DOCSLIB.ORG

Lower Cienega Creek Restoration Evaluation Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lower Cienega Creek Restoration Evaluation Project ti LOWER CIENEGA CREEK RESTORATION EVALUATION PROJECT: An Investigation into Developing Quantitative Methods for Assessing Stream Channel Physical Condition Funded by the Arizona Water Protection Fund Grant # 90-068 WPF by Lin Lawson and Hans Huth November 2003 Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Southern Regional Office Tucson, Arizona ADEQ Report #EQR0303 The "Old Timer" on the title page is a cottonwood we found in the Upper Basin of Cienega Creek near primary control point #2. The cadastral location of the tree is T19S R17E S15 dac (7.5 minute topographic map Spring Water Canyon, Ariz., 1981). The photo was taken from the terrace on the west side of the creek looking east. The base of the tree sits about ten feet below the top of the terrace and next to a barbed wire fence. Photo was taken at sunset on 18 June 2001 by Hans Huth with a Nikon digital camera. ABSTRACT This project was funded by the Arizona Water Protection Fund to evaluate a 10-mile reach in the Lower Basin of Cienega Creek, in southeast Arizona, for potential stream stabilization projects, and to develop and test quantitative techniques for assessing the physical condition of stream channels. A land survey of the geomorphology of the stream channel in the Upper and Lower Basins was conducted during the period December 2000 through April 2002. Two samples sites were located in each of the basins from which water quality, macroinvertebrate, and diatom samples were retrieved. One of the two sites in the Upper Basin was chosen as the reference condition to which the two sites in the Lower Basin were compared. Differences in water quality between the two basins are likely due to exposed marine sedimentary rocks in the Lower Basin. Macroinvertebrate and habitat assessment data revealed that habitat complexity was significantly less at the Lower Basin sites. Diatom taxa and abundance were correlated with water quality but not habitat complexity. The land survey showed that ephemeral and perennial reaches of the creek responded to the same hydrological processes. A local watershed area/cross-section area curve was constructed from over sixty cross-sections measured along the creek. Ephemeral cross-sections plotted closely to the regression line, which had a high correlation coefficient. The local curve was congruent with two regional curves, indicating its consistency with regional hydrological processes. These results gave validity for combining morphological data from both ephemeral and perennial reaches for streambed morphological analyses. Streambed feature analysis revealed morphological differences between the two basins. A Linear Habitat Complexity Index, developed from survey data, isolated a least impaired reference reach in the Upper Basin. A comparison of the reference reach to the channel in the Lower Basin showed the channel in the Lower Basin to be dominated by runs with few pools or riffles, indicative of an unstable channel. A pool facet slope analysis revealed that pools in the Lower Basin have shallow slopes, indicative of shallow pools. Pool facet slopes in the Lower Basin were significantly different than pool facet slopes in the reference reach. Reach slope departure analysis identified twenty-one ephemeral tributaries contributing sediment to the Lower Basin channel. Four of the contributors have supplied massive amounts of sediment to the lower channel. Several quantitative techniques for assessing the physical state of stream channels were developed and successfully employed to evaluate the morphological data collected during the project. These techniques will require further testing on streams throughout the state. It was concluded that the additions of sediment to the Lower Basin channel have been long in duration and massive in extent throughout its entire length, and any stream stabilization projects constructed in the near future would be without merit. The presence of the sediment and several active headcuts indicate an unstable channel, not conducive to long-term successful restoration projects. A series of recommendations are made to federal, state, and county agencies, and private land- holders for watershed management and improvement actions. PREFACE "It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, and comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory and defeat." Theodore Roosevelt, address at the Sorbonne, Paris, France, April 23, 1910. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page FIGURES ii TABLES iii MAPS iv INTRODUCTION 1 STUDY AREA AND BACKGROUND 3 METHODS 5 Sampling Sites and Sampling Frequency 5 Sample Collection 5 Water Quality Procedures Discharge Measurement 6 Macroinvertebrate Collection Procedure 6 Diatom Collection Procedure 7 Bank Loss Procedure 7 Geomorphology Survey Procedure 7 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 10 Water Quality 10 Results 10 Biological 16 Diatom Results 16 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Results 20 Geomorphology 25 Comparison of Ephemeral and Perennial Stream Channels 25 Bank Erosion as an Indicator of Excessive Sediment 27 Pool Facet Slope as an Indicator of Excessive Sediment 29 Streambed Feature Index as an Indicator of Excessive Sediment 32 Slope Deflection Analysis for Identifying Sediment Sources 35 Estimated Sediment Loads to Cienega Creek from Tributaries 66 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 67 RECOMMENDATIONS 70 LITERATURE CITED 72 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 73 APPENDIX TABLE OF CONTENTS 75 FIGURES Page Figure 1. Primary Control Point Distribution and Sample Site Locations for the Cienega Creek Basin 9 Figure 2. Conceptualization of Structural Components Producing Intermittent Flow in Lower Cienega Creek, Pima County, Arizona 15 Figure 3. Non-Metric Multidimensional Scaling Ordination Plot of Diatom Communities 17 Figure 4. Dendogram of Hierarchical Clustering of Water Quality Data from Four Sample Sites 21 Figtire 5. Dendogram of Hierarchical Clustering of Habitat Data from Four Sample Sites 22 Figure 6. MDS of Bray-Curtis Similarities from Log+1 Transformed Species Data and Water Quality Data and Untransformed Physical Data 23 Figure 7. Cienega Creek and Regional Curves Showing Cross-sectional Area as a Function of Watershed Area 25 Figure 8. Map of the Cienega Creek Basin Showing Locations of Primary Control Points and BM sites 28 Figure 9. Comparison of Reference Reach Facet Slopes to Lower Basin Facet Slopes 29 Figure 10 Box-and-Whiskers Plot of Pool Facet Slopes 30 Figure 11. Pool Facet Slope Distribution of Lower Basin Data Set 30 Figure 12. Pool Facet Slope Distribution of Reference Data Set 30 Figure 13. Results of First Exploratory Analysis to Identify a Reference Reach in the Upper Basin 34 Figure 14. Linear Habitat Complexity Index Applied to Reference Reach 35 Figure 15. Linear Habitat Complexity Index Applied to Lower Basin Channel 35 Figure 16. Longitudinal Profile of Streambed from CP17 to CP 19 38 Figure 17. Longitudinal Profile of Streambed from CP19 to CP20 41 Figure 18. Longitudinal Profile of Streambed from CP20 to CP21 46 Figure 19. Longitudinal Profile of Streambed from CP21 to CP22 54 Figure 20. Longitudinal Profile of Streambed from CP22 to CP23 55 Figure 21. Longitudinal Profile of Streambed from CP23 to CP24 61 TABLES Page Table I. Chemical Results for Nutrients 11 Table 2. Chemical Results for Metals , 11 Table 3. Chemical Results for Inorganics 12 Table 4. Field Data 13 Table 5. Summary of Results for the Kruskai-Wallis Test to Examine the Differences in Water Quality Parameters Among Sites 14 Table 6. Percent Similarity Matrix of Diatoms at Four Sample Sites with Replicates 17 Table 7. Correlation Analysis on Diatom Abundance and Selected Environmental Variables 18 Table 8. Summary of Macroinvertebrate Results with Arizona Index of Biological Integrity Rating 20 Table 9. Summary of Site Field Assessment for Physical Integrity 24 Table 10. Cienega Creek BEM Sites, Locations, and Potential Erosion Ratings 27 Table 11. Frequency Table of Pool Facet Slope Data from Lower Basin and Reference Reach 31 Table 12. Estimated Sediment Loads to Cienega Creek from Tributaries 66 MAPS Page Map 1. Cienega Creek Showing Beginning of Survey in the Lower Basin 37 Map 2. Cienega Creek Showing Next Downstream Reach from Map 1 42 Map 3. Cienega Creek Showing Next Downstream Reach from Map 2 45 Map 4. Cienega Creek Showing Next Downstream Reach from Map 3 53 Map 5. Cienega Creek Showing Next Downstream Reach from Map 4 62 iv INTRODUCTION The primary objective of the "Lower Cienega Creek Restoration Evaluation Project" was to gather environmental data, from which the streambed in the lower basin of the watershed could be evaluated for potential stream stabilization projects, and to develop and test quantitative techniques for assessing the physical condition of stream channels in Arizona. After several years of viewing portions of the creek, observations were made that excessive amounts of sediment were being stored in the channel, but it was unknown to what magnitude the ecosystem was being impaired by this pollutant. The sediment problem in Cienega Creek is not uncommon to the nation's streams and rivers. For several decades in the twentieth century, point source pollution was the focal point of pollution abatement to the nation's waters by the responsible federal and state agencies. After much success in lessening that problem, emphasis has now shifted to non-point source pollution. The single greatest non-point source pollutant to surface water resources in the United States is sediment (Ritchie, 1972; Oschwald, 1972; Downing, 1980; Lemley, 1982).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Aquatic Communities of Stream Ecosystems
    Arid West Water Quality Research Project Aquatic Communities of E~hemeral Stream Ecosystems FINAL REPORT Funding Provided by: EPA Region 9 Under Assistance Agreement: XP-99926701 Directed by: Pima County .. ~ (~ ) Wastewater •.,.0, Management Department Prepared by: URS GE I Consultants Chidw•ck Ecolo-gical D•v•~•on November 2006 Arid West Water Quality Research Project AQUATIC COMMUNITIES OF EPHEMERAL STREAM ECOSYSTEMS funding provided by EPA Region IX under Assistance Agreement XP-9992607 directed by Pima County Wastewater Management Department prepared by URS Corporation, Albuquerque, New Mexico and Chadwick Ecological Consultants, Littleton, Colorado November 2006 cover photo: Santa Cruz River, near Tubac, Arizona Linwood Smith, photographer FOREWORD The Arid West Water Quality Research Project (AWWQRP or “Project”) was established in 1995 as a result of a federal appropriation (Public Law 103-327) and the establishment of an Assistance Agreement between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and Pima County Wastewater Management (PCWMD), Tucson, Arizona. The establishment of this Agreement provided a significant opportunity for western water resource stakeholders to (1) work cooperatively to conduct scientific research to recommend appropriate water quality criteria, standards and uses for effluent-dependent and ephemeral waters in the arid and semi- arid regions of the West (“arid West”), and (2) improve the scientific basis for regulating wastewater and stormwater discharges in the arid West. Effluent-dependent waters are created by the discharge of treated effluent into ephemeral streambeds or streams that in the absence of effluent discharge would have only minimal flow. With the establishment of the AWWQRP, a management infrastructure was created to support the development of peer-reviewed research products.
    [Show full text]
  • History of the Empire Ranch
    HISTORY OF THE EMPIRE RANCH by Gregory Paul Dowell A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY In Partial Fulfillment off the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 1978 Original typescript thesis converted by the Empire Ranch Foundation to a Word document in 2011 with permission granted by Gregory Paul Dowell STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University 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 acknowledgement of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction 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 his judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author. SIGNED: _______________________________ APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR This thesis has been approved on the date shown below: ______________________________ ____________________ HARWOOD PERRY HINTON Date Professor of History Dowell, Gregory Paul History of the Empire Ranch, 1978 ii PREFACE Ranching in southern Arizona assumed a measure of permanence in the 1870s. With the slackening of the Apache threat, a number of cattle growers filtered into the valleys south of Tucson to start ranches and supply beef to mining camps and military detachments.
    [Show full text]
  • Index of Surface-Water Records to September 30, 1967 Part 9 .-Colorado River Basin
    Index of Surface-Water Records to September 30, 1967 Part 9 .-Colorado River Basin Index of Surface-Water Records to September 30, 1967 Part 9 .-Colorado River Basin By H. P. Eisenhuth GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 579 Washington J 968 United States Department of the Interior STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary Geological Survey William T. Pecora, Director Free on application to the U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. 20242 Index of Surface-Water Records to September 30, 1967 Part 9 .-Colorado River Basin By H. P. Eisenhuth INTRODUCTION This report lists the streamflow and reservoir stations in the Colorado River basin for which records have been or are to bepublishedinreportsoftheGeological Survey for periods through September 30, 1967. It supersedes Geobgical Survey Circular 509. Basic data on surface-water supply have been published in an annual series of water-supply papers consisting of several volumes, including one each for the States of Alaska and Hawaii. The area of the other 48 States is divided into 14 parts whose boundaries coincide with certain natural drainage lines. Prior to 1951, the records for the 48 States were published in 14 volumes, one for each of the parts. From 1951 to 1960, the records for the 48 States were pub~.ished annually in 18 volumes, there being 2 volumes each for Parts 1, 2, 3, and 6. The boundaries of the various parts are shown on the map in figure 1. Beginning in 1961, the annual series ofwater-supplypapers on surface-water supply was changed to a 5-year S<~ries. Records for the period 1961-65 will bepublishedin a series of water-supply papers using the same 14-part division for the 48 States, but most parts will be further subdivided into two or more volumes.
    [Show full text]
  • Cienega Creek Basin Groundwater Evaluation
    Cienega Creek Basin Groundwater Evaluation Frank Postillion, CGWP, Chief Hydrologist David Scalero, Principal Hydrologist Jacob Prietto, Hydrologist Jennifer Becker, Principal Hydrologist Pima County Regional Flood Control District July, 2015 Draft Executive Summary Overview: Pima County Regional Flood Control District (District) has evaluated the historical and current water balance and effects on regional groundwater conditions, and potential impacts on the hydro- and meso-riparian vegetation along the watercourses of the Cienega Creek Watershed (CCW) . The CCW study area is approximately 475 square miles in eastern Pima County, western Cochise County and northeastern Santa Cruz County, Arizona, with most of the basin in Pima County (Figure 1-1, Area Map). The amount of the CCW in the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) Tucson Active Management Area is 80 square miles, mostly within the southern portion of Davidson Canyon (Figure 1-1) Pima County (County) property within the CCW includes the Cienega Creek Natural Preserve (CCNP) in the lower part of the watershed, Bar V Ranch, Empirita Ranch, and Sands Ranch and Clyne Ranch. Cienega Creek stream flow supports rare and endangered fish and frogs as well as dense areas of riparian vegetation including cottonwoods, mesquites, and willow that provide shelter and foraging habitat for a wide variety of birds, bats, and other wildlife species. These unique natural resources are under threat from man-made land use changes and natural changes, including global climate change. The County and the US Government have invested millions to protect the CCNP in the lower watershed and the Las Cienegas National Conservation Area in the upper watershed and other important conservation areas in the CCW.
    [Show full text]
  • ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORTS and PUBLICATIONS Available Bound Prices Listed with Report Title Comb Bound $5.00 USB $5.00 Disk $4.00 Scan to E‐Mail Free If Available
    t THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO, OFFICE OF CONTRACT ARCHEOLOGY ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORTS AND PUBLICATIONS Available Bound Prices listed with report title Comb Bound $5.00 USB $5.00 Disk $4.00 Scan to e‐mail Free if available Please check specific reports listed below for format availability @unm.edu kk oca The University of New Mexico Phone: (505) 277‐5853 1717 Lomas Blvd. NE Fax: (505) 277‐6726 MSC07 4230 www.unm.edu 1 University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131‐0001 Publications sold within New Mexico are subject to NM Gross Receipts Tax T HESE PUBLICATIONS AND ANY INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN THEM ARE CONFIDENTIAL AND INTENDED SOLELY FOR PROFESSIONAL USE AUTHOR DATE REPORT FORMAT TITLE AVAILABILITY John C. Acklen 1977 185‐2 PDF available for An Archaeological Survey in the Rio Puerco Valley (East): The Public Service Company of New Rory P. Gauthier scan, disk, USB Mexico Marquez Line Adrienne Actis 2006 185‐901 $5.00 Bound Class III Cultural Resources Survey of Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Driver Training PDF available for Emergency Response Ranges on BLM and Private Lands Near Artesia, Eddy County, New scan, disk, USB Mexico Adrienne Actis 2006 185‐885 $5.00 Bound Cultural Resources Survey and Testing Nearby Water Well No. 12, Rio Rancho, Sandoval Richard C. Chapman PDF available for County, New Mexico scan, disk, USB Robert K. Alexander 1990 OCA‐017 PDF available for An Archaeological Survey of a Proposed Transwestern Pipeline Company Haul Road Near scan, disk, USB Laguna Pueblo, Cibola County, New Mexico Robert K. Alexander 1991 OCA‐019 PDF available for An Archaeological Survey of Proposed Building Sites for the Sevilleta Wildlife Refuge, Socorro scan, disk, USB County, New Mexico Robert K.
    [Show full text]
  • Section VII Potential Linkage Zones SECTION VII POTENTIAL LINKAGE ZONES
    2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT 41 Section VII Potential Linkage Zones SECTION VII POTENTIAL LINKAGE ZONES Linkage 1 Linkage 2 Beaver Dam Slope – Virgin Slope Beaver Dam – Virgin Mountains Mohave Desert Ecoregion Mohave Desert Ecoregion County: Mohave (Linkage 1: Identified Species continued) County: Mohave Kit Fox Vulpes macrotis ADOT Engineering District: Flagstaff and Kingman Mohave Desert Tortoise Gopherus agassizii ADOT Engineering District: Flagstaff ADOT Maintenance: Fredonia and Kingman Mountain Lion Felis concolor ADOT Maintenance: Fredonia ADOT Natural Resources Management Section: Flagstaff Mule Deer Odocoileus hemionus ADOT Natural Resources Management Section: Flagstaff Speckled Dace Rhinichthys osculus Spotted Bat Euderma maculatum AGFD: Region II AGFD: Region II Virgin Chub Gila seminuda Virgin Spinedace Lepidomeda mollispinis mollispinis BLM: Arizona Strip District Woundfin Plagopterus argentissimus BLM: Arizona Strip District Congressional District: 2 Threats: Congressional District: 2 Highway (I 15) Council of Government: Western Arizona Council of Governments Urbanization Council of Government: Western Arizona Council of Governments FHWA Engineering: A2 and A4 Hydrology: FHWA Engineering: A2 Big Bend Wash Legislative District: 3 Coon Creek Legislative District: 3 Virgin River Biotic Communities (Vegetation Types): Biotic Communities (Vegetation Types): Mohave Desertscrub 100% Mohave Desertscrub 100% Land Ownership: Land Ownership: Bureau of Land Management 59% Bureau of Land Management 93% Private 27% Private
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix E: Facility Inventory
    Facility Inventory FY 2019 Distance to Risk/ Facility Name Waterway Name Evaluation Date waterway (~ mi) Priority Val Vista Unnamed 0.38 0.00 04/18/16 Old Nogales Maintenance Yard Nogales Wash 0.00 0.53 02/05/16 Nogales Maintenance Yard Nogales Wash 0.10 1.44 02/05/16 Tucson Commercial DL MVD Unknown 0.00 0.06 03/08/16 Tucson Construction Office Unnamed Wash 0.00 0.59 03/08/16 Tucson East MVD Tributary to Pantano Wash 0.00 0.12 03/09/16 Tucson Regional MVD Unnamed Tributary to Julian Wash 0.10 0.35 03/09/16 Tucson District Office Unamed Wash 0.00 0.26 03/18/16 Tucson North MVD Canada del Oro 0.36 0.12 03/19/16 Tucson Stack Operation Julian Wash 0.00 0.59 03/19/16 Grant Rd Maintenance Yard Santa Cruz River 0.00 3.24 04/13/16 Picacho Unnamed - 0.00 04/18/16 Casa Grande Maintenance Yard Unknown 0.00 1.47 04/18/16 Sonoita Rest Area Sonoita Creek 0.31 0.18 04/19/16 Benson Construction Office Unnameed Tributary to San Pedro 0.00 0.26 04/19/16 Johnson Road Storage Site Walnut Wash 0.24 0.35 04/19/16 Sonoita Maintenance Yard Sonoita Creek 0.42 0.41 04/19/16 Amole Storage Site Unnamed Tributary to Mescal Arroyo 0.22 0.47 04/19/16 St. David Maintenance Yard Unnameed Tributary to San Pedro 0.00 1.82 04/19/16 Sells Storage Yard Sells Wash 0.33 0.12 04/25/16 Ajo Maintenance Yard Unamed Tributary to Gibson Arroyo 0.00 0.47 04/25/16 Nogales POE Unnamed Wash 0.00 0.26 05/02/16 Holbrook MVD Tributary to Little Colorado River 0.35 0.12 05/10/16 Holbrook Statewide Striping Facility Unnamed Tributary to the Little Colorado River 1.05 0.47 05/10/16 Kayenta
    [Show full text]
  • TABLE of REGULATORY PEAK DISCHARGES (Revised October 28, 2014)
    TABLE OF REGULATORY PEAK DISCHARGES (Revised October 28, 2014) Section 16.16.030.B requires the Chief Engineer to list the base flood peak discharges of all watersheds that generate flood peaks greater than 5,000 cfs. This list meets that requirement and includes peak discharges for other return frequencies as well as for smaller watersheds where regulatory discharges have been determined. This list is not all inclusive; any watershed that generates base flood peak discharges of more than 100 cfs is subject to the requirements of the Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Management Ordinance, Title 16 of the Pima County Code. Listed discharges are subject to review and revision due to urbanization, improvements, changes in the watershed, and improved methodology (check with Floodplain Management Division staff before use). All discharge values are in cubic feet per second. Watercourse Regulatory Discharge1 Other Discharge Values Drainage Area Source of Discharge (1% Return (Return Frequencies)2 (sq. miles) Information Frequency) Agua Caliente Wash3 Upstream of confluence with FEMA Map Revision Tanque Verde Creek 7,180 6,090 (2%), 9,555 (0.2%) 40.40 (11-09-1817S) Downstream of the divergence of 10,540 7,930 (2%), 18,925 ‘’ the Agua Caliente Spur Flow (0.2%) Downstream of confluence with 13,000 9,200 (2%), 26,000 ‘’ Soldier Canyon Wash (0.2%) Upstream of confluence with 12,000 3,400 (10%), 8,400 (2%), 28.60 ‘’ Soldier Canyon Wash 24,000 (0.2%) Agua Caliente Split Flow @ Divergence from Agua Caliente FEMA Map Revision Wash 3,360 1,890 (2%), 7,080 (0.2%) (11-09-1817S) @ Confluence with Tanque Verde 5,820 3,160 (2%), 16,445 ‘’ Creek (0.2%) Page 1 of 29 Watercourse Regulatory Discharge1 Other Discharge Values Drainage Area Source of Discharge (1% Return (Return Frequencies)2 (sq.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix a Detailed Study Area Descriptions
    Appendix A – Study Area Description Appendix A Detailed Study Area Descriptions This Appendix provides more detailed descriptions of the geography and hydrology of the five transboundary regions that make up the study area. These summaries draw heavily on previous work on the U.S.-Mexico border project conducted by Parsons Engineering Science, Inc. (U.S. EPA, 2000), as well as USGS factsheets for three of the basins (Central Desert/Closed Basins: Papoulias et al., 1997; Rio Grande Basin: Blackstun et al., 1996; and Lower Rio Grande Basin: Buckler et al. 1997). A.1 Pacific/Salton Sea Transboundary Basins The Pacific/Salton Sea Basins contain watersheds that drain either to the Pacific Ocean or to inland seas. The basins drain an area of 14,000 square miles (36,000 km2). These basins have a very dry, semiarid climate with few fresh water resources. Flow is primarily from east to west, with stream flows originating from precipitation in the mountains flowing toward the Pacific Ocean. The flow in these streams is controlled through a series of hydraulic structures, including reservoirs. The Tijuana River is one of the main streams in the basin and one of the City of Tijuana’s major natural resources. The river flows northwest through the city of Tijuana before crossing into California near San Ysidro and then flowing into the Pacific Ocean. Figure A-1 shows the Pacific/Salton Sea Basins and their most important characteristics. Figure A-1. Pacific/Salton Sea Basins. A-1 Appendix A – Study Area Description A.1.1 Geography of the Pacific/Salton Sea Basins The San Diego, Cottonwood-Tijuana, and Salton Sea watersheds are the most important watersheds within the Pacific/Salton Sea Basins.
    [Show full text]
  • By the Rillito Creek Hydrologic Research Committee of the University of Arizona and the U
    CAPTURING ADDITIONAL WATER IN THE TUCSON AREA By The Rillito Creek Hydrologic Research Committee of The University of Arizona and The U. S. Geological Survey June 1959 Open-file Report CONTENTS Page Abstract.............................................................. 1 Introduction.......................................................... 3 Metropolitan development......................................... 3 Physical characteristics of Tucson basin......................... 4 Surficial water supplies.............................................. 8 Precipitation.................................................... 8 Runoff........................................................... 12 Sediment content of floodwaters.................................. 21 Quality of floodwaters........................................... 23 Soils............................................................ 23 Evaporation...................................................... 24 Vegetation....................................................... 28 Planned control of vegetation.......................... 31 Areas of phreatophytes................................. 31 Natural recharge of ground water................................. 31 Subsurface water supplies............................................. 34 Geology.......................................................... 34 Rock units.................................................. 34 Crystalline complex.................................... 34 Pantano beds........................................... 34 Alluvial deposits
    [Show full text]
  • Programmatic Biological Assessment
    PROGRAMMATIC BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF BUREAU OF RECLAMATION’S WATER AND RIVER MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS, ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS’ FLOOD CONTROL OPERATION, AND NON-FEDERAL ACTIONS ON THE MIDDLE RIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO March 1, 2003 – February 28, 2013 Partially incorporating the 2001 Biological Assessment Submitted to the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service RIO GRANDE SILVERY MINNOW SOUTHWESTERN WILLOW FLYCATCHER BALD EAGLE INTERIOR LEAST TERN February 19, 2003 U. S. Department of the Interior U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Bureau of Reclamation Albuquerque District Albuquerque Area Office Albuquerque, New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................1 1.1 Biological Assessment Content and Scope................................................................................1 1.2 Summary of Recent Consultation Activities..............................................................................1 1.3 Summary of Minnow v. Keys Litigation and 2003 Consultation Approach..............................1 2 AREA OF ACTION ..............................................................................................................................................3 3 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTIONS........................................................................................................5 3.1 Introduction................................................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • Arid West Water Quality Research Project AQUATIC COMMUNITIES
    Arid West Water Quality Research Project AQUATIC COMMUNITIES OF EPHEMERAL STREAM ECOSYSTEMS funding provided by EPA Region IX under Assistance Agreement XP-9992607 directed by Pima County Wastewater Management Department prepared by URS Corporation, Albuquerque, New Mexico and Chadwick Ecological Consultants, Littleton, Colorado November 2006 cover photo: Santa Cruz River, near Tubac, Arizona Linwood Smith, photographer FOREWORD The Arid West Water Quality Research Project (AWWQRP or “Project”) was established in 1995 as a result of a federal appropriation (Public Law 103-327) and the establishment of an Assistance Agreement between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and Pima County Wastewater Management (PCWMD), Tucson, Arizona. The establishment of this Agreement provided a significant opportunity for western water resource stakeholders to (1) work cooperatively to conduct scientific research to recommend appropriate water quality criteria, standards and uses for effluent-dependent and ephemeral waters in the arid and semi- arid regions of the West (“arid West”), and (2) improve the scientific basis for regulating wastewater and stormwater discharges in the arid West. Effluent-dependent waters are created by the discharge of treated effluent into ephemeral streambeds or streams that in the absence of effluent discharge would have only minimal flow. With the establishment of the AWWQRP, a management infrastructure was created to support the development of peer-reviewed research products. From within the Environmental Planning Division of PCWMD, the AWWQRP Project Director, Program Manager and support staff administer the Project. A Regulatory Working Group (RWG), comprised of 15 stakeholders representing both public and private interests, works to ensure that Project research has a sound regulatory basis and that research activities focus on important regulatory concerns.
    [Show full text]