ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
<<
Previous
|
Table of
Contents |
Next
>>
ALTERNATIVE C: PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
This section evaluates the potential impacts of alternative C, the preferred
alternative.
Biotic Communities
Under alternative C, impacts would occur to vegetation and wildlife associated
with rehabilitation of the Highway 62 West corridor and the realignment of the
highway through the switchbacks. Impacts associated with rehabilitation of the
roadway would be similar to the impacts described in alternative B, resulting in
a short-term, negligible, adverse effect to vegetation and wildlife.
Vegetation
Under this alternative, approximately 0.5 mile of roadway—the switchbacks—would
be removed and the road realigned (figure 7). Approximately 2.5 acres (1.0
hectares) of vegetation would be disturbed for the new alignment, resulting in a
long-term, negligible, adverse impact to vegetation. Up to six pine trees over
10-feet tall located at or near the toe of the fill slope would be protected
with tree wells. Also, six to eight pine trees under 10-feet tall would be saved
for transplanting. Following highway rehabilitation work, 1 acre (0.4 hectare)
of land previously covered by the existing highway and turnouts would be
available for restoration to native habitat resulting in a long-term,
negligible, beneficial effect to vegetation.
Wildlife
Wildlife species would be expected to avoid the area during construction or
would only travel through the area when traffic and noise had abated. Following
highway rehabilitation work, 1 acre (0.4 hectare) of land previously covered by
the existing highway and turnouts would be available for restoration to native
habitat resulting in a long-term, negligible, beneficial effect to wildlife.
Alternative C would result in a short-term, negligible, adverse effect to
wildlife during construction.
Cumulative Impacts. Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions
that would have an effect on vegetation and wildlife include fire management
using prescribed burning and construction projects related to waterlines and
lagoons in Munson Valley. Prescribed burns would emulate a natural occurrence
under controlled conditions that would result in short-term adverse impacts to
vegetation, individual wildlife, and habitat; however, the long-term effect from
prescribed burns would be beneficial as the health of the plant communities
would improve and habitat would be more diverse for wildlife. Construction in
the Munson Valley would result in temporary to
long-term adverse effects on vegetation and wildlife on a localized site. This
alternative would contribute a negligible, long-term, adverse effect to the
cumulative impacts on vegetation and wildlife.
Conclusion. Alternative C would have a short-term, negligible, adverse effect on
vegetation and wildlife during construction. Long-term, negligible, adverse
impacts on vegetation and wildlife would be expected; however, a long-term,
negligible beneficial effect would occur where habitat is restored. The
cumulative effect would be a long-term, negligible, adverse effect on vegetation
and wildlife.
Because there would be no major adverse impacts to a resource or value whose
conservation is (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes identified in the
park’s establishing legislation, (2) key to the natural or cultural integrity of
the park or to opportunities for enjoyment of the park, or (3) identified as a
goal in the park’s General Management Plan or other relevant National Park
Service planning documents, there would be no impairment of park resources or
values related to biotic communities at Crater Lake National Park.
