Laserfiche WebLink
<br />" " <br /> <br />o <br />o <br />CO <br />c/) <br /> <br />Habitat replacement estimates relied on experiences with a similar program in the nearby <br />Grand Valley Unit. They assumed land interests would average $1,700 per acre; current <br />land values could double these costs. Development costs were assumed to average $1,350 <br />per acre. Reclamation added a 10 percent overhead cost, making the total cost about <br />$3,050/acre. Costs for the cottonwood tree program assumed each transplanted tree would <br />cost approximately $20, or $45,000. Reclamation estimated annual operation and <br />maintenance costs at $85/acre. If all systems are piped, the $4.6 million habitat replacement <br />costs would represent about 8.4 percent of the capital investment in the project. <br /> <br />Data provided in this EA and the FR Supplement (Reclamation, 1994) can be used to develop <br />specific proposals for piping laterals and replacing habitat. Specific proposals should include <br />updated cost estimates. To keep proposals for salinity control funds competitive, proposals <br />could consider alternative funding sources. To minimize replacement costs, options to <br />purchasing fee title lands should also be explored., Examples include: obtain long-tenn <br />conservation easements; purchase development rights; enter into partnerships with other <br />compatible projects along the river corridors. Development plans should be reviewed using <br />value-engineering principles. Reclamation should assume responsibility for budgeting and <br />managing funds to meet habitat replacement commitments. <br /> <br />Recreation and Esthetics <br /> <br />The FR/FES shows recreation development in the study area consists primarily of public <br />facilities in schools and city parks. Sweitzer Lake, a popular State-operated facility about 2 <br />miles southeast of the town of Delta, receives much recreational use. Dispersed recreation, <br />mainly walking, hunting, and horseback riding, occurs throughout the project area. Since <br />publishing the FR/FES, local communities have successfully begun development of riverfront <br />areas for trniIs, parks, and natural areas. <br /> <br />The East Side Laterals proposal would have similar effects to those described for the 1984 <br />Plan. Potential hunting losses associated with wildlife habitat losses might occur, although <br />habitat replacement measures might reduce these losses. Habitat replacement along river <br />corridors would be compatible and coordinated with on-going local efforts to preserve these <br />resources. Aesthetic losses associated with mature cottonwoods scattered within an otherwise <br />tree-less landscape would be replaced over time. <br /> <br />Safety <br /> <br />There are both human and wildlife safety concerns with the present irrigation system. Buried <br />pipelines would improve safety for both humans and wildlife as compared to concrete lining <br />or existing conditions. Exposure to open waterways would be significantly reduced. <br />Hazards, such as drowning in open waterways, would be eliminated for pipelines, continue if <br />no action is taken, and increase if the canals and laterals are lined with concrete. <br /> <br />25 <br />