Arizona State and Local Government Documents Collection

The City of Chandler developed the South Arizona Avenue Entry Corridor Study in 2006, setting forth a vision for the development of the corridor between Dr. A.J. Chandler Park and the new SanTan Freeway, ¾ mile to the south. Between downtown and the freeway is the corridor that the City intends to see redeveloped, with mixed residential and commercial uses to create a dynamic new “front door” for Chandler. The purpose of these design guidelines is to guide zoning requests within the South Arizona Avenue Corridor to achieve the objectives of the Chandler General Plan. The overall goal of these objectives is to implement the vision for South Arizona Avenue. The guidelines address the major design aspects of new office, retail and residential buildings in the corridor. Design Guidelines are not building or streetscape designs; they provide design direction so that each project’s architectural design will reinforce the City’s strategic intentions as this important area of the city responds to its new role as Chandler’s “front door.” These guidelines also identify streetscape design principles for South Arizona Avenue with the objective of coordinating public and private design in the Corridor.

The Southeast Chandler Area Plan seeks to pay respect to the sense of place and history embedded in Southeast Chandler while simultaneously; a) supporting the diversity of lifestyles and development preferences of existing and future residents; b) nurturing true community building and stewardship over the unique attributes of the area; and, c) fostering quality development based on sound planning principles and meaningful public involvement.

The Chandler Airpark area encompasses nine square miles surrounding the Chandler Municipal Airport. The area plan provides the City of Chandler with a document that will strategically guide future development in and around the existing airport. The two major goals of this plan are the protection of the Municipal Airport from residential encroachment and the aggressive economic development of the Airpark area.

The Mexican gray wolf subspecies was listed as endangered in 1976. In 1998 a nonessential experimental population was established in New Mexico and Arizona. Eleven captive-born and reared animals were released into the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area. In June 2007, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service contracted with D.J. Case and Associates to assist in planning and implementing public input for a scoping process to identify issues to consider in developing alternatives preparatory to development of a new Environmental Impact Statement for the Mexican gray wolf introduction program.

This report summarizes some of the findings from the Arizona Youth Survey administered to 8th, 10th and 12th grade students. The results for each city are presented along with comparisons to the results for the state. The survey was designed to assess school safety, adolescent substance use, anti-social behavior and the risk and protective factors that predict these adolescent problem behaviors.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is the lead agency responsible for recovery of the Mexican wolf, pursuant to the Endangered Species Act. The Mexican Wolf Recovery Program essentially is separated into two, interrelated components: 1) Recovery – includes aspects of the program administered primarily by the Service that pertain to the overall goal of Mexican wolf recovery and delisting from the list of threatened and endangered species, and 2) Reintroduction – includes aspects of the program implemented by the Service and cooperating States, Tribes, and other Federal agencies that pertain to management of the reintroduced Mexican wolf population in the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area, which consists of the entire Apache and Gila National Forests in Arizona and New Mexico. This report details all aspects of the Mexican Wolf Recovery Program.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the lead agency responsible for recovery of the Mexican wolf, pursuant to the Endangered Species Act. The Mexican Wolf Recovery Program essentially is separated into two, interrelated components: 1) Recovery – includes aspects of the program administered primarily by the Service that pertain to the overall goal of Mexican wolf recovery and delisting from the list of threatened and endangered species, and 2) Reintroduction – includes aspects of the program implemented by the Service and cooperating States, Tribes, and other Federal agencies that pertain to management of the reintroduced Mexican wolf population in the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area, which consists of the entire Apache and Gila National Forests in Arizona and New Mexico. This report details all aspects of the Mexican Wolf Recovery Program.

Whether reintroduction and recovery should be allowed, and if so where and how, were hotly debated through the 1990s, when reintroduction was formally proposed. They still are. Regardless, the proposal process ended with a nonessential experimental population rule (hereafter Final Rule) approved on January 12, 1998. In keeping with the stated experimental nature of the reintroduction effort, and respectful of the doubts expressed by many, the Final Rule required full evaluations after 3 and 5 years to recommend continuation, modification, or termination of the Reintroduction Project. The 3-Year Review, conducted in 2001, concluded that reintroduction should continue, albeit with important modifications. However, as we discuss elsewhere in this report, for many reasons the 3-Year Review recommendations were not implemented, at least not to the extent that interested parties and stakeholders expected or desired. Regardless of cause, the apparent lack of closure was a significant agency and public concern when the time came for the next review.

By agreement among the primary cooperating agencies, responsibility for the Reintroduction Project’s 5-Year Review fell to the Mexican Wolf Blue Range Adaptive Management Oversight Committee (AMOC) that oversees the Project on behalf of six Lead Agencies and various formal and informal Cooperator agencies. AMOC and the Project's Interagency Field Team conducted the 5-Year Review to comply with the Final Rule, but above and beyond that the intent was to identify and implement improvements in the Project. The Review consists of several primary components: Administrative, Technical, Socioeconomic, and Recommendations. Each is detailed in this report. Review and adaptive management of the Reintroduction Project will not stop with this review. Project cooperators will continue to seek internal and public input regarding Mexican wolf reintroduction to help achieve recovery goals and objectives.

This report summarizes the results of the first two meetings of the Arizona-New Mexico Jaguar Conservation Team (JAG Team) Research Committee and outlines future research that will guide the JAG Team in sound conservation management of jaguars in the United States. Research objectives were identified and approved by the JAG Team. These objectives are to describe and quantify (1) the current distribution and (2) habitat requirements of jaguars in southeastern Arizona and southwestern New Mexico. The second meeting focused on selecting study methods to achieve these objectives.

After virtual extirpation from the Southwest during the mid-1900’s, jaguars have been rediscovered in portions of their former range in the United States, changing the way we think about their current status and distribution. However, we must look ahead and take the next step towards responsible jaguar conservation and apply serious, in depth and objective research on the jaguar in the borderlands region. We emphasize the unique situation of wild jaguars currently occupying portions of southeastern Arizona and recommend investigations to learn as much as possible on the specific habitat selection and habitat requirements of these jaguars while the opportunity exists. We propose a combination of studies. These would include noninvasive presence/absence surveys to determine the current status and distribution. Once jaguars are located, we recommend conducting detailed studies of their habitat selection and ecology using a combination of GPS telemetry and noninvasive monitoring techniques.

The Jaguar Conservation Agreement provides opportunities and incentives for interested parties to become involved with conservation activities. These activities include collection of biological information (to provide a sound scientific basis for decisions); consideration of relevant cultural, economic, and political factors; design and implementation of a comprehensive approach to conservation (including public education); and monitoring, evaluation, and feedback. This summary will focus on the mapping efforts and make recommendations to the Jaguar Conservation Team on conservation measures for potential jaguar habitat.