Matching Items (18)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

Created1994-04-29
Description

Phase IIA focuses on identifying alternatives for mitigating the hazards and problems, evaluating the alternatives for flood mitigation potential and cost effectiveness, and recommending a preferred alternative and flood control policy.

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.

43461-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2004-08-25
Description

Identifying the primary managers of wildlife habitat can provide one useful type of information for development of Arizona’s Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. This can contribute to satisfying at least three of the required elements: #4 (conservation actions and priorities), #5 (monitoring plans), and #7 (coordination). This can be particularly useful

Identifying the primary managers of wildlife habitat can provide one useful type of information for development of Arizona’s Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. This can contribute to satisfying at least three of the required elements: #4 (conservation actions and priorities), #5 (monitoring plans), and #7 (coordination). This can be particularly useful in the prioritization of actions and resources.

Toward that end, The Nature Conservancy has compiled relevant information and conducted new analyses from our recent statewide efforts to map and analyze two natural communities, grasslands and forests, and a species group, native fish. The results are presented in three sections, with appendices describing data sources.

43459-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2005
Description

The Arizona Game and Fish Department held four Wildlife Summits to obtain input from their stakeholders into the development of the Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Stakeholder groups invited to participate in the Summits included Department constituency groups, special interests, local governments, Native American tribes, interagency cooperators, and the general public.

The Arizona Game and Fish Department held four Wildlife Summits to obtain input from their stakeholders into the development of the Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Stakeholder groups invited to participate in the Summits included Department constituency groups, special interests, local governments, Native American tribes, interagency cooperators, and the general public. This report combines the votes from each of the four Summits into one database for analysis. The results for each individual Summit are attached as separate reports. Comparisons are made in this combined report to show differences between the results of individual Summits. The combined results have also been analyzed to determine if there were any significant differences in opinions of the various stakeholder groups. Demographic breakdowns of the individual Summit results are not included in the separate reports because they would not be statistically valid given the small number of participants at each Summit. Participant comments are included in the
individual Summit reports.

Created1990-07
Description

The purpose of this study, which represents Phase I, is to determine long range planning and land use policies for flood control and floodplain management in the southwest area.

42347-Thumbnail Image.png
Created1990-09-12
Description

The purpose of this report is to assist the Pima County Board of Supervisors in assessing whether the Black Wash area requires area-specific flood control policies.

42346-Thumbnail Image.png
Created1994-10
Description

The purpose of this study is to revise the existing Flood Insurance Study and Flood Insurance Rate Maps for a portion of the Canada del Oro Wash. This information will be used by Pima County to update existing flood plain information.

42343-Thumbnail Image.png
Created1992-09
Description

The study developed the 100-year floodplain limits within the watershed and identified the area between Westover Avenue and Valencia Road as a major flood hazard area affecting most of the properties along the channel.

42339-Thumbnail Image.png
Created1993-08-03
Description

This plan has focused on two program areas: 1) floodplain management through revised floodplain delineations and assessment of subsequent FEMA mapping revisions; and 2) basin-wide planning issues involving both short- and long-term drainage infrastructure and regulatory needs.

42330-Thumbnail Image.png
Created1987 to 1989
Description

Offsite drainage impacts the project site from several watersheds whose headwaters lie to the northeast of the project site. This report will address the manner in which the existing offsite and the post-development onsite drainage will be conveyed across this project.