Laserfiche WebLink
The Proposed Action, Alternative B, would have greater effects on the environment because of <br />the additional disturbance of 19.5 acres. Alternative B, with all mitigation, meets four of the six <br />criteria (1, 2, 4, and 5). Although mitigating measures would reduce effects to park resources <br />and values, there would still be some undesirable consequences due to the mining of an <br />additional 19.5 acres of previously undisturbed land. Therefore, this altemative would not meet <br />national environmental policy goals as well as the No Action Alternative would, and therefore is <br />not the environmentally preferred alternative. <br />2.11. NPS Preferred Alternative <br />Although Alternative A is the environmentally preferable alternative, it would deny the mineral <br />reservation owners the reasonable exercise of their remaining mineral rights, and possibly lead <br />to litigation. Thus, the NPS preferred alternative is Alternative B, Proposed Action with <br />mitigation. The NPS believes this alternative would fulfill its mandates and direction, giving due <br />consideration to environmental, economic, technical, and other factors. Table 2.4 outlines both <br />alternatives and how well each alternative meets the objectives of this project. The actions <br />required for this project and to what extent park resources are impacted are summarized in <br />Tables 2.5 and 2.6. <br />Table 2.4 -Extent that Each Alternative Meets Identified Objectives <br /> Does Alternative A No Does Alternative B, <br />Objectives Action, Meet Objective? Proposed Action, Meet <br />' <br /> ective? <br />Ob <br />Provide holders of private No (-) Yes (+) <br />mineral rights reasonable The expansion would not occur, The expansion would be permitted, <br />access for development, to the precluding the owner/operator with the application of mitigation <br />extent it does not compromise from reasonable access to measures to meet other objectives. <br />the purposes of Curecanti develop his/her nonfederal mineral <br />National Recreation Area or interests. <br />conflict with the mission and <br />mandates of the National Park <br />S stem. <br />Analyze potential impacts to Yes (++) yes (++) <br />cultural resources on or eligible The impacts to these resources The impacts to these resources are <br />for listing on the National are fully analyzed in the EA. fully analyzed in the EA. <br />Register of Historic Places as <br />well as natural and <br />socioeconomic resources. <br />Develop measures to avoid, Yes (++) Yes (+) <br />minimize, or mitigate adverse The lack of expansion would result Mitigation measures would avoid <br />impacts to park resources and in avoidance of the archeological and minimize impacts. <br />values, human health and sites and would limit impacts to <br />safety, and visitor use and other resources. <br />experience; and to prevent <br />impairment to park resources <br />and values. <br />Involve the public in the Yes (++) Yes (++) <br />environmental process. Public involvement was completed Public involvement was completed <br /> as part of the EA process, as par[ of the EA process, including <br /> including notices and distribution notices and distribution of a <br /> of a newsletter. The document will newsletter. The document will be <br /> be made available for public made available for public review <br /> review and comment. and comment. <br />I <br />~I <br />26 <br />