Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Ol)2~61 <br /> <br />The effect upon hunting would be much less than either <br />Alternatives Two or Three. Fewer people would be attracted to the <br />area and the access into the better hunting habitats would remain <br />similar to the current situation. Initially there would be an <br />increase within the upper San Juan River Basin from the increase <br />in human population; but this increase would be comparable to what <br />has occurred as a result of the deve10puent of pagosa Lakes. <br /> <br />c. Alternative ~ <br /> <br />Alternative Two will disturb the most acres of habitat and have <br />the most miles of road (3.7 miles per section) and the longest <br />period of disturbance and the largest number of humans present in <br />the area. Consequently, it is believed that Alternative Two will <br />have the greatest impact upon the POPUlations of wild animals. <br /> <br />Disturbance and harassment activities within the private land will <br />be similar to Alternative One, only somewhat higher since there is <br />more developnent planned. This alternative all~ls the developnent <br />of the ski area base facilities and a village center at a high <br />density level, ski runs on the private land which tie into the ski <br />area developnent on National Forest lands, and one additional 18 <br />hole golf course. <br /> <br />Calving and fawning habitat in areas A, C and E (Map 20) will <br />definitely be altered; and the associated disturbance and <br />harassment will reduce the number of animals utilizing these <br />habitats which are of limited extent. Even if the animals <br />continue to utilize these habitats to some degree, it is <br />anticipated that the additional stress factors placed on the <br />mother and young will lead to a lower overall success rate for <br />birthing. <br /> <br />Spring migration routes will be altered in areas B, D and F (Map <br />20). The amount and degree of effect is very hard to determine. <br /> <br />Depending upon the amount of disturbance and how the animals react <br />to it, it is uncertain whether the elk may continue on their <br />traditional routes, or (a) more animals may go up Turkey Creek, <br />(b) animals may divert to the east and go up Coal Creek and Mill <br />Creek and then on over into Sand Creek, (e) more animals may <br />utilize route F or, (d) any combination of any or all of the above <br />may occur. The actual effect upon spring migration of elk may <br />also be determined by the kind and amount of developnent occurring <br />on private lands along the highway corridor going to pagosa <br />Springs. If more animals utilize route F there would probably be <br />more cow elk utilizing the calving habitat at map site E. <br /> <br />The disturbance and harassment factors associated with the <br />developuent of the back bowl portion of Alternative Two are <br />considered to be highly disturbing for the following reasons: 1) <br />Developuent would occur along the ridge and on portions of the <br /> <br />205 <br />