Laserfiche WebLink
<br />- <br /> <br />Environmental Evaluation <br /> <br />Environmental resources evaluation during this step of planning will be of sufficient <br />scope and detail to effectively quantify the impacts the alternatives will have on the <br />resources, and to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act. This will include <br />any impacts to flood stages by recognizing and relating to the analysis accomplished for <br />the water supply planning. <br /> <br />The Corps will also comply with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act by giving full <br />consideration to reports and recommendations furnished by the US Fish and Wildlife <br />Service, and the appropriate head of the State agency exercising administration over the <br />fish and wildlife resources; will also comply with the Endangered Species Act by giving <br />special consideration to the reports and recommendations of the US Fish and Wildlife <br />Service on the conservation of Federally listed and proposed listed endangered and <br />threatened species, and their designated critical habitat; will consider comments furnished <br />by local public officials and the general public and use the information, as appropriate, to <br />supplement information and recommendations provided by the above Federal and State <br />fish and wildlife resources agencies; and will determine the need for any mitigation by <br />assessing ecological resources gains and losses attributed to alternative plans. A <br />summarized statement of compliance with environmental laws and executive orders will <br />be prepared. <br />(Note - the water supply planning analysis will analyze any far downstream effect on <br />threatened and endangered species Platte River habitat in Nebraska) <br /> <br />Habitat-based evaluation methodologies will be used to the extent possible to describe <br />and evaluate ecological resources and benefits/impacts associated with alternative plans. <br />The Corps will use the ecosystem assessment methodology developed in Step 2. The <br />method will involve outputs in acres of stream habitat and riparian habitat improved <br />and/or gained. The method will also involve outputs in quality as discussed in Step 2. <br /> <br /> <br />Regarding the simplest, least costly approach that would give an approximation of <br />ecosystem units, the analysis might work as follows for wintertime target flows - it <br />would be essentially atop width analysis. We know that the added flows within the. <br />targeted range will make pools and runs deeper and slower, which is the most important <br />winter habitat of most fish species found in the South Platte. And we know that the <br />added flows will provide some added top width, which will provide open water that is <br />shallow that is preferred by wintering bird populations. Thus, for each alternative with <br />winter time flow increase, we can claim the entire baseline top width acreage for winter <br />fish habitat benefit because the alternative will have made all the pools and runs deeper; <br />and we can claim the added top width acreage as added wintering bird habitat, because <br />the alternative will have added that habitat, and the existing shallow open water habitat <br />will not have been made so much deeper as to be unusable. And we would figure out <br />something similar for other times of the year once the workgroup of fish and wildlife <br />stakeholders develops those in-stream flow targets. <br /> <br />12 <br />