Laserfiche WebLink
<br />TABLE 2 (Continued) <br /> <br />Comparison of Planning Question by Alternative (Average Annual Output for Year 1995 Unless Noted Otherwise) <br /> <br /> Alternative <br /> A B C D E F <br /> Output or Effect Non- Reduced <br /> PQ Planning Question to be Measured Units Preferred No Action RPA Market Market Budget <br /> 8. HOW SHOULD THE A. Vegetation MAc. Ft. 14,415 10,725 17,465 10,655 7,015 5,295 <br /> FOREST BE MANAGED Trea tmen t <br /> IN RESPONSE TO THE B. Wa ter yield M Ac.Ft. 2,092 2,086 2,112 2,095 2,083 2,079 <br /> INCREASING DEMANDS from the Forest <br /> FOR WATER C. Water meeting M Ac.Ft. 1,902 1,896 1,922 1,905 1,893 1,889 <br /> state and fed- <br /> eral standards <br />".. 9 . HOW WILL THE FOREST A. Administration ADMINISTRATION OF WINTER SPORTS SITES WILL BE DEALT <br />;>- ADMINISTER EXISTING and allocation WITH AS PART OF THE ON-GOING ADMINISTRATION OF THE <br /> WINTER SPORTS SITES of sites FOREST. ALLOCATION OF POTENTIAL SITES WILL BE <br /> AND ALLOCATE INVEN- BASED ON THE REGIONAL PRIORITY SYSTEM - SEE CHAPTER <br /> TORIED POTENTIAL IV. <br /> SITES MMRVDl! <br /> B. Potential 4,400 4,500 4,000 4,950 3,850 3,850 <br /> winter sports <br /> opportunity <br /> C. Effects on local <br /> areas from ski area <br /> expansion <br /> 1) Additional No. of 15,920 15,932 12,713 20,976 10,743 10,360 <br /> Jobs Jobs <br /> 2) Additional No. of 19,582 19,596 15,637 25,800 13,214 12,743 <br /> Population People <br /> <br />11capacity of winter sports sites is measured in skiers-at-one-time. <br />MRVD's to permit comparibility. A detailed analysis of capacity may <br /> <br />This number was also converted to <br />be found in Chapter III of the EIS. <br /> <br />