WSP11863 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I I I I Hunting for deer and elk will definitely be aefected by this alternative. '!'here will probably initially qe more hunters in the field as the access is improved and las more people becane aware of the area. In the long run, ihunting, or at least hunter success and the quality of huntil'\9 may suffer as the word gets out and there are more and morebhunters in the area. If this situation were to continue f r five to ten years, then there may be fewer hunters attrac~ed to the area and the revenue from hunting would eventua~ly drop. This scenario is der:endent upon hCM fast the ent~re area may be develor:ed, hCM the animals react to the deve~opllent and how much of the area is or:en to hunting. ! I Although the increase in human population of the general area may initially result in an increase in huntiers and overall hunting pressure, many of the present local h~nters feel that the quality of hunting may decrease. This rrjay very well be true in their perception of "quality hunting". Quality hunting is really whatever each and every hun~er perceives it to be. A recent study conducted by JaIl)es R. Goodwin, Associate Professor of Anthropology, University of Colorado, indicates that quality hunting as perce~Ved by hunters (responding to a questionnaire) varies, i.e. Ikilling a trophy bull, killing a bull, killing an elk, havihg a good time, being in excellent scenery, being with enjo~able companions, and enjoying the outdoors in good weatherl. The Colorado Division of Wildlife is currently analyzing hCM the state might be managed for quality hunting. Th~y are having a difficult time defining what is "quality hun~ing". I With each alternative there will be additiqnal expenditures of time and money by the Colorado Division lof Wildlife as a result of handling additional road kills,1 additional garre damage claims, dog control, etc. Additidnal coordination meetings will also occur with county commis~ioners, etc., to give attention to wildlife concerns as I subdivision and developllent proposals are considered as a result of the ski area developnent or with the No Action Alte~native. . I This ski area proposal will degrade sane habitats which eventually result in a decrease in sane I species numbers. HCMever, there are nCM or will be other ~rojects in other areas on the forest that will improve hab~tats and numbers will increase. The San Juan National IForest Land and Resource flangernent Plan very visibly di~plays that on a forest-wide basis there will be an overap improvement in wildlife habitats which will be capable of supporting more numbers of the current species presentty occupying the forest. This was so stated with the fu;tl knCMledge that there would be sane areas where the habita~F would be altered in a manner which decreased their abili~y to provide the needs of wild animals. At the same time there would be other I 202