Laserfiche WebLink
Table I-6-6. State Employment -Incremental Impacts Over Time of Critical Habitat Designation <br /> (Jobs) <br /> 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 <br />Arizona -0.91 -2.065 -3.69 -6.90 -12.97 -19.65 <br />California 21.20 28.060 274.00 504.41 828.15 1231.78 <br />Colorado 11.32 9.240 -2.17 -14.76 -30.83 -47.95 <br />Nevada 0.00 -1.067 -3.68 -7.62 -12.90 -19.49 <br />New Mexico -1.78 -7.840 -23.94 -47.36 -82.62 -126.34 <br />Utah -22.27 -42.390 -60.09 -72.56 -84.60 -95.58 <br />Wyoming 0.00 -0.770 -1.50 -2.27 -2,91 -3.55 <br />Colorado <br />River Basin 28.88 84.700 204.21 364.21 586.82 877.69 <br />5. Present Value and Annualized Incremental Impacts <br />Table I-6-7 presents three ways of representing the impacts associated with- the designation of <br />critical habitat for the aggregate measures of economic activity. The values presented in <br />Table I-6-7 were previously presented in Tables I-6-3, I-6-4, and I-6-5 and are included here <br />for comparison purposes. In addition, Table I-6-7 reports the annualized values and the <br />present value of the impacts as a percent of the present value using the without fish scenario <br />projections." This provides a relative compazison of the size of the incremental critical <br />habitat impacts between the without fish and with fish scenarios. <br />An examination of the percentage deviations reported in Table 1-6-7 illustrates that <br />incremental critical habitat impacts represent a small deviation from the level of economic <br />activity projected in the without fish scenario. For example, for the Basin as a whole, the <br />deviation in total output is 0.0006 percent (6 ten thousandths of a percent). <br /> <br />"The annualized value transforms a fluctuating impact stream into a levelized equivalent present value. <br />I-37 <br />