Matching Items (8)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

43448-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2005-12-31
Description

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

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.

42806-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2009-08
Description

For the 2008 AARIN study, 2,105 Maricopa County (AZ) arrestees volunteered to complete the survey instrument and to provide a valid urine specimen for testing. In addition, the arrestees responded to a series of questions related to methamphetamine use, including patterns of use, treatment, drug transactions, sales and manufacturing, and

For the 2008 AARIN study, 2,105 Maricopa County (AZ) arrestees volunteered to complete the survey instrument and to provide a valid urine specimen for testing. In addition, the arrestees responded to a series of questions related to methamphetamine use, including patterns of use, treatment, drug transactions, sales and manufacturing, and awareness of the Arizona Meth Project. Among those participants, 435 (20.7%) admitted to having used methamphetamine in the 30 days prior to arrest.

42807-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2009-01
Description

The purpose of this report is to examine methamphetamine use among adult arrestees and juvenile detainees in Maricopa County, Arizona. We relied on data from the Arizona Arrestee Reporting Information Network (AARIN) to address the following five questions:
1. What percent of adult arrestees are methamphetamine users and what are their

The purpose of this report is to examine methamphetamine use among adult arrestees and juvenile detainees in Maricopa County, Arizona. We relied on data from the Arizona Arrestee Reporting Information Network (AARIN) to address the following five questions:
1. What percent of adult arrestees are methamphetamine users and what are their social characteristics?
2. What is the relationship between methamphetamine use and arresting offense?
3. What is the relationship between methamphetamine use by parents and the presence of children in the household?
4. What percent of methamphetamine users are receiving treatment for their drug use?
5. What percent of juvenile detainees are methamphetamine users and what are their social and legal characteristics?

43355-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2006
Description

On February 13 & 14, 2006, Governor Janet Napolitano and Attorney General Terry Goddard sponsored
a solution-focused conference: Addressing the Methamphetamine Problem in Arizona- Enforcement,
Prevention and Treatment - A Call to Action. The Conference provided a quality, fact-based array of
public policy and community action solutions for an audience that included law

On February 13 & 14, 2006, Governor Janet Napolitano and Attorney General Terry Goddard sponsored
a solution-focused conference: Addressing the Methamphetamine Problem in Arizona- Enforcement,
Prevention and Treatment - A Call to Action. The Conference provided a quality, fact-based array of
public policy and community action solutions for an audience that included law enforcement, human
services professionals, medical professionals, community-based organizations, educators, Tribal
organizations, the faith community and neighborhood activists.

Nationally recognized speakers provided insight into and recommendations about the impact of
methamphetamine and what is working nationwide in the areas of prevention, treatment and law
enforcement. Arizona experts shared their experiences regarding the impact of methamphetamine on
Arizona children, youth, families and communities, current practices to address the meth crisis in Arizona
and possible future directions. Finally, participants heard the public policy perspectives of some of
Arizona’s policy makers and presented their individual views of the issues and possible solutions.

43227-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2003-09-30
Description

The Arizona Drug Endangered Children Program (formerly referred to as the Meth and Kids Initiative) was established in 2000 to address problems associated with methamphetamine production in homes with children present. For the past three years the DEC Program has focused primarily on Maricopa County cases and Task Force members

The Arizona Drug Endangered Children Program (formerly referred to as the Meth and Kids Initiative) was established in 2000 to address problems associated with methamphetamine production in homes with children present. For the past three years the DEC Program has focused primarily on Maricopa County cases and Task Force members have provided training and technical assistance to agencies throughout the state. Representatives from the DEC Task Force worked together to formalize the multidisciplinary protocol to address the needs of children and ensure the safety of children who are present at an investigation of a methamphetamine laboratory.

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.

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.