Laserfiche WebLink
Executive Summary <br />■ Increased trespassing <br />■ Increased mosquito or rodent populations <br />• Property damage from wildlife <br />■ Unacceptable access to property <br />Four of the five respondents said that there have been no weed infestations caused by <br />management of the habitat- protected property. One of the respondents said that the tree clearing <br />and ground cultivation on the habitat- protected property has increased the musk thistle <br />population on his property. He has not taken any action to control this infestation but says that <br />he will if the problem gets any worse. Based on information provided by the Weed Control <br />District Superintendents, the cost to treat weed-infested areas during the three to five year control <br />period will vary with the intensity of the infestation. For a severe infestation, an order of <br />magnitude cost would be about $500 per acre during the treatment period. <br />One of the respondents, a farmer, said that the widening of the river for habitat management has <br />caused flooding on some of his property. As a result, he has had to move his fences. <br />One respondent indicated that, over the years, there has been an increase in the number of <br />birdwatchers due to the increased crane population. Another farmer indicated that he plans to <br />install fences and no- trespassing signs due to the greater number of bird watchers in recent years. <br />This farmer remarked that "the installation cost of $1,500 for fences, gates and signs was a small <br />price to pay to ensure additional wildlife variety right next door." Overall, neighboring property <br />owners say that the bird watchers are tolerable. However, four of the neighbors interviewed <br />stated that wild game poachers and joy riders are a problem and their numbers would increase <br />proportionally with an increase in the number of birdwatchers. <br />While adjacent landowners did not indicate that trespassing is a problem on lands located next to <br />currently protected habitat, it is worth noting the policies implemented by habitat managers <br />concerning public access. For all of the private habitat areas in the study area, there is either no <br />public access or it is strictly controlled. As a result, adjacent landowners have not experienced <br />an increase in trespass related problems. If the Program chooses to increase public access to <br />protected habitat areas it is likely that this activity will need to be controlled to avoid problems <br />associated with illegal trespass. <br />The five neighbors interviewed identified the following positive impacts they received from the <br />habitat - protected property. <br />■ Neighbors enjoy gazing at scenic rangeland <br />■ Aggressive trespasser control of managed property <br />■ Neighbors who are hunters enjoy the additional wildlife <br />■ Potential to receive new fences paid by habitat owner <br />Hwd.40210R009.doc ES -14 Third Party Impact Study <br />Final Report <br />