Hopi Hazard Mitigation Planning Team

Tribal code

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

HAZARD

MITIGATION PLAN

October 2015

Prepared by the

Hopi Hazard Mitigation Planning Team

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section 1: Introduction .................................................................................................... 1

1.1

Purpose................................................................................................................................1

1.2

Background and Scope ........................................................................................................1

1.4

Tribal Assurances ................................................................................................................3

1.5

Plan Description..................................................................................................................3

Section 2: Community Description ................................................................................... 4

2.1

Section Changes ..................................................................................................................4

2.2

Introduction .......................................................................................................................4

2.3

Demographics .....................................................................................................................4

2.4

Economy................ .............................................................................................................4

2.5

Topography/Climate ...........................................................................................................7

2.6

Water Resources .................................................................................................................8

2.7

Traditional Culture and Archaeology ................................................................................. 11

2.8

Land Use.. ......................................................................................................................... 12

2.9

Public Infrastructure ......................................................................................................... 13

2.10 Emergency Medical Services.............................................................................................. 14

2.11 Development Trends ......................................................................................................... 15

2.12 Cultural and Sacred Sites ................................................................................................... 15

Section 3: Planning Process ........................................................................................... 16

3.1

Section Changes ................................................................................................................ 16

3.2

Points of Contact .............................................................................................................. 16

3.3

Planning Team and Activities............................................................................................. 16

3.4

Public and Stakeholder Involvement ................................................................................. 18

3.5

Program Integration.......................................................................................................... 18

Section 4: Risk Assessment............................................................................................. 21

4.1

Section Changes ................................................................................................................ 21

4.2

Risk Assessment................................................................................................................ 21

4.3

Hazard Profiles.................................................................................................................. 27

4.3.1

Drought ...................................................................................................................... 27

iii

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

4.3.2

Flooding ..................................................................................................................... 33

4.3.3

Landslide and Rockfall ............................................................................................... 41

4.3.4

Severe Wind ................................................................................................................ 45

4.3.5

Winter Storm .............................................................................................................. 48

Section 5: Mitigation Strategy ....................................................................................... 56

5.1

Section Changes ................................................................................................................ 56

5.2

Goals and Objectives ......................................................................................................... 56

5.3

Mitigation Actions/Projects............................................................................................... 56

5.4

Capability Assessment ...................................................................................................... 59

Section 6: Plan Maintenance ......................................................................................... 64

6.1

Section Changes ................................................................................................................ 64

6.2

Monitoring, Evaluating and Updating ................................................................................ 64

6.3

Monitoring Progress of Mitigation Activities ...................................................................... 64

6.4

Incorporation into other Planning Mechanisms ................................................................. 65

6.5

Past and Continued Member and Stakeholder Involvement ............................................... 66

Tables

Table 2-1: Keams Canyon Average Monthly Climate (1948-2005) ...................................... 7

Table 3-1: Planning Team ............................................................................................... 16

Table 3-2: Existing Plans, Studies, Reports ...................................................................... 19

Table 4-1: Hazard Identification ..................................................................................... 21

Table 4-2: Executive Order Declarations ......................................................................... 22

Table 4-3: Calculated Priority Risk Index (CPRI) ............................................................... 23

Table 4-4: CPRI Values by Hazard ................................................................................... 24

Table 4-5: Critical and Non-Critical Facilities ................................................................... 25

Table 4-6: Estimated Replacement Costs ........................................................................ 25

Table 4-7: Drought Related Executive Order Declarations ............................................... 28

Table 4-8: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Drought ............................................. 30

Table 4-9: Flooding Related Executive Order Declarations .............................................. 37

Table 4-10: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Flooding .......................................... 38

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 4-11: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Landslide & Rock Fall ....................... 42

Table 4-12: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Severe Wind .................................... 45

Table 4-13: Winter Storm Related Executive Order Declarations ..................................... 49

Table 4-14: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Severe Winter Storm ....................... 53

Table 5-1: Current Mitigation Strategy ........................................................................... 58

Table 5-2: Capability Assessment ................................................................................... 60

Appendix

Appendix A - Planning Process Documentation............................................................... 68

Appendix B - Public Involvement Documents ................................................................. 74

Appendix C - Assessment of Previous Plan’s Mitigation Strategy ..................................... 80

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Flagstaff

Winslow

Springerville

vii

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

viii

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1

Purpose

This Plan will guide and organize

current and future efforts to

effectively and efficiently mitigate

hazards on the Hopi Main and

Moenkopi District Reservations.

This Plan is intended to help create

disaster-resistant Reservations by

reducing the threat of hazards to

life, property, emergency response

capabilities, economic stability, and

infrastructure, while encouraging

the protection and restoration of

natural and cultural resources.

A Vision of Hopi

Hopi should be a place where:

Hopi culture and religion are strong;

Sacred sites are protected;

Cultural and environmentally sensitive development occurs;

The land is looked after;

There are jobs and businesses;

Quality infrastructure serves everyone;

Everyone has their own quality home;

The hazards identified for this

Public service facilities serve all needs.

planning effort have affected the

Reservations in the past and are

likely to affect the Reservations in

the future. These hazards include dam failure, drought, flooding, landslide/rockfall, severe wind and

winter storm.

This Plan will enable the Hopi Tribe to apply for FEMA grants for further mitigation planning and

mitigation projects. This eligibility will allow the Hopi Tribe to continue mitigation efforts to further

ensure the protection of the people and property of the Reservations.

The main purpose and goals of this Plan are:

1.2



Reduce the threats to public health and safety posed by hazards;



Reduce structural damages caused by hazards;



Reduce the environmental impacts of hazards, mitigation actions, and future development

activities; and



Reduce the costs resulting from disasters.

Background and Scope

Nationwide, billions of dollars are spent annually to help communities, organizations, businesses,

and individuals recover from disasters. These monies only partially reflect the true cost of disasters,

because additional expenses to insurance companies and nongovernmental organizations are not

reimbursed by tax dollars. Many disasters are predictable, and much of the damage caused by these

events can be alleviated or even eliminated.

Hazard mitigation is defined by FEMA as “any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate longterm risk to human life and property from a hazard event.” The results of a three-year

congressionally mandated independent study to assess future savings from mitigation activities

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

provides evidence that mitigation activities are highly cost-effective. On average, each dollar spend

on mitigation saves society an average of $4 in avoided future losses in addition to saving lives and

preventing injuries (National Institute of Building Science Multi-Hazard Mitigation Council 2005).

Examples of hazard mitigation measures include, but are not limited to the following:



Development of mitigation standards, regulations, policies, and programs



Land use/zoning policies



Strong building code and floodplain management regulations



Dam safety program, seawalls, and levee systems



Acquisition of flood prone and environmentally sensitive lands



Retrofitting/hardening/elevating structures and critical facilities



Relocation of structures, infrastructure, and facilities out of vulnerable areas



Public awareness/education campaigns



Improvement of warning and evacuation systems

Hazard mitigation planning is the process through which hazards that threaten communities are

identified, likely impacts of those hazards are determined, mitigation goals are set, and appropriate

strategies to lessen impacts are determined, prioritized, and implemented. This Plan documents the

planning process employed by the Planning Team. The Plan identifies relevant hazards and risks, and

identifies the strategy that will be used to decrease vulnerability and increase resiliency and

sustainability.

This Plan was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Action of 2000 and

the implementing regulations set forth in the Federal Register (hereafter, these requirements will be

referred to collectively as the DMA2K). While the act emphasized the need for mitigation plans and

more coordinated mitigation planning and implementation efforts, the regulations established the

requirements that hazard mitigation plans must meet in order to be eligible for certain Federal

disaster assistance and hazard mitigation funding under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and

Emergency Act.

Information in this Plan will be used to help guide and coordinate mitigation activities and decisions

for future land use. Proactive mitigation planning will help reduce the cost of disaster response and

recovery to the community and its property owners by protecting structures, reducing exposure and

minimizing overall community impacts and disruption. The community has been affected by hazards

in the past and is thus committed to reducing future disaster impacts and maintaining eligibility for

Federal funding.

1.3

Plan Objectives



Assess and guide regulation of new development in areas that are vulnerable to hazards or

ensure that development occurs in a manner so that risk is minimized;



Protect or alter existing development in hazardous areas to make it less susceptible to

damage;

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

1.4

2015



Ensure that the solutions to protect existing development are the most cost-effective

available; protects or enhances cultural and natural resources and sensitive to wildlife and

riparian habitats; and is consistent with applicable land use plans, regulations, and natural

resources management;



Ensure that the benefits of maintaining existing facilities outweigh their costs; if not

redesign facilities to make them less susceptible to damage or implement other solutions at

the site;



Manage natural resources including floodplains, wetlands and other resources for multiple

uses in line with the existing;



Improve coordination and consistency between the Hopi Tribe and Navajo Nation and other

jurisdictions, as appropriate, in management activities for floodplain areas;



Increase public awareness of hazards and improve appropriate preparation for and response

to such hazards;



Increase Reservation-wide and Tribal responsibility and support for hazard mitigation for the

Reservations; and



Organize and Improve hazard warning and emergency response systems.

Tribal Assurances

The Hopi Tribe will comply with all applicable Federal statutes and regulations in effect for those

periods when the Tribe receives grant funding per the DMA2K requirement §201.7(c)(6).

1.5

Plan Description

Tribal officials recognize that hazards pose a significant threat at varying degrees of magnitude and

frequency, to the safety and economic stability of the Tribe and its residents. Tribal officials

understand that not addressing the risk can result in increased costs, both in terms of financial and

human losses. Accordingly, the Hopi Tribe has prepared the 2015 Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation

Plan (the Plan) with a desire to become more aware of the Tribe’s vulnerability to those hazards and

to develop mitigation strategies that reduce the risks associated with them.

This plan is arranged and prepared to satisfy Tribal level planning requirements mandated by the

Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA2K). DMA2K requirements are provided as appropriate in each

section. The plan is divided into sections as follows:



Section 1 – Introduction



Section 2 – Community Description



Section 3 – Planning Process



Section 4 – Risk Assessment



Section 5 – Mitigation Strategy



Section 6 – Plan Maintenance

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

SECTION 2: COMMUNITY DESCRIPTION

2.1

2.2

Section Changes



Maps and graphs that were determined to be irrelevant or to not contribute to the

effectiveness of the Plan were removed.



Extraneous detail was removed from the ‘Economy’ and ‘Ecological Zones’ sections

and was updated in a more clear and concise manner.

Introduction

Hopi Indian Tribal Lands today encompass two Federal Trust lands reservations located in the high

desert of northeastern Arizona on the Colorado Plateau. These two reservations were established

by different means and like many Indian Tribes in the United States, fall short of the entire breadth

of indigenous land claims and former land use. The Hopi people have a longstanding occupation

within the Southwestern United States being descendants of the various archaeologically identified

pre-historic cultures and complexes known as Anasazi, Mogollon, Sinagua, Salado, Hohokam and

Hakataya. An occupational time span of over a millennium characterizes the nature of the oldest

Hopi pueblo villages and their members. It is important for us to understand the nature of

occupation for the Hopi people on their lands so that our planning effort reflects the current

challenges and sensitivities pertinent to the unique Hopi communities.

The main Hopi Indian reservation has been more recently established following from the original

1882 Executive Order Reservation created by President Chester Arthur and finalized through the

1974 Navajo-Hopi Land Settlement Act to include over 1.6 million acres and recognition of Hopi land

management units District Six and the Hopi Partitioned Lands under full control of the Hopi Tribe.

Land management unit District Six encompasses 15 units at the core of the main reservation with

most of the Hopi villages and communities listed here from east to west: Keams Canyon, Polacca,

First Mesa Villages of Walpi, Sichomovi, and Tewa; Second Mesa Villages of Shungopavi,

Mishongnovi and Sipaulovi; Kykotsmovi, and the Third Mesa Villages of Oraibi, Hotevilla and Bacavi.

The Hopi Partitioned Lands make up the outer areas of the main reservation with a total of 36

numbered range units which includes various scattered home sites, ranch homes and the charter

community of Yuwehloo Pahki Community established in March 27, 2000 in Range Units 567 & 568.

The second Hopi reservation was more currently established and recognized the longstanding

occupation of the Hopi village of Moenkopi. The Moenkopi District was established through

litigation of a Congressional Act of 1934 that expanded the Navajo Indian Reservation without due

recognition of Hopi occupation and land use. The ceded land acquisition has re-established 61,604

acres for use by the Hopi Tribe and Moenkopi villages including important irrigation and agricultural

uses.

2.3

Demographics

The Hopi Tribal population as of August 2014, of enrolled Hopi members total 13,990. Living on the

Reservation: 7,769 and living off the Reservation: 6,221.

2.4

Economy

The Hopi Reservation economy consists of a formal and informal or traditional economy. The formal

sector is defined as organized, business-like activity meant to create jobs and personal income. The

informal economy consists of goods and services produced for household consumption or for

exchange in social and cultural settings.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

The annual monetary value of the formal economy on the Hopi Reservation is approximately $44.8

million. This economy produces 2,941 reservation jobs. In addition, the Kayenta Mine is located on

or adjacent to the Reservation provide another 24 Hopi jobs.

Tribal government operations are funded by about $70 million in recurring annual revenue. About

95% of this revenue is derived from the three sources:



Contracts, grants, awards and indirect costs recovery from the federal government and

State of Arizona



Coal royalties and water sales from the Peabody Coal; and



Earning from financial investments

Other revenue sources include business leases and rents; fees, fines and forfeitures, and

miscellaneous sources. The tribe also generates enterprise-type revenues from the Hopi Tribe

Economic Development Corporation, which accounts for the following Hopi owned businesses: Hopi

Cultural Center Motel and Restaurant, a motel in Sedona, Arizona, Hopi, and two shopping centers

located in Flagstaff, Arizona, and a Truck Stop Center near Holbrook, Arizona.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Map 2-1: Hopi Reservations

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2.5

2015

Topography/Climate

The Hopi Reservation is located within the Great Basin Desert, on the Colorado Plateau,

encompassing and extending beyond the southern edge of Black Mesa. Black Mesa consists of

sandstone belonging to the Mesa Verde Group, underlain by Mancos Shale. The southern

escarpment breaks off sharply to form the broad, flat Little Colorado River Valley. The southern

scarp of Black Mesa forms discontinuous, finger-like projections called Antelope Mesa, First Mesa,

Second Mesa, Third Mesa, Howell Mesa and Coalmine Mesa.

Five major washes cross the Hopi Reservation: Moenkopi, Dinnebito, Oraibi, Polacca, and Jeddito

along with contributing channels of Keams Canyon and Wepo. All the five major washes are

tributaries of the Little Colorado River, and flow in a generally northeast to southwesterly direction.

While the majority of the flow of washes is ephemeral, intermittent and perennial reaches exist in

some areas, primarily as a result of groundwater discharge.

The climate of the Hopi Reservation is semiarid, with precipitation ranging from 6 to 10 inches per

year in the lower elevations, and 10 to 14 inches per year in the higher elevations. The majority of

the precipitation occurs July through October. Snow accumulates most heavily in January and

decreases steadily into May. The average seasonal snowfall is 14 inches. The climate is characterized

by mild to hot summers, and cold winters. In summer the average temperature is 70°F, and the

average daily maximum temperature is 87°F, as recorded at Keams Canyon.

Elevations within the planning area range between 4,500-7,500 feet above mean sea level.

Table 2-1: Keams Canyon Average Monthly Climate (1948-2005)

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul

Aug Sep Oct

Nov

Dec

Max Temp (F)

43.3 49

55.3 64.7 73.4

84.9 89.1 85.4 79.3 68.6 54.7 44.5

Min Temp (F)

16.2 21.1 25.1 30.9 38.9

47.1 55.3 54.6 46.9 35.9 25.2 16.8

Precipitation (in) .77

.80

.88

.56

.39

.30

1.20 1.62 .88

1.01 .68

.88

Snowfall (in)

2.4

1.8

0.4

0.0

0.7

10.1

1.4

0.0

0.1

3.2

Source: Western Regional Climate Center website (http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/), July 22, 2014.

Ecological Zones

The Hopi Reservation covers diverse ecological zones. These various ecological zones support plant

communities that Hopi continue to harvest and manage for a number of needs and applications,

since prehistoric times. As part of Hopi stewardship, plant resources are key to sustaining the many

domestic and religious needs of Hopi society. Prior to widespread grazing land use, native

vegetation supported wildlife such as small and big game, resident and migratory birds, insects,

reptiles, amphibians, and many others that made up the source of annual gathering harvests for

Hopi needs.

Ecological zones within the Hopi Reservation are classified based on climate, vegetation, and soil

criteria. There are five zones: Semi-Desert Grassland, Mixed Grassland, Sagebrush-Grassland,

Pinyon-Juniper Woodland, and Wetlands.

Semi-Desert Grassland occurs below 5,500 feet in elevation and receives average annual

precipitation of 5-8 inches. It occupies 264,353 acres, or 17% of the Reservation. Vegetation in this

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

zone is predominantly grasses and is a nearly treeless area, with the exception of riparian areas, or

where soil moisture is concentrated.

Mixed Grassland occurs between 5,500 and 6,200 feet in elevation, and receives average annual

precipitation of 8-12 inches. It occupies 993,907 acres, or 64% of the Reservation. This zone is

dominated by grasses when in good range condition.

Sagebrush-Grassland occurs between 6,200 and 7,000 feet and receives average annual

precipitation of 12-15 inches. It occupies 285,738 acres, or 18% of the Reservation.

Pinyon-Juniper Woodland occurs between 6,500 and 7,500 feet elevation, and receives average

annual precipitation of 15-17 inches. Pinyon-juniper canopy is the dominant feature. This zone

occupies only 9,543 acres or less than 1% of the Reservation.

Wetlands are not elevation specific ecological zones; neither do they receive more or less

precipitation than surrounding environments. However, they are characterized by the presence of

water, for some or all of the year, hydric soils, and wetland vegetation. This zone occupies an

estimated 8,000 acres, or less than 1% of the Reservation.

2.6

Water Resources

Paavahu, Water resources, are highly valued by the Hopi as a main source of life in a harsh and arid

environment. The central focus in Hopi ceremonial life is the propitiation of moisture in its various

forms. Moisture provides for the domestic and agricultural needs of Hopi people as well as the

supernatural and spiritual essence of Hopitutskwa, the Hopi indigenous lands. As a valuable natural

resource to the Hopi people, water must be protected and conserved so that we may all fulfill our

ultimate stewardship responsibility: the needs of our children and future generations for this life

giving resource.

Historically, Hopi people relied on a dense network of springs for their water. However, growing

population and modern development have increased the demand for water beyond the capacity of

these springs and compelled Hopi to look for alternative sources. The Hopi now rely primarily on

subsurface aquifers for both human and livestock use.

Many growing communities in northeast Arizona use these same aquifers and the surface drainages

of the Little Colorado River and its tributaries. Since the area's constrained water supply has to

support a growing population, there is negotiation and litigation surrounding water use rights.

Additionally, human impacts are compromising the quality of the region's water, both above and

belowground. Since aquifers depend on infiltration of surface water for recharge, they are

vulnerable to overuse, drought, contamination and harmful human activities. Source water for the

Hopi Reservation is in dire straits for a variety of reasons.

Surface Water Resources

The surface water resources of the Hopi Reservation include the five major washes, Jeddito, Polacca,

Oraibi, Dinnebito, and Moenkopi, which traverse the Hopi Reservation from a northeast to

southwest direction. All of the Hopi washes are listed as impaired under the Hopi Tribe’s Clean

Water Action Plan Unified Watershed Assessment, due to sediment load, chemical contamination,

and presence of coliform bacteria. The only known current utilization of surface water on the Hopi

Reservation is for cattle watering through diversions to off-stream storage and cattle ponds on

tributaries to the washes. Under the settlement proposal in the Little Colorado River Adjudication,

the Hopi and Navajo Tribe would share in the waters of these washes equally, according to a

formula regulating impoundment storage volumes.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Ground Water Resources

Perched aquifers - are sand deposits which lie within a confining soil and rock layer. These aquifers

are easily contaminated by livestock, game, and human occupation. The Tuba City Landfill

contaminates one of the perched zones and another is contaminated by the Thriftway/Sunwest

gasoline station spills at Tuba City and Moenkopi. These aquifers may yield water to seeps, springs

and windmills. They are limited in extent and poor in quality.

Quaternary Alluvial Deposits - sand and soil are deposited along the washes by fluvial action and

wind. These deposits may contain water of variable quality and production. D.B. Stephens and

Associates dug four wells into the alluvium in 1993 as part of the ongoing water source inventory

conducted by the Hopi Water Resources Program. A well dug into the alluvium along upper Wepo

Wash was very good in quality and production. A well dug into the alluvium near Polacca Airport

was moderate in quality. Two wells dug into the alluvium along Oraibi Wash were moderate to poor

in quality. Two boreholes attempted in the alluvium along upper and lower Dinnebito Wash were

dry. A windmill near Polacca is dug into the alluvium and used for water hauling for drinking and

livestock water. The quality is unknown.

Wepo Sandstone Aquifer - this uppermost aquifer is a rock unit high on the Hopi mesas near the

Peabody Coal Company Black Mesa Mine lease. A few windmills are drilled into this aquifer, mostly

on the Navajo Partitioned Lands. It is limited in extent and storage, and little is known about the

quality of the water.

Toreva Sandstone Aquifer (T-Aquifer) - this aquifer outcrops along the edges of the Hopi Mesas, and

supplies the springs traditionally used for drinking water supply and garden irrigation near the

villages. Water supply wells have been drilled into this aquifer at First Mesa and a hand-dug well

was drilled into it at Kykotsmovi early in the 20th Century. Water quality ranges from very good

(potable) to poor (due to metals and bacterial contamination), production is fair. At Hotevilla and

Bacavi, the water contains radioactive gas (radon) in excess of the proposed maximum contaminant

level. The exact extent of the aquifer is unknown due to poor well logs at Hopi. This aquifer is easily

contaminated by human occupation, due to its nearness to the ground surface in inhabited areas.

Dakota Sandstone Aquifer (D-Aquifer) - this aquifer consists of the Dakota Sandstone and Entrada

Sandstone water-bearing units. It is extensively used for windmills in cattle watering. Some people

may haul water from these windmills. The aquifer water quality ranges from very good to poor.

Springs in the Keams Canyon area discharging from this aquifer may contain arsenic and other

metals. Saline water from this aquifer may contaminate drinking water wells in the Polacca and Hopi

High School areas due to poor well construction and/or natural inter-formational leakage and

seepage. The Spider Mound well is thought to penetrate this aquifer and contains fluoride in excess

of the MCL. The exact extent of this aquifer is unknown due to poor well logs at Hopi. Production

ranges from poor to fair. The Entrada Sandstone is unsaturated in the south Oraibi basin.

Navajo Sandstone Aquifer (N-Aquifer) - this aquifer consists of the Navajo Sandstone, the Kayenta

Mudstone and the Windgate Sandstone. It is the primary drinking water aquifer on the Hopi

Reservation, being the source for all village wells, except Spider Mound. In many areas, the water is

sufficiently pure to use in steam irons (nearly distilled water quality). The production rate is

generally good, ranging from 20-600 gallons per minute. Contamination is possible from interformational leakage through faults and fractures in the overlying rock. The exact extent of this

aquifer is unknown due to poor well logs at Hopi.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Coconino Sandstone Aquifer (C-Aquifer) - this aquifer consists of the Coconino Sandstone and Supai

formations. It is known to underlie the Hopi Reservation. It extends throughout the Little Colorado

River Basin and is used for drinking water supply in the nearby cities of Flagstaff, Winslow, Holbrook,

St. Johns, and others. The quality ranges from very good (at Peabody) to very poor. The production

rate is very good at Winslow and very poor at the Peabody Mine. An oil exploration well in the

southern part of the Hopi Reservation (Oraibi Wash Basin) was once used for water supply. This

aquifer is under intense investigation by Hopi Water Resources Program Staff and D.B. Stephens and

Associates for water supply in the southern portion of the Hopi Reservation and at Moenkopi.

Exploration wells may be drilled into this aquifer in the next several years at Moenkopi. Another

study is soon to be published for the southern part of the aquifer by the US Geological Survey.

Muav Limestone and Redwall Limestone Aquifer – this aquifer is used for water supply in the City of

Sedona and at the Hualapai and Havasupai Indian Reservations, but is nearly 4,000 feet deep at

Hopi. It is not considered a viable or affordable source of water for Hopi.

The Hopi Tribe is engaged in a water rights adjudication of the Little Colorado River Basin. Due to

court-ordered confidentiality rulings, and not to endanger the position of the Tribe in litigation and

settlement activities, Tribal programs cannot utilize nor have access to a significant amount of

technical data and analyses. Unfortunately, some of the most applicable information for resource

planning purposes has been developed for the adjudication, at great expense to the Hopi Tribe and

the Bureau of Indian Affairs acting as trustee for the Tribe, and is not available to programs for use

in the development of projects.

Data suggests that the major surface water problem is sediment generated from extensive soil

erosion. However, it has not been determined if this is a natural phenomenon or aggravated by

improper management of soils. Most range soils are sandy loam, yet a significant percentage of

sediment is clay, indicating that eroding Mancos shale could be a significant source of this

sedimentation.

Hydro-geological data and analyses required for the delineation of aquifers and water bearing

alluvial deposits is normally derived from well logs and pump tests. The Indian Health Service (IHS)

and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) drilled wells for over 50 years without adequate well logs or

pump tests. Since over 90% of the wells were not logged, little information is available to assist in

locating new wells, estimating the cost of new wells in the proximate area, or determining water

quality. A lack of data regarding a geological fault line that runs through the southeastern corner of

the Hopi Reservation led to a number of wells being drilled that produced inferior water. Lack of

data also inhibits the ability to plan for future water use on the reservation.

To date, little is known about the C-aquifer, the deepest feasible aquifer underlying the Hopi

Reservation, extending south of Interstate 40. Data that is available for evaluating ground water

resources is contained in databases that cannot be accessed without expensive sort-retrieve

programming.

Water quality data is sparse and expensive to collect. The Hopi Tribe has invested a significant dollar

amount in USGS data collection, with little return, in part because the USGS Water Wells database

uses different locator identity information from that of the Tribe’s.

Current data cannot directly link health problems to possible water contamination however, risk

assessments for water contamination change as advances are made in technology. In most cases,

acceptable levels of contamination are decreased as more information is learned. While this raises

questions regarding current acceptable levels, this also directly conflicts with Hopi philosophy that

any level of contamination is unacceptable.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

The major implication of limited water data is that the Hopi Tribe is also unable to do good planning,

due to the unavailability of data. More research is needed to avoid expensive mistakes, for example,

in selection of well drilling locations.

2.7

Traditional Culture and Archaeology

The Hopi Reservations are a place rich in traditional cultural activity and archaeological sites. There

are numerous Hopi shrines, sacred springs, eagle and snake gathering areas not only on the Hopi

Reservation but throughout Hopi indigenous lands. Many of these places are still visited and used

during the Hopi ceremonial cycles to fulfill traditional obligations. There are approximately 2,500

recorded archaeological sites on the reservation ranging from scatters of ceramics and stone tools

to prehistoric villages. Hopi people have lived in this area for over a millennium.

Archaeological and cultural resources on the Hopi reservation encompass many sites and places that

are extremely valuable to Hopi culture and history. The Hopi view archaeological sites as footprints,

physical evidence, of indigenous occupation and believe that ancestral remains still physically and

spiritually inhabit those places. Just as important are other sites labeled Traditional Cultural

Properties (TCPs) such as petroglyph panels, religious shrines, resource collection areas, which are

considered living elements of Hopi culture and identity. Many Hopi clans and religious societies still

carry out responsibilities that center around archaeological sites and TCPs related to all Hopi

villages. Unfortunately the full breadth of archaeological sites and TCPs affiliated with Hopi

prehistory do not fall within the jurisdiction of Hopi stewardship and political control. The Hopi are

culturally affiliated with many of the prehistoric cultures which have been labeled as Anasazi,

Fremont, Sinagua, Mogollon, Hohokam, Salado, and others including Paleo-Indian remains being

currently researched and identified.

The Hopi Tribe, through the establishment of the Office of Cultural Preservation (CPO) in 1982,

works with four federal acts that address the protection of cultural properties on federal trust land:

the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1990, Archaeological

Resources Protection Act (ARPA) of 1976, American Antiquities Act of 1906, and the National Historic

Preservation Act of 1945. While not specifically designed to protect cultural resources, the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires archaeological surveys to be performed for projects

receiving federal funds, or requiring federal action. As a local measure, the Hopi Tribe enacted

Ordinance No. 26, the Ordinance for the Protection of Places and Objects of Sacred, Historical and

Scientific Interest on the Hopi Reservation in 1974. Ordinance No. 26 specifies its intent, which is:

To provide for the protection of places and objects of sacred, historical and scientific

interest on the Hopi Reservation; To provide a means of enforcing these protective

measures; and To provide for the licensing of all scientific and historical exploration

or excavation on the Reservation.

Although numerous, these protective measures do not address all aspects of cultural resource

protection. They each face significant obstacles in their implementation, through such limitations as

insufficient monitoring and tribal prosecution capabilities. Also, conflicts often occur when

protecting archaeological sites within the context of a living culture. A great number of issues

therefore face cultural and archaeological resources, both from within the tribal government and

external organizations.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Restoration of traditional Hopi architecture home in the

village of Shungopavi on Second Mesa. Homes such as

these represent great value to the community and continue

the Hopi tradition and identity.

2.8

Land Use

Four major categories of land use can be identified on the Hopi Reservations, these are agricultural

and range, recreational, industrial, and community mixed use which includes residential,

institutional, and commercial uses all located in clustered configurations locally referred to as village

and communities.

By far the most prevalent use of the Reservations trust land is agricultural and range land use,

approximately 1,565,590 acres. The principal activity on this land is livestock grazing. In support of

this use, the Hopi tribal government maintains a range management program with a maintenance

budget for range improvements and infrastructure. Other activities for agricultural and range land

include Hopi traditional corn agriculture, traditional gathering, low density rural residential (Navajo

home sites in Hopi Partitioned Lands), and infrastructure rights-of-way.

In 1992, the Hopi Tribal Council designated the Blue Canyon Special Management Area, an area of

approximately 36,860 acres located in the northwestern part of the reservation, dedicated to

outdoor recreation and conservation purposes. It is currently the subject of watershed rehabilitation

projects and traditional gathering.

There are four areas of industrial land use located on the tribal trust land. These are the Western

Peabody Coal Mine lease located in the northeastern part of the Main Reservation, the solid waste

facility on the main reservation, and the Hopi Winslow Property. These three areas total

approximately 6,290 acres. Another area of industrial use (unmapped) is the former BIA dump

located in the Moenkopi District near the Moenkopi villages.

The community mixed use category, approximately 14,600 acres, consists of areas of residential,

commercial and public facilities development. It is within these areas that the bulk of the Hopi

resident population lives. Public service facilities, specifically the Hopi Tribal government complex,

the Hopi Veterans Memorial Center, Hopi Wellness and Conference Center, the Hopi Jr/Sr High

School, and new IHS ambulatory health care center are just outside the community areas.

Contemporary Hopi people, like their ancestors, continue to live in the high desert of the Colorado

Plateau of northeastern Arizona. While they retain many of their traditions particularly their

religious beliefs and ceremonies, their modern life has changed in many dramatic ways from the

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

traditional Hopi life of just one hundred years ago. The twelve contemporary villages and

communities reflect a growth in community settlement patterns. Instead of living in highly compact,

multi-story pueblos, many Hopi families now live in single family detached houses laid out in cul-desac subdivisions. Many families, particularly in the First Mesa area, have moved from the mesa tops

onto the lower flood plains and valleys. Many modern Hopi participate in the local and regional cash

economy as well as grow crops and herd livestock for household consumption. A tribal constitution

was adopted in 1936 and under its authority a tribal government was formed. Several villages have

adopted elected forms of government to replace their former traditional oligarchies and others have

not. Most Hopi people have come to understand the benefits and conveniences of the modern

world with domestic water and wastewater systems, electricity, telephones, automobiles and other

forms of technology. These are but a few of the changes that have occurred over the past hundred

years and they point in the direction of continual change as the Hopi move into the second

millennium of occupation on the high desert mesas of the Colorado Plateau.

Historic Land Use

The Hopi people, like their ancestors, have a longstanding agrarian way of life and developed a

unique form of farming the arid lands that continues to sustain them. Since their ancestral

occupation of the Greater Southwest and the local Hopi region, the Hopi brought with them a set of

domesticated crops and farming methods that were adapted to the arid lands, ephemeral washes

and soils to ensure an annual sustainable crop harvest. To complement these domestic crops was

the knowledge of plant gathering, hunting and trapping wildlife resources, manufacturing

construction materials, medicinal needs and other socio-cultural developments that formed the

nexus of Hopi villages and their survival. The local ecosystems made available a variety of resources

to be found along with more distant areas such as the ponderosa pine forests of the San Francisco

Peaks area about eighty miles to the west. Life on the Colorado Plateau necessitated the use of even

distant regional ecosystems and a large land base had provided the Hopi people with access to

resources to continue their way of life and customs. Beyond farming within the lower floodplains

and gardening the mesa tops and terraces, a large regional trade network of relationships with

Eastern Pueblos (Zuni, Jemez, Rio Grande Pueblos, etc.) in what is now New Mexico, Hualapai and

Havasupai near the Grand Canyon, Southern Paiute and other tribes formed an economy that the

Hopi participated in and benefited from.

The local farming tradition is controlled by village traditional governments with village boundaries

generally agreed to along with some resource collection boundaries. These village land use practices

continue to exist into contemporary times.

The arrival of European and Old World explorers and settlers brought in another system of Spanish

colonialism which was ended with the Pueblo Revolt of 1680 and subsequent conflicts with Spanish

missionaries and conquistadores. They were driven from the Hopi region and never re-established

rule over the Hopi villages again. Many productive tools and crops were brought by this Spanish and

later Euro-American contact and trade. These have been added to the repertoire of the Hopi

farmers and also began another form of economy and subsistence with livestock herds and work

animals.

2.9

Public Infrastructure

Reservation infrastructure development and infrastructure land uses, with the exception of roads

and range improvements for livestock, tend to be located in association with community mixed land

use areas. Most village and community settlements have some public utilities—water, wastewater,

electricity, and phone. Coal, wood, and propane are used for heating and cooking. Private utility

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

companies provide electricity, propane, and telephone service. A number of homes have solar

power. Water and wastewater systems were developed with federal assistance in cooperation with

villages and communities which in turn operate and maintain them. Despite the progress made,

some villages still do not have water and wastewater systems in place including electricity and

telephone.

This limited network of developed public service infrastructure, especially reliable electrical supply,

is perceived as severely constraining to both economic development and new housing on the

reservations. The only sources of electrical power are provided by Arizona Public Service from the

Cholla Power Plant in Joseph City, AZ. Another source serving the Yu Wehloo Pahki (Spider Mound)

Community and several residents in the Teesto area is provided by the Navajo Utility Authority

(NTUA).

The existing infrastructure systems are not without problems. Water and wastewater service within

villages is not comprehensive, and most villages systems are in dire need of upgrading. Many water

systems cannot meet village needs, and most village wastewater system lagoons are poorly sited

and severely overloaded. Septic systems are still a prevalent mode of wastewater treatment on the

reservation, even in and around village areas.

There is currently a water contamination issue relating to high levels of Arsenic in Keams Canyon,

First Mesa and Second Mesa, which has caused the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to

enforce compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Regulations on the Bureau of Indian Affairs-Hopi

Agency and the villages. To meet compliance, Reverse Osmosis (RO) systems have been installed

and bottled water is distributed for human consumption.

To remedy this water problem, the Hopi-Tribe Water Resource Program and Indian Health ServiceOffice of Environmental Health have implemented the Hopi Arsenic Mitigation Project (HAMP),

which entails the drilling of two (2) N-aquifer wells and water to be piped to the First and Second

Mesa villages, and to Keams Canyon.

2.10

Emergency Medical Services

The emergency medical services are provided by the Hopi Emergency Medical Services. Hopi EMS is

a full-time tribal EMS program based at the Hopi Health Care Center just west of Polacca. Hopi EMS

operates from the Health Care Center and the Wildland Fire Building (Paawiki) located at

Kykotsmovi Village to cover both the west and east areas of the Hopi Land, Tewa village, Spider

Mound Community and several outlying Navajo Nation communities.

The Hopi EMS program provides both Basic and Advanced Life Support pre-hospital emergency care

along with other services including vehicle extrication and high angle mesa rescue.

Currently the Hopi EMS program employs 10 basic EMTs and 10 paramedics, all of who hold local

(Arizona Department of Health Services, Bureau of EMS & Trauma Systems) and national (National

Registry of Emergency Medical Technicians) certifications. The Hopi EMS Basic EMTs receive their

medical control through the Hopi Health Care Center while the Paramedics receive theirs through

the Flagstaff Medical Center Pre-Hospital Care Program. The Hopi EMS program runs with 2-3 fully

stocked ambulances staffed by ALS/BLS crews for 911 calls and inter-facility transports. The Hopi

EMS is dispatched through the BIA/LES 911 dispatch system and is under the Department of Public

Safety & Emergency Services of the Hopi Tribe.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2.11

2015

Development Trends

The Tribe has developed and the Hopi Tribal Council has adopted the Hopi Tribal Council of the Hopi

the Strategic Land Stewardship; an Integrated Resource Management Plan for the Hopi Tribe 2001.

Both of these plans reflect the desire of the Tribal government to promote the Hopi economy,

community growth quality infrastructure and the overall general welfare of the Reservation in a

culturally and environmentally sensitive manner guided by Hopi values.

The plans provide guidance and actions that will help achieve the planning goals and objectives that

are important to the environmentally sensitive and quality development of the Reservation for the

future of the Hopi Tribe. The 2015 Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan is conducive to the efforts of

assessing the vulnerability of the Reservation to hazard events and will provide another tool to

Tribal land use planning in determining quality development.

Any development of Tribal lands over the past several years has been guided by the oversight of the

Tribal Council. The Tribe has been proactive in mitigation planning and will continue to do so for

future development. The hazard profiles contain specific discussions regarding mitigation

opportunities or perceived requirements regarding possible future growth and development of

Tribal lands.

The Hopi Tribe values keeping the land in its pristine natural environment. It is unlikely that the tribe

will experience significant grow in population and developed areas.

2.12

Cultural and Sacred Sites

In the previous Plan, there was little discussion of the tribe’s cultural and sacred sites. Therefore, the

discussion begins here with the Planning Team describing these sites in basic form, their upkeep and

where additional information can be found.

Hopi Ordinance #26 provides for the protection of places and objects of sacred, historical and

scientific interest on the Hopi Reservation. The Hopi Cultural Preservation Office sponsors The Hopi

Cultural Advisory Team which is comprised of a group of tribal members. The team makes annual

visits to all significant cultural and sacred sites to pay their respects as well as maintain and provide

continued protection. Those sites will not be discussed in detail in this Plan, however can be found

at the Hopi Cultural Preservation Office.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

SECTION 3: PLANNING PROCESS

3.1

Section Changes



This entire section was reformatted for improved clarity.



A ‘Program Integration’ subsection was added. This requirement was not addressed in the

Tribe’s previous Plan.

3.2

Points of Contact

Primary Contact:

Public Health Emergency Preparedness

Velleda R. Sidney

The Hopi Tribe

P.O. Box 123

Kykotsmovi, AZ 86039

Office Phone: (928) 734-3664

Email: vsidney@hopi.nsn.us

Secondary Contact:

Emergency Management Coordinator

Paul V. Saufkie

The Hopi Tribe

P.O. Box 123

Kykotsmovi, AZ 86039

Office Phone: (928) 734-3663

Email: psaufkie@hopi.nsn.us

The authorities responsible for adoption of the Plan include:

3.3



Herman G. Honanie, Chairman



Alfred Lomahquahu, Jr., Vice-Chairman



Hopi Tribal Council

Planning Team and Activities

At the beginning of the update process, the Primary Point of Contact identified potential members

for the Planning Team by extending invitations to, all Indian Tribal government department leads,

tribal and public and private organizations and businesses, local utility companies and regional,

federal and state organizations. These agencies included those such as: Hopi government

departments and agencies; BIA agencies, CERT Teams, all Hopi villages/communities via their

Community Service Administrator, the Hopi Health Care Center and the AZ Dept of Emergency and

Military Affairs.

There was a good response to the invitations and the Planning Team members are listed below and

those who participated in this update as well as the previous version of this Plan are indicated in

bold print.

Table 3-1: Planning Team

Name

Title

Agency/Organization

Role/Responsibilities

Herman Honanie

Hopi Chairman

Office of Chairman

Approve Executive Orders & major

mitigation projects

Velleda Sidney

PHEP, Coordinator

Hopi Public Health Emergency

Preparedness

Plan update lead.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Betty Poley

Supervisor Geodesist

Land Information Systems

Keep this plan updated with maps,

tables and graphs.

Paul V. Saufkie

Dept. of Public Safety & EM

Services – EM Coordinator

Assist in making revisions to the

Plan & quarterly updates.

Edison J. Tu’tsi

Director

Hopi Lands

Keep this plan updated with tribal

lands pertaining to the hazards.

Wendell Honanie,

Superintendent

Hopi BIA

Keep this plan updated with BIA

policies.

Lance Honeyestewa

Paramedic Supervisor

Hopi EMS

Provide hazard and response

information.

Laverne Dallas

Program Manager

Hopi Dept. of Health Services

Provide information on impacts to

health from hazards.

Clayton Honyumptewa

Director DNR

Dept. of Natural Resources (DNR) Oversee Plan update.

Sam Yazzie

BIA Wildland Fire

Provide information on wind

speeds and wildfire conditions.

Michael Poleahla

Maintenance Technician

Spider Mound Community

Provide information on issues and

damage impacts within the specific

community.

Claude Pahona

Maintenance Technician

Village of Tewa

Provide information on issues and

damage impacts within the specific

community.

Carlene Tenakhongva

Staff Assistant

Chairman’s Office

Keep the Chairman apprised of the

plan update process.

Fred Shupla

Hopi Office of Community

Planning & Economic

Development

Provide information from other

planning mechanisms that help

guide this Plan update.

Roger Tungovia

Director

Dept. of Public Safety and

Emergency Services

Oversee Plan update.

Hazard mitigation planning for the Indian Tribe began in July 2014, with the first Planning Team

Meeting. An overview of the current Plan was provided. The current hazards were analyzed as well

as others that threaten the reservation. The hazards were also ranked and prioritized as well as new

hazards added. Assignments were discussed and were sent to the Team after the meeting.

To better understand the mitigation planning process, representatives from the Hopi Tribe attended

a Hazard Mitigation and THIRA Workshop as well as FEMA’s G393 Mitigation for Emergency

Managers two-day course in October 2014.

The Primary Point of Contact provided mitigation plan update presentations to the Hopi Emergency

Response Team (HERT) at their monthly meetings. Some of the HERT members also serve on the

mitigation planning team.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

In January and April of 2015 the state planner assisting the tribe on this Plan, met with the Tribe’s

Mitigation Planning team and worked on compiling updated material in the Plan. At that time,

detailed work of developing the various elements of the Plan by reaching out to specific subject

matter experts in various areas was performed. These areas included: hazard profile, identification

of capabilities, and mitigation strategy development and plan maintenance. Planning

documentation such as agendas, minutes and sign-in sheets are in the Appendices of this Plan.

3.4

Public and Stakeholder Involvement

The term “public” is defined by the Tribe as, “All people that reside or visit within the exterior

boundaries of the Hopi Reservation or any new acquired lands”. Members of the community, not

specifically participating on the planning team or employed by the community, can prove to be great

assets to the hazard mitigation planning process. The Planning Team employed the following

strategy to solicit public and stakeholder involvement and input to the planning process:



Newspaper article was placed in the Hopi Tutuveni, December 6, 2014. The article explained

the plan update process, the hazards being examined and the benefits of having a plan. It

also gave contact information for questions or input.



Bulletins explaining the planning process and need for a Plan were posted on March 9, 2015

at six locations among the villages across the Reservation. With the bulletins, a copy of the

current Plan was placed there along with a notebook for questions and comments.

 There was one comment on the current Plan regarding rockfalls.

The Planning Team employed the following strategy to solicit public and stakeholder involvement

and input to the Plan during the draft review period prior to submission to FEMA:



A newspaper article was published in the Hopi Tutuveni on August 4, 2015. The article

explained the importance of the plan and the most significant threats to the tribe. It also

provided information on where to review the plan and contact information for

comment/input.



Bulletins and printed plans were placed at six locations across the Reservations for the

period of July 20-August 17, 2015. This provided the public the opportunity to review and

comment on the Plan update draft.

 There were no comments on the Plan update draft.

Copies of these documents and any comments, questions or input can be found in the Appendices

of this Plan.

3.5

Program Integration

The Hopi Tribe encourages utilizing existing information and activities to integrate data, mitigation

strategies and other resources that support the mitigation goals of this Plan. The Tribe believes this

practice will ensure we are working toward common goals and assist in the effective

implementation of this Plan as well as other plans.

Below is a list of current tribal resources either related to, referenced in, and/or parallel to the Plan.

As appropriate, the Tribe will also reference the Plan when developing new plans to associate the

Tribe’s overall mitigation goals.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 3-2: Existing Plans, Studies, Reports

Plan/Study Name

Hopi Wildland Fire

Management Plan

Hopi Integrated Woodlands

Management Plan for the

Hopi Reservation

Hopi Emergency Response

Plan

Hopit Potskwaniat (Hopi

Tribal Consolidated Strategic

Plan)

Hopi Tustsqua Makiwa’yta

(Hopi Land Stewardship An

Integrated Plan for the Hopi

Reservation)

Hopi Tunatya’at (Community

and Economic Plan)

Ordinance #26 – Protection of

places and objects of sacred,

historical and scientific

interest on the Hopi

Reservation

Ordinance #47 – The Hopi

Tribe Woodland Ordinance

Description

Integration Characteristics

Date

Completed or

Implemented

BIA Wildland Fire Mgmt 2005 Adopted

Office

by Tribe

Hopi Dept .of Natural

Resources, USDA

Forest Service and BIA

2006

Plan/Study Author

Defines what the BIA Wildland Fire Agency will respond to and manage fires on the Reservations.

Sets management direction for the Hopi Indian Reservation woodland forest. The Plan is specific

to woodland forest management as well as other natural resources with the forest ecosystem.

Guides the proper protection of environment and land.

Defines how the responders and response teams will respond to disaster events. The plan

outlines the intended protocols for managing disaster incidents.

The Plan helps to define what the hazards are that most threaten the Reservation.

Defines the vision for the Tribe’s future and addresses specific needs to promote the welfare of

the Hopi and Tewa people. It also provides a means to a better quality of life and provides a

framework for organizing our efforts.

Provides direction for all planning mechanisms to follow to ensure cohesive movement forward.

Defines the rules by which the Hopi are to utilize natural resources and provide conservation

efforts for environmental health.

Provides guidelines by which to use and protect the Hopi natural resources against hazards.

A guide that sets the standards for land and environmental use based upon Hopi values.

Will help ensure minimal development in hazard-prone areas.

Provides a means of enforcing these protective measures; and provide for the licensing of all

scientific and historical exploration or excavation on the Reservation.

Guides information to use when looking at potential projects that will protect the cultural and

sacred sites and assets.

Provides and adequate and flexible system for the protection and conversation of the woodland

resource on the Hopi Reservation while providing an opportunity to utilize the resource. It

regulates the taking and transporting of forest products, prescribes enforcement sanctions and

Hopi Emergency

Response Team (HERT)

2005

Hopi Tribe

2011

Dept. of Natural

Resources

Community and

Economic Development

Office

2001

2000

Cultural Preservation

Office (CPO)

1974

Hopi Tribe

1993

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

establishes a woodland fund for rehabilitation and conservation efforts.

Ordinance #48 – The Hopi

Tribe Wildlife Ordinance

Hopi Drought Contingency

Plan

Emergency Action Plan for

Pasture Canyon Dam

Hopi Tribe Watershed Study

Threat and Hazard,

Identification and Risk

Assessment (THIRA)

The purpose is to ensure the proper management and protection of the Hopi Wildlife Resource

while providing the opportunity for the Hopi people to utilize the resource.

Purpose of Plan is to assist the Tribe with early drought warning, preparedness, mitigation and

responsiveness.

Helps define drought issues and mitigation goals.

Assists the Tribe, BIA and others in safeguarding lives and reducing damage to property in the

event of an emergency with the dam. Identifies roles and responsibilities that will help

communities in planning emergency response activities. Plan to guide the emergency response

notification and operation procedures that will be implemented to save lives, reduce damages to

property and structures and minimize impacts to the environment during emergency situations

affecting Pasture Canyon Dam.

Hopi Tribe

1993

Hopi Tribe and

contractor

2000

BIA, U.S. Dept of

Interior, DIA, Div of

Water & Power

2012

Assists with understanding the flood hazard as it pertains to the tribe.

Hopi Tribe

Designed to inform the community of and provide an understanding of risks and estimate

capability requirements.

Hopi Tribe (In

development)

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

SECTION 4: RISK ASSESSMENT

4.1

4.2

Section Changes/Notes



The hazard of Severe Wind has been added to this Plan.



Note: when data or information deficiencies exist in this Plan, it is likely attributed to lack of

resources/funding. Those and other deficiencies related to this Plan will be addressed as

resources and funding become available.

Risk Assessment

Planning Area

The planning area referred to in this Plan is described in the Community Description section. The risk

assessment for the Tribe was performed for the entire Reservation, with the information input and

development being accomplished by the Planning Team and the appropriate subject matter experts,

when necessary.

Hazard Identification/Profiles

The hazards identified in the previous plan, Drought, Flood, Landslide/Rock Fall, and Winter Storm

have been analyzed and updated and now includes Severe Wind. Those considered but not profiled

in the previous Plan are: Power/Utility Failures, Fuel/Resource Shortages, Hazardous Materials

Incidents, Transportation Accidents, and Explosion/Fires were found to not be of significant enough

nature to the Tribe for inclusion in this Plan. Dam Failure was carefully considered regarding Pasture

Canyon Dam near the Village of Moenkopi. The Planning Team determined there was not a

significant enough history of breach or failure to warrant including it in this Plan, however it will be

considered at each revision of this Plan. The Tribe’s Department of Land Operations maintains an

emergency action plan for the tribe’s only dam.

Information acquired from the identification process above was also utilized in determining the

vulnerability of the Reservations assessment areas to each hazard. This information included the

probability, the likelihood of the severity, the warning time, and the duration of the hazard

situation. The estimated relative levels of vulnerability for each hazard assessment area were based

on the following factors:

 Probability of damage resulting from a hazard event;



Magnitude and/or severity of the hazard



Warning time prior to the arrival of the hazard



Duration of the hazard on the Hopi Reservation

The relative probability of hazard occurrence (span between hazards) is variable and mostly derived

at this point from local historical accounts and emergency action events. The current vulnerability

assessment is aided by mapping done previously by the Hopi Tribal programs that lends itself to

illustrating the local understanding and prioritization of vulnerable areas.

2010 Plan Hazards

Drought

Table 4-1: Hazard Identification

2014 Plan Hazards

Drought

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

Flood

Landslide/Rockfall

Winter Storm

2015

Flood

Landslide/Rockfall

Severe Wind

Winter Storm

Below is a listing of the most recent hazard events and their impacts on the reservation. This

information was provided by the Tribal Office of Emergency Management.

Table 4-2: Executive Order Declarations

Declaration Date

Cause

Damages

June 26, 2014

Extreme Fire Danger

State of Extreme Fire Danger

None

March 7, 2014

Protection Of Livestock/Calves

Control of Livestock And Grazing; Ordinance 43, Section 108

None

August 13, 2013

For Hopi Reservation And Surrounding Areas

Due to Heavy Rain; Rock And Mudslides, Flooding & Damages

to Water & Sewer Systems

$100,000

May 28, 2013

Extreme Fire Danger

State of Extreme Fire

None

January 16, 2013

Severe Cold Weather Created Water Emergencies For First

Mesa Consolidated Villages And Hopi Villages

Due To Severe Cold Freezing Weather

$60,000

September 12, 2012

For Upper And Lower Moenkopi Villages And Surrounding

Hopi Reservations

Heavy Rain Storms

$15,000

July 12, 2012

Extreme Drought Conditions and Illegal Water Hauling

State of Extreme Drought

$10,000

June 11, 2012

Extreme Fire Danger

High winds pose extreme wildfire threats

None

January 21, 2010

Emergency Situation and Natural Disaster Area

Severe Winter Storms, Muddy Conditions, Damaged Roads

$358,000

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Hazard Ranking

For the purpose of ranking the identified hazards in this Plan, the Planning Team utilized the

Calculated Risk Priority Index (CPRI), which is a tool used to assess hazards based on a system that

considers probability, magnitude/severity, warning time, and duration. The CPRI value is obtained

by assigning varying degrees of risk to each of the four categories for each hazard, and then

calculating a value based on a weighting scheme. The CPRI uses the weighing criteria below.

Table 4-3: Calculated Priority Risk Index (CPRI)

CPRI

Category

Degree of Risk

Level ID

Unlikely

Possible

Probability

Likely

Highly Likely

Negligible

Limited

Magnitude/

Severity

Critical

Catastrophic

Warning

Time

Duration

Less than 6 hrs

6 to 12 hrs

12 to 24 hrs

More than 24 hrs

Less than 6 hrs

Less than 24 hrs

Description

 Extremely rare with no documented history of occurrences or events.

 Annual probability of less than 0.001.

 Rare occurrences with at least one documented or anecdotal historic

event.

 Annual probability that is between 0.01 and 0.001.

 Occasional occurrences with at least two or more documented historic

events.

 Annual probability that is between 0.1 and 0.01.

 Frequent events with a well documented history of occurrence.

 Annual probability that is greater than 0.1.

 Negligible property damages (less than 5% of critical and non-critical

facilities and infrastructure).

 Injuries or illnesses are treatable with first aid, no deaths.

 Negligible quality of life lost.

 Shut down of critical facilities for less than 24 hours.

 Slight property damages (greater than 5% and less than 25% of critical and

non-critical facilities and infrastructure).

 Injuries or illnesses do not result in permanent disability, no deaths.

 Moderate quality of life lost.

 Critical facilities shut down for more than 1 day and less than 1 week.

 Moderate property damages (greater than 25% and less than 50% of

critical and non-critical facilities and infrastructure).

 Injuries or illnesses result in permanent disability, at least 1 death.

 Critical facilities shut down for more than 1 week & less than 1 month.

 Severe property damages (greater than 50% of critical and non-critical

facilities and infrastructure).

 Injuries or illnesses result in permanent disability & multiple deaths.

 Shut down of critical facilities for more than 1 month.

Self explanatory.

Index

Value

Assigned

Weighting

Factor

45%

30%

15%

10%

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

Less than 1 week

More than 1 week

Self explanatory.

2015

The table below summarizes the CPRI values for the hazards identified in this Plan.

Hazard

Drought

Flooding/Flash Flood

Severe Wind

Wildfires

Table 4-4: CPRI Values by Hazard

Magnitude

Probability

Severity

Warning Time

Likely

Limited

24+ hours

Likely

Limited

6-12 hours

Likely

Limited

6-12 hours

Likely

Critical

6-12 hours

Duration

More than one week

Less than 24 hours

More than 24 hours

More than one week

CPRI

2.50

2.60

3.10

Note: Maximum value is 4.00

Vulnerability Assessment

The vulnerability assessment builds upon the previously developed hazard information by

identifying the community assets and development trends and intersecting them with the hazard

profiles to assess the potential amount of damage that could be caused by each hazard event.

Some of the information may have changed slightly, however due to minimal changes in population

and development there were no significant changes to record in this Plan. For the Plan, the

following tasks were performed as a part of the vulnerability assessment and can be found in this

section’s hazard profiles.

Asset Inventory

For the purpose of this Plan, an asset is defined as:

Any natural or human-caused feature that has value, including, but not limited to people; buildings;

infrastructure like bridges, roads, and sewer and water systems; lifelines like electricity and

communication resources; or environmental, cultural, or recreational features like parks, dunes,

wetlands, or landmarks.

Assets are identified by either critical or non-critical facilities and infrastructure. Critical facilities

and infrastructure are those systems within the reservation whose incapacity or destruction would

have a debilitating impact on the Tribe’s ability to recover following a major disaster, or to defend

the people and structures of the Tribe from further hazards. To identify facilities and infrastructure

for this Plan, the Tribe utilized the following criteria:

Telecommunications Infrastructure

Transportation Networks

Electrical Power Systems

Water Supply Systems

Gas and Oil Facilities

Government Services

Banking and Finance Institutions

Emergency Services

Other assets such as public libraries, schools, museums, parks, recreational facilities, historic

buildings or sites, churches, residential and/or commercial subdivisions, apartment complexes, and

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

so forth, are classified as non-critical facilities and infrastructure, as they are not necessarily

“critical”. They are however, very important to the Tribe and critical and non-critical should not be

interpreted as meaning important and non-important.

The Planning Team performed a detailed asset inventory including collecting data such as the

facility’s physical location, description, and replacement cost. Those data sets are compiled in a

separate document that, for security reasons, will not be generally distributed to the public. The

asset inventory was performed in the planning process for the prior Plan and will remain in the

updated plan as there have been no significant changes.

Table 4-5: Critical and Non-Critical Facilities

Facility Type

Indian Tribe Totals

Critical Facilities and Infrastructure

Telecommunications Infrastructure

Electrical Power Systems

Gas and Oil Facilities

Banking and Finance Institutions

Transportation Networks

Water Supply Systems

Governmental Services

Emergency Services

Non-Critical Facilities and Infrastructure

Cultural

Government Facilities

The table below summarizes the total replacement costs for Indian Tribe. Replacement costs were

estimated using insurance and/or current market value estimates. Since there is unlikely to be

damage to buildings as a result of drought, that hazard was not included in the analysis.

Table 4-6: Estimated Replacement Costs

Community

Residential

Potential

Economic

Impact (x$1000)

Commercial

Building Count

Industrial

Building Count

$8,865

$4,435

$13,300

$9,300

4,650

$13,950

Total Building

& Content

Exposure

(x$1000)

Total Estimated

Loss (x$1000)

Residential

Content Value

(x$1000)

Tribe Totals

*Tribe

Totals

Flood

Total Estimated

Replacement Cost

$9,360,510

Residential

Building Value

(x$1000)

HAZUS

Summary

Percent of

All Facilities

100%

Residential

Building Count

Indian Tribe Total

Number of

Facilities

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

High Risk

*High Risk

Wildfire

High Risk

Medium Risk

2015

$23

$2,800

$12

$1,400

$35

$4,200

$35

$4,200

$210

$2,638

$6,227

$1,320

$3,115

$3,958

$9,342

$3,958

$9,342

$792

$467

Loss Estimations

In addressing the impacts of hazard events, vulnerability and losses, The Hopi Office of Facilities

Management & Risk Management (OFRMS) retains a listing of tribal buildings & property that

represents buildings currently utilized as general office functions Village Community Centers, and

other buildings & property received from OFRMS reflects a 15% overall increase in replacement

costs.

For potential loss estimates, the analysis was performed for the previous Plan and replacement

costs were based on current Consumer Price Index (CPI) rates that are subject to change. Specialized

systems and non-existing infrastructure utilities will increase cost, based on location and regulatory

compliance.

The OFRMS has limited information from past experiences in relationship to actual cost for repairs

based on records data from 1997 when CPI monies became available including storm related

incidents that impact both mechanical and structural repairs.

The average costs of determining potential losses to Hopi Reservations village and community

residential structures was derived from the HUD Hopi Tribal Housing Authority average construction

costs for the Hopi Reservations. These potential loss estimates are based on replacement costs for

structures within the hazard areas and are understood that they may or may not be close to actual

replacement costs as there are many variables that can affect each individual structure.

Various records for residents of the Hopi villages and communities are derived from US Census 2000

records as well as Bureau of Indian Affairs Police census records.

The value of religious / non-profit and village government structures was derived from average

renovation and repair records.

Like other parts of the Risk Assessment/Vulnerability Analysis, the loss estimations were not

updated for this Plan as there has been minimal population growth or development within the tribal

boundaries.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3

Hazard Profiles

4.3.1

Drought

2015

Introduction/History

Drought is a normal, recurrent feature of climate, although many erroneously consider it a rare and

random event. It occurs in virtually all climatic zones, but its characteristics vary significantly from

one region to another. Drought is a temporary aberration; it differs from aridity, which is restricted

to low rainfall regions and is a permanent feature of climate.

Drought is an insidious hazard of nature. Although it has scores of definitions, it originates from a

deficiency of precipitation over an extended period of time, usually a season or more. This

deficiency results in a water shortage for some activity, group, or environmental sector. Drought

should be considered relative to some long-term average condition of balance between

precipitation and evapotranspiration (i.e., evaporation + transpiration) in a particular area, a

condition often perceived as “normal”. It is also related to the timing (i.e., principal season of

occurrence, delays in the start of the rainy season, occurrence of rains in relation to principal crop

growth stages) and the effectiveness (i.e., rainfall intensity, number of rainfall events) of the rains.

Other climatic factors such as high temperature, high wind, and low relative humidity are often

associated with it in many regions of the world and can significantly aggravate its severity.

Depending on its severity, a drought can have widespread impact on the human & natural

environment and economy of the Hopi Reservations. These impacts are significant especially in such

an arid environment and can be seen in short and long term losses. The Hopi Drought Contingency

Plan provides a profile, vulnerability analysis and potential losses as well as mitigation, monitoring &

maintenance, review and funding sources.

The Hopi Drought Contingency Plan provides an analysis and reports on precipitation indices.

Drought Summary Based on 24-month SPI and SSWI, a regional indication identifies drought

conditions for the Keams Canyon station located in the eastern portion of the Main Reservation

providing readings of drought beginning in 1946, 1950, 1954, 1962, 1972, 1975, and 1989 of variable

durations. A look at regional drought indicators may also present locations and information that

would be pertinent to conditions on the reservation as Flagstaff, Tuba City, Ganado and Winslow

stations are located within a 90 mile radius of the Hopi Reservations. The drought reporting from

the Keams Canyon station on the Main Hopi Reservation for the most part coincides with La Niňa

weather patterns seen throughout the State. A Hopi Drought Plan Chart of Spatial Patterns of

Drought illustration also represents our latest drought conditions beginning in 1996 through 2004.

All of these illustrations and methods can be found in the Hopi Drought Monitoring Plan as part of

the Hopi Drought Contingency Plan. No updated information available.

Official declarations and responses to drought from the tribal government are listed in the following

table and highlight a more recent trend toward recognizing and mitigating the onset and impacts of

drought. Such as livestock reduction and water hauling restrictions.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 4-7: Drought Related Executive Order Declarations

Declaration Date

Cause

Damages

Sept 2014

Extreme Fire Danger due to below average

precipitation, severe drought

Burning restrictions

None

May 2013

Extreme Fire Danger due to below average

precipitation, severe drought

Burning restrictions

None

July 2012

Extreme Drought and Illegal Water Hauling

$10,000

October 2012

Extreme Fire Danger due to below average

precipitation, severe drought

Burning restrictions

None

June 2012

Extreme Fire Danger due to below average

precipitation, severe drought

Burning restrictions

None

July 2009

Extreme Fire Danger due to below average

precipitation, severe drought

Burning restrictions

None

Vulnerability

The Hopi Tribe, as a sovereign nation, is responsible for protecting and managing Tribal natural

resources in accordance with established cultural and economic values. Reduction of the already

limited water supply, over an extended period of time, could result in devastating impacts to the

Hopi people. This vulnerability assessment has been derived by determining the current status of

water supply and use, and projecting future demands on the water resources as found in the Hopi

Drought Contingency Plan. The Hopi Drought Monitoring Plan Table, Assessment of drought

Vulnerability, provides characteristics of various drought categories and their degree of

vulnerability. The potential risk reduction actions are also part of this table. Our planning effort has

only reaffirmed the importance of this Plan’s continuing inclusion of drought hazard identification

and mitigation for this arid environment. The current planning process has provided us with a

prioritization of vulnerable areas as follows that draws on the information found in the Hopi

Drought Plan and again, the plan vulnerability assessment provides more detail along with

mitigation.

Priority Group 1: Primary Hopi Villages and Communities



First Mesa Villages: Walpi, Sichomovi, Tewa and Polacca



Keams Canyon Community



Second Mesa Villages: Shungopavi, Sipaulovi, Mishongnovi



Second Mesa Community

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan



Kykotsmovi Village



Third Mesa Villages: Oraibi, Hotevilla and Bacavi



Moenkopi District Hopi Villages: Upper Moenkopi and Lower Moenkopi

2015

These villages and communities provide the primary source of potable drinking water and serve the

needs of the Hopi population. Vulnerability is high in terms of distribution infrastructure

inadequacies that are exacerbated during drought. These villages serve as key areas for water in any

situation and drought demands readily exhibit inadequacies that may not be remedied during

normal years. These villages also have local surface outcropping springs that come from the

sandstone aquifers and are the historic sources of water for Hopi villages and are valuable assets.

These springs are used for cultural, agricultural and domestic needs and are highly vulnerable to

drought and can go dry in drought years. The following Existing Hopi Public Water Supply Systems

illustration which does not take into account the new or non-tribal maintained water services in

Yuweeloo Pahki, Keams Canyon, Hotevilla, and Bacavi.

The following is an excerpt from the Hopi Strategic Land Use and Development Plan, describing the

Tribal Hydrologist assessment of water resources on Hopi:

Current per capita water use is estimated to be 40 gallons per person per day, or a reservation

demand of 400 acre-feet per year. It is expected that this demand will increase to between 160 to

200 gallons per day as running water, modern appliances and light industry become more

widespread across the reservation. Current projections estimate that both the increase in total

gallons used per person and the growing population will create an annual demand of 3,800 acre-feet

by 2020. This demand which includes both municipal and agricultural use is an almost 10-fold

increase in water consumption in 20 years. Existing water supplies available on the Hopi Reservation

cannot meet this projected demand.

Priority Group 2: Outlying Communities and Residences



Yuweeloo Pahki Charter Community



Hopi Partitioned Lands: Hopi Home sites & Navajo Accommodation Agreement Home sites

The outlying community of Yuweeloo Pahki is currently installing a new domestic water well and

pump distribution system although water quality and treatment is still an issue for this as well as

other established primary village systems. Water hauling and access to water sources provides a

vulnerability situation if they are forced to compete with livestock and agricultural demands on

domestic water systems.

Priority Group 3: Hopi District Six and Hopi Partitioned Lands Range Units



Livestock & Agriculture



Surface and Groundwater Infrastructure

The major land use of the Hopi Reservations is livestock grazing in various range units across the

Reservations. Vegetation and water resources to support this economic activity are vulnerable to

drought. A major focus of the Hopi Drought Contingency Plan was the cost estimation of drought

impacts and mitigation for water resources and infrastructure supporting livestock grazing. The

Hopi Drought Plan Table, Range Unit Carrying Capacity, Usability and Watering Facilities and Hopi

Drought Range Well Locations Map help to illustrate the vulnerable areas in this section and current

infrastructure.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 4-8: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Drought

Assessment Area

Estimated

Vulnerability

Priority Yuhweeloh Pahki

Group Charter Community High

Hopi Partitioned

Lands Residences

Priority Keams Canyon

Group Community

Number of

Structures

Public Water

System

Dependent on

High to Extreme Group 1, 2, &3

Structure

Losses

Contents

Losses

Location

Comment

Costs and mitigation

projects are detailed in Eastern Reservation

the Hopi Drought

Outer Area of

Contingency Plan

Reservations

BIA & Public Water

System & Springs

Eastern Reservation District Six

First Mesa Villages

of Walpi, Sichomovi

& Tewa

High

(2) Public

Water System &

Springs

District Six

Polacca Community High

Public Water

System

District Six below First

Mesa

High

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 4-8: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Drought

Assessment Area

Estimated

Vulnerability

Number of

Structures

Structure

Losses

Contents

Losses

Location

Comment

Second Mesa

Villages of

Shungopavi,

Sipaulovi &

Mishongnovi

High

Second Mesa

Community

High

Kykotsmovi Village

High

Public Water

System

District Six below Third

Mesa

Third Mesa Villages

of Oraibi, Hotevilla

and

Bacavi

High

(2) Public Water

System & Springs

District Six

Moenkopi District:

Upper & Lower

Moenkopi

Villages

Extreme

(2) Public

Water System &

Springs

Moenkopi District

Tribal Government

& Services Facilities

Low

(2) Public Water

Systems

Kykotsmovi & Other

Villages

Hopi Health Care

Center Complex &

EMS

Low

(3) Public

Water System &

Springs

District Six

District Six below

Second Mesa

Hopi Walpi Housing Low

First Mesa

Elementary School

Low

Priority

Group

Livestock &

Agriculture

High

8,000 Current

Livestock and

Animal Units

$4,398,400

Reservation-wide.

Estimated Capital

(Voluntary reduction Livestock Value @

in 2006 results:

$800.00 per head of

11,000 - 8,000)

livestock average

Livestock located in

Hopi Partitioned Lands

and District 6.

$550,000 Hopi Annual

Economic

Income from

Livestock &

Agriculture

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 4-8: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Drought

Assessment Area

Surface water,

Groundwater &

Other Agricultural

Infrastructure

Estimated

Vulnerability

Moderate

Number of

Structures

Range Unit

Fencing.

Windmill &

Infrastructure

(158) total.

Springs

(211) total.

Earthen Tanks

(556) total.

Structure

Losses

Contents

Losses

Range Unit

Fencing

$2,000-5,000 per mile.

Windmill &

Infrastructure

$75,000 each.

Earthen Tanks

Repair Costs

Location

Comment

Hopi Partitioned

Lands, District 6 and

Moenkopi District.

$900,000.00

Annual Tribal

Maintenance Budget.

See Appendix for

Tribal Windmill

Inventory.

The impact of drought on the Hopi Reservations has been detailed in the Hopi Drought Contingency

Plan. The Hopi Tribe will expand on the impact of drought as required during the update and plan

maintenance identified in the Drought Plan. This Plan will help to further refine and identify the

Reservation-wide impact of drought hazard events and will be aided by mitigation planning grant

funding to integrate these two documents.

Hopi Tribe Water Code

The instrument that is hereby referenced as the Hopi Tribe Water Code is made up of the following

documents:



Hopi Tribe Water Quality Standards



Wellhead Protection Manual



Standard Specification for Well Construction and Pump Installation

This Code was tribally adopted on October 14, 1997 with the passage of Tribal Council Resolution H107-97. These documents were developed in accordance with principles of sound water

management and protection, and incorporate conservation principles and practices in order to

protect the source water and producing water supply for the residents of the Hopi Reservation and

to safeguard health, resources, and property in the vicinity of existing and potential water supply

wells and springs (2010 WRP Director).

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.2

2015

Flooding

Introduction/History

Flooding on the Hopi Reservations is limited to storm events that bring significant rainfall and

precipitation resulting in storm water run-off that fills the ephemeral washes and natural drainage

channels of the Hopi Reservations.

There are three major precipitation zones across the reservation, which bisect diagonally from

northwest to southeast. The lowest precipitation zone, which receives between six and eight inches

annually, is found in the southwestern corner and western reaches of Moenkopi Wash on the Main

Reservation, and across most of the Moenkopi District. The most prevalent precipitation zone,

which receives between eight and ten inches annually, extends in a northwest to southeast band

across the middle of the Main Reservation. Areas receiving between ten and twelve inches per year

are found in areas of higher elevation on the reservation. Extremely limited areas receive between

12 and 14 inches per annum, and are found in the northeast and extreme east of the Hopi

Partitioned Lands.

The major wash channels of the Hopi Reservations are listed here from east to west:



Jeddito Wash



Keams Canyon Wash



Polacca Wash



Wepo Wash



Oraibi Wash



Dinnebito Wash



Moenkopi Wash flows in northwestern Main Reservation through the northern Moenkopi

District

The precipitation map and illustrations of the major washes and drainages on the Hopi Reservations

provide information on the general southwesterly flow of storm-water runoff from the higher

elevations in the northeast with 12 to 14 inches of precipitation per annum to the lower

southwestern area with only eight to ten inches of precipitation per annum.

The main areas of flash flooding are within and along the major wash channels of the Hopi

Reservations including slopes along the mesas where storm water can accumulate. The Hopi villages

and residences were historically located above the floodplains that were fed by these major washes

but more recent development (over the last 100 years) has led to potentially vulnerable site

development. Roads and trails crossing these major washes are also highly vulnerable to flash

flooding and washouts. Other areas such as the floodplains that were historically fed by these major

wash channels are still prone to flooding if and when the flood waters overflow the channels or

otherwise breach flood control installations such as dikes, dams or berms.

Many of the floodplain areas served by the major washes had been utilized by Hopi farmers in

situating their fields of corn and other crops. Significant erosion and channel cutting have

contributed to the intensity of flash flooding which previously was more of a surface flow over a

larger floodplain area. Dikes, berms and dams constructed in the last 100 years have tried to control

this surface floodplain flooding and major flash flooding from the major washes.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

FIGURE 18.0.

The major washes of the Hopi

Reservations

FIGURE 18.0

The major washes of the

Hopi Reservations

FIGURE 18.0.

The major washes of the Hopi

Reservations

Moenko

Tuba City

160

Pino n

Moe nk op i

264

Ky k ots m ov i

Ke am s Can yo n

loc

ito

aib

GIS\7075.2\PROJECT (PR OJECT = RANGE-C7_13_00.APR) (VIEW EXTENTS = A-SIZE) (VIEW NAME = 4) (LAYOUT = 5)

General pattern of

storm water run-off

flow and main areas of

water channeling and

drainages across the

Reservations.

Gauging stations are

indicated by ▲.

Data was unavailable

due to time constraints.

Monitored by the US

Geologic Survey and

Hopi Water Resources

Program.

Mi le s

Expla na ti on

Proposed soil m ois ture station

Regional tow n

Hopi land boundary

Riv er /w ash

Major road

Agricultural land

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Flash floods usually coincide with the two major precipitation seasons in the Hopi region, winter

(Dec—March) and summer monsoon (late July—early Sept) seasons. These include a majority of the

winter storm events and summer monsoon events that are capable of producing storm water runoff that have major impacts in the region.

Overall, the slopes and grades of the Hopi mesa canyon country and the topography of the

Reservation provide ample evidence of the continuing hazard of storm events that lead to flash

flooding in a very short duration. In many cases communities and travelers are unprepared, carrying

away cars and lives along roadways and compromised bridges. The deteriorating and unmaintained

dikes, dams and berms are leading to an event that can impact major critical facilities and homes

within the developing floodplain areas below the Hopi mesas.

Vulnerability

A lack of regional flood plain mapping and identification of flood zones across Hopi Reservations has

precluded us from being able to definitely identify key areas of vulnerability. The Planning Team has

local knowledge of old flood control structures along with major flood problem areas so this had

driven our vulnerable areas assessment. The need to develop and establish this flood plain and

zone mapping is critical to the further definition of flash flood hazard vulnerability and mitigation

measures for the Hopi Reservations.

Some flood mapping of major development areas have been established such as in the planning of

the Hopi Health Care Center, Second Mesa Day School, First Mesa Elementary School, Hopi Veterans

Memorial Center Wellness Center, Hopi Tribal Housing Authority Housing Developments, etc. These

flood plain mapping data are available from the site authorities but not included in this Plan. The

data is site specific and would only reflect flooding relative to the new sites (approximately 2-30

acres each) that are developed and not comprehensive reservation studies. The potential for further

mapping will be addressed as funding and resources become available.

Priority Group 1: Primary Hopi Villages and Community Areas



Keams Canyon Community



Beaver & Twin Dams located and the top and midpoint of Keams Canyon



Polacca Community



First Mesa Villages: Walpi, Sichomovi, Tewa and Polacca



Second Mesa Community



Second Mesa Villages: Shungopavi, Sipaulovi, Mishongnovi



Kykotsmovi Village



Third Mesa Villages: Oraibi, Hotevilla and Bacavi



Moenkopi District Hopi Villages: Upper Moenkopi and Lower Moenkopi



Pasture Canyon Dam located within Pasture Canyon above Moenkopi Villages



Tribal Government & Services Facilities



Second Mesa Day School



First Mesa Elementary School



Hopi Health Care Center, Air Strip, & Emergency Medical Services



Hopi Walpi Housing

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Flash flooding and flooding in general can affect the new developments of these communities in the

lower floodplain areas below the Hopi mesas. Another key vulnerability is the location of three dam

structures above the communities of Keams Canyon and Moenkopi Villages. Other village

infrastructure such as older constructed wastewater lagoons were located within the flood prone

major washes or along mesa slopes that have lead to breaches or damages resulting in wastewater

flows into the washes and Hopi farmlands. Lack of maintenance and planning of quality

infrastructure has resulted in these poor development location choices as well as a lack of space

within village communities themselves. Dikes, berms and dams have provided for some level of

flood control yet the continuing lack of maintenance and engineering plans in their initial

construction may outweigh any benefit as storm events continue to deteriorate them.

Many of the roads, highways and trails that access the Hopi villages and communities are impacted

by flash flooding especially along the major washes and mesa slopes. An ongoing study funded by

the Hopi Transportation Task Team and conducted by an outside consultant will provide inventory

information on roads that have or can be impacted by flash flooding.

Priority Group 2: Hopi District Six and Hopi Partitioned Lands Range Units



Blue Canyon Special Management Area (along Moenkopi Wash)

 Agriculture: Hopi Farmlands along Major Washes

Priority Group 3: Outlying Communities and Residences



Yuweeloo Pahki Charter Community



Hopi Partitioned Lands: Hopi Home sites & Navajo Accommodation Agreement Home sites

Table 4-9: Flooding Related Executive Order Declarations

Declaration Date

Cause

Damages

August 2013

Heavy Rain

Roadways damaged and impassable

$30,000

September 2012

Heavy Rain Storms

Roadways damaged and impassable

$70,000

July 2010

Heavy Rain Storms

Several homes flooded, damaged roads, water & sewer lines

damaged telephone lines down

$200,000

January 2010

Rain and Snow Storms

Roads damaged and impassable

$368,000

Potential Losses

The impacts of flash flooding and flooding in general are at this point focused on the areas that have

historically been affected including areas within floodplain or mesa slopes. The potential losses are

listed in following and impact various sectors of the Hopi Reservations.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 4-10: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Flooding

Estimated

Vulnerability

Number of

Structures

Low

None

Low

$ 1,633,500

Undetermined

Moderate

Beaver & Twin Dams

within Keams

Canyon

Unknown

High

In Keams Canyon above Keams Canyon

Community

First Mesa Village of

Walpi

High

$ 250,000

Undetermined

First Mesa Village of

Sichomovi

High

Unreported

First Mesa Village of

Tewa

High

$ 160,000

Undetermined

Polacca Community

Moderate

Second Mesa Village

of Shungopavi

High

$ 216,690

Undetermined

Second Mesa Village

Sipaulovi

High

$ 100,000

Undetermined

Second Mesa Village

of Mishongnovi

High

$ 3,089,000

Undetermined

$ 1,910,000

Undetermined

Assessment Area

Priority Yuhweeloh Pahki

Group Charter Community

Hopi Partitioned

Lands Residences

Priority Keams Canyon

Group Community

Structure

Losses

Contents

Losses

Location

Comment

Included in First Mesa

Administration

Second Mesa

Community

Moderate

Kykotsmovi Village

Moderate

Third Mesa Villages

of Oraibi and

Hotevilla

High

Third Mesa Village

of Bacavi

High

$ 288,000

Moenkopi District:

Lower Moenkopi

Villages

Moderate

$370,000

Undetermined

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 4-10: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Flooding

Assessment Area

Moenkopi District:

Moenkopi Villages

Moenkopi District:

Pasture Canyon

Dam

Estimated

Vulnerability

Number of

Structures

Structure

Losses

Contents

Losses

Moderate

High

Unknown.

Will impact

floodplain,

Hwy 160 and Pasture Canyon above Moenkopi Villages

Moenkopi

See Reference to Pasture Canyon

Villages

Emergency Action Plan

Priority

Group

$10,000

$20,000

$10,000

Tribal Government

& Services Facilities

Moderate

$125,697

$655,200

$234,000

$315,000

Hopi Health Care

Center & EMS

Ambulatory Facility

Moderate-High

$30,000,000 $125,000

Undetermined

Hopi Walpi Housing

Complex

Moderate-High

$505,000

$6,777,484

Priority Agriculture: Hopi

Group 2 Farmlands along

Location

Comment

Zone I

Keams Canyon Wash:

Modular Buildings:

Veterinary Clinic

Tribal Court(Probation)

Domestic Violence

Tribal Prosecutor

Zone II

Second Mesa Steep

Mesa Slope:

Hopi Guidance Center

Buildings (4)

Undetermined

High

Major Drainages

Village Roads &

Trails along Major

Drainages & Slopes

High

BIA Routes along

Major Drainages

(Bridges &

Crossings)

High

Further

Research & Study

required to determine

costs and potential

losses (Will be addressed

as resources/funding

become available)

ADOT Hwy 264

Moderate-High

Along Major

Drainages (Bridges &

Crossings)

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 4-10: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Flooding

Assessment Area

Blue Canyon Special

Management Area

along Moenkopi

Wash

Estimated

Vulnerability

High

Number of

Structures

Structure

Losses

Contents

Losses

Location

Comment

Archaeological Sites, Wetlands, Rehabilitation

Projects, Wildlife, Habitat Support Projects

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.3

2015

Landslide and Rockfall

Introduction/History

A landslide is the movement of rock, soil, and/or other debris down a slope that occurs when the

materials comprising the slope can no longer resist gravity. In the case of the Hopi Reservations the

known probable and usual occurrences are rock avalanches on the steep sloped sandstone mesas

and canyons that comprise a large area of Hopi lands. Erosion can also occur along many of the

lower floodplain areas as well as along the major drainage channels which can affect slope stability

or even undercutting that may impact major roads or facilities.

Landslides encompass a wide range of slope movements, from small rock falls to debris flows to the

failure of entire mesa sides and multiple landslides types can occur within a single event. In general,

most steep slopes are at some risk of slope failure, and some soil/geologic formations are

particularly susceptible to landslide activity, even on relatively gentle slopes. For example, when

layers of sand and gravel lie above less permeable silt and clay layers, ground water can accumulate

and zones of weakness can develop. This can be a cause of the local landslides / rockfalls in the Hopi

mesas wherein sandstone formations (Mesa Verde Group) overlay siltstone and clay shale of the

Mancos Shale Formation in the Cretaceous Geologic Unit.

The primary landslide & rockfall hazard areas that threaten public safety and structures on the

Reservations occur along the Hopi mesa sandstone outcrops mainly affecting the primary Hopi

villages and communities located along AZ State Highway 264.

The Hopi Strategic Land Use and Economic Development Plan provides a Reservations Slope map

with an identification of grades from 5% on above 10% reflecting vulnerable areas along many of the

high slopes of the sandstone mesas near villages and communities. These higher grade areas also

show areas of steep-walled canyons and high country areas in the northern portion of the main

reservation.

Landslides and rock fall can occur from natural conditions such as wind, erosion, and flooding but

can be caused by human activity as well as poor planning. The natural geologic formations of the

Hopi mesas and Reservations have attributed to problems and hazard events that have resulted in

losses and injuries in the past. Mitigation actions by the Bureau of Indian Affairs occurred in the

First Mesa Villages access road to the mesa top, stabilizing rock walls with anchoring and

monitoring. The Arizona Dept of Transportation redesigned and constructed a portion of the major

highway including a wide right of way drainage/ditch to capture falling rocks. These are mitigation

projects that prioritize local health and safety after numerous concerns were issued from the

reservation population. The effort will continue and mitigation efforts must be realized in these

priority areas well in advance of loss of property or life.

Vulnerability

The vulnerability of the assessment areas is prioritized with the high grade slopes and known history

of landslide & rock fall hazards known to occur. Almost 84% of the land within the reservation

boundary is less than 5% slope. The most rugged areas are found in the northern one-third of the

reservation while the southern two thirds are dominated by areas with gentle slopes under 10% and

most under 5%. The predominant slope direction (43%) is westerly.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Priority Group 1: Primary Hopi Villages and Communities



First Mesa Villages: Walpi, Sichomovi, Tewa and Polacca



Second Mesa Villages: Shungopavi, Sipaulovi, Mishongnovi



Third Mesa Villages: Oraibi, Hotevilla and Bacavi



Moenkopi District Hopi Villages: Upper and Lower Moenkopi



Agriculture: Hopi Mesa Terrace Gardens



Village Roads & Trails



Bureau of Indian Affairs Roads



Arizona Department of Transportation Highway 264 & 77



Keams Canyon Community



Polacca Community



Second Mesa Community



Kykotsmovi Village

Landslide and rock fall hazards can impact many areas within the villages themselves. Affecting

homes, infrastructure such as power lines, water & wastewater lines, village support structures

(retaining walls), trails, roads and other sites such as cultural sites like springs that have been totally

covered by rock falls.

Priority Group 2: Hopi District Six and Hopi Partitioned Lands Range Units



Blue Canyon Special Management Area

 Surface and Groundwater Infrastructure

Priority Group 3: Outlying Communities and Residences



Yuweeloo Pahki Charter Community

 Hopi Partitioned Lands: Hopi Homesites & Navajo Accommodation Agreement Homesites

Potential Losses

The impacts of landslides and rock fall focused on the areas that have historically been affected

including areas along mesa escarpments and mesa slopes identified through the planning process

identification. The potential losses are listed in the table below and impact various sectors of the

Hopi Reservations including key critical facilities of the Tribe that lie within along areas of the major

Hopi mesas and slope areas.

Table 4-11: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Landslide & Rock Fall

Assessment Area

Priority Yuhweeloo Pahki

Group Charter Community

Hopi Partitioned

Lands Residences

Estimated

Vulnerability

Number of

Structures

Structure

Losses

Contents

Losses

Low

$ 66,000

Undetermined

Low

$ 192,500

Undetermined

Location

Comment

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 4-11: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Landslide & Rock Fall

Number of

Structures

Structure

Losses

Contents

Losses

Moderate

$ 10,000

(3)

structures

only

Undetermined

First Mesa Villages

of Walpi

High

$ 681,000

First Mesa Village

of Sichomovi

High

Unreported

First Mesa Village

of Tewa

High

Assessment Area

Priority

Group

Keams Canyon

Community

Polacca Community

Estimated

Vulnerability

2,890,000

Location

Comment

Undetermined

Included in First

Mesa Village

Administration

Moderate

Second Mesa

Village of

Shungopavi

High

$608,040

Undetermined

Second Mesa

Village of Sipaulovi

High

$ 624,375

Undetermined

Second Mesa

Village of

Mishongnovi

High

$ 969,000

Undetermined

Second Mesa

Community

Moderate

Kykotsmovi Village

Moderate

$ 74,000

Undetermined

Third Mesa Villages

of Oraibi and

Hotevilla

High

Third Mesa Village

of Bacavi

High

$ 168,000

Undetermined

Moenkopi District:

Lower Moenkopi

Village

Moderate

$20,000

Moenkopi District:

Upper Moenkopi

Village

Moderate

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 4-11: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Landslide & Rock Fall

Assessment Area

Tribal Government

& Services Facilities

Priority

Group Agriculture: Hopi

Mesa Terrace

Gardens

Village Roads &

Trails

BIA Routes along

Villages and Hopi

Mesas

Estimated

Vulnerability

Number of

Structures

Low

High

(3) Main

Villages with

Terrace

Gardens

High

Undetermined

Moderate-High Undetermined

ADOT Hwy 264

Along Hopi Villages

& Mesas

Moderate-High Undetermined

Beaver & Twin

Dams in Keams

Canyon

Moderate

Structure

Losses

$87,000

Contents

Losses

$13,000

Location

Comment

Kykotsmovi &

Other Sites

Appendix

Further

Research & Study

required to

determine costs &

potential losses

(Will be addressed

resources/funding

become available)

Undetermined

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.4

2015

Severe Wind

Introduction/History

Severe winds result from extreme pressure gradients (such as the Santa Ana winds in southern

California), or from thunderstorms. Thunderstorms occur in Arizona in all seasons, and are

associated with cold fronts in the winter, monsoon activity in the summer, and tropical storms in the

late summer or early fall. In Arizona, thunderstorms occasionally spawn tornadoes, which also cause

severe wind damage. According to the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), there were 234

tornadoes ranging from F0 to F3 on the Fujita scale recorded across Arizona between 1950 and

2013. The total property damage was approximately $47.9 million with 3 fatalities and 147 injuries.

The Fujita scale ranks tornados by wind speed. Since 1950 there have been three F3 tornadoes in

Yavapai, Maricopa and Coconino Counties but none in Navajo County or on the Hopi Reservation.

In a microburst the wind speeds are highest near the location where a downdraft reached the

surface, and are reduced as they move outward due to the friction of objects at the surface. Typical

damage from microbursts includes uprooted trees, downed power lines, mobile homes knocked off

their foundations, block walls and fences blown down, and porches and awnings blown off homes.

Thunderstorms are also capable of producing straight line winds at speeds of 75 mph or higher. As

thunderstorms reach the mature stage, cold air downdrafts reach the ground and move outward

from the storm, creating straight line surface winds. In the most extreme case, this would be a

microburst or macroburst as discussed above. However, these winds tend to be sustained and are

frequently responsible for generating dust storms and sand storms, reducing visibility and creating

hazardous driving conditions.

In the past, wind events on the Hopi Reservation have caused structure roofs to be damaged and/or

removed, power line damage and/or failure, land erosion that has exposed water lines, rock falls,

transportation accidents due to low visibility and health issues for those who have respiratory

problems.

Vulnerability

The majority of the Reservation is open and has many unpaved roads which create hazardous

conditions to most residents and structures during wind events.

Power failures are of significant concern to the tribe as there are residents with health issues that

require power to medical equipment. In the past, power failures have lasted up to 48 hours. Since

those occurrences there have been no significant improvements to the systems and infrastructure

so it is expected to happen in the future. Power failures happen on an average of once a year.

Potential Losses

Table 4-12: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Severe Wind

Assessment Area

Estimated

Vulnerability

Number of

Structures

Structure

Losses

Contents

Losses

Low

$ 300,000

Undetermined

Location

Comment

Priority Yuhweeloh Pahki

Charter Community

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 4-12: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Severe Wind

Estimated

Vulnerability

Number of

Structures

Structure

Losses

Contents

Losses

Low

$ 1,270,500

Undetermined

Low

First Mesa Village of

Walpi

Moderate

$ 2,406,000

Undetermined

First Mesa Village of

Sichomovi

Moderate

136

$ 3,994,000

Undetermined

First Mesa Village of

Tewa

Moderate

200

$1,330,000

Undetermined

Assessment Area

Location

Comment

Group 1 Hopi Partitioned Lands

Residences

Priority Keams Canyon

Group 2 Community

Polacca Community

Included in First

Mesa Village

Administration

Low

Second Mesa Villages of

Shungopavi

Moderate

150

$4,721,643

Undetermined

Second Mesa Villages of

Sipaulovi

Moderate

$ 710,000

Undetermined

Second Mesa Village of

Mishongnovi

Moderate

159

$4,434,000

Undetermined

270

$1,984,000

Undetermined

Second Mesa

Community

Low

Kykotsmovi Village

Moderate

Third Mesa Villages of

Oraibi & Hotevilla

Moderate

Third Mesa Village of

Bacavi

Moderate

100

$ 5,112,000

Undetermined

Moenkopi District:

Lower Moenkopi Village

Moderate

$680,000

Undetermined

Moenkopi District:

Upper Moenkopi Village

Moderate

Tribal Government &

Services Facilities

Moderate

$87,000.00

$13,000.00

Hopi Health Care Center

& EMS Ambulatory

Facility

Moderate

$30,000,000

Undetermined

Kykotsmovi &

Other Sites

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 4-12: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Severe Wind

Estimated

Vulnerability

Number of

Structures

Structure

Losses

Contents

Losses

Hopi Walpi Housing

Complex

Moderate

$ 6,777,484

Undetermined

New First Mesa

Elementary School

Low

$ 20,000,000

Structure and

Undetermined Housing Complex

Hopi Reservation

Roads: ADOT, BIA &

Tribal

Moderate

Assessment Area

Areas within

Priority Areas Undetermined

Priority Beaver and Twin Dams

Group

in Keams Canyon

Moenkopi District:

Pasture Canyon Dam

Moderate

Location

Comment

Further Study

Required

Unknown

Located in Keams

Canyon

Unknown

Located above US

Route 160 &

Moenkopi Villages

Range unit

Windmill &

fencing

infrastructure $2,000-5,000

(158) total

per mile

Located in Hopi

Partitioned Lands,

District 6, and

Moenkopi District.

Springs

(211) total

$900,000.00

Annual Tribal

Maintenance

Budget.

Range unit

fencing

Surface water,

Groundwater & Other

Agricultural

Infrastructure

Low

Windmill &

infrastructure

$75,000 each

Earthen tanks

(556) total

Earthen tanks

repair Costs

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.5

2015

Winter Storm

Introduction/History

Severe winter storm events affecting the Hopi Reservations can be comprised of a mixture of

meteorological conditions including heavy snowfall, heavy rainfall, blizzards, high winds, and hail

and freezing temperatures. These conditions can immobilize many parts of the Hopi Reservations by

simply affecting the main transportation corridors which in turn disrupts many other services

including emergency and utility services. In considering that most of the Hopi Reservation areas are

mostly rural in nature with limited paved roadways and a lack of centralized services within each

community area, severe winter storms can have Reservations-wide impacts. As may be found in

many Indian Nations, the Hopi Reservations are not financially capable of providing infrastructure

and economies that can support mitigation and emergency responses to this type of hazard.

Communications and utility services are often compromised and even small accumulations of ice

can impact those major transportation routes. Extreme cold temperatures and prolonged exposure

to cold affects homes and structures that are representative of the high percentage of low income &

poverty level households & communities that define Hopi socio-economics.

The Hopi Reservations are located on the arid high desert of the Colorado Plateau and local weather

and precipitation patterns present us with two main annual seasons of major precipitation: the

winter season (Dec-Mar) and summer monsoon season (late July-early Sept). The winter season

provides the Hopi Reservations with the major precipitation amounts that can result in blizzard

conditions and immobilization of communities and services from heavy snow and rainfall.

The magnitude of these winter storm events vary from heavy snow and rainfall to freezing

temperatures. They have also impacted the Reservations in different ways from snowbound

isolation to inaccessible muddy conditions. In 2010 among other areas, the Hopi Reservations

experienced one of the nastiest storms in the State’s history. Much of the Reservations were

covered with 5 – 8 foot snow drifts, making road travel impossible. They also experienced power

outages, collapsed roofs and mud conditions resulting in disruptions and stuck vehicles. This storm

was so severe, food, water and other supplies were airlifted in and even that operation was

temporarily stalled due to heavy fog and clouding and other dangerous conditions.

Based on historical information/events and the location of the reservations, it is certain the Tribe

will continue to experience a variety of winter storms. The severity and impacts of previous and

future winter storm events have and will most likely continue to vary. Additionally, the impacts may

be increased by the lack of quality infrastructure throughout the Reservations resulting in problems

both for government and tribal facilities as well as private business and residents. The early

historical accounts, prior to 1967, of severe winter storms resulted in requests for assistance from

local BIA, county governments, public and private organizations and companies to provide aid

though no official tribal executive declaration was prepared. This lack of tribal executive

declarations in this early period and later has been mainly due to lack of information of sources of

emergency aid and relief. The Hopi Tribe has always looked out for the best interest and emergency

needs of their members and this planning effort allows us to be more fully capable of reaching those

resources to assist them.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 4-13: Winter Storm Related Executive Order Declarations

Declaration Date

Cause

Damages

January 2013

Severe Cold freezing Weather

Water issues

$60,000

January 2010

Rain and Snow Storms

Muddy and damaged roads impacting general transportation $358,000

and emergency health services transport

Vulnerability

Winter storms on the Hopi Reservations can be either localized or large-scale events. The following

three assessment areas can be exposed to severe winter storms to a similar degree. The biotic

communities, elevations and precipitation zone mapping across the Reservations provide us with

vulnerability assessment tools along with the condition of infrastructure and roads located in those

areas. Lack of quality infrastructure to handle the impacts of severe winter storms plays a prominent

role in the vulnerability of areas to these natural hazard events. This lack of quality infrastructure

can be seen in undeveloped roads, old water & wastewater systems, lack of building codes, poor

economic resources for buildings and homes, old agricultural infrastructure, under maintained

roads, under maintained buildings, etc. that all represent why severe winter storms with significant

precipitation can impact the Reservations. The following vulnerability assessment areas are listed

according to prioritization. There are three priority groupings, based on the need for a response

effort in the event of a severe winter storm. The highest priority are the outlying communities in the

Hopi Partitioned Lands, second are the primary villages and communities and third is Hopi

agriculture, livestock, and Water Infrastructure.

Priority Group 1: Outlying Communities and Residences



Yuweh loo Pahki Community

 Hopi Partitioned Lands: Hopi Homesites & Navajo Accommodation Agreement Homesites

The Spider Mound Community roads received aggregate and gravel covering and construction of

drainage culverts in 2008 to better the quality for the residents. The Hopi Partitioned Lands are

particularly vulnerable in the quality of the roadways, mainly accessibility (mostly grade & drain

under-maintained dirt roads) and lack of infrastructure & equipment to support the residents during

severe winter storm events. Previous State responses to local emergencies have shown that

“mudlifts” and “airlifts” are needed for isolated citizens and communities when medical, food,

water, and fuel services are needed.

Priority Group 2: Primary Hopi Villages and Communities



Keams Canyon Community



First Mesa Villages: Walpi, Sichomovi, Tewa and Polacca Community



Second Mesa Villages: Shungopavi, Sipaulovi, Mishongnovi



Second Mesa Community



Kykotsmovi Village



Third Mesa Villages: Oraibi, Hotevilla and Bacavi

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan



2015

Moenkopi District Hopi Villages: Upper and Lower Moenkopi

The proximity of the Hopi villages and communities alongside Arizona State Highway 264 allows for

a low and moderate priority ranking for response, Moenkopi villages are located at the westernmost

extent of Highway 264 near the junction of AZ State Highway 160 across from Tuba City. Yet, most of

the mesa-top villages still have accessibility issues along AZ State Highway 264, BIA Routes, and

villages roads and trails. Village and residential structures that can be affected by storm events is

also part of why accessibility needs to be maintained along with upgrading of roads. Applicable

Reservation-wide, structures themselves reflect the low economic status and lack of building codes

susceptible to storm events. Mesa-top villages are supported by retaining walls along access routes,

public areas, mesa slopes or other residential areas that often are compromised or deteriorate due

to storm events.

Tribal facilities and property can be located within villages as well, key to the critical facilities that

need to be addressed in storm events. Utilities such as water well pumping & distribution systems,

wastewater systems (lagoons), electricity, and communication are also susceptible to storm event

damages and the conditions they present. A newspaper article in the Hopi Tribal newspaper,

Tutuveni, on April 14, 2005 highlights the Arizona Corporation Commission’s deadline for a required

assessment of the electric utility company, Arizona Public Service to increase reliability that affects

most of the reservation, known to occur especially during winter storm events. The disabling of

Tribal & government services, emergency medical & hospital services, home heating, local radio

service & equipment damage, and other hampered services and equipment damages were testified

to by local representatives who experience documented unreliable, “dirty power, spikes and

surges.”

Priority Group 3: Hopi District Six and Hopi Partitioned Lands Range Units



Livestock & Agriculture



Surface and Groundwater Infrastructure



Beaver and Twin Dams in Keams Canyon



Pasture Canyon Dam in Moenkopi area

These areas of vulnerability for the Hopi Reservations are the major land use of Hopi tribal members

in traditional farming and livestock grazing. A number of the early historic winter storm accounts in

1941 and 1954 resulted in a shift for many livestock owners from sheep flocks to cattle herds. The

shift was due to the impact of snow drift depths, lack of emergency feed, freezing temperatures and

frozen water sources. Although the Hopi cattle herds at the time did suffer losses they were much

less significant than those of the Hopi sheep flocks. Cattle were seen as being physically hardier and

tolerated the snowstorms along with the ease to move from snowdrift packed, muddy or frozen

areas so that clearer areas for grazing could be found. Today many of the range units are potentially

vulnerable to severe winter storm events having older infrastructure and again poor quality

accessibility with mostly under-maintained grade and drain dirt roads. Livestock grazing accounts

for a majority of land use on the Hopi Reservations and severe winter storms can take a toll with a

lack of accessibility, as well as prior maintenance, during times of heavy snow and rainfall to care for

livestock and infrastructure with possible damage.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Mesa-top Village Retaining Walls

Mesa-top villages require road access support structures

such as those pictured above along with areas that may

require trail access or residential/village structure support

as provided by these sandstone retaining walls below.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Potential Losses

There are many areas of losses that can occur from winter storm damages on the Reservations.

Damage to roofing from heavy snow accumulations and rainfall depends on the quality of

construction and loads. Frozen water facilities and distribution pipes have been known to occur

especially at water spigots for water hauling. Any number of factors could combine at various

degrees of severity to produce the total structural damages that may result from a winter storm.

Recovery from winter storms often requires assistance from emergency responders from public

safety and tribal programs though they are limited in their funding and capability. The costs of these

services can quickly add up for the governments or providers and they may not have a sufficient

reserve in place to cover the costs.

Many of the local utilities may also be damaged with services hampered. Power outages that occur

in one area will affect every community beyond that area since the electric transmission lines are

not looped in the main Hopi Reservation. Extended outages may require community buildings be

opened to help those in need or to share weather & public safety information.

The economic losses caused by a winter storm may frequently be greater than structural damages.

This can be reflected in the accessibility issues and snow or rainfall damages to roads with

employees and others unable to attend work or get to jobsites. Many times schools are unable to

accommodate extra heating or damages to their structures along with student pickup on rural,

impassable bus routes which can mire down buses with students. The Hopi Tribal offices are often

in a state of uncertainty when major power outages occur in a different part of the reservation.

These major power outages can affect the ability of the Tribe along with all other public health and

safety services (police, fire & rescue, air landing strip, hospital, etc.). Overall, winter storms can

result in significant human, economic and property losses & damages on the Reservations.

Table 4-14: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Severe Winter Storm

Estimated

Vulnerability

Number of

Structures

Structure

Losses

Contents

Losses

High

$ 300,000

Undetermined

High

$ 1,270,500

Undetermined

Low

Walpi

Moderate

$ 2,406,000

Undetermined

First Mesa Village of

Sichomovi

Moderate

136

$ 3,994,000

Undetermined

First Mesa Village of

Tewa

Moderate

200

$1,330,000

Undetermined

Assessment Area

Priority Yuhweeloh Pahki

Group Charter Community

Hopi Partitioned Lands

Residences

Priority Keams Canyon

Group Community

First Mesa Village of

Location

Comment

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 4-14: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Severe Winter Storm

Assessment Area

Polacca Community

Estimated

Vulnerability

Number of

Structures

Structure

Losses

Contents

Losses

Location

Comment

Included in First

Mesa Village

Administration

Low

Second Mesa Villages of

Shungopavi

Moderate

150

$4,721,643

Undetermined

Second Mesa Villages of

Sipaulovi

Moderate

$ 710,000

Undetermined

Second Mesa Village of

Mishongnovi

Moderate

159

$4,434,000

Undetermined

270

$1,984,000

Undetermined

Second Mesa

Community

Low

Kykotsmovi Village

Low

Third Mesa Villages of

Oraibi & Hotevilla

Moderate

Third Mesa Village of

Bacavi

Moderate

100

$ 5,112,000

Undetermined

Moenkopi District:

Lower Moenkopi Village

Moderate

$680,000

Undetermined

Tribal Government &

Services Facilities

Low

$87,000.00

$13,000.00

Hopi Health Care Center

& EMS Ambulatory

Facility

Moderate

$30,000,000

Undetermined

Hopi Walpi Housing

Complex

Moderate

$ 6,777,484

Undetermined

New First Mesa

Elementary School

Low

$ 20,000,000

Structure and

Undetermined Housing Complex

Areas within

Priority Areas Undetermined

Further Study

Required (Will be

addressed as

resources/funding

become available)

Moenkopi District:

Upper Moenkopi Village

Hopi Reservation

Roads: ADOT, BIA &

Tribal

Moderate

Priority Beaver and Twin Dams

in Keams Canyon

Moderate

Unknown

Kykotsmovi &

Other Sites

Located in Keams

Canyon

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 4-14: Vulnerability & Potential Losses due to Severe Winter Storm

Assessment Area

Estimated

Vulnerability

Number of

Structures

Structure

Losses

Group

Moenkopi District:

Pasture Canyon Dam

Moderate

Unknown

8,000 Current

Livestock and

Animal

Grazing Units

Reservationwide

Livestock & Agriculture

High

$4,398,400

Estimated

Capital

Livestock

Value @

(Voluntary

$800.00 per

reduction in

head of

2006 results: livestock

11,000- 8,000) average

Contents

Losses

Location

Comment

Located above U.S.

Route 160 &

Moenkopi Villages

Livestock located

in Hopi Partitioned

Lands and District

$550,000 Hopi

Annual Economic

Income from

Livestock &

Agriculture

Range Unit

Fencing

Surface water,

Groundwater & Other

Agricultural

Infrastructure

Moderate

Range Unit

Windmill &

Fencing

Infrastructure $2,000-5,000

(158) total

per mile

Located in Hopi

Partitioned Lands,

District 6, and

Moenkopi District.

Springs

(211) total

$900,000.00

Annual Tribal

Maintenance

Budget.

Windmill &

Infrastructure

$75,000 each

Earthen Tanks

(556) total

Earthen Tanks

Repair Costs

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

SECTION 5: MITIGATION STRATEGY

5.1

Section Changes



The Local Capability Assessment, Local Assistance Prioritization Criteria and Local Mitigation

Planning Coordination sections were omitted from the Plan. The previous Plan was based on

and those topics were required under the State Plan requirements. This Plan is based on and

those topics are not required under FEMA’s official Tribal Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Review

Crosswalk, April 2010.

5.2

Goals and Objectives

The goals and objectives from the previous Plan were reviewed and the Planning Team decided to

refine them to provide clarity and ease of understanding for all. This was accomplished by

developing one main, all encompassing goal and objectives to define main areas of focus for the

activities that may benefit the tribe and its citizens. The new objectives look similar to the goals

from the previous Plan. The current goal and objectives are:

Goal:

To reduce and/or eliminate the risk to the people and property of the Hopi Reservations from

hazard events.

Objectives:

1. Protect the health and safety of our community members;

2. Protect existing and future structures and infrastructure;

3. Reduce environmental impacts and future development activities within hazard-prone

areas;

4. Increase public awareness and education of hazard risks.

5.3

Mitigation Actions/Projects

Mitigation measures are activities identified by a jurisdiction, that when implemented, are intended

to reduce and/or eliminate the community’s exposure and risk to the particular hazard(s) being

mitigated. This is intended to reduce response needs and shorten the recovery time/process.

The process for redefining the list of mitigation measures for this Plan was accomplished in steps.

First, an assessment of the measures identified in the previous Plan was performed, wherein each

was evaluated to determine the current status and disposition. Second, a new list of measures was

developed by combining those deemed as ‘keepers’ from the previous Plan as well as new

measures.

Current Mitigation Actions/Projects

Reviewing the previous Plan’s mitigation strategy, the Planning Team realized there were several

actions/projects that were too vague to understand what the projects was or was meant to

accomplish. It was also discovered that many of them were representative of hazards not identified

in the Plan. Therefore, considering this information and the results of the vulnerability analysis, the

capability assessment, and the goals and objectives, the Planning Team formulated a list of

measures for mitigation of the identified hazards within the community.

The mitigation measures developed for this Plan include the following information:

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015



New or Existing – Indicates if the measure is a carryover from the previous Plan or new in this

Plan.



Hazard(s) Mitigated – Indicates which of this Plan’s identified hazards the measure will

potentially mitigate against.



Project Name – The identifying name or title of the measure.



Project Description – Description of the proposed measure, may include reason for activity

and/or phases of activity.



Estimated Cost – An estimate of the cost related to implementing the proposed measure based

on the knowledge about the project at the time of Plan development.



Lead Agency – A lead agency that will be responsible for the measure’s development and

implementation.



Estimated Timeframe – An implementation schedule was developed to specify the anticipated

completion dates and/or timeframe.



Potential Funding Source(s) – Potential sources of funding that might be available for

implementation.

Although it is conceivable to think all nine mitigation measures in this Plan could be implemented

concurrently as the responsibilities vary among agencies, we have made an effort to prioritize them.

The mitigation measures were prioritized using a High, Medium and Low rating using the following

criteria:

High Priority – Measure could likely lead to preservation of life.

Medium Priority – Measure could possibly or indirectly lead to preservation of life and property.

Low Priority – Measure could possibly improve quality of life now and in the future.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

New or

Existing

Table 5-1: Current Mitigation Strategy

Hazard(s)

Mitigated

Severe Wind

Landslide/Rockfall

Winter Storm

Flood

Drought

Estimated

Cost &

Completion

Date

Description

HIGH PRIORITY

Research building/utility codes for the Hopi Tribe to determine they

adequately protect our people and property.

Continue to enforce Ordinance 55 that ensures buildings are constructed

to a standard.

Monitor the roads near first, second & third mesa areas identified as

potentials of slope and mesa erosion.

Conduct outreach program to have residents develop a 72- hour

emergency kit.

Coordinate and identify alternative routes for emergencies.

Identify the floodplains of Hopi land holdings.

MEDIUM PRIORITY

Identify possible improvements to low-water crossings and culverts on

Indian Reservation Road. (IRR)

LOW PRIORITY

Research and assess the need for a drought response plan.

Lead Agency

Potential

Funding

Source(s)

Ongoing

OCPED

N/A

Ongoing

OCPED

N/A

Ongoing

N/A

Ongoing

2 years

Ongoing

HDOT

DPSES, PHEP, Villages,

DNR & DHHS

HDOT

DNR Planner

Ongoing

HDOT / DNR Programs

N/A

Staff Time

Ongoing

ORM/Land Operations

N/A

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

5.4

2015

Capability Assessment

A capability assessment provides information that is helpful in assessing the Tribe’s ability to

mitigate against hazards. The Planning Team reviewed and evaluated the Tribe’s resources and

capabilities in the following areas:



Planning and Regulatory



Administrative and Technical



Financial



Education and Outreach

In the previous Plan only funding sources for mitigation were discussed. For this Plan three other

capability/resource areas were explored (listed above). The tables list the capabilities/resources of

primarily the Tribe itself. However, following the tables is a discussion of other funding sources that

are known, applied for or previously utilized.

The capabilities and resources of the Hopi Tribe are summarized in the following tables.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Table 5-2: Capability Assessment

PLANS

Capital Improvements Plan

Community Wildfire Protection Plan

Comprehensive/Master Plan

Drought Contingency Plan

Economic Development Plan

Emergency Operations Plan

Stormwater Management Plan

Environmental Strategic Plan

Strategic Land Use and Development Plan

BUILDING CODES, PERMITTING, INSPECTIONS

Building Codes

Site plan review requirements

LAND USE PLANNING & ORDINANCES

Floodplain ordinance

Subdivision ordinance

Zoning ordinance

ADMINISTRATION

Mutual aid agreements

Planning Commission

TECHNICAL STAFF

Community Planner

Emergency Manager

PLANNING and REGULATORY

Does the plan address hazards?

Yes/No

Does the plan ID projects to include in the mitigation strategy?

Year

Can the plan be used to implement mitigation actions?

Yes

The Hopi Wildland Fire Management Plan. Addresses wildland fire.

Yes

Addresses drought. Yes, it can be useful for mitigation measures.

Yes

More of a guidance document. Not instrumental in mitigation measures.

Yes

What type of codes?

Yes/No

Are codes adequately enforced?

Is the ordinance effective for reducing hazard impacts?

Is the ordinance adequately administered and enforced?

ADMINISTRATIVE and TECHNICAL

Describe capability.

Yes/No

Is coordination effective?

Is staff trained on hazards and mitigation?

Yes/No

Is coordination between agencies and staff effective?

FT/PT

Have skills/expertise been used to assess/mitigate risk in the past?

Yes

Director, Hopi Lands. Yes, knowledgeable on hazards and on the community itself.

Yes

Yes, trained and knowledgeable and continuing education and training. Fairly effective.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

Engineer

Floodplain Manager/Administrator

GIS/HAZUS Coordinator

Yes

Grant writer

Yes

FINANCIAL

Capital improvements project funding

Community Development Block Grant

Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes

Impact fees for new development

Incur debt through special tax bond

Incur debt through general obligation bonds

FEMA mitigation grant funding

PROGRAM / ORGANIZATION

Community Bulletins

Yes/No

Yes

Access /

Eligibility

(Yes/No)

Yes

Hopi Emergency Response Team (HERT)

Yes

Citizen groups focused on emergency

preparedness, environmental protection, etc.

Public education/information programs (fire

safety, household preparedness, responsible

water use, etc)

Yes

2015

Yes, again, knowledgeable on community and mitigation needs.

Project Managers on staff at Community and Economic Development Dept

Director of Land Info Systems. Knowledgeable on local hazards and risks. Fair

coordination.

Use dept staff as required.

FINANCIAL

Has the funding resource been used in past and for what type of activities?

Could the resource be used to fund future mitigation actions?

Used after 2010 disaster event.

This can be a source of future funding following a disaster (Hazard Mitigation Grant

Program).

EDUCATION and OUTREACH

Describe program/organization and how it relates to disaster resilience and

mitigation.

Could the program/organization help implement future mitigation activities?

This program will be used to keep the communities informed about hazards, risks and

mitigation efforts.

This team’s monthly meetings are used to delivery on-going mitigation updates and

engage other individuals and departments in mitigation related activities.

Structural Fire, Hopi Environmental Protection Office, (HEPO), Water Resources, and

Department of Public Emergency Services, (DPSES) - (CERT).

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

From the previous Plan and now, there have been no significant changes in the

capabilities/resources of the Tribe. Although plans may have been updated, there is no significant

change with them or the Tribe’s ordinances, codes and regulations. There has however, over time

been a significant change in the government funding for programs including disaster response.

Consequently there has been there is a growing need to consider better partnering with neighboring

tribes, counties, local jurisdictions and the State.

The Hopi Office of Planning and Evaluation administers the land use planning input and control of a

tribal regulatory measure as contained within the Hopi Tribal Planning Ordinance No. 55. This

ordinance provides a Land Development Review within its regulations in Chapter 4. Land

Development Review. The applicability section does identify projects and developments with

exceptions to the review although mitigation of hazards should apply to these exceptions in order to

identify vulnerable areas and provisions for mitigation. Most of the guidance and rules established

in Ordinance 55 are conducive to developing and implementing mitigation strategies and actions.

In the past, the Hopi Reservations have received funding directly and indirectly from local and State

governments for disaster relief. The Hopi Tribe has received funding from FEMA and looks to further

the opportunity for disaster and mitigation funding with the acceptance of this Plan.

Local potential funding sources for pre-disaster mitigation activities and emergency response to

disasters has been very limited. It is critical that the Hopi Tribal Council continue with the

established Emergency & Disaster Response Contingency Fund so that responses to disaster events

are not drawn out and unresponsive to the needs of the Hopi people. Coordination and planning

should be well supported so the efficiency and organization is executed to the highest degree during

these disaster events. The Hopi Tribe is faced with a major reduction of government financial

revenues to continue the fund. Therein, planning and grant funding should be a priority for support

from the Tribe due to this financial constraint, including the development of this Plan. As a result,

financial support for hazard mitigation projects will largely rely on off-Reservation sources in the

foreseeable future.

Upon receipt of a presidential disaster declaration, the Tribe will develop a Public Assistance

Administration Plan and a Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Administration Plan. Both plans will be

used to identify the roles and responsibilities of the Tribe in administering the FEMA Public

Assistance (PA) and Hazard Mitigation Grant Programs (HMGP), and to outline staffing requirements

and the policies and procedures to be used. A result of developing these plans will be to further

focus Tribal resources on the importance of hazard management and mitigation planning.

Staff resources in several Tribal departments/programs, working under the auspices of the Council

collectively provide hazard mitigation for the Tribe. The Tribe often hires consultants to conduct the

necessary technical studies and analyses to determine both risk and mitigation alternatives.

Current financial resources available to the Tribe for hazard mitigation planning and projects include

potential disaster and mitigation funds through FEMA are post-disaster Public Assistance and HMGP,

and the annual Pre-Disaster Mitigation grant program. Potential sources of funds may include any

of the previously mentioned resources and others such as the U.S. Department of Interior (Bureau

of Reclamation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Geological Survey, Bureau of Land Management), U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Housing and Urban Development, U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services (Indian Health Service), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (U.S. Forest Service,

Natural Resources Conservation Service).

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

In summary, the Hopi Tribe currently has in place regulatory mechanisms for mitigation of hazards,

with most being directed at new construction and development. Staff resources and/or consultants

are available for the identification, development and implementation of mitigation measures.

Financially, the Tribe applies for Community Development Block Grants, obtains Capital

Improvement Project funding, and has the authority to levy taxes for specific purposes, however, all

of these mechanisms require political approval.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

SECTION 6: PLAN MAINTENANCE

6.1

Section Changes



6.2

The previous Plan was based on the State Plan requirements which did not include

Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms and Continued Member and Stakeholder

Involvement. Those elements are now included in this Plan.

Monitoring, Evaluating and Updating

The responsibility for ensuring the plan maintenance and update procedures are performed belongs

to the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Services. For evaluation purposes, the Planning

Team shall review the Plan once a year, on or around the approval anniversary date.

Each evaluation shall include, but not be limited to the following:

 Risk Assessment – Analyze changes in the type, nature or magnitude of risks.

 Goals and Objectives – Ensure they address current and expected conditions.

 Mitigation Strategy – Review mitigation activity progress and available resources to

implement.

The results of the evaluation shall be documented and kept with the Plan. The review

documentation and any other related materials will be reviewed and considered during the next

update process.

A summary of the evaluation shall also be presented as an informational item to the Hopi

Emergency Response Team (HERT) on at least an annual basis as well as performing periodic

presentations to the team to keep the Plan ‘alive’ and active. The evaluations of the previous were

not performed as discussed in the Plan. This is due mostly to staff turn-over and lack of awareness of

the Plan and the commitments within. We feel we now have a much better understanding and are

currently educating several government departments on the Plan and will continue to do so in the

future. The process has been modified to encourage adherence.

The Plan requires updating and re-approval from FEMA every five years. The plan update will adhere

to the set schedule using the following procedure:

6.3



One year prior to the plan expiration date, the Planning Team will convene to review and

assess the Plan and areas for potential change.



The Planning Team will update and/or revise the Plan according to the requirements in

FEMA’s Tribal Plan Review Crosswalk and reproduce the Plan.



The updated Plan will be presented to the Tribal Council for review and approval.



The updated Plan will be submitted to FEMA for review, comment and approval.



Once the Plan is determined ‘approvable’ by FEMA, the Plan will be presented to the Tribal

Council for adoption via Tribal resolution.



The signed resolution will be sent to FEMA.

Monitoring Progress of Mitigation Activities

The Hopi Hazard Mitigation Planning Team will discuss, on at least an annual basis, the Mitigation

Strategy progress. Representatives of the Planning Team will report on the progress made by their

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

respective departments. Other departments or programs will be invited, as necessary to report or

present data relative to the Plan or mitigation measures implemented by their departments. The

implementation of mitigation measures will be monitored by the Planning Team on an on-going

basis until implementation is complete. Due to the vague and/or unrelated nature of the previous

Plan’s mitigation measures, the monitoring was not executed as discussed. However, with a clearer

and more concise Plan the probability of a better understanding, resulting in a higher level of

success in implementing mitigation measures is likely.

For FEMA supported projects, progress reports are required on a quarterly basis throughout the

project duration. The degree of quarterly reporting will be dependent upon the type of project, its

funding source, and the associated requirements. At a minimum, the quarterly report shall address:



Project Completion Status



Project Challenges/Issues (If any)



Budgetary Considerations (Cost Overruns or Underruns)



Detailed Documentation of Expenditures

Upon completion of projects, a member of the Planning Team will visit the project location to view

the final results. A closed project will also change status to “Completed” and will then be monitored

for effectiveness in the intended are of mitigation. FEMA supported project closeouts will include

an audit of the project financials as well as other guidelines/requirements set forth under the

funding or grant rules, and any attendant administrative plans developed by the Tribe.

6.4

Incorporation into other Planning Mechanisms

In the past, this Plan has not been successfully incorporated with our other tribal efforts. The Plan

was not highly publicized nor was it organized in a manner that lent itself to easily see the

opportunity for integration/incorporation. However with the improved format of this Plan, there is

likely to be greater opportunity to use the material in this Plan to inform other tribal efforts, projects

and planning mechanisms. This Plan will be publicized and made available to all tribal members,

departments and agencies. It will also be discussed regularly with community members and updates

presented at the Hopi Emergency Response Team (HERT) meetings. We believe this will give the

Plan improved on-going exposure resulting in a higher level of awareness of its benefits and how it

may be utilized for current and future tribal ventures ensuring its members a sustained high quality

of life for generations to come. It is our hope and intent that when plans, ordinances, regulations,

etc., are developed, reviewed or updated, the information from this Plan will be used where

appropriate. The responsibility of encouraging that practice will be owned by the Office of

Emergency Management.

The plans the tribe will, as appropriate incorporate this Plan’s information, data and mitigation

practices into are as follows:

PLANS

Hopit Potsqwani’at Goals and Objectives 2001

Hopi Tunatya’at : Strategic Land Use and Development Plan 2000

LAND USE

Hopi Emergency Response Plan 2005

Hopi Drought Contingency Plan 2000

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Hopi Water Code 1997

Hopi Wildland Fire Management Plan 2005

Hopi Integrated Woodlands Management Plan 2006

Hopi Integrated Resources Management Plan 2001

CODES AND REGULATIONS

Ordinance 55: Hopi Tribal Planning

Ordinance 26: Protection of place and objects of sacred historical

and scientific interest on the Hopi Reservation

Hopi Emergency Response Team ERP 2005

Hopi Emergency Operations Structure (with Tribal Declaration)

EMERGENCY

OPERATIONS

Hopi Incident Command Structure (at Incident Scenes)

Hopi Risk Management—Emergency Evacuation Plan

Hopi Environmental Protection Office—Leaking Underground

Storage Tank Program

BIA—Volunteer Structural Fire Response

Community Emergency Response Team (CERT)

PROGRAMS

Hopi Tribe Watershed Study 2009

Hopi Solid Waste Program

Hopi Cultural Preservation Office

LAND USE

Hopi Environmental Protection Office

Hopi Range Management Program

Hopi Wildlife Ecosystem Management Program

Hopi Resources Enforcement Services

6.5

Past and Continued Member and Stakeholder Involvement

During the previous Plan cycle of 2010 to 2015 the Tribe has not been involved as is planned for the

next five years. Having a more established program now and the development of this update has

been a learning lesson for the Tribe on how they can be more involved with the community. Other

than presenting at community meetings and schools some of the community events the program

did participate in were a Community Family Night Out sponsored by the BIA. The event was for first

responders and the public to learn and become more aware of how to protect themselves and the

community. They also participated in the Domestic Violence Month Conference which was hosted

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

by tribal agencies and departments. The hosts set up booths with information to help educate the

public on their programs and the hazard information was presented at that time.

The Tribe is committed to keeping the public informed about the reservations’ risks and hazards and

their resulting mitigation planning efforts. In order to accomplish this, the Planning Team will

pursue the following opportunities for public involvement and dissemination of information

whenever possible and appropriate:



Continue to develop and disseminate flyers to the public via community bulletin boards.

These flyers discuss a wide range of topics such as safe winter preparedness and driving tips,

elder and functional needs care/preparation, National Preparedness Month information,

Ready.gov, winterizing vehicles, emergency kits, etc. The intent is to continue to publish the

flyers monthly and focus on seasonal topics.



Educate the public on the risk and potential impacts of the hazards that threaten the

community and their villages at fairs, educational events and special community events.



Presentations will continue to be delivered to the Hopi Emergency Response Team (HERT) at

their monthly meetings. The intention of the on-going updates is to keep the Plan ‘alive’ and

engage other departments and individuals in the on-going mitigation efforts of the tribe.

The Tribe will continue to explore other opportunities to be more involved with the community and

will attend them whenever possible.

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Appendix A - Planning Process Documentation

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Appendix B - Public Involvement Documents

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Public comment on Landslide/Rock Fall:

Mr. Lloyd Ami from Polacca member of the Tewa Village called my desk phone wanted to share his

comments and concerns regarding the 2010 Mitigation Plan the hazard for Landslide/Rock Fall and

recommendations for the 2015 Mitigation Plan updates.

Mr. Ami is addressing the Polacca Mesa “Gap” area. He, rock continues to fall after heavy rain and

snow storms and is he is concerned this being a hazard for loss of lives and safety of the people.

Mr. Ami suggested for the planning team to continue to work with a Yanter Company from Salt Lake

City to stabilize the rocks and installment of embankments. Mr. Ami feels that the Yanter Company

would be knowledgeable of the Polacca Mesa area because they have collected vibrations maps,

and this company may have other useful records and documentation of the information collected

during that time.

After 15+years after the stabilization and anchoring of rocks it continues to be very unstable and

erosion is occurring causing the rocks to fall in large chucks after a storm or high winds pass through

the area.

Mr. Ami is willing to work with Tewa CD to assist the staff with the knowledge his has regarding the

Polacca Mesa “Gap” Project. There they can also include the Sichomovi and Walpi Community

Development Offices to come together and work on small projects to start addressing the problem.

Each project can build upon one another so the work on the Polacca Mesa can be continuous for the

safety of the people.

Velleda’s comments:

I recommend in the projects/action sections we can started with listing out a beginning phase to

address the landslide/ rock fall hazard. This will include Community Development Office and Cultural

Preservation office and the Hopi Department of Transportation since they now have the BIA 638

contract for Road Maintenance. To start a phase one for the next five years for the Polacca Area this

will include all three villages to work together to start developing a plan. This cost will be paid with

Transportation funds from the 638 contract and Village Allocation funds, the villages can start

working on grant funding to cover their cost.

Next, we can do this same idea of phases for the other villages that have high landslide rock fall

areas. We can work on this landside/rock fall projects in phase one, two and three for all villages.

Llyod Ami

P.O. Box 154

Polacca, Arizona 86039

(928) 737-2379; (928) 928-313-6100

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

2015

Appendix C - Assessment of Previous Plan’s Mitigation Strategy

2015

Drought

Incentive program to install water

saving devices

Drought

Winter

Storm

Winter

Storm

Winter

Storm

Infestation

Installation of water meters and

billing rates

Assess/upgrade primary and village

water systems. Perform village

surveys to determine needs

Building of central water

supply/storage for First and Second

Mesas villages to alleviate arsenic in

water sources

Installation of emergency generators

at critical structures and

communication towers

Outreach program to have residents

have one week of emergency

supplies

Strengthen/retrofit Tribal roof

structures

Partner with Dept of Agriculture &

Land Mgmt for prevention treatment

programs

Education outreach addressing

human infestations

On-going

Potential Funding

Source(s)

Part of in-place

program budgets

RSWA, Facilities Mgmt,

Village CSA, VUMC

IHS, Home Depot,

Lowes, Water

Resources Agency

IHS

Explanation

Too vague, will revise and place in

update to cover multiple hazards.

Villages manage their own water

systems & projects like these

would be different village to

village.

Again, villages manage their own

water systems. Projects like these

are up to the individual villages.

IHS

Description too vague, no one

recognized project.

Annually

$20M

10 years

IHS

$30,000

5 years???

Facilities/Risk Mgmt

Dept., Village CSA

Staff Time

On-going

CRS, CHR, ASEM, BIO

$50,000

On-going

Lead Agency

Village CSA, CHR, IHS,

PSEM, BIO

Water Co., Coops,

Village CSA

Natural Resources

Dept., IHS, Village CSA,

BIA

On-going

Revise

Community education outreach

Keep

Drought

Action

Complete

Description

Estimated

Cost &

Completion

Time

In Progress

Hazard

Status

No Action

Assessment of Previous Plan’s Mitigation Measures

Delete

Hopi Tribe Hazard Mitigation Plan

Facilities/Risk Mgmt

Dept., Villages

Dept of Range Mgmt,

IHS, Tribal Health

Resources

CHR, Village CSA, IHS,

ASEM, BIO

IHS, EPA

Hopi Tribe, BIA, IHS,

Red Cross,

Homeland Security

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.