DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Payson Off-Highway Vehicle Recreation Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Payson Off-Highway Vehicle Recreation Project Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Payson Off-Highway Vehicle Recreation Project USDA Forest Service Payson Ranger District Tonto National Forest Gila County, Arizona Introduction The popularity of recreational off-highway vehicle (OHV) use continues to increase across the State of Arizona and the Tonto National Forest (TNF). The impacts associated with this increased use have become especially prevalent across the Payson Ranger District and a Proposed Action has been developed for recreational OHV management. The Payson Off-Highway Vehicle Recreation Project is designed to address specific needs on the Payson Ranger District associated with recreational OHV use trends and local resource conditions. The purpose and need for this project is to protect sensitive riparian areas and other Forest resources and values while organizing and managing recreational OHV use. An Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared to determine whether the proposed action of 1) Prohibiting motorized vehicle use within 200 feet for stream corridors identified in the EA; 2) Designating three OHV staging areas; and 3) Identifying a potential future OHV specific campground would significantly affect the quality of the human environment and thereby require the preparation of an environmental impact statement to disclose the effects. Preparing the EA has fulfilled agency policy and direction to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The EA documents the analysis of two alternatives; 1) No Action, and 2) The Proposed Action to meet the purpose and need. Project Location The areas contained within this analysis are located northwest, north, east and south of Payson, Arizona within the Payson Ranger District, Tonto National Forest, State of Arizona (EA Figures 1 and 2). The proposed riparian corridor buffers, staging areas and campground sites are, generally accessible by Arizona State Routes (AZ SR) 87, 260, and National Forest System Roads (NFSR) 32, 32A, 64, 199, 272, 284, 289, 405, 405A, 440, 458, and 1190. Decision and Reasons for the Decision Based upon my review of the alternatives, my decision is to implement Alternative 2, the proposed action, which will meet the purpose and need. This alternative includes prohibiting; 1) Motorized travel off of established system roads within 200 linear feet of identified streams/rivers, 2) Dispersed overnight camping within selected reaches of Christopher Creek, East Verde River, Tonto Creek, Webber Creek and Bear Flats (also located on Tonto Creek). Alternative 2 will also serve to establish 3 separate OHV staging areas, each approximately one half acre to two acres in size within previously disturbed sites located south of Pine, AZ, within Mayfield Canyon and nearby the Jim Jones Shooting Range. Alternative 2 also identifies an OHV specific campground at Pyeatt Draw. The campground 1 Payson Off Highway Vehicle Recreation Project area would be approximately +/- 45 acres in size with final number and arrangement of individual sites to be determined, would have a single campground host site with electric service (e.g. small solar panel) and overall site amenities to be determined via the campground facility design and planning process. The No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) was not selected because it does not meet the mission of the Forest Service or achieve the goals necessary to move ecosystems toward desired conditions as described in the Forest Plan. Other Alternatives Considered In addition to the selected alternative, one other alternative was considered. While alternative sites were evaluated, the sites that the Interdisciplinary Team determined had the best access, least ground disturbance and those that limited the potential environment effects were brought forward for analysis in Alternative 2. A comparison of these alternatives can be found in the associated project EA, Chapters 2 and 3. Alternative 1- No Action This alternative is presented to establish a baseline for comparison of impacts between alternatives and to provide the responsible official a viable choice in the range of reasonable alternatives. Under the No Action alternative, a new OHV campground and three OHV staging areas would not be developed and the 200-foot streamside buffers from motorized travel and overnight camping would not be implemented. Public Involvement and Scoping The Payson Ranger District began 30 days of public scoping on March 28, 2014 with the publication of a Legal Notice in the Payson Roundup. Letters were mailed to 73 entities and individuals, including local and state governments, Tribes, Federal Agencies, partner groups and individuals who in the past had expressed interest in Forest projects. Following strong interest in the proposed project, the Payson Ranger District twice extended the scoping period, which closed on June 6, 2014. In addition, the Ranger District hosted a public forum on May 23, 2014 in Payson, Arizona. The Payson Ranger District received approximately 300 pieces of correspondence as a result of scoping, including a petition to remove the Houston Mesa Campground from consideration for conversion from an equestrian-focused campground to OHV motorized use. This issue was acted upon and an alternative campground site is proposed as part of the proposed action, Alternative 2 (e.g. Pyeatt Draw location). The Payson Ranger District provided a public notice of opportunity to comment on the draft EA for the proposed project on January 30, 2018 with the publication of a Legal Notice in the Payson Roundup. At the end of the 30 day comment period no responses had been received. On May 24, 2018 the Payson Ranger District designated an opportunity for public comment on the draft EA by written request to 45 interested parties. The parties were those that had previously provided written comments to the planning of the project and they were requested to provide written comments within 30 days from the date of the written request. There were 9 responses to the opportunity for comment. All responses were positive or neutral to the overall proposed action with many requesting that additional limitations be placed on streamside use and camping. 2 Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact Finding of No Significant Impact The following is a summary of the project analysis to determine significance, as defined by Forest Service Handbook 1909.15_05. “Significant” as used in NEPA requires consideration of both context and intensity of the expected project effects. Context means that the significance of an action may be analyzed in several contexts (i.e. local regional, worldwide), and over short and long time frames. The effects of this site-specific proposed action and the significance of the effects are limited to the local level. This project is limited in scope and duration. The project was designed to minimize environmental effects through management, mitigations and resource protection measures. For the proposed action and alternatives the context of the environmental impacts is based on the environmental analysis in the final EA. Intensity refers to the severity of the expected project impacts and is defined by the 10 factors identified in 40 CFR 1508.27(b). My finding of no significant impact is based on the context of the project and the results of the evaluation of effects using the following 10 factors. 1. Impacts may be both beneficial and adverse. A significant impact may exist even if the Federal agency believes that on the balance the effects will be beneficial. My finding of no significant impact is neither the result of balancing beneficial and adverse impacts nor biased by beneficial impacts of the proposed action. 2. The degree to which the proposed action affects public health or safety. Organizing and managing OHV use is of limited scope not expected to present hazards to workers or the public. No significant impacts on public health and safety were identified. 3. Unique characteristics of the geographic area such as proximity to historic or cultural resources, park lands, prime farmlands, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or ecologically critical areas. There are no known unique characteristics associated with the areas of analysis. The action will not adversely impact any resources considered to have unique characteristics. 4. The degree to which the effects on the quality of the human environment are likely to be highly controversial. The proposed action includes practices that are commonly used and mitigations that address issues raised in scoping and the analyses of specialists. While there is some opposition to OHV use and other uses of public lands, this action is not controversial in the context of NEPA. 5. The degree to which the possible effects on the human environment are highly uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks. The Forest Service is experienced in implementing the activities proposed in this action. The environmental impacts are not uncertain for organizing and managing recreational uses on Forest lands and no unique or unknown risk can be reasonably identified. 6. The degree to which the action may establish a precedent for future actions with significant impacts or represents a decision in principle about a future consideration. The proposed action is unlikely to establish a precedent for future actions, and all similar actions related to proposed OHV recreation management would be analyzed through the NEPA process and would be independent of this site-specific action to protect specific segments of riparian corridors along the East Verde River, Christopher, Webber and Tonto Creeks. 3 Payson Off Highway Vehicle Recreation Project 7. Whether the action is related to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts. Cumulative impacts are analyzed in Chapter 3 of the EA and were determined not to be significant. 8. The degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, sites, highways, structures, or objects listed in the National Register of Historic Places or may cause loss or destruction of significant cultural or historical resources. While many historic/cultural sites exist on the Payson Ranger District and project locations (e.g.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arizona TIM PALMER FLICKR
    Arizona TIM PALMER FLICKR Colorado River at Mile 50. Cover: Salt River. Letter from the President ivers are the great treasury of noted scientists and other experts reviewed the survey design, and biological diversity in the western state-specific experts reviewed the results for each state. RUnited States. As evidence mounts The result is a state-by-state list of more than 250 of the West’s that climate is changing even faster than we outstanding streams, some protected, some still vulnerable. The feared, it becomes essential that we create Great Rivers of the West is a new type of inventory to serve the sanctuaries on our best, most natural rivers modern needs of river conservation—a list that Western Rivers that will harbor viable populations of at-risk Conservancy can use to strategically inform its work. species—not only charismatic species like salmon, but a broad range of aquatic and This is one of 11 state chapters in the report. Also available are a terrestrial species. summary of the entire report, as well as the full report text. That is what we do at Western Rivers Conservancy. We buy land With the right tools in hand, Western Rivers Conservancy is to create sanctuaries along the most outstanding rivers in the West seizing once-in-a-lifetime opportunities to acquire and protect – places where fish, wildlife and people can flourish. precious streamside lands on some of America’s finest rivers. With a talented team in place, combining more than 150 years This is a time when investment in conservation can yield huge of land acquisition experience and offices in Oregon, Colorado, dividends for the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Area Land Use Plan
    DETAIL VIEW #1 RIM TRAIL ESTATES DETAIL VIEW #2 GIRL SCOUT CAMP 260 KOHL'S RANCH VERDE GLEN FR 199 TONTO CREEK 5 THOMPSON THOMPSON DRAW I E. VERDE RIVER DRAW II BOY SCOUT CAMP FR 64 FR 64 WHISPERING PINES PINE MEADOWS BEAR FLATS FR 199 DETAIL VIEW #3 FLOWING SPRINGS DETAIL VIEW #4 DETAIL VIEW #5 DIAMOND POINT FOREST HOMES & 87 FR 29 COLLINS RANCH E. VERDE RIVER COCONINO COUNTY EAST VERDE PARK FR 64 260 FR 64 TONTO VILLAGE GILA COUNTYLION SPRINGS DETAIL VIEW #6 DETAIL VIEW #7 DETAIL VIEW #8 FR 200 FR FR 291 PONDEROSA SPRINGS CHRISTOPHER CREEK 260 HAIGLER CREEK HAIGLER CREEK (HIGHWAY 260 REALIGNMENT) COLCORD MOUNTAIN HOMESITES HUNTER CREEK FR 200 DETAIL VIEW #9 DETAIL VIEW #10 DETAIL VIEW #11 ROOSEVELT LAKE ESTATES 87 FR 184 188 OXBOW ESTATES SPRING CREEK 188 JAKES CORNER KEY MAP: LEGEND Residential - 3.5 to 5 du/ac Residential - 5 to 10 du/ac Regional Highways and Significant Roadways NORTHWEST NORTHEAST Major Rivers or Streams Residential - 10+ du/ac Gila County Boundary Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial WEST EAST Federal/Incorporated Area Lands CENTRAL CENTRAL Light Industrial LAND USE CLASSIFICATIONS Heavy Industrial SOUTH Residential - 0 to 0.1 du/ac Public Facilities AREA LAND USE PLAN Residential - 0.1 to 0.4 du/ac DETAILED VIEWS Multi-Functional Corridor FIGURE 2.F Residential - 0.4 to 1.0 du/ac Mixed Use Residential - 1 to 2 du/ac Resource Conservation 0' NOVEMBER, 2003 3 Mi Residential - 2 to 3.5 du/ac GILA COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2012 Potential Resort/Lodging Use 1 1/2 Mi GILA COUNTY, ARIZONA DETAIL VIEW #1 RIM TRAIL ESTATES DETAIL VIEW #2 GIRL SCOUT CAMP 260 KOHL'S RANCH VERDE GLEN FR 199 TONTO CREEK 5 THOMPSON THOMPSON DRAW I E.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Fishing Regulations 3 Fishing License Fees Getting Started
    2019 & 2020 Fishing Regulations for your boat for your boat See how much you could savegeico.com on boat | 1-800-865-4846insurance. | Local Offi ce geico.com | 1-800-865-4846 | Local Offi ce See how much you could save on boat insurance. Some discounts, coverages, payment plans and features are not available in all states or all GEICO companies. Boat and PWC coverages are underwritten by GEICO Marine Insurance Company. GEICO is a registered service mark of Government Employees Insurance Company, Washington, D.C. 20076; a Berkshire Hathaway Inc. subsidiary. TowBoatU.S. is the preferred towing service provider for GEICO Marine Insurance. The GEICO Gecko Image © 1999-2017. © 2017 GEICO AdPages2019.indd 2 12/4/2018 1:14:48 PM AdPages2019.indd 3 12/4/2018 1:17:19 PM Table of Contents Getting Started License Information and Fees ..........................................3 Douglas A. Ducey Governor Regulation Changes ...........................................................4 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH COMMISSION How to Use This Booklet ...................................................5 JAMES S. ZIELER, CHAIR — St. Johns ERIC S. SPARKS — Tucson General Statewide Fishing Regulations KURT R. DAVIS — Phoenix LELAND S. “BILL” BRAKE — Elgin Bag and Possession Limits ................................................6 JAMES R. AMMONS — Yuma Statewide Fishing Regulations ..........................................7 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT Common Violations ...........................................................8 5000 W. Carefree Highway Live Baitfish
    [Show full text]
  • A Conceptual Hydrogeologic Model for Fossil Springs, Western
    A CONCEPTUAL HYDROGEOLOGIC MODEL FOR FOSSIL SPRINGS, WESTERN MOGOLLON RIM, ARIZONA: IMPLICATIONS FOR REGIONAL SPRINGS PROCESSES By L. Megan Green A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Geology Northern Arizona University May 2008 Approved: _________________________________ Abraham E. Springer, Ph.D., Chair _________________________________ Roderic A. Parnell, Jr., Ph.D. _________________________________ Paul J. Umhoefer, Ph.D. ABSTRACT A CONCEPTUAL HYDROGEOLOGIC MODEL FOR FOSSIL SPRINGS, WEST MOGOLLON MESA, ARIZONA: IMPLICATIONS FOR REGIONAL SPRINGS PROCESSES L. Megan Green Fossil Springs is the largest spring system discharging along the western Mogollon Rim in central Arizona and is a rare and important resource to the region. The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of the source of groundwater discharging at Fossil Springs. This was accomplished by (1) constructing a 3-D digital hydrogeologic framework model from available data to depict the subsurface geology of the western Mogollon Rim region and (2) by compiling and interpreting regional structural and geophysical data for Arizona’s central Transition Zone. EarthVision, a 3-D GIS modeling software, was used to construct the framework model. Two end-member models were created; the first was a simple interpolation of the data and the second was a result of geologic interpretations. The second model shows a monocline trending along the Diamond Rim fault. Both models show Fossil Springs discharging at the intersection of the Diamond Rim fault and Fossil Springs fault, at the contact between the Redwall Limestone and Naco Formation. The second objective of this study was a compilation of regional data for Arizona’s central Transition Zone.
    [Show full text]
  • Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River Comprehensive River Management Plan: Geology Report
    Fossil Creek Wild & Scenic River Comprehensive River Management Plan Geology Report Prepared by: Polly Haessig (retired) Physical Scientist/NEPA Specialist/Partnership Coordinator Mogollon Rim Ranger District Coconino National Forest Steven Overby Soil Scientist Forest and Woodlands Ecosystem Program Rocky Mountain Research Station /s/ Steven T. Overby for: Red Rock Ranger District Coconino National Forest Payson Ranger District Tonto National Forest November 2018 USDA NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICY STATEMENT: DR 4300.003 USDA Equal Opportunity Public Notification Policy (June 2, 2015) In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720- 2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form.
    [Show full text]
  • East Verde TMDL Arsenic De-List Report
    FINAL DE-LIST REPORT FOR TOTAL ARSENIC Reach 15060203-022C East Verde River –American Gulch to the Verde River June 9, 2015 Executive Summary In the 2006-08 305(b) report, reach 15060203-22C of the East Verde River (confluence of American Gulch to the Verde River confluence) was placed by ADEQ on the state of Arizona’s 303(d) Impaired Waters List for total arsenic. Based on the best available data collected within the assessment time frame, it continued to be assessed as impaired for arsenic in the 2010 and 2012-14 reports. This listing was based on exceedances that occurred at monitoring point VREVR002.62 (East Verde River near Childs, AZ). Personnel from the TMDL Unit of ADEQ collected additional water samples at multiple monitoring points along the impaired reach outside of the Mazatzal Wilderness Area at various hydrologic conditions, ranging from base flow to flood stage conditions. Personnel from the USGS Tempe office collected monthly samples for a little over a year from monitoring point VREVR002.62 which is located within the Mazatzal Wilderness Area. Analysis of the total arsenic was performed by laboratories that had the ability to analyze to a detection level that was below the strictest applicable total arsenic standard for the drinking water source designated use of 10 µg/L. Data collected at the various sample points since 2009 show further exceedances of the total arsenic standard are still occurring. All of the arsenic detections are once again from samples collected at the VREVR002.62 monitoring site. A review of the available ground and surface water data indicates that surface water in the lower reaches of the East Verde River is being impacted by the mixing of groundwater through upwelling of the local aquifer.
    [Show full text]
  • SR 260 – Payson to Heber Archaeological Project: Results of Archaeological Testing and a Plan for Data Recovery in the Doubtful Canyon Segment
    SR 260 – Payson to Heber Archaeological Project: Results of Archaeological Testing and a Plan for Data Recovery in the Doubtful Canyon Segment Sarah H. Herr Pat H. Stein Technical Report No. 2009-09 Desert Archaeology, Inc. SR 260 – Payson to Heber Archaeological Project: Results of Archaeological Testing and a Plan for Data Recovery in the Doubtful Canyon Segment DRAFT Project Number: STP-053-2 (38) Sarah H. Herr TRACS Number: 260 GI 269 H4698 01C Pat H. Stein Contract Number: 99-59 Submitted to Historic Preservation Team Environmental and Enhancement Group Arizona Department of Transportation 205 South 17th Avenue Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Technical Report No. 2009-09 Desert Archaeology, Inc. 3975 North Tucson Boulevard, Tucson, Arizona 85716 • December 2009 COMPLIANCE SUMMARY Date: 18 December 2009 Report Title: SR 260 – Payson to Heber Archaeological Project: Results of Archaeological Testing and a Plan for Data Recovery in the Doubtful Canyon Segment. Technical Report Number 2009-09. Client: Arizona Department of Transportation Client Project Name: State Route 260 – Payson to Heber project Compliance Agency: Tonto National Forest, Arizona Department of Transportation Compliance Level: Federal ADOT TRACS Number: 260 GI 269 H4698 01C Applicable Laws/Regulations: Arizona Antiquities Act, ARS §41-841; Federal Organic Administration Act of June 4, 1897; Antiquities Act of 1906, As Amended; Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, As Amended; National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Section 106; Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) Applicable Permits: TNF permit TON426 for prehistoric period sites; TNF permit TON425 for historic sites; TNF permit TON570 for survey work. Arizona Antiquties Act Project Specific Permit 1999-121ps Tribal Consultation: When working on Tonto National Forest land the State Route 260 project works under the Plan for the Treatment and Disposition of Human Remains and Other Cultural Items from the Tonto National Forest pursuant to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (Revised 2001).
    [Show full text]
  • The East Verde Is a Rapidly Degrading Stream Flowing Through a Country Of
    An archeological reconnaissance of the East Verde River in central Arizona Item Type Thesis-Reproduction (electronic); text Authors Peck, Fred Rawlings,1925- Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 23/09/2021 22:17:51 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/191414 FroritespieCe The East Verde is a rapidly degradingstream flowing through a country of high relief. AN AtC HEOLOGICAL RECO ISANCE OF THE Ei$T VERDE RIVER IN CENTPLMIDNA by Fred R. Peck A Thesis submitted to the faculty of the Department of Anthropology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of M$TER OF ARTS in the Graduate College, University of Arizona l96 Approved: Director of T is Y Date /95 This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited in the Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or repro- duction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the dean of the Graduate College when in their judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship.
    [Show full text]
  • The East Verde Is a Rapidly Degrading Stream Flowing Through a Country of High Relief
    An archeological reconnaissance of the East Verde River in central Arizona Item Type Thesis-Reproduction (electronic); text Authors Peck, Fred Rawlings,1925- Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 23/09/2021 16:25:37 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/191414 FroritespieCe The East Verde is a rapidly degradingstream flowing through a country of high relief. AN AtC HEOLOGICAL RECO ISANCE OF THE Ei$T VERDE RIVER IN CENTPLMIDNA by Fred R. Peck A Thesis submitted to the faculty of the Department of Anthropology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of M$TER OF ARTS in the Graduate College, University of Arizona l96 Approved: Director of T is Y Date /95 This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited in the Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or repro- duction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the dean of the Graduate College when in their judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship.
    [Show full text]
  • Gila River Basin Native Fish Monitoring 2017 Annual Report
    Gila River Basin Native Fish Monitoring 2017 Annual Report Lara J. McCall and Paul C. Marsh Marsh & Associates, LLC 5016 S. Ash Avenue, Suite 108 Tempe, Arizona 85282 Submitted to William Stewart, COR Bureau of Reclamation Phoenix Area Office 6150 West Thunderbird Road Glendale, Arizona In behalf of Reclamation Contract No. R17PC00108 December 2017 Table of contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 4 Methods ........................................................................................................................................................ 5 Results ........................................................................................................................................................... 6 Oak Creek .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Middle reach – Crescent Moon Ranch and Chavez Crossing Campground ...................................... 7 Lower reach – Bubbling Ponds Fish Hatchery and Willow Point Rd. ................................................ 9 West Clear Creek ..................................................................................................................................... 11 Blodgett Basin Trail (#17) ................................................................................................................ 12 East Verde River .....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Otter Newsletter Summer 2014
    The Otter SPONSORED BY FRIENDS OF VERDE RIVER GREENWAY VOLUME TWO SUMMER ISSUE Adventures into the East Verde: A Week in the Life of a Conservation Corps Crew This April I had the pleasure of joining our spirits, thinking “our hike is only eight miles Arizona Conservation Corps (AZCC) interns as downhill to the confluence of the Verde and East an “alternate” for a week long back-country Verde,” where we were to begin our survey. We backpacking trip to map invasive species along knew from planning that we would drop off the the East Verde (an underexplored tributary to Mongollon Rim and descend around 2,500 ft., the Verde River located downstream of Fossil but the mood was still, “no worries, we’re tough, Creek). Prior to leaving, we heard stories of we got this”. Well, let’s just say it turned out to bears, cougars, boating mishaps; recollections of be considerably more challenging than expected! pure and rugged wilderness. Beyond the myths, The trail was much longer and the terrain much no one seemed to have much concrete infor- steeper than we could have imagined (in-fact, the mation about the East Verde. We were packed estimated mileage increased by the day!). and ready for an adventure! See Adventures Page 3 We got to the Twin Butte Trailhead and start down the Hardscrabble Mesa Trail in good P ROGRAM C OORDINATOR ’ S L OG News you otter know about VWRC Hi Friends, Summertime for me has included boating the Verde (even Meanderland Private Land- with a Flow of 32 CFS), eating Camp Verde corn, enjoying owner Partners Stepping Up monsoon storms, gardening, fireworks, farmers markets, Page 2 LEAF interns, synthesizing data and planning for the up- coming VWRC treatment season, with a lot of grant writing 2014 Tamarisk Coalitions sprinkled on top!! Annual Conference Page 4 During the past few years VWRC AmeriCorps Interns and field crews have inventoried and mapped over 10,000 riparian acres for invasive plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona's 2006 Impaired and Not Attaining Waters (Draft)
    Arizona’s 2012/14 Impaired Waters This list contains assessment units that were assessed as impaired (Category 5) by ADEQ or EPA during the current and previous assessment listing cycles. The year each parameter was listed is located in parentheses after each parameter (2012/14 listings are in bold). Size Assessment Unit Cause(s) of Impairment (year first listed) (acres/miles) Bill Williams Watershed Alamo Lake Ammonia (2004), mercury in fish tissue (2002- EPA), 1414 a 15030204-0040 high pH (1996) Bill Williams River Alamo Lake to Castaneda Wash 35.9 mi Ammonia and high pH (2006) 15030204-003 Boulder Creek Beryllium (dissolved) Tributary at 344114/1131800 to Wilder Creek 14.4 mi (2010) 15030202-006B Coors Lake 230 a Mercury in fish tissue (2004- EPA) 15030202-5000 Colorado-Grand Canyon Watershed Colorado River Selenium (total) and suspended sediment concentration Parashant Canyon to Diamond Creek 27.6 mi (2004) 15010002-003 Lake Powell 9770 a Mercury in fish tissue (2010- EPA) 14070006-1130 Paria River Suspended sediment concentration (2004), E. coli Utah border to Colorado River 29.4 mi (2006) 14070007-123 Virgin River Sullivan’s Canyon to Beaver Dam Wash 9.7 mi Selenium (total) (2012) 15010010-004 Virgin River Selenium (total) and suspended sediment concentration Beaver Dam Wash to Big Bend Wash 10.1 mi (2004), E. coli (2010) 15010010-003 Colorado-Lower Gila Watershed Colorado River Hoover Dam to Lake Mohave 40.4 mi Selenium (total) (2004) 15030101-015 Colorado River Bill Williams River to Osborne Wash 13.4 mi Selenium (total) (2010)
    [Show full text]