Laserfiche WebLink
Executive Summary <br />Ability of neighbors to observe new cultural practices on the habitat - protected <br />land <br />Water Quality and Quantity. Under Scenario 1, about 2,497 acres of alfalfa, corn, row crops <br />and pasture would be converted to wildlife habitat. Under Scenario 2, about 2,643 acres of these <br />agricultural lands would be converted to habitat while Scenario 3 would convert 2,033 acres of <br />agriculture production to habitat. Converting land from agricultural production to wildlife <br />habitat has the potential to change the quality of water in the natural watercourse and the quantity <br />of water consumed by the plant life. However, because the amount of acreage to be converted <br />from agricultural production is not significant, positive water quality and quantity impacts are <br />expected to be minor. No detrimental impacts are expected.. <br />Educational and Research Opportunities. The extent and value of educational and research <br />opportunities for habitat - protected areas depends on the management policies of the owners and <br />the degree to which the land can be easily accessed. Some local habitat - protected properties <br />offer access to educational. groups, ranging from grade school to graduate school. Some owners <br />encourage research with universities, scouting camps and hunting - mentoring programs. Some <br />owners provide a variety of education programs and look for expansion opportunities; while <br />other owners offer limited programs and seek limited expansion opportunities. Some owners <br />have aggressively pursued visitors while others are passive. There are also concerns of accident <br />Iiability, which could increase habitat management costs. <br />Mitigation Strategies. The negative third party impacts associated with the Program that were <br />identified in the Final Draft Report can be summarized as follows. <br />Potential negative economic impacts to the agricultural sector in the Central Platte <br />Region due to a land use change from agricultural production to protected wildlife <br />habitat. <br />Potential negative impacts to adjacent landowners <br />Considering these potential negative impacts, Hazen and Sawyer suggests the following <br />mitigation strategies. <br />If possible avoid the conversion of high - valued row crop areas such as corn and <br />soybeans to wildlife habitat. <br />Maximize the use of agricultural best management practices (BMPs) and local <br />land use practices that are compatible with habitat restoration goals to avoid <br />losses in crop and livestock production. <br />Maximize the positive local and regional economic impacts from habitat <br />restoration and management by hiring local contractors to perform restoration and <br />management activities. <br />Hwd:40210R"doc ES -15 Third Party Impact Study <br />Final Report <br />