Laserfiche WebLink
<br />082398 <br /> <br />,. <br /> <br />recreational use on these lands could also impact riparian vegetation due to increased streambank <br />impacts and altered irrigation water use. This would be evaluated in any future land e.xchange or <br />acquisition environmental documents. <br /> <br />Management Prescription #2 (Identifying Land Use Priorities): The proposed action would <br />identify the majority of the SRMA as a recreation priority. The proposed action would <br />additionally establish or retain a water. soil, wildlife, protected, or no priority for some lands <br />within the SRMA. The Colorado River, as well as other major tributaries within the proposed <br />SRMA boundary would be identified with a water priority. The management prescription for the <br />recreation priority indicates that soils, watershed. and water quality are compatible with <br />recreation and that these resources would be "protected through limits or restrictions placed on <br />location of recreation developments, certain types of recreation activities (e.g., OHVs), and other <br />compatible uses. ". The proposed land use priorities, therefore. would not directly impact <br />wetland/floodplain values or the ability to meet standard #2. Specific land use actions or <br />promoting the area for increased recreational use could result in the negative impacts described <br />under Prescription #1 and would require mitigative measures. Recreational uses include many <br />nonpennitted actions, so impacts from recreation can be harder to control than permitted <br />activities (e.g., livestock or oil & gas). There is no benefit to wetlands/fJoodplains, etc. in the <br />portions of the proposed SRMA identified as a recreation priority, and there could be some <br />negati ve effects if recreation uses increase. <br /> <br />Management Prescription #3 (NSO for oil and gas leasing): Although oil and gas development is <br />not expected to be a major land use within the proposed SRMA, management prescription #3, <br />would automatically provide protection for wetlands and floodplains from direct or indirect <br />impacts associated with that activity. Existing riparian conditions could be maintained and the <br />ability to meet standards would not be impacted. <br /> <br />Management Prescription #4 (LandlMineral Withdrawal): By closing the SRMA to mining, <br />existing riparian conditions could be maintained and the ability to meet standards would not be <br />impacted. <br /> <br />NATIVE AMERICAN RELIGIOUS CONCERNS <br /> <br />Affected Environment: <br />There are no known Native American religious, traditional use or burial locations within the <br />proposed SRMA boundary. Cultural resource inventories have been completed for various <br />projects within this area. <br /> <br />Environmental Consequences of Proposed Action: <br />Management Prescription #1,2,3. and 4 (Boundary Adjustment, Identifying Land Use Priorities, <br />NSO for oil and gas leasing. LandlMineral Withdrawal): Consultation on the proposed action <br />was completed August 23, 1999. It was detennined the proposed action would not affect Native <br />American religious. traditional use or burial locations. <br /> <br />13 <br />