Laserfiche WebLink
<br />The agriculture impacts in the current stud are smaller than those reported in the original study, <br />' largely due to NIIP Block 9 being projected to be built (see Chapter 5-C). This represents a <br />smaller reduction in irrigated acreage. In the current study the acreage withdrawn is 61% of that <br />' withdrawn in the original study which results in a commensurate reduction in the direct impacts <br />in agriculture. The cropping patterns are those used in the final report for the original study. <br />B. Reconciliation of Total (Direct Plus Indirect) Impacts <br />The impacts associated with critical habitat are computed by comparing the level of economic <br />' activity with critical habitat designated to that without. A key to such comparison is the <br />construction of a reliable baseline projection. In the original study the baseline was constructed <br />using Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) regional projections data. These data are prepared at <br />' the state level and are, of necessity, highly aggregated. Thus, local development projects are <br />often omitted because their effect at the state level would be quite small. When the analysis is <br />' conducted at the level of a few counties such projects should, and can, be incorporated into the <br />baseline. <br />' Although projects such <br />p ? as NIIP represent substantial investment and output of agricultural <br />products, their effect in the original analysis would have been insignificant. In terms of 1995 <br />output and employment, the Four Corners region (present study) is very small relative to that of <br />' the seven states that comprise the Colorado River Basin region (original study). The 1995 output <br />of the Four Corners region economy is approximately 0.6% of the Colorado River Basin <br />' economy, and the employment is approximately 1% of the Basin econom}-. Within the Four <br />Corners region, NIIP amounts to less than 1% of the regional economy. <br />C. Conclusions <br />t <br />' The overall impacts associated with critical habitat designation are significant dollar amounts but <br />represent only a small fraction of the regional economy. In no instance are the economic impacts <br />' 56 <br />