WSP05771 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

t C (; "4~1':' . 1..' toO f ,.t . . neighboring ranch meadows. The lower portion of Stage 4 in Area E, shows a significant increase in vegetation during 2001 as related to increased precipitation. Certainly many factors beyond project pumping; including irrigation practices, precipitation, runoff, and the condition of old artesian wells that once supported Area A, are contributing to the change in vegetation in Area A and E. To monitor the change in composition of plant species and densities, a network of vegetation transects is used for annual measurement and monitoring. Percent cover values for forbs at the salvage wells in Area A are higher than or similar to pre-pumping levels with the exception of invasions of annual weeds at two sites. For Area A, percent cover of grasses has increased at four sites, decreased at one site and fluctuated at two sites. Percent cover of shrubs has decreased at four sites and fluctuated at three sites in Area A. With the exception of sporadic invasions of weeds at one site, percent cover of forbs in Area C remains quite low. For Area C, percent cover of grasses has increased at four sites, fluctuated at three sites and remained zero at one site. Percent cover of shrubs has increased at one site, decreased at five sites and fluctuated at two . sites for Area C. At Area D, percent cover offorbs are insignificant at one site and have fluctuated at one site. For Area D, shrub levels have stayed about the same and grass levels are generally above pre-pumping levels. Forbs were found at very low levels in Area E b'efore 1998, but are now very prevalent at five of the eight sites. Percent cover and biomass production of grasses in Area E decreased at all sites since pumping started or since 1993, with the exception of SW99. No significant changes have occurred for shrubs in Area E. No significant changes have occurred in Upper Stage 4. Insufficient data is available for Stage 5. The Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Project estimated that the worst case result of the Project would involve the loss of or significant alteration of from 25,000 to 40,000 acres of ephemeral and seasonal wetlands. Final analysis presented in the Draft Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Statement indicated that 8,460 acres of wetlands would be effected. To offset this predicted injury, mitigation water was provided to the Alamosa National Wildlife Refuge and the Blanca Wildlife Habitat Area and stabilization water was provided to the San Luis Lakes State Wildlife Area. From the 2001 imagery, an average of 1,264 acres within the project boundary showing a significant decrease in vegetation from the Pre-project Baseline. This amount is less than 2000 and 1998, and is similar but larger than 1999. Much of this amount is known 10 be attributed to factors other than project pumping. This amount is also far less than the 8,460 acres that were predicted in the FEIS and for which mitigation water is being provided. The 2001 imagery also shows an average of 857 acres within the project boundary showing a significant increase in vegetation from the Pre-project Baseline. This amount is very similar to the past three years. Areas within the project boundary that show an increase in vegetation include, in part, lands that are receiving mitigation water such as the San Luis Lakes State Wildlife Area and the BI.anca Wildlife Habitat Area. Other areas outside of the project boundary like the Alamosa Wildlife Refuge have also benefitted from mitigation water ii