Projects to Enhance Arizona’s Environment: An Examination of their Functions, Water Requirements and Public Benefits* May 2006 Sharon B. Megdal, Ph.D. Kelly Mott Lacroix and Andrew Schwarz Water Resources Research Center University of Arizona, Tucson AZ *Funded by the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Assistance Agreement Number 04-FG-32-0270 with the University of Arizona Table of Contents Section I: Summary Findings Introduction .....................................................................................................................I-1 Background ......................................................................................................................I-2 Methodology ....................................................................................................................I-5 Summary Findings .........................................................................................................I-6 Drivers ..............................................................................................................................I-7 Sponsorship ....................................................................................................................I-10 Benefits ...........................................................................................................................I-14 Water use .......................................................................................................................I-17 Lessons Learned Summary..........................................................................................I-20 Section II: Project Summaries EC Bar Ranch ..............................................................................................................II-3 Little Colorado River Enhancement Demonstration Project..............................II-10 Ahakhav Tribal Preserve............................................................................................II-15 Yuma East Wetlands....................................................................................................II-22 Yuma West Wetlands..................................................................................................II-27 Rio Salado Oeste.........................................................................................................II-32 Rio Salado Phoenix......................................................................................................II-34 Rio Salado Tempe........................................................................................................II-39 Tres Rios.......................................................................................................................II-43 Va Shly ‘ay Akimel......................................................................................................II-47 Bingham Cienega.........................................................................................................II-52 Las Cienegas National Conservation Area..............................................................II-56 San Pedro Three Links Farm.....................................................................................II-60 San Pedro Preserve.....................................................................................................II-64 Agua Caliente Spring..................................................................................................II-70 Ed Pastor Kino Environmental Restoration...........................................................II-74 Esperanza Ranch.........................................................................................................II-79 Marana High Plains Effluent Recharge Project...................................................II-83 Paseo de las Iglesias...................................................................................................II-88 Rillito River Restoration (Swan Wetlands).............................................................II-92 El Rio Antiguo............................................................................................................II-95 Santa Fe Ranch Riparian Restoration......................................................................II-98 San Xavier Indian Reservation Riparian Restoration................................................II-102 North Simpson Riparian Recovery.............................................................................II-109 Sweetwater Wetlands................................................................................................II-116 Tres Rios del Norte.................................................................................................II-121 Accidental Restoration in Pima County.................................................................II-125 Grand Canyon Tamarisk Management and Tributary Restoration...................II-128 Fossil Creek Restoration..........................................................................................II-134 Verde River Headwaters Restoration....................................................................II-138 Appendices A . Project survey used to verify information.....................................................App. A1 B1. Drivers Matrix.................................................................................................App.B1 B2. Benefits Matrix................................................................................................App.B2 C1. Classification of Drivers (Human focused vs. Non-human focused).........App.C1 C2. Classification of Drivers (Human focused vs. Non-human focused).........App.C2 D. Water use flow diagram ............................................................................App.D1 Projects to Enhance Arizona’s Environment Section I. Summary Findings Introduction1 In Arizona, many once lush riparian areas have been lost. This decline has not gone unnoticed, and in the past decade a growing number of efforts have been undertaken to restore, maintain or create new riparian and wetland areas. The number of riparian restoration projects nationwide has also increased, growing exponentially in the last decade.2 Along side this explosion of restoration projects, the interest of the scientific community and the public at large has also grown significantly.3 Scientists have conducted many studies examining various aspects of environmental enhancement projects. Considerable Source: Arizona Water Protection Fund research and debate have surrounded defining and measuring restoration areas4,5 and the value of “created” habitat. Other research has focused on identifying the common elements of restoration projects, such as the work by Bernhart, et al. who are compiling a comprehensive database of restoration efforts throughout the United States. In this report, we provide complementary information to these studies in the form of a descriptive look at 30 environmental enhancement projects throughout the State of Arizona. The report examines the more subjective aspects of environmental enhancement projects. At the outset of the project we sought to answer a series of questions: Who are the key players in the implementation of environmental enhancement projects and what factors drive the project’s undertaking? What are the benefits of these projects? How are these projects using scarce water resources? Do they have legal claim to these water sources? And how long will supplementary water be required? Along with answers to these questions, we sought lessons learned both through the specific projects and from the wider lens of the 30 projects taken as a whole. Though the study can not be considered exhaustive, important observations are drawn from the projects we surveyed. The projects highlighted in this study are only a sample of the many environmental enhancement efforts underway in Arizona. In this study we wanted a diverse selection of projects; therefore, project selection was based, in part, on choosing projects with varied sponsors, locations, and intentions. A unique aspect of this study is that it combines a descriptive project summaries with objective surveys to describe the project. The surveys created categories for each area we were interested in examining. For example, project drivers were summarized into categories such as 1 The authors of this study would like to thank Jennifer Jones, former research assistant at the WRRC and Magda- lena Escobeda, WRRC NASA intern. We would also like to extend a special thanks to all of the project contacts and to the staff at the Water Protection Fund for their time spent responding to our surveys, answering our questions and attending stakeholder meetings. This report would not have been possible with out the funding and project support provided by the Phoenix office of the Bureau of Reclamation. 2 Berhardt, E.S., et al. (2005). Synthesizing U.S. River Restoration Efforts. Science. Vol 308, 636 3 Ibid. p. 6 (supporting online material). 4 Westman, WE. (1991) Ecological restoration projects: Measuring their performance. Environmental Protection [ENVIRON. PROT.]. Vol. 13, no. 3, 207-215. 5 David J. Schaeffer, Edwin E. Herricks and Harold W. Kerster. (1988). Ecosystem health: Measuring ecosystem health. Environmental Management, Volume 12, Number 4, 445 – 455. Projects to Enhance Arizona’s Environment I-1 flood control and public use and enjoyment. We filled in each survey based on information gathered for the project summaries and sent the survey to the project sponsors