Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Asp" Highlands Sli Are. - Draft E.viro....",al /1IIfHU1 SIal.,..", <br />Tabl. 2,6 COIIJin..d <br /> <br />Discipline Impacts <br /> Alternative A Allemative B Alternative C Potential MitigBlion <br />Species of High Public adaptability mule deer would likely expanded summertime and winter Minimize nuisance bear hazard by keeping all <br />Interest return to vacated areas following recreation activities along the Loge restaurant associated food and garbage out of reach of <br />(Continued) cessation of construction activities. Peak -Highlands Peak ridge are bear.;, lnIining employees in proper waste disposal <br /> likely to cause sheep to avoid lhis techniques, and providing bear.prooftraSh cans in <br /> Due 10 the prevalence of high quality area year-round. off-sea'ion visitor areas. <br /> summer forage in the nearby Black bear -lhe new reslaurant and <br /> wilderness, displacement of bighorn expanded summer and winter <br /> sheep by summertime consb'Uction recreation at Loge Peak could have <br /> activities in Loge Peak, Highland Bowl additional adverse impacts by <br /> and Maroon Bowl areas would not likely attracting bears to restaurant waste <br /> impact the population. HowevCf, winter siteS. <br /> activities in these areas would affect <br /> sheep when lheyare most subject to <br /> physiological srress and may lead to <br /> mortality if bighorns are forced to move. <br /> Black bear could be adversely affected <br /> by the development of new ski lerrain if <br /> these areas contain denning sites. <br />Threatened and Only the bald cagle (H.Ii...."" Since noT&E species were found to Since no T&E species were found No conservation measures, as per USFWS <br />Endangered (f&E) leucocephalus) was identified as a exist within the area of influence of the 10 exisl within the area of influence requirements in section 7 consultation, will be <br />Species threatened species that may occur Aspen Highlands Skiing Area, of the Aspen Highlands Skiing necessary since no T&E species were found to occur. <br /> within the illea of influence of the implementation of all or pan of Area. implementation of all or part <br /> proposed action. However, no Allemative B would not impact any such of Alternative C wou Id not impact <br /> evidence was found thallhis or any species, any such species. <br /> other T &E species QCCUlli within <br /> the analysii area. Therefore, the No <br /> Action Al1Cmative would not <br /> imvact anY such ~, <br />BtO-DtvERSITY Impacts 10 biodiversity (including Forest fragmentation would resul1 in an Since most of the forest To reduce loss of snags and forest debris habitaJ. <br /> habiLBJ: fragmentation and additional 62 forest patches (19% fragmentation under bo!.h elements. phase glading, retain snags that occur <br /> elimination of hahita1linkages) increase) with 92% of the increase being Alternative B and C would occur among live trees, and recruit snags in ungladed areas. <br /> would be minor since additional 0-5 acre blocks. on the east side of Aspen <br /> clearing for the already-approved Highlands, and forest fragmentation To reduce habitat fragmentation, reduce !.he amount <br /> developments would lie in or Tree clearing and revegetation would in Maroon Bowl (which is excluded of eleareutting for liftIineslaccess roads. conso\idalc <br /> adjacent 10 existing artificia1 affect genetic diversity if exotic plants in Alterative C) would be limited, blocks of habilllts where possible. avoid wildlife <br /> openings, that out-compete locaJ flora are bicxliversily impacts in AllcI11ative movement corridors linking core habitat areas. <br /> introduced, and if populations of snag- C would be similar to those in <br /> dependent species are reduced. Tree Alternative B. Displacement of (orest interior and edge-oensWve <br /> <br />2-24 <br /> <br />Comparison of AlIerntJlives <br />