Biological Assessment: Yavapai-Apache Sand & Rock

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Biological Assessment: Yavapai-Apache Sand & Rock BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT PARALLEL FLOW 200 TPH DRUM MIX HOT ASPHALT PLANT Prepared for YAVAPAI-APACHE SAND & ROCK 3750 W. OLD HIGHWAY 279 CAMP VERDE, ARIZONA 86322 January 23, 2018 Prepared by: KETZEL ENVIRONMENTAL TRAINING and SERVICES LLC Stuart (Stu) Tuttle, Owner, Manager 3391 S. Gillenwater Dr. Flagstaff, AZ 86005 (928) 607-3302 1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this biological assessment is to review a proposed hot mix asphalt plant project on the extent the proposed action may affect any of the threatened, endangered, proposed, or sensitive species listed below. This biological assessment is prepared in accordance with legal requirements set forth under the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1536 (c)). This document only addresses the expected effects to federally listed species and state species of concern; it does not address any other environmental resources such as greenhouse gasses or cultural resources. No direct impacts to federally listed species will occur because of the asphalt plant and any indirect effects are insignificant and immeasurable. The Verde River, located approximately 3,100 feet from the project boundary (Figure 1), is designated as Critical or Proposed Critical Habitat for the many of the listed species analyzed in this document. However, no Critical Habitat occurs on the project site. The Yavapai-Apache Sand and Rock has a stormwater pollution prevention plan in place to avoid any potential degradation of the Verde River water quality resulting from stormwater runoff during and after development operations. LOCATION The project area is in Section 11, T14N, R4E. The area is southwest of Middle Verde and the Camp Verde Indian Reservation on the Middle Verde and Cornville, AZ USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles (Figure 1). Elevation ranges between 3,170 and 3,200 feet. The area lies in the Verde River valley; the Verde River serves as the major drainage in the region and the only perennial water source near the project area. The Verde Valley area comprises a transition zone between the high elevation Colorado Plateau physiographic province and the low deserts of the Basin and Range province south of the Black Hills (Brown 1994). Figure 1 General Location map of proposed hot asphalt plant. Red dot indicates plant location. 2 ACTION AREA Elevation ranges between 3,170 and 3,200 feet. The area lies in the Verde River valley; the Verde River serves as the major drainage in the region and the only perennial water source near the project area. The Verde valley area comprises a transition zone between the high elevation Colorado Plateau physiographic province and the low deserts of the Basin and Range province south of the Black Hills (Brown 1994). The project area is underlain by the Verde Formation. This formation consists of limestone beds alternating with fluvial deposits; of silt and sand, resulting from the formation’s history as lake deposition (Chronic 1983, Nations and Stump 1981). Soils within the parcel are generally rocky or sandy, derived from decomposition of the Verde formation (Hendricks 1985). The site location for the asphalt plant is within the area currently mined as a sand and gravel operation (Figure 2). The site is devoid of vegetation, has multiple building units (Figure 3), and frequent vehicle and large equipment traffic. The closest habitat is approximately 800 feet west of the plant location and is comprised of catclaw acacia (Acacia greggii), mesquite (Prosopis velutina), one-seed juniper (Juniperus monosperma), soapweed yucca (Yucca elata), and Engelmann's prickly pear (Opuntia phaeacantha var. discata). It is not habitat for any of the Listed species, but is utilized by some of the species of concern (Appendix I and II). Wildlife observed in this section included Gambel's quail (Lophortyx gambeli) and desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii). CURRENT MANAGEMENT The property is privately held by the Yavapai-Apache Nation and is managed as a gravel and rock mining operation. This project proposal is to add the hot asphalt plant within the existing mining operations on land that has already been mined and is devoid of habitat. Once mining is complete, some or all of the 230-acre site is expected to be revegetated and used for agricultural purposes. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is a Portable Parallel Flow 200 TPH Drum Mix Asphalt Plant (similar to Figure 4) consisting of the following major components: A. 7’ diameter x 34‘long drum mixer with burner, slinger conveyor and discharge hood and recycle collar. B. 8’ x 20’ control house with EZ-Blend asphalt blending controls, feeder bin controls, burner controls, totalizer, damper controls, motor push button panel, MCC, with all cables pre-wire, with plug-in connectors. C. (4) Cold feed bins, size 9’ x 14’, collecting conveyor D. 45’ long weigh conveyor, 4’ x 6’ scalping screen 3 E. 75-ton silo, cone heated and fully insulated F. 225 Ton per hour (TPH) drag elevator 5,000# batcher for loading trucks. However, the plant will probably only result in 185 tph because of elevation and moisture in the aggregate material being used. G. Asphalt injection pump and meter, unloading pump, fuel pump H. 20,000-gallon direct heated asphalt tank I. 42,000 cfm baghouse with interconnecting ducting to drum mixer J. (2) 25 hp air compressors. Figure 2 Proposed site of hot asphalt plant. Although potentially a portable unit, this plant is planned to be permanent but will run only daylight hours during the week and be closed on most weekends. Truck traffic will be approximately 50 loads hot asphalt per month or 600 loads per year. The first year of asphalt production is estimated to be 12,000 tons divided by 185 tons per hour = 65 hours run time for the year. In subsequent years, the production target is 25,000 to 30,000 tons per year for 163 hours run time. The fuel type is natural gas, and with relatively low production levels, the emission and noise levels are calculated well below NSR major source thresholds in the EPA Permit Application (Figure 5). Noise emissions are expected to be insignificant given the plant location will be at least 3100 feet from the riparian zone, resulting in dBA of 36, lower than current levels of truck traffic operating closer to the riparian zone in other operations (Figure 6). 4 Figure 3 Photo looking southwest from site location towards office trailer. Figure 4. Example of a hot asphalt batch plant like the one proposed for this project. 5 Pollutant PM PM102 PM2.53 SO2 NOx CO VOC Emission Factor 0.2 0.7 0.7 0.0 13 84 5.5 Threshold1 (lb/MMSCF) Proposed Plant’s PTE 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.43 0.36 0.02 (ton/yr) Notes: 1 Emission factors are from AP-42, Chapter 1.4, Tables 1.4-1 and 1.4-2 (updated 07/98). 2 PM10 emission factor is condensable and filterable PM combined. PM emission factor is for filterable PM only. 3 Assume PM2.5 emissions are equal to PM10 emissions. Figure 5 Worst Case Potential to Emit (PTE) (ton/yr) expected for Yavapai-Apache Sand & Rock Asphalt Plant. PTE (ton/yr) is calculated using the following formula: PTE= Heat Input (MMBtu/hr) x 1 MMSCF/1,020 MMBtu x EF (lb/MMSCF) x 8760 hr/yr x 1 ton/2000 lb. Noise Level Distance from Center of Plant 85 dBA 50 feet (measured reference level) 78 dBA 100 feet 70 dBA 200 feet 63 dBA 400 feet 55 dBA 800 feet 46 dBA 1,600 feet 3,200 feet (The approximate closest distance 36 dBA of the plant to the Verde River) 24 dBA 6,400 feet Figure 6 The typical noise emissions from a Hot-Mix Asphalt Plant. We do not know the assumptions that went into the measurements in this noise summary table. SPECIES CONSIDERED The list below of Endangered and Threatened species was obtained from the US Fish and Wildlife Service’ IPAC system and the Arizona Game and Fish On-Line Environmental Tool. 6 SPECIES COMMON SCIENTIFIC NAME CRITICAL HABITAT STATUS NAME Northern Thamnophis eques Mexican Critical proposed Threatened megalops Gartersnake Yellow-billed Coccyzus americanus Critical proposed Threatened Cuckoo Proposed Roundtail Chub Gila robusta None Threatened Proposed Headwater Chub Gila nigra None Threatened Southwestern Empidonax traillii Critical Endangered Willow Flycatcher extimus Gila Chub Gila intermedia Critical Endangered Razorback Sucker Xyrauchen texanus Critical Endangered Loach Minnow Tiaroga cobitis Critical Endangered Spikedace Meda fulgida Critical Endangered Plagopterus Woundfin None EXPN argentissimus Purshia (=Cowania) Arizona Cliffrose None Endangered subintegra Narrow-headed Thamnophis Critical proposed Threatened Gartersnake rufipunctatus The effects analysis took into consideration the current condition of the proposed project site (within active gravel and rock mining site and devoid of vegetation), the distance of the site from the nearest habitat and riparian zone (Figure 7) and a berm or ridge of land that surrounds the site. 7 Verde River ~3100’ ~5400’ ~700’ ~3600’ Figure 7 Site location of proposed Hot Asphalt Batch Plant. Red rectangle represents approximate footprint of construction and operation. Orange line indicates approximate location of stormwater containment berm. ANALYSIS OF SPECIES EFFECTS BIRDS Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) Endangered Although there is final critical habitat designated for this species, the project location is outside the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6749 Habitat and description: The southwestern willow flycatcher is an insectivorous, neotropical migrant that breeds in the southwestern United States and winters in Mexico and Central America. It is found in riparian habitats along perennial drainages where dense growth of willows, tamarisk, and other shrubs and medium-sized trees are present with a scattered overstory of cottonwoods. Breeding and foraging occurs throughout this habitat (Spencer et al.
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]
  • Roundtail Chub Repatriated to the Blue River
    Volume 1 | Issue 2 | Summer 2015 Roundtail Chub Repatriated to the Blue River Inside this issue: With a fish exclusion barrier in place and a marked decline of catfish, the time was #TRENDINGNOW ................. 2 right for stocking Roundtail Chub into a remote eastern Arizona stream. New Initiative Launched for Southwest Native Trout.......... 2 On April 30, 2015, the Reclamation, and Marsh and Blue River. A total of 222 AZ 6-Species Conservation Department stocked 876 Associates LLC embarked on a Roundtail Chub were Agreement Renewal .............. 2 juvenile Roundtail Chub from mission to find, collect and stocked into the Blue River. IN THE FIELD ........................ 3 ARCC into the Blue River near bring into captivity some During annual monitoring, Recent and Upcoming AZGFD- the Juan Miller Crossing. Roundtail Chub for captive led Activities ........................... 3 five months later, Additional augmentation propagation from the nearest- Department staff captured Spikedace Stocked into Spring stockings to enhance the genetic neighbor population in Eagle Creek ..................................... 3 42 of the stocked chub, representation of the Blue River Creek. The Aquatic Research some of which had travelled BACK AT THE PONDS .......... 4 Roundtail Chub will be and Conservation Center as far as seven miles Native Fish Identification performed later this year. (ARCC) held and raised the upstream from the stocking Workshop at ARCC................ 4 offspring of those chub for Stockings will continue for the location. future stocking into the Blue next several years until that River. population is established in the Department biologists conducted annual Blue River and genetically In 2012, the partners delivered monitoring in subsequent mimics the wild source captive-raised juvenile years, capturing three chub population.
    [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]
  • Appendix a Assessment Units
    APPENDIX A ASSESSMENT UNITS SURFACE WATER REACH DESCRIPTION REACH/LAKE NUM WATERSHED Agua Fria River 341853.9 / 1120358.6 - 341804.8 / 15070102-023 Middle Gila 1120319.2 Agua Fria River State Route 169 - Yarber Wash 15070102-031B Middle Gila Alamo 15030204-0040A Bill Williams Alum Gulch Headwaters - 312820/1104351 15050301-561A Santa Cruz Alum Gulch 312820 / 1104351 - 312917 / 1104425 15050301-561B Santa Cruz Alum Gulch 312917 / 1104425 - Sonoita Creek 15050301-561C Santa Cruz Alvord Park Lake 15060106B-0050 Middle Gila American Gulch Headwaters - No. Gila Co. WWTP 15060203-448A Verde River American Gulch No. Gila County WWTP - East Verde River 15060203-448B Verde River Apache Lake 15060106A-0070 Salt River Aravaipa Creek Aravaipa Cyn Wilderness - San Pedro River 15050203-004C San Pedro Aravaipa Creek Stowe Gulch - end Aravaipa C 15050203-004B San Pedro Arivaca Cienega 15050304-0001 Santa Cruz Arivaca Creek Headwaters - Puertocito/Alta Wash 15050304-008 Santa Cruz Arivaca Lake 15050304-0080 Santa Cruz Arnett Creek Headwaters - Queen Creek 15050100-1818 Middle Gila Arrastra Creek Headwaters - Turkey Creek 15070102-848 Middle Gila Ashurst Lake 15020015-0090 Little Colorado Aspen Creek Headwaters - Granite Creek 15060202-769 Verde River Babbit Spring Wash Headwaters - Upper Lake Mary 15020015-210 Little Colorado Babocomari River Banning Creek - San Pedro River 15050202-004 San Pedro Bannon Creek Headwaters - Granite Creek 15060202-774 Verde River Barbershop Canyon Creek Headwaters - East Clear Creek 15020008-537 Little Colorado Bartlett Lake 15060203-0110 Verde River Bear Canyon Lake 15020008-0130 Little Colorado Bear Creek Headwaters - Turkey Creek 15070102-046 Middle Gila Bear Wallow Creek N. and S. Forks Bear Wallow - Indian Res.
    [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]
  • Eagle Creek, Arizona
    Trip Report: Eagle Creek, Arizona 15-17 June 2009 Participants: Abraham Karam, Brian Kesner, and Mike Childs Native Fish Lab Marsh & Associates, LLC 5016 South Ash Avenue Suite 108 Tempe, Arizona 85282 Summary Fish surveys were conducted on portions of Eagle Creek, Greenlee County, Arizona, during 15-17 June 2009 to determine species composition, distribution, and relative abundance. Survey methods included backpack electroshocking, seining, dip netting, gill netting, and hook and line. A total of 1,315 individuals were contacted, representing five native and eight non-native species. With the exception of one desert sucker which was captured downstream of the Freeport-McMoRan water diversion dam, non-native fishes were contacted exclusively at all downstream sites, while native species predominated sites upstream of the dam. Methods Surveys were conducted at eight localities on Eagle Creek between Honeymoon (HM; elev. = 1,650 m) in the upper portion of the watershed, and Bat Cave (elev. = 1,036 m), approximately 12 km upstream from Eagle Creek’s confluence with the Gila River (Fig. 1). Survey locations included HM (12S 641111, 3704989), 1st Crossing below HM (12S 640444, 3701320), 2nd Crossing below HM (12S 640636, 3697789), Sheep Wash (12S 640707, 3686663), Above Freeport McMoRan (FM) Dam (12S 643380, 3661181), Below FM Dam (12S 645252, 3659588), Graves (12S 646449, 3656592), and Bat Cave (12S 647611, 3655046). Surveys were conducted using a Smith-Root backpack shocker (SR 12-B), seines (1.2 x 1.2 and 3.7 x 1.2 m; 3 mm mesh), dip nets, experimental gill nets (38.1 x 1.8 m; square mesh size ranged from 13 to 51 mm), and hook and line.
    [Show full text]
  • Wallow Fire Impacts on Fish Populations Arizona Game and Fish Department Survey Results September‐October 2011
    Wallow Fire Impacts on Fish Populations Arizona Game and Fish Department Survey Results September‐October 2011 Rivers and Streams with High Impact Bear Creek – Most fish (brown trout) killed throughout stream (possible complete kill, no fish found) Bear Wallow Creek (Apache trout recovery stream) – Most fish (Apache trout) killed throughout stream (possible complete kill, no fish found); Habitat looks relatively intact; Barriers relatively intact Black River – Most fish (brown trout, dace, suckers) killed downstream of Beaver Creek; Habitat looks relatively intact; Should recover quickly Buckelou Creek (Gila trout candidate stream) – Most fish killed throughout, no fish collected Colter Creek – Most fish (hybrid rainbow‐Apache trout) killed throughout stream (possible complete kill, no fish found); Habitat looks relatively intact Fish Creek (Apache trout recovery stream) – Most fish (Apache trout) killed throughout stream; Habitat severely impacted; fish barrier blown out; Loss of canopy cover in upper reaches Hannagan Creek (Apache trout stream, nonrecovery) – Most fish killed throughout stream (possible complete kill, no fish found); Habitat impacted in upper and middle reaches KP Creek (Gila trout candidate stream) – Most fish (hybrid rainbow‐Apache trout) killed throughout stream, only two live trout collected in extreme headwaters; Habitat severely impacted throughout most of stream; Barrier intact Lower East Fork Little Colorado River (LCR) – Most fish (brown trout) killed in short lower reach just above Church Camp in Greer; Habitat
    [Show full text]
  • Birding Arizona in Greenlee County
    Birding Arizona Arizona Field Ornithologists BIRDING SOUTHERN AZFO GREENLEE COUNTY By Tommy Debardeleben INTRODUCTION Greenlee County is Arizona’s second smallest county, the least populated, and by far the most underbirded. The latter aspect fired Caleb Strand, Joshua Smith, and I to focus an entire weekend gathering data about the Flagsta birds of this county, as well as building our county lists. Starting Thursday Greenlee night, 16 February 2017, and ending Saturday night, 18 February 2017, County we covered a wide range of locations in the southern part of the county. Although small, Greenlee County has many habitats, with elevations Phoenix ranging from just over 3,000 ft in Chihuahuan desert scrub to over 9,000 ft in spruce-fir forest in the Hannagan Meadow area of the White Mountains. Tucson On this trip we didn’t go north to the White Mountains. DUNCAN We left the Phoenix area around 6 PM on Thursday night and arrived in Duncan after 10 PM. Duncan is situated at an elevation of 3655 ft and has a population of about 750 people, according to a 2013 census. We started owling immediately when we arrived. It wasn’t long before we had our first bird, a Great Horned Owl in town. We stayed at the Chaparral Hotel, which is a small hotel with good rates that is close to any Duncan or Franklin birding location. After getting situated at our motel, we drove a short distance to the Duncan Birding Trail, perhaps the county seat of birding hotspots in Greenlee County. We owled there for about an hour and were rewarded with a second Great Horned Owl, a pair of cooperative and up-close Western Screech-Owls, and a stunning Barn Owl calling and flying overhead several times.
    [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]