The continued growth of the human-built environment in Pima County, Arizona will result in the “incidental take” of species that are listed under the Endangered Species Act. To avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to both listed and unlisted species and their habitats, Pima County is submitting this Multi-species Conservation Plan for 44 species that may be impacted as a result of the otherwise lawful activities of Pima County and its development community. The Incidental Take Permit, also called a Section 10 permit, will be for 30 years. This MSCP is part of the required documentation needed to receive an Incidental Take Permit under Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA.

Provides an overview of the issues related to monitoring the 36 species proposed for coverage under the forthcoming Section 10 permit to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. By integrating the requirements for MSCP compliance and effectiveness monitoring with the challenges inherent in single-species monitoring, this document seeks a balance between species-specific monitoring and other habitat, ecosystem and threats-based measures (parameters). By designing such a program, Pima County will be in a better position to anticipate and adjust management actions for the conservation of covered species and the ecosystems that support them.

The Multiple Species Conservation Plan will complete the land use planning process in a conflict between competing interests on the question of growth. A path of balance was chosen by advancing the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan. This second draft will be posted on the website and distributed to interested community and committee members. A public process will be conducted so that during 200t the document can be finalized and submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as part of the application for a federal endangered species permit.

Argues that the canons of evidence that apply to artifactual evidence of prehistoric behavior patterns are sometimes distinct from those that apply to non-artifactual evidence, and the logic and archaeological value of the latter is not less simply because it is different. The essay is intended to instruct and sensitise archaeologists to this issue as much as it is to allay concern that the pollen evidence for Archaic maize cultivation at the Koster site may not be credible. 49 p. Also see Schoenwetter 1994

Set of documents and data tables presenting results of palynological studies initiated 1984 and completed 1988. The 1988 report was submitted to colleagues in the Department of Geography, University of Liverpool, for consideration as part of a planned volume of Pre-Alps village life edited by Prof. David Siddle. The volume was never compiled. An archaeological investigation