DOCSLIB.ORG

Town of Prescott Valley

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Town of Prescott Valley Upper Verde River Watershed Protection Coalition Watershed Taskforce Watershed Restoration and Management Project Plan Prepared for: MENT OF THE ART INT EP ER D IO S. R U. BU N R E TIO AU O F RECLA MA Prepared by: Upper Verde River Watershed Protection Coalition Watershed Taskforce December 2014 Upper Verde River Watershed Protection Coalition WATERSHED TASKFORCE Table of Contents Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 Acknowledgements............................................................................................................................................................ 3 2.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................ 4 3.0 Plan Development Process .............................................................................................................................................. 6 4.0 Development of Mission Statement .............................................................................................................................. 8 4.1. Common Ground...................................................................................................................................................... 8 4.2. Goal Comparison ...................................................................................................................................................... 9 4.3. Group Objectives ...................................................................................................................................................... 9 5.0 Assessment of Watershed..............................................................................................................................................11 5.1. Historical Conditions..............................................................................................................................................11 6.0 Need to Enhance Recharge...........................................................................................................................................14 7.0 Mapping ..............................................................................................................................................................................15 8.0 Desired Conditions .........................................................................................................................................................16 9.0 Realizing Desired Conditions........................................................................................................................................18 9.1. Existing Recharge Facilities....................................................................................................................................18 9.2. Enhanced Runoff and Recharge............................................................................................................................19 9.3. Silvicultural Prescriptions.......................................................................................................................................19 9.4. Possible Effects of Juniper Removal on Water Balance ...................................................................................19 9.5. Fire Regime and Condition Class.........................................................................................................................20 9.6. Capitalization on Urbanization .............................................................................................................................22 9.7. Land Use Management, Conservation and Aquifer Protection.....................................................................23 10.0 Project Evaluation Criteria ............................................................................................................................................24 10.1. Vegetation Management........................................................................................................................................24 10.2. Infiltration Enhancement......................................................................................................................................25 10.3. Capitalization on Urbanization...........................................................................................................................26 10.4. Land Use Management, Conservation and Aquifer........................................................................................26 11.0 Project Development......................................................................................................................................................27 11.1. Vegetation Restoration .........................................................................................................................................27 11.1.1. Hydrologic Monitoring Plan for Vegetation Restoration Projects ...................................................28 11.2. Infiltration Enhancement......................................................................................................................................39 11.2.1. Flood Detention .........................................................................................................................................39 11.2.2. Hydrologic Monitoring Plan for Gabion Projects ...............................................................................39 11.3. Induced Recharge..................................................................................................................................................53 11.4. Capitalization on Urbanization..........................................................................................................................55 11.4.1. Slaughterhouse Gulch Watershed .............................................................................................................55 11.4.1.1. Project Concept......................................................................................................................................55 WATERSHED PLAN Page i of ii Upper Verde River Watershed Protection Coalition WATERSHED TASKFORCE 11.4.1.2. Background Information........................................................................................................................55 11.4.1.3. Project Description ................................................................................................................................56 11.4.1.4. Project Cost.............................................................................................................................................57 11.5. Land Use Management, Conservation and Aquifer Protection ....................................................................57 11.5.1. Well Owner’s Rainwater Harvesting and Recharge System...................................................................58 11.5.1.1. Background ..............................................................................................................................................58 11.5.1.2. Policy/Institutional Issues ......................................................................................................................59 11.5.1.3. Cost Estimate for a Small Scale French Drain for Rainwater Harvesting and Aquifer Recharge.......59 12.0 Implementation/Next Steps...........................................................................................................................................62 12.1. Partnerships and Grant Applications Underway .............................................................................................62 12.1.1. U.S. Forest Service Wood to Energy Grant................................................................................................62 12.1.2. USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service, Resource Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP)...............................................................................................................................................................62 12.1.3. ASLD Woody Biomass Harvesting and Valuation .......................................................................................62 12.1.4. Arizona Water Protection Fund....................................................................................................................62 12.1.5. National Resource Conservation District (NRCD) Partnership ..........................................................62 12.1.6. U.S. BOR, Water and Energy Efficiency Grant.............................................................................................62 13.0 Conclusion.........................................................................................................................................................................63 13.1. Opportunities .........................................................................................................................................................63 13.2. Constraints..............................................................................................................................................................63 13.3. Needs........................................................................................................................................................................63
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hydrology and Geomorphology of the Santa Maria and Big Sandy Rivers and Burro Creek, Western Arizona
    Hydrology and Geomorphology of the Santa Maria and Big Sandy Rivers and Burro Creek, Western Arizona By Jeanne E. Klawon Arizona Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-02 March, 2000 Arizona Geological Survey 416 W. Congress, Suite #100, Tucson, Arizona 85701 46 p. text Investigations supported by the Arizona State Land Department As part of their efforts to gather technical information for stream navigability assessments Investigations done in cooperation with JE Fuller Hydrology / Geomorphology Hydrology and Geomorphology of the Santa Maria and Big Sandy Rivers and Burro Creek, Western Arizona by Jeanne E. Klawon Page 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides hydrologic and geomor- than 10 cfs. Flood events are dramatic in phologic information to aid in the evaluation of comparison. Historical peak flow estimates for the navigability of the Big Sandy River, Santa these rivers have been estimated at 68,700 Maria River, and Burro Creek. These streams cubic feet per second (cfs) (2/9/93) for the Big flow through rugged mountainous terrain of Sandy River, 47,400 cfs (2/14/80) for Burro Mohave, Yavapai, and La Paz counties in Creek, and 23,100 cfs (3/1/78) for the Santa western Arizona and join to form the Bill Maria River. The largest flow events have Williams River at what is now Alamo Dam occurred during the winter months when and Reservoir. The rivers reflect a diversity of meteorological conditions cause a series of channel patterns, and include the mainly wide storms to pass through the region, frequently and braided sandy alluvial channels of the Big generating multiple floods within a given year.
    [Show full text]
  • General Crook's Administration in Arizona, 1871-75
    General Crook's administration in Arizona, 1871-75 Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Bahm, Linda Weldy 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 29/09/2021 11:58:29 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/551868 GENERAL CROOK'S ADMINISTRATION IN ARIZONA, 1871-75 by Linda Weldy Bahm A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 19 6 6 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fu lfill ment 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 acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for per­ mission 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: J/{ <— /9 ^0 JOHN ALEXANDER CARROLL ^ T 5 ite Professor of History PREFACE In the four years following the bloody attack on an Indian encampment by a Tucson posse early in 1871, the veteran professional soldier George Crook had primary responsibility for the reduction and containment of the "hostile" Indians of the Territory of Arizona.
    [Show full text]
  • Visit Cochise Country Where Even JOHNNY REB Got a Taste of Apache Vengeance
    Backpack a Dizzying Descent to the Colorado River arizonahighways.com SEPTEMBER 2004 Visit Cochise Country Where Even JOHNNY REB Got a Taste of Apache Vengeance Drop in on Kingman A Family Place view the Little Colorado River Primeval Splendor Boy-artist Phenom of the Navajos {also inside} SEPTEMBER 2004 46 DESTINATION S an Jose de Tumacacori Mission Some 300 years ago, the mission was a “community” amid turmoil and danger in a primitive land, now southern Arizona. 42 BACK ROAD ADVENTURE COVER/HISTORY PORTFOLIO 34 Northwest of Prescott, a winding route takes visitors to Ambushed by Apaches 20 A Cool, Moist Mountain Place remnants of classic ranch country around Camp Wood. In 1862, Confederate soldiers may have overreached A photographer finds primeval beauty and tranquility 48 HIKE OF THE MONTH for territory into Arizona, where some fell during a along the West Fork of the Little Colorado River. A pleasant journey in the Huachuca Mountains turns a surprise attack by Indians at Dragoon Springs. rattlesnake encounter into a happy-go-lucky memory. FOCUS ON NATURE 2 LETTERS & E-MAIL Rider Navajo Indian ADVENTURE 32 Grand Canyon Canyon Reservation 6 Tracking the Tiger Rattlesnake 3 TAKING THE National Park Rim-to-River Trek Reclusive most of the time, this Sonoran Desert OFF-RAMP Camp Two hardy Grand Canyon backpackers pick their way species gets all worked up and on the move when it’s KINGMAN 40 HUMOR Wood through rocky and difficult Rider Canyon to reach an time to find a mate. West Fork of the isolated, historic spot on the Colorado River.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Department of the Interior U.S
    United States Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 Phoenix, Arizona 85021-4951 Telephone: (602) 242-0210 FAX: (602) 242-2513 In Reply Refer To: AESO/SE 2-21-01-F-241 December 14, 2001 Memorandum To: Field Manager, Kingman Field Office, Bureau of Land Management, Kingman, Arizona From: Field Supervisor Subject: Biological Opinion for the proposed prescribed burn program within the Kingman Field Office boundaries - Pine Lake Wildland/Urban Interface This document transmits the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) biological opinion based on our review of the proposed implementation of a prescribed fire program within land administered by the Kingman Field Office of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), located in Mohave and east Yavapai counties, Arizona, and its effects on the Hualapai Mexican vole (Microtus mexicanus hualpaiensis) in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Your March 14, 2001, request for formal consultation was received on March 16, 2001. This biological opinion is based on information provided in the biological evaluation attached to the March 14, 2001, request for consultation; additional information provided by the BLM via electronic mail; the April 18, 2001, field investigation; telephone conversations; and other sources of information. A complete administrative record of this consultation is on file at this office. Consultation History The Service received BLM’s March 14, 2001, request for formal consultation on March 16, 2001. The request included the “Biological Evaluation: Programmatic Environmental Assessment for Prescribed Fire” (BE).
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization and Ground-Water Flow Modeling of the Mint
    CHARACTERIZATION AND GROUND-WATER FLOW MODELING OF THE MINT WASH / WILLIAMSON VALLEY AREA, YAVAPAI COUNTY By Luis Fernando Navarro A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Geology Northern Arizona University May 2002 Approved: Abraham E. Springer, Ph.D., Chair Paul J. Umhoefer, Ph.D. Charles M. Schlinger, Ph.D. ABSTRACT CHARACTERIZATION AND GROUND-WATER FLOW MODELING OF THE MINT WASH / WILLIAMSON VALLEY AREA, YAVAPAI COUNTY LUIS FERNANDO NAVARRO The characterization of the Mint Wash / Williamson Valley System (MWWVS) is a combination of geological and hydrogeological characterization of the Mint Wash / Williamson Valley area. The characterization was used to construct a ground-water flow model, used to research the water supply of the area. The geological characterization included data from previous investigations as well as data gathered through this study. The results include a geologic map, cross sections throughout the site, a synopsis of the known geological history of the area, including the identification of lithologies, and a description of the tectonic history of the area. The hydrogeological characterization included analyses of existing data, and collection and analyses of new data. A conceptual model was developed from preliminary analyses of data, then modified as more data was gathered. The characterization was used in the development of a three-dimensional finite- difference ground-water flow model. The model was calibrated to both the steady-state and transient conditions. The calibrated model was used to simulate MWWVS using several different water use scenarios and to compare these scenarios to the concept of sustainable ii yield.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Golden Eagle Productivity Assessment and Nest Survey 2015
    ARIZONA GOLDEN EAGLE PRODUCTIVITY ASSESSMENT AND NEST SURVEY 2015 Kyle M. McCarty, Eagle Field Projects Coordinator Kurt L. Licence, Birds and Mammals Technician Kenneth V. Jacobson, Raptor Management Coordinator Nongame Wildlife Branch, Wildlife Management Division Photo by Kurt Licence Technical Report 300 Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program Arizona Game and Fish Department 5000 West Carefree Highway Phoenix, Arizona 85086 December 2015 CIVIL RIGHTS AND DIVERSITY COMPLIANCE The Arizona Game and Fish Commission receives federal financial assistance in Sport Fish and Wildlife Restoration. Under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the U.S. Department of the Interior prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex, or disability. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility as described above, or if you desire further information please write to: Arizona Game and Fish Department Office of the Deputy Director, DOHQ 5000 W. Carefree Highway Phoenix, Arizona 85086 and U.S. Department of the Interior Office for Equal Opportunity 1849 C Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20240 AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT COMPLIANCE The Arizona Game and Fish Department complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. This document is available in alternative format by contacting the Arizona Game and Fish Department, Office of the Deputy Director at the address listed above, call (602) 789-3326, or TTY 1-800-367-8939.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona (Arizona Did Not Achieve Statehood Until 1912 So All Pre-WWI Locations Should Be Considered As Arizona Territory)
    Medal of Honor Recipients Who Were Born In Arizona (Arizona did not achieve statehood until 1912 so all pre-WWI locations should be considered as Arizona Territory) Alchesay, William Arizona Indian Campaigns Blanquet, Arizona Indian Campaigns Chiquito, Arizona Indian Campaigns Dunagan, Kern Wayne Superior, AZ Vietnam War Elsatsoosh, Arizona Indian Campaigns Jim, Arizona Indian Campaigns Kelsay, Arizona Indian Campaigns Kosoha, Arizona Indian Campaigns Luke, Jr, Frank Phoenix, AZ World War I Machol, Arizona Indian Campaigns Mendoza, Manuel Verdugo Miami, AZ World War II Nannasaddie, Arizona Indian Campaigns Nantaje, Arizona Indian Campaigns Rowdy, Y.B. Arizona Indian Campaigns Smith, Cornelius Cole Tucson, AZ Indian Campaigns Vargas, Jr., Jay R. Winslow, AZ Vietnam War Compiled by Gayle Alvarez, Medal of Honor Historical Society, US As of 7 June 2019 Page 1 Medal of Honor Recipients Who Entered The Service In Arizona Alchesay, William Camp Verde, AZ Indian Campaigns Austin, Oscar Palmer Phoenix, AZ Vietnam War Bacon, Nicky Daniel Phoenix, AZ Vietnam War Blanquet possibly Camp Grant, AZ Indian Campaigns (An 1873 enlistment for Ba-ela-ye, an alternate spelling recorded in US Army Gallantry and Meritorious Conduct 1866-1891, was at Camp Grant.) Bonnyman, Jr., Alexander "Sandy" New Mexico/Phoenix, AZ World War II (Bonnyman is often listed as accredited to New Mexico but his USMC biography states he enlisted in Phoenix, AZ. The USMC muster rolls agree) Chiquito, San Carlos, AZ Indian Campaigns Elsatsoosh possibly Camp Grant, AZ Indian Campaigns
    [Show full text]
  • Minerals of Arizona Report
    MINERALS OF ARIZONA by Frederic W. Galbraith and Daniel J. Brennan THE ARIZONA BUREAU OF MINES Price One Dollar Free to Residents of Arizona Bulletin 181 1970 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA TUCSON TABLE OF CONT'ENTS EIements .___ 1 FOREWORD Sulfides ._______________________ 9 As a service about mineral matters in Arizona, the Arizona Bureau Sulfosalts ._. .___ __ 22 of Mines, University of Arizona, is pleased to reprint the long-standing booklet on MINERALS OF ARIZONA. This basic journal was issued originally in 1941, under the authorship of Dr. Frederic W. Galbraith, as Simple Oxides .. 26 a bulletin of the Arizona Bureau of Mines. It has moved through several editions and, in some later printings, it was authored jointly by Dr. Gal­ Oxides Containing Uranium, Thorium, Zirconium .. .... 34 braith and Dr. Daniel J. Brennan. It now is being released in its Fourth Edition as Bulletin 181, Arizona Bureau of Mines. Hydroxides .. .. 35 The comprehensive coverage of mineral information contained in the bulletin should serve to give notable and continuing benefits to laymen as well as to professional scientists of Arizona. Multiple Oxides 37 J. D. Forrester, Director Arizona Bureau of Mines Multiple Oxides Containing Columbium, February 2, 1970 Tantaum, Titanium .. .. .. 40 Halides .. .. __ ____ _________ __ __ 41 Carbonates, Nitrates, Borates .. .... .. 45 Sulfates, Chromates, Tellurites .. .. .. __ .._.. __ 57 Phosphates, Arsenates, Vanadates, Antimonates .._ 68 First Edition (Bulletin 149) July 1, 1941 Vanadium Oxysalts ...... .......... 76 Second Edition, Revised (Bulletin 153) April, 1947 Third Edition, Revised 1959; Second Printing 1966 Fourth Edition (Bulletin 181) February, 1970 Tungstates, Molybdates.. _. .. .. .. 79 Silicates ...
    [Show full text]
  • A Spatial Model of Potential Jaguar Habitat in Arizona Author(S): James R
    A Spatial Model of Potential Jaguar Habitat in Arizona Author(s): James R. Hatten, Annalaura Averill-Murray, William E. Van Pelt Source: The Journal of Wildlife Management, Vol. 69, No. 3 (Jul., 2005), pp. 1024-1033 Published by: Allen Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3803341 Accessed: 19/09/2009 18:33 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=acg. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Allen Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Wildlife Management.
    [Show full text]
  • Bagdad Mine Stockpile Extension Modification to the Mine Plan of Operations (AZA-28639)
    Bagdad Mine Stockpile Extension Modification to the Mine Plan of Operations (AZA-28639) 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 DOCUMENT PURPOSE Pursuant to the requirements of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Surface Management Regulations, 43 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 3809, Freeport-McMoRan Bagdad Inc. (FMBI) has prepared this Stockpile Extension Modification to the Mine Plan of Operations (MPO Modification; AZA-28639). FMBI seeks approval of this MPO Modification for the extension of the existing, consolidated Plan IX Leach/South Waste Rock Stockpile (the Stockpile) at the Bagdad Mine. In addition, this MPO Modification proposes future, distributed facilities south of the Stockpile. As depicted in Figure 1, the project area is located in western Yavapai County, immediately west of the unincorporated community of Bagdad and on the south side of the existing Bagdad Mine. 1.2 EARLIER OPERATIONS Mining has occurred in the Bagdad area since the early 1880s, initiated with the staking of claims along Copper Creek and the formation of the Eureka Mining District in 1884. Prior to 1900, gold, silver, and lead were the primary minerals extracted (BLM, 1995a). Copper production began generally after 1900, and the first mill began production in 1928 to process ore from the underground mine. A transition to open pit mining began in 1945 (Freeport-McMoRan, 2014). Following numerous ownership changes through first half of 20th century, the Bagdad Copper Company merged with Cyprus Mines Corporation and formed the Cyprus Bagdad Copper Company in 1973. The Phelps Dodge Corporation acquired the mine in 1999, following which the mine operated as Phelps Dodge Bagdad, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • HUALAPAI MEXICAN VOLE (Microtus Mexicanus Hualpaiensis)
    HUALAPAI MEXICAN VOLE (Microtus mexicanus hualpaiensis) STATUS: Endangered (52 FR 36776; November 2, 1987) without critical habitat. SPECIES DESCRIPTION: A small, cinnamon-brown, mouse-sized mammal with a short tail and fur that nearly covers its small, round ears. HABITAT: Primarily associated with woodland forest types containing grasses and grass-sedge associates. Occurs in moist, grass/sedge habitats along permanent or semipermanent waters (such as springs or seeps), but may be able to occupy drier areas when grass/forb habitats are available, particularly during wetter years. RANGE: Historic: The type locality for the subspecies is in the Hualapai Mountains of Mohave County. At the time that the recovery plan was finalized, two specimens from the lower Prospect Valley, Coconino County, had been tentatively assigned to the Hualapai Mexican vole. In addition, specimens from the Music Mountains, Mohave County, were known but unidentified at the subspecies level. Current: Recent research suggests that populations in the Hualapai Mountains, Music Mountains, Hualapai Nation, Aubrey Cliffs, Chino Wash, Santa Maria Mountains, and Bradshaw Mountains may be regarded as this subspecies. Populations from Round Mountain and Sierra Prieta may also be included as this subspecies based on geography. However, the conclusions are tentative at this time. Peer review of existing studies and, potentially, additional genetic studies are needed to come to a more definitive conclusion. In the meantime, the range of the subspecies is considered by the Service to be restricted to the Hualapai Mountains. REASONS FOR DECLINE/VULNERABILITY: Endangered due to rarity and very limited habitat along with threats posed by drought; elimination of ground cover due to grazing by livestock and elk, increased concentration of ungulates at developed water sources, and human recreation.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Golden Eagle Nest Survey 2013
    ARIZONA GOLDEN EAGLE NEST SURVEY 2013 Kyle M. McCarty, Bald Eagle Field Projects Coordinator Kurt Licence, Birds and Mammals Technician Kenneth V. Jacobson, Raptor Management Coordinator Nongame Branch, Wildlife Management Division Photo by Kurt Licence Technical Report 277 Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program Nongame Branch Chief: Mike Rabe Arizona Game and Fish Department 5000 West Carefree Highway Phoenix, Arizona 85086 December 2013 CIVIL RIGHTS AND DIVERSITY COMPLIANCE The Arizona Game and Fish Commission receives federal financial assistance in Sport Fish and Wildlife Restoration. Under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the American with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the Arizona Game & Fish Department joins the U.S. Department of the Interior and its bureaus in prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex, or disability. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility as described above, or if you desire further information please write to: Arizona Game and Fish Department Office of the Deputy Director, DOHQ 5000 West Carefree Highway Phoenix, Arizona 85086 Or The Office for Diversity and Civil Rights U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 4040 North Fairfax Drive, Room 300 Arlington, Virginia 22203 AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT COMPLIANCE The Arizona Game and Fish Department complies with all provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This document is available in alternative format by contacting the Arizona Game and Fish Department, Office of the Deputy Director at the address listed above or by calling (623) 236-7290 or TTY 1-800-367-8939.
    [Show full text]