Matching Items (15)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

42805-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2013-04
Description

This report and the accompanying Geographic Information System (GIS) datasets summarize the results of the workshop held in Florence, Arizona in 2010. At this workshop, stakeholders representing a broad range of organizations and interests identified and mapped the locations of important wildlife linkages across Pinal County. This report provides background

This report and the accompanying Geographic Information System (GIS) datasets summarize the results of the workshop held in Florence, Arizona in 2010. At this workshop, stakeholders representing a broad range of organizations and interests identified and mapped the locations of important wildlife linkages across Pinal County. This report provides background information on the importance and benefits of conserving wildlife linkages for both people and wildlife in Pinal County and describes the methods used during stakeholder workshops and in developing the accompanying GIS products. It includes a series of maps generated from the digitized stakeholder data that depict the general locations of wildlife linkages and potential barriers to wildlife movement within Pinal County. The maps are followed by tables with descriptive information about the habitat areas each linkage connects, the species each linkage serves, and known threats and potential conservation opportunities associated with each linkage.

Created2004 to 2013
Description

A majority of the work performed by ADEQ's Nonpoint Source Program is funded by Clean Water Act grants, awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency which requires States to report annually on progress in meeting the schedule of milestones contained in their nonpoint source management plans, and report reductions in

A majority of the work performed by ADEQ's Nonpoint Source Program is funded by Clean Water Act grants, awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency which requires States to report annually on progress in meeting the schedule of milestones contained in their nonpoint source management plans, and report reductions in nonpoint source pollutant loadings and improvement in water quality resulting from program implementation.

42364-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2007-03
Description

Pima Association of Governments updated a portion of the Water Usage Along Selected Streams in Pima County, Arizona, which PAG created in 2000. The updated report and datasets show current potential water usage in these critical areas. Deliverables include the shapefiles, spreadsheets and maps that accompany this memorandum. The purpose

Pima Association of Governments updated a portion of the Water Usage Along Selected Streams in Pima County, Arizona, which PAG created in 2000. The updated report and datasets show current potential water usage in these critical areas. Deliverables include the shapefiles, spreadsheets and maps that accompany this memorandum. The purpose of this report is to provide updated information about the location and pumping history of wells located in Pima County near shallow groundwater areas, generally located near drainages.

43165-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2001-12
Description

The purpose of this report is to present the data gathered to date in the Santa Cruz AMA in support of the management goal and groundwater modeling effort. This report presents groundwater and surface water monitoring data, USGS stream gaging data, effluent data, gravity studies, historical water use and water

The purpose of this report is to present the data gathered to date in the Santa Cruz AMA in support of the management goal and groundwater modeling effort. This report presents groundwater and surface water monitoring data, USGS stream gaging data, effluent data, gravity studies, historical water use and water quality data for three distinctive stream reaches of the Santa Cruz River.

Created2003 to 2012
Description

The Arizona Department of Transportation, the Arizona Game & Fish Department and the Arizona State Parks Board are required to conduct a study every three years on watercraft fuel consumption and recreational watercraft usage. The fuel consumption data is collected to determine the allocation of motor vehicle fuel tax to

The Arizona Department of Transportation, the Arizona Game & Fish Department and the Arizona State Parks Board are required to conduct a study every three years on watercraft fuel consumption and recreational watercraft usage. The fuel consumption data is collected to determine the allocation of motor vehicle fuel tax to the State Lake Improvement Fund. The information on recreational watercraft usage patterns on Arizona’s lakes and rivers is necessary, in part, to determine the distribution of SLIF funds to applicants.

42733-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2000-07
Description

The purpose of this project was to compile information on groundwater withdrawals and surface water diversions near perennial streams, intermittent streams, and shallow groundwater areas previously identified by PAG for the SDCP. The information could be used to prioritize future investigations of potential impacts of these withdrawals and diversions on

The purpose of this project was to compile information on groundwater withdrawals and surface water diversions near perennial streams, intermittent streams, and shallow groundwater areas previously identified by PAG for the SDCP. The information could be used to prioritize future investigations of potential impacts of these withdrawals and diversions on riparian and aquatic habitats for the SDCP.

Created2001 to 2008
Description

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

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.

Created2001 to 2017
Description

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

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.

43572-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2005-06
Description

The quality of jobs in the United States became a national concern in the 1980s after a long period of losses of relatively high-paying manufacturing jobs and gains of frequently low-paying service jobs. National job quality remains a concern today, as witnessed by the debate in the 2004 presidential campaign.

The quality of jobs in the United States became a national concern in the 1980s after a long period of losses of relatively high-paying manufacturing jobs and gains of frequently low-paying service jobs. National job quality remains a concern today, as witnessed by the debate in the 2004 presidential campaign. The overall average wage is a measure of prosperity or well-being, but is not in itself a measure of job quality since job quality is just one of several factors — including cost of living, productivity, and desirability of an area — that affect the overall average wage. Little information on these factors is available by state. Adjusting for job quality reduces the state-by-state variation in wages. However, even after adjusting for job quality, the average wage still varies substantially by state.

43574-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2006-03
Description

The long-term trend toward lower-quality jobs in the United States continued between 2001 and 2004. Industrial job quality fell 1.6 percent nationally between 2001 and 2004. The decrease in occupational job quality was not quite as great at 0.9 percent. Thus, overall U.S. job quality dropped 2.5 percent during the

The long-term trend toward lower-quality jobs in the United States continued between 2001 and 2004. Industrial job quality fell 1.6 percent nationally between 2001 and 2004. The decrease in occupational job quality was not quite as great at 0.9 percent. Thus, overall U.S. job quality dropped 2.5 percent during the three years, causing the U.S. average wage to be 2.5 percent less than it otherwise would have been. Arizona’s job quality fell between 2001 and 2004 at a pace worse than the national average. Relative to the national average, the industrial and occupational job mixes each slipped a bit more than 0.3 percent during the three years, for an overall decline of 0.7 percent. In Arizona, job quality in 2004 was 2.0 percent below the national average, but Arizona ranked 23rd among all states.