Historical Society, [email protected] 480-387-5355 McArtan, Neill, develops Pastime Park 31:20-22 death of 31:36-37 photo of 31:21 McArthur, Arthur 10:20 McArthur, Charles H. 21:171-72, 178; 33:277 photos 21:177, 180 McArthur, Douglas 38:278 McArthur, Lorraine (daughter), photo of 34:428 McArthur, Lorraine (mother), photo of 34:428 McArthur, Louise, photo of 34:428 McArthur, Perry 43:349 McArthur, Warren, photo of 34:428 McArthur, Warren, Jr. 33:276 article by and about 21:171-88 photos 21:174-75, 177, 180, 187 McAuley, (Mother Superior) Mary Catherine 39:264, 265, 285 McAuley, Skeet, book by, reviewed 31:438 McAuliffe, Helen W.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of Uranium Favorability of Cenozoic Sedimentary Rocks, Basin
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY A Study of Uranium Favorability of Cenozoic Sedimentary Rocks Basin and Range Province, Arizona Part I General Geology and Chronology of Pre-late Miocene Cenozoic Sedimentary Rocks By Robert Scarborough and Jan Carol Wilt Open File Report 79-1429 1979 This report was funded by U.S. Geological Survey Grant No. 14-08-0001528. It;has not been edited for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey standards or with accepted U.S. Geological Survey stratigraphic nomenclature. FOREWORD This report by Robert Scarborough and Jan Carol Wilt summarizes the results of a study made for the U.S. Geological Survey jointly by the Bureau of Geology and Mineral Technology and the Laboratory of Isotope Geochemistry, College of Earth Sciences, University of Arizona, under Grant No. 14-08-0001528. Age dating by the K/Ar method was cost-shared with. NSF Grant No. EAR78-11535 which supports volcanic rock studies by the Laboratory of Isotope Geochemistry. It is considered that this report adequately fulfills the agreement objectives. Principal Investigator: H. Wesley Peirce, Principal Geologist Geological Survey Branch Bureau of Geology and Mineral Technology University of Arizona, Tucson Co-Principal Investigator: Paul E. Damon, Chief Scientist Laboratory of Isotope Geochemistry Department of Geosciences College of Earth Sciences University of Arizona, Tucson CONTENTS Page Abstract ,....,,...,...,........« « 1 Introduction ...,.,..*....««..« «« 3 General statement ........ , ».....,....». 3 Purpose and scope .«..,,.....,.......... 3 Acknowledgments ..................... * . 4 Location and physiographic setting .............. 4 Approach ........................... 5 General Cenozoic geology of Basin and Range Province sediments . General statement ...................... 7 Group I localities with radioactive anomalies ........ 9 Mineta Formation ..................... 9 Cardinal Avenue sediments ................
    [Show full text]
  • Planning and Zoning
    TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Summary............................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Overview ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Definitions Used in This Plan ....................................................................................... 1 1.3 How to Use the Plan .................................................................................................... 2 1.4 Land Use ...................................................................................................................... 2 1.5 Circulation .................................................................................................................... 3 1.6 Applicability .................................................................................................................. 3 1.7 Previous Comprehensive Plans ................................................................................... 3 1.8 Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan ................................................................... 3 2.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Role and Purpose of the Comprehensive Plan ............................................................ 5 2.2 Land Use Element........................................................................................................ 5 2.3
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Stand-Replacing Fire in Upper Montane Forests of the Madrean Sky Islands and Mogollon Plateau, Southwestern USA
    Fire Ecology Volume 7, Issue 3, 2011 Margolis et al.: Historical Stand-Replacing Fire doi: 10.4996/fireecology.0703088 Page 88 RESEARCH ARTICLE HISTORICAL STAND-REPLACING FIRE IN UPPER MONTANE FORESTS OF THE MADREAN SKY ISLANDS AND MOGOLLON PLATEAU, SOUTHWESTERN USA Ellis Q. Margolis1*, Thomas W. Swetnam1, and Craig D. Allen2 1University of Arizona Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research, 105 W. Stadium, Tucson, Arizona 85721, USA 2US Geological Survey Jemez Mountains Field Station, HCR 1, Box 1, Number 15, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87544, USA *Corresponding author: Tel.: 001-520-626-2733; e-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT The recent occurrence of large fires with a substantial stand-replacing component in the southwestern United States (e.g., Cerro Grande, 2000; Rodeo-Chedeski, 2002; Aspen, 2003; Horseshoe 2, Las Conchas, and Wallow, 2011) has raised questions about the his- torical role of stand-replacing fire in the region. We reconstructed fire dates and stand-re- placing fire patch sizes using four lines of tree-ring evidence at four upper montane forest sites (>2600 m) in the Madrean Sky Islands and Mogollon Plateau of Arizona and New Mexico, USA. The four lines of tree-ring evidence include: (1) quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) and spruce-fir age structure, (2) conifer death dates, (3) traumatic resin ducts and ring-width changes, and (4) conifer fire scars. Pre-1905 fire regimes in the upper montane forest sites were variable, with drier, south-facing portions of some sites record- ing frequent, low-severity fire (mean fire interval of all fires ranging from 5 yr to 11 yr among sites), others burning with stand-replacing severity, and others with no evidence of fire for >300 yr.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Drought Preparedness Plan
    Arizona Drought Preparedness Plan OOPPEERRAATTIIOONNAALL DDRROOUUGGHHTT PPLLAANN Governor’s Drought Task Force Governor Janet Napolitano October 8, 2004 GOVERNOR’S DROUGHT TASK FORCE ARIZONA DROUGHT PREPAREDNESS PLAN Operational Drought Plan - 10-08-2004 GOVERNOR’S DROUGHT TASK FORCE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Governor’s Drought Task Force would like to thank Herb Guenther, Director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources and his staff for their support and assistance in the development of this Plan. Additionally, the Task Force would like to recognize the following individuals and organizations for their assistance and contributions: Mike Austin, Arizona Department of Water Resources Staff to the Task Force Sandy Whitney, Arizona Water Banking Authority (Coordinator) Carol Young, Arizona Department of Water Resources (Administrative Assistant) Workgroup/Committee Co-Chairs Commerce, Recreation & Tourism Jim Holt, Arizona Department of Water Resources Conservation Committee Marjie Risk, Arizona Department of Water Resources (Coordinator) Environmental Health, Watershed Management, Livestock & Wildlife Steve Barker, Natural Resources Conservation Service (Co-Chair) George Ruyle, University of Arizona (Co-Chair) Sandy Whitney (Co-Chair) Irrigated Agriculture Mike Hanrahan, Arizona Department of Water Resources (Co-Chair) Sheldon Jones, Agri-Business Council (Co-Chair) Monitoring Committee Gregg Garfin, University of Arizona – CLIMAS (Co-Chair) Tony Haffer, National Weather Service – Phoenix (Co-Chair) Municipal & Industrial Workgroup Tom
    [Show full text]
  • 3D Terrain Virtual Databases
    3D Terrain Virtual Databases MetaVR Continental US Plus Alaska and Hawaii (CONUS++) 3D Terrain MetaVR Africa, Asia, Australia & Oceania, Europe, North America, and South America 3D Terrain © 2018 MetaVR, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Virtual Reality Scene Generator, VRSG, and Metadesic are trademarks of MetaVR, Inc. Esri and ArcGIS are registered trademarks of Esri. Virtual Kismayo, Somalia Kismayo, Somalia Terrain Specifications Imagery coverage = 50 cm per-pixel Digital Globe (GeoEye-1) satellite imagery covering 1,017 sq km of the southern Somalia port city and are blended into 15 meters-per-pixel (mpp) natural view imagery Elevation coverage = SRTM void filled elevation source data. Cultural features MetaVR’s terrain is populated with hundreds of geographically specific culture models built from ground-level photographs taken on the streets of Kismayo. In addition to these geolocated and photographically specific models of buildings and other structures, several hundred other buildings were modeled by matching the structural footprints visible in the imagery as geographically typical models with culturally and architecturally accurate details. MetaVR’s virtual city contains varied terrain representative of important training environments, from a built-up port to dense urban streets to a sparsely populated outer region that includes a commercial airport. Virtual Afghanistan Village Imagery coverage The overall imagery resolution of the virtual terrain of the whole country is 2.5 meters per pixel. The terrain, built Cultural features with MetaVR’s Terrain Tools for Esri® ArcGIS®, includes an area of 1,120 sq. km of 60 cm Digital Globe commercial The village area has approximately 520 custom-built 3D structures that match the building satellite source imagery and 90 meter elevation posts.
    [Show full text]
  • BLM Public Land Statistics 2007
    Click Here for Table of Contents PUBLIC LAND STATISTICS 2007 Volume 192 BLM/OC/ST-08/001+1165 May 2008 WELCOME TO PUBLIC LAND STATISTICS 2007 Welcome to the 2007 edition of Public Land Statistics, published by the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM). As in years past, the cover of this year’s publication is designed to convey the scope of the Bureau’s complex and multifaceted mission using visual imagery. The 80-plus tables inside the document tell the story of the BLM’s mission, programs, and accomplishments using numerical data and detailed footnotes. Many of the minor acreage changes from 1 year to the next occur because: 1. Inholdings have been acquired or some other land exchange has taken place during the year. 2. Better GIS mapping of land boundaries has enabled us to recalculate the total BLM acres within the unit. Public Land Statistics is available on the Internet. Please visit our national homepage at: http://www.blm.gov/public_land_statistics/index.htm . Note that the data presented in the 2007 Public Land Statistics tables may not exactly match the data in other BLM publications covering Fiscal Year 2007 operations and accomplishments. This occurs because the databases that provide table data are not static; they are constantly being updated to provide the latest information, sometimes many months after the end of the fiscal year. We have presented the most current data available in this edition of Public Land Statistics. We remain committed to publishing a Public Land Statistics report each year that is timely, complete, and helpful as possible to our readers.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Environmental Assessment for Reestablishment of Sonoran Pronghorn
    Final Environmental Assessment for Reestablishment of Sonoran Pronghorn U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Region 2 6 October 2010 This page left blank intentionally 6 October 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION............................................ 1 1.1 Proposed Action.............................................................. 2 1.2 Project Need................................................................. 6 1.3 Background Information on Sonoran Pronghorn . 9 1.3.1 Taxonomy.............................................................. 9 1.3.2 Historic Distribution and Abundance......................................... 9 1.3.3 Current Distribution and Abundance........................................ 10 1.3.4 Life History............................................................ 12 1.3.5 Habitat................................................................ 13 1.3.6 Food and Water......................................................... 18 1.3.7 Home Range, Movement, and Habitat Area Requirements . 18 1.4 Project Purpose ............................................................. 19 1.5 Decision to be Made.......................................................... 19 1.6 Compliance with Laws, Regulations, and Plans . 19 1.7 Permitting Requirements and Authorizations Needed . 21 1.8 Scoping Summary............................................................ 21 1.8.1 Internal Agency Scoping.................................................. 21 1.8.2 Public Scoping ........................................................
    [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]
  • Arizona Department of Veterans' Services DIRECTORY
    Arizona Department of Veterans’ Services DIRECTORY November 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS INFORMATION UPDATE FORM FOR VETERANS’ ORGANIZATIONS………. 3 ARIZONA VETERANS’ SERVICE ADVISORY COMMISSION…………………. 4 MEDAL OF HONOR RECIPENTS ― ARIZONA…………………………………….. 5 NATIONAL SERVICE OFFICERS ― ARIZONA……………………………………… 7 AZDVS VETERAN BENEFITS COUNSELORS (VBC’s)………………………… 9 VETERAN SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS; ARIZONA SERVICE OFFICERS…. 10 OTHER VETERANS’ SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS……………………….…… 21 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS………………………………..... 33 ARIZONA VA MEDICAL CENTERS………………………………………………. 33 COMMUNITY BASED OUTPATIENT CLINICS (CBOC’s)……………………… 34 VETERAN CENTERS; VA CEMETERY ― ARIZONA….………………………... 37 OTHER FEDERAL/STATE AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS ― AZ……..… 37 ARIZONA MILITARY INSTALLATIONS…………………………………………... 44 MILITARY DEPT. OF FINANCE & RETIREE ASSISTANCE…………………… 47 ARIZONA U.S. CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION……………………………... 49 ARIZONA EXECUTIVE OFFICIALS………………………………………………. 52 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE DIRECTORS OF VETERANS’ AFFAIRS (NASDVA)…………………………………………………… 54 STATE VETERAN HOMES WITHIN THE U.S…………………………………… 63 2 INFORMATION UPDATE FORM FOR VETERANS’ ORGANIZATIONS When there are changes or corrections required, organizations should complete this form and submit it to the following address: Mail to: Arizona Dept. of Veterans’ Services Corrections or Updates: ATTN: Office of the Director Information may be phoned in: 3839 North 3rd Street, Suite 200 Telephone: (602) 234-8406 Phoenix, AZ 85012 Facsimile: (602) 255-1038 E-mail to: [email protected] FROM: ORGANIZATION
    [Show full text]