Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />... <br /> <br />Addition of the seasonal pool and inundation of 1,100 more ac- <br />res will cause additional upland game habitat losses. It is <br />our opinion, however, that by intensive development and man- <br />agement of project lands by the Mississippi Game and Fish Com- <br />mission wildlife losses will be mitigated. <br /> <br />This optimistic view was substantiated by post-construction occurrences <br /> <br />which indicate a project-supported deer herd estimated at 100-120 ani~ <br /> <br />mals, which is equivalent to the deer herd estimated to be supported by <br /> <br />the project area prior to disruption (Prosser, Martin and Stroud, in <br /> <br />press). <br /> <br />Littleville Lake. Typical of many water developments in the northeast, <br /> <br />this primarily water supply project affected a small area. The area of per- <br /> <br />manent inundation covers only 275 ac (111 ha) while the additional land <br /> <br />area acquired in fee includes 1,337 ac (541 hale The limited extent of <br /> <br />habitat alteration e~ected in conjunction with the project was addressed <br /> <br />in the Fish and Wildlife Service's report (Bailey, 1961), viz: <br /> <br />The loss of wildlife habitat by the inundation of 275 acres is <br />expected to be insignificant. <br /> <br />There proved to be no post-impoundment data contradicting this assessment <br /> <br />although the eventual closure of all project lands by the local sponsor, <br /> <br />prevented access by hunters and other potential users on the entire area. <br /> <br />John Redmond Reservoir. The project was not located in important big <br /> <br />game habitat. In fact, the reservoir, which permanently inundated 9,400 <br /> <br />ac (3,804 ba) a~d included the fee acquisition of an additional 20,810 ac <br /> <br />(8,422 ha) was the only project evaluated to date with no deer population <br /> <br />of consequence either before or after construction. Big game were not <br /> <br />Dentioned in the pre-construction planning report. <br /> <br />49 <br />