Laserfiche WebLink
<br />002163 <br /> <br />Many of the effects listed in the following discussions will be viewed by' <br />same as beneficial, while others will see them as negative. No attempt will <br />be made to characterize effects as "good" or "bad". <br /> <br />1. Economic Base <br /> <br />a. Alternative One <br /> <br />Under this alternative no develoJ;Ulent would occur on National <br />Forest system land. This would eliminate some additional <br />recreation and tourism opportunities associated with the project, <br />and generally maintain those that exist currently. Also, this <br />alternative will create little demand for ne'\'l goods or services, <br />nor will it necessarily provide any new incremental revenues for <br />or costs to local govenment. <br /> <br />DeveloJ:!l1E!nt on private land, however, may occur independent of a <br />Forest SerVice decision allowing use of public land. Econamic <br />effects will take place if private land alone is developed, but <br />due to the self-contained nature of this developrent and specially <br />created service districts, the effects on demand for new county <br />and municipal services will not be great. <br /> <br />b. Alternatives Two and Three <br /> <br />DeveloJ;Ulent under either Alternative Two or Three will lead to an <br />expansion of the local econamic base. New employment <br />opportunities will be generated in both Nineral and Archuleta <br />counties to serve and support visiting tourists and the higher <br />permanent population base. Many existing local business <br />establishments, especially in pagosa Springs, will be strengthened <br />by the growth in sales volumes and revenues, and expanded demand <br />for goods and services will also provide new retail and commercial <br />opportuni ties. <br /> <br />The economic expansion is not expected to result in substantial <br />econamic diversification. !>bst of the growth will be concentrated <br />in the trade, services, finance/real estate and construction <br />industries, which already account for a disproportionate amount of <br />total employment. In spite of this, either alternative could <br />contribute to employment stability because peak season employment <br />needs will typically occur in winter, thereby countering the <br />existing pattern of high seasonal employment in the summer. To <br />the extent that fiI1llS now hire additional staff on a year-round <br />basis, or that local residents can effectively achieve full-time <br />employment by combining two different seasonal positions, more <br />employment stability would result. The potential also exists that <br />the number of seasonal jobs associated with ski resort develoJ;Ulent <br />will be so large in comparison to the surmnertime level that the <br />same problem of seasonal employment imbalances will result, but be <br />shifted from surmner to winter. <br /> <br />209 <br />