Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />'. <br /> <br />''Q0?303 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />16 <br /> <br />Adoption of the recommendations would <br />and also provide additional benefits. <br />3 would assure fishing and hunting. <br /> <br />replace the wildlife losses <br />Recommendations Nos. I and <br /> <br />Recommendation No.2 would assure adequate access facilities for <br />fishing at San Luis Lake and would provide an additional 10,000 <br />man-days of fishing with a benefit of $15,000 annually. <br /> <br />Implementation of Recommendations Nos. 5, 6, and 7 would replace <br />annual losses of 2,600 man-days of upland-game hunting, 1,200 man- <br />days of waterfowl hunting, production of 12,000 ducks, and 500 man- <br />days of wildlife-oriented recreation. The refuge also would pro- <br />vide an additional 600 man-days of upland-game hunting, 3,200 man- <br />days of waterfowl hunting, and 4,000 man-days of wildlife-oriented <br />recreation for yearly benefits of $1,200, $14,400, and $2,000, <br />respect i ve ly. <br /> <br />Recommendation No.8 would assure maximum development of the AI- <br />amosa National Wi ldl ife Refuge,:and Recommendation No.9 would <br />prevent damage to the Alamosa National Wi ldlife Refuge. <br /> <br />Cpsts, based on 1969 prices, related to the fish and wildlife aspects <br />of the project are shown in Table 5. <br /> <br />Table 5. Costs Related to Fish and Wildlife Measures <br /> <br />Item <br /> <br />Capi tal <br />Cos ts <br /> <br />Annual OM&R <br />Costs <br /> <br />Fishing access, San Luis Lake <br />Mishak National Wildlife Refuge <br /> <br />$ 30,000 <br />1,708,000 <br /> <br />$ 1,000 <br />62,000 <br /> <br />d.~. ~~h?jU- <br /> <br />F. Victor Schmidt <br /> <br />Enclosures 2 <br /> <br />Copies (10) <br /> <br />