Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ENV IRONMENT AL COND IT IOIIIS AND I MIPACTS <br /> <br />A field review of the Elk River was conducted on May 1, <br />1987, Comparison of old maps/photos along with newer <br />maps/photos was made to determine the movement of the <br />stream, A good portion of the land adjacent to the river <br />itself is used for hay production 'H livestock grazing, <br /> <br />Install ing alternatives wi II effectively reduce the, <br />erosion and sediment problems for the erosive areas and to <br />the river. The alternatives would also enable the landowner <br />to maintain the present land use or change the land ~se as <br />needed, In some areas, fish, wildlife, and wetland habitat <br />may be maintained or in some cases impr.oved, Installation <br />may also help maintain the diversity of habitat in the basin <br />area. <br /> <br />There are also aesthetic and social benefits to <br />implementing practices, The area tends to look more <br />pleasing to the eye. There is also pride of ownership that <br />comes into play, Landowners like having th.,ir. prope,-ty look <br />good and are wi I ling to spend substant i a I amounts to make it <br />more pleasing to the eye, <br /> <br />All of the alternative treatml'ints anal\lzed In this <br />study wi I I improve riparian habitat by reducing damages <br />caused by erosion and sedimentation, However, vegetated <br />buffer strips, vegetative sprig revetment, and riparian <br />zones will return the habitat to native conditions more <br />completely and rapidly. <br /> <br />A comparison between the alternatives of the economic, <br />env i ronmental, and soc i al factors are listed in TABU: 3, <br />These factors are rated as to benefioial, adverse, or no <br />effect due to the type of treatment used, <br /> <br />23 <br />