Arizona Administrative Code › Title 12 - NATURAL RESOURCES › Chapter 5 - State Land Department › Article 25 - CLASSIFYING TRUST LANDS AS SUITABLE FOR CONSERVATION PURPOSES › Section R12-5-2502 - Reclassification

Current through Register Vol. 30, No. 28, July 12, 2024
A. Criteria:
				Reclassification of state lands as suitable for conservation purposes shall be
				in the best interest of the Trust as determined by the Commissioner. The
				Commissioner and the Conservation Advisory Committee may consider any or all of
				the following criteria in evaluating whether the nominated land should be
				reclassified as suitable for conservation purposes:
1. Open space: Existence of substantially
				undisturbed open space values that make the land's conservation an asset to the
				community or to other adjacent developable state trust land;
2. Unique scenic beauty:
a. Existence of a natural community landmark
				such as a significant mountain vista; or,
b. Existence of a scenic vista on to or
				through the land under petition from nearby major roadways or pathways, in
				addition to the mere existence of undeveloped open space;
3. Wildlife and vegetation:
a. Existence of significant vegetation or
				wildlife, both native to the region and worthy of protection due to the
				relative lushness, health and diversity of the vegetation or the number and
				diversity of the wildlife;
b.
				Existence of endangered, threatened, or protected plants or endangered or
				threatened wildlife species as identified under federal or state
				laws;
c. Existence of significant
				stands of a signature plant characteristic of the location;
4. Cultural resources:
a. Existence of a prehistoric or historic
				archaeological site;
b. Existence
				of a historic structure; or
c.
				Comparative costs of mitigation, data recovery, or preservation compared to
				potential revenue production of the land;
5. Wildlife habitat:
a. Existence of sufficient acreage and
				habitat quality to support populations of endangered, threatened, or other
				particular species;
b.
				Interconnection between the land under petition and nearby public lands for
				wildlife movement;
c. Diversity of
				plant communities or biodiversity of plant or animal species;
d. Habitat condition, whether intact or
				degraded; or
e. Distance from an
				existing or proposed roadway, utility line, or urban development;
6. Other:
a. Geologic and topographic features:
i. Existence of a significant wash, slope, or
				other topographic feature;
ii.
				Existence of a unique rock outcropping, formation or other unusual geologic
				feature; and
iii. Known soil
				conditions unsuitable for development purposes;
b. Watershed integrity: Relationship of the
				land to maintenance of the integrity of one or more watersheds;
c. Floodplain management: Impact of the
				100-year floodplain on the land;
d.
				Surface water and groundwater:
i. Existence of
				a spring or other wetland;
ii.
				Occurrence of perennial or intermittent stream flow; and
iii. Potential for groundwater
				recharge.
e. Long-term
				viability of the land for conservation management:
i. Viability of the land based on its size,
				configuration, and location for successfully conserving the resources it seeks
				to protect; and
ii. Relationship of
				conservation of the land to resolving wildland fire issues, particularly in the
				urban-wildland interface;
f. Local, regional, or other planning
				considerations:
i. Relationship between the
				proposed conservation designation and adopted local and regional plans and
				policies; and
ii. Relationship of
				the land to other federal, state, local, or private land trust preserves,
				holdings, or plans;
g.
				Recreation:
i. Existence of or proposed
				trail-based or other low impact recreation opportunities; and
ii. Existence of direct access to or from
				adjacent public or private lands used for recreational purposes;
h. Accessibility:
i. Public accessibility and nature of that
				accessibility to the land; and
ii.
				Impact of accessibility, based on the purpose of conservation of the
				land;
i. Scientific
				education:
i. Historic use of the land for
				scientific research purposes; and
ii. Opportunities for scientific
				education;
j. Types of
				multiple use:
i. Multiple use potential of the
				land; and
ii. Impact of specific
				multiple uses on the land;
k. Resource production preservation:
i. Existence of grazing lands under petition
				that a conservation designation may help to protect;
ii. Existence of prime agriculture areas
				under petition that a conservation designation may help to protect;
				and
iii. Protection of the resource
				production component (such as grazing, agriculture, mining, and timber) of the
				local or regional economy;
l. Relationship to other state trust lands:
i. Proximity to other state trust
				lands;
ii. Development capability
				of adjacent state trust lands; and
iii. Anticipated timing of development
				activity on adjacent state trust lands;
m. Preexisting protections: Existence of any
				federal, state, or local law requiring protection by existing lessee of
				proposed conservation values;
n.
				Tourism: Impact on local or regional tourism;
o. Benefit to the Trust: Whether and for what
				reason reclassification is in the best interest of the Trust;