WSP06750 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

"' CluJpler 2 ' rh< Allerna1ives r abl. 2.6 COnliNu:d c:.~ 1...:,;) i.~ cO t-:l '-'1 Discipline Impacts Potentia) MitigaIion Altern";"'. A A1tern.,;."e B Altern";"'. C VEGETATION The main impact, listed by vegetation Mixed conifer - 358 acres (24%). Clearly marked paths wiD be established for summer General Vegetation type, would consist of the following (% Potential recruiunent old growth - visitors, and interpretative signs will be provided to (Continued) of mediumJhigh intensity glading plus 104=es (43%). inform hikers of the sensi.tive nature of alpine tundra line clearing in parentheses): Aspen ,76 acres (20%), vegetation. Mixed conifer - 399=es (21%), The affected area of alpine tundra Use environmentally sensitive timber removal Potential spruce/fir and lodgepole would be 21 acres less than under teChniques including helicopters in inaccessible 81ea5 recruiImentold growth -104""""'(43%). Alternative B. but where this to minimize disturbance to ground cover along lift Aspen 72 acres (15%). habitat is affected, the impact wnuld corridors. be greater due to the need for Limit glading in stands that have been identified as In additinn, 74 acres of sensitive alpine grading part of the riclgeline for the potential or recruitment old growth to minimize the blndra (80% of the total area of this installation of the Ridge Surface loss of shade-tolerant species in dense forested stands. type) could be affected during times of Uft. In addition, only 27 =es of low snow cover, and 80 acres of mountain brush Use only native species for revegeL21ion obtained only mounlain brush, and 17 acres of and 5 acres of montane willow from certified weed free seed sources. aggressively montane willow could be affected by would be affected by low intensity tBtget new popu lations of noxious or invasive species. low intensity glading. glading only, end minimize disturbance 10 limit the risk of introducing non-native species. Follow guidelines for tree removal in avalanche suuting zones specified in the avalanche tochnical report. Plant Species of No known populations of fedentlly No known populations of brownie lady The impact on brownie lady slipper None proposed. Special Concern listed threatened or enclangered slipper would be impacted although habitat is likely to be similar under species occur within the analysis rather extensive areas of potential both Alternatives B and C although area although potential habitat for habitalS do occur on north and north-e&l exclusion of the Steeplechase the brownie lBdy slipper facing slopes. Use of existing fall-lines Catwalk under Alternative C could (CypripedillJ1lfascicuJaJlIJ1l) does and natural ski corridors decreases the somewhat reduce the impact on exist, and there would be no impact probability of causing adverre impacts potential habilal for this species. to plan, species of """"",I concern. on ootential habitats, WETLANDS There would be no identifiable Five acres of wetland! riparian areas The same 5 acres of wetland! To reduce dredging and filling impacts to wetlands, impact to wetlands in the analysis could be affected under Ibis aI1ernative riparian areas would be affected avoid wetlands when possible, reduce size of impact. area. by low intensity glading or ski nv.... under Alternatives B and C by low use bridges to cross linear wetland feannes. and Direct impac.ts 011 jurisdictional wetlands inlerlSUy glading or ski ov..., mitigale for wetland losses as =Iuired by the ACOE would potentially affect two small during Section 404 permit1ing. intenninent streams with small adjacent Direct impacts would affect Blleast wetlands (each with OIIe aussing about three realllres with six sepanIIe to feel long and 22 feet wide). and one crossings. These include two Comparison of Alternalil1el 2-21