Alternative A – Preferred Alternative. Implementing the Preferred Alternative is expected to result in positive impacts to vegetation. Establishing permanent native grasses (CP2) and restoring rare and declining habitat (CP25) where crops were once grown would result in restoration of native vegetative communities and greater vegetative species diversity, as areas of agricultural monocultures are replaced with a number of native plant species. Establishing permanent vegetation is expected to reduce runoff of agricultural chemicals and soils, thus improving the quality of habitats for aquatic plants. Decreased turbidity and enrichment from fertilizers are expected to result in more light available to submerged rooted plants. The occurrence of invasive and exotic species is expected to be reduced because native plants are more able to out-compete such species than the monocultures currently in place.
Alternative A – Preferred Alternative. The establishment of native vegetation (CP2), shallow areas for wildlife (CP9) and the restoration of rare and declining habitat (CP25) are expected to increase the quantity and quality of terrestrial and aquatic wildlife habitat and thus wildlife species diversity. Increasing diversity among plant species and restoring native plant communities and habitats are expected to result in increased animal species diversity, as native animal species move in to inhabit newly created habitats where homogenous and highly disturbed habitat existed before. Species diversity is expected to increase among all terrestrial animal groups, including insects which historically were abundant and diverse in the Coastal Prairie ecosystem. Reduced runoff of agricultural chemicals and soils is expected to improve the quality of habitats for aquatic animals as decreased turbidity and reduced enrichment from fertilizers result in more dissolved oxygen and fewer contaminants. Species would be impacted directly by the new habitat made available through the establishment of CPs and indirectly by improved water quality resulting from reduced runoff of sediment, nutrients and other chemicals.
Alternative A – Preferred Alternative. As with vegetation and wildlife, some threatened and endangered species are expected to benefit from the improvements in surface water quality both within and downstream of the project area and the restoration of native terrestrial habitats. The aquatic habitat used by the pallid xxxxxxxx is expected to improve as a result of reduced runoff of agricultural chemicals and soil erosion. Such water quality improvements are also expected to improve the foraging habitat of Bald Eagle, Brown Pelican and Piping Plover. The Louisiana black bear, a habitat generalist, could be positively impacted by restoration of native vegetation which could result in larger tracts of habitat that are not fragmented by agricultural fields. Both the Red Cockaded Woodpecker and American chaffseed are species that occur in pine forests. Like the Louisiana black bear, these species could benefit if the proposed action resulted in larger tracts of unfragmented habitat.
Alternative A – Preferred Alternative. Due to the long history of human occupation in the CREP agreement area, the potential for encountering archaeological resources during implementation of CREP contracts is considered high. Conservation practices that are ground disturbing beyond what is normally disturbed from agricultural plowing have the potential to impact known and yet unknown archaeological resources. Such practices may include mechanical removal of vegetation and brush, and restoration of local hydrology by removal of crop levees, terraces or other conditions that cause ponding of water and smoothing of rills and gullies. In order to determine whether proposed ground-disturbing practices would impact archaeological resources listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register, an archaeological survey would be required prior to implementation of the contract. The archaeological survey should meet all survey guidelines set forth by the Louisiana SHPO. Results and recommendations from the survey should receive concurrence for the Louisiana SHPO prior to project implementation.
Alternative A – Preferred Alternative. The CREP agreement area contains a rich architectural history related to early settlement and plantation themes of Louisiana’s history (see Table 3.2-1). Should proposed conservation practices include the removal or modification of historic architectural resources included in or eligible for the National Register, a historic architectural resources survey would be required in order to determine whether such resources are present. Coordination and consultation with the Louisiana SHPO would minimize or eliminate potential impacts.
Alternative A – Preferred Alternative. Because the areas of potential effect of CREP actions are not yet defined, no Native American sacred sites or traditional cultural properties are identified. Once these areas are defined, consultation with Native American groups that have traditional ties to the lands may be needed to determine whether such properties exist on affected lands. Federally recognized tribes with traditional ties to Louisiana include the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas, the Caddo Tribe of Oklahoma, the Chitimacha Tribe of Louisiana, the Jena Band of Choctaw Indians, the Mississippi Band of the Choctaw, the Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma, and the Tunica-Biloxi Indians of Louisiana (FR 2002).
Alternative A – Preferred Alternative. Implementation of the proposed LA CREP II would have long term positive impacts to water resources. The CPs listed in Section 2.1 are designed to improve water quality and quantity in the coastal prairie as well as restore shallow waters and rare habitat. Activities such as vegetation clearing and soil disturbance may occur during the installation of CPs. These activities could result in temporary and minor negative impacts to surface water quality resulting from runoff associated with these activities. Use of filter fencing or similar practices would reduce these impacts. These impacts would be localized and cease with land preparation activities. The LA CREP II proposal estimates that implementation of the agreement would reduce the amount of sediment entering the project area streams by 160,000 to 480,000 tons over ten years. Agricultural chemical inputs that would be substantially reduced over the life of the program would include 9,600 tons of nitrogen, 4,080 tons of phosphorous and potash, 1,360 tons of fungicides and 260,000 gallons of herbicides. Reduction of these chemical inputs would greatly improve water quality in the Mermentau River Basin. This improvement could ultimately lead to removing some streams, rivers, and bayous currently found on the Louisiana Section 303(d) list. Implementation of CP2 (Establish native grasses) and CP25 (Restore rare habitat) would help stabilize soils within the CREP area and further reduce sedimentation and turbidity from runoff. Implementing the proposed agreement would reduce groundwater consumption by an estimated
Alternative A – Preferred Alternative. Under Alternative A, long-term positive impacts to soil resources are expected to occur with the implementation of the proposed CPs resulting in localized stabilization of soils and topography as a result of increased soil moisture, reduced erosion and runoff. Restoration of riparian areas will reduce stream bank destabilization, resulting in reduced rates of sedimentation and subsequent improvements to water quality (see Section 4.3 for a discussion of surface water quality). Establishing permanent vegetation on former croplands would reduce wind and water erosion commonly associated with bare land. Short-term disturbance to soils during implementation of CPs could include tilling, or installation of various structures such as fences, breakwaters and roads. These activities may result in temporary minor increases in soil erosion.
Alternative A – Preferred Alternative. Implementation of Alternative A would result in the establishment of CPs as described in Section
2.1 on 28,000 acres of agricultural land in seven parishes in the coastal prairie region. It is not expected that any of these practices would change the current attainment status or violate Louisiana’s SIP standards. Preparing lands for CPs could include activities such as tilling, burning, and installation or removal of various structures in water or on land. These activities would have localized temporary minor impacts to air quality. Tilling would temporarily increase the PM10 concentrations in the immediate area; however, this increase is not expected to be significant. Watering exposed soils during and after tilling would reduce the release of PM10. The amount of open burning that would take place in conjunction with clearing and preparing lands for installation of CPs is not known. Burning could release PM10, PM2.5, CO, hydrocarbons and NO2 into the atmosphere (EPA 1992). The type and quantity of these pollutants would be determined by the type of vegetation being burned, the configuration of the burned material, and the weather conditions. It is not anticipated, however, that this burning would have a significant impact on the local air quality. Open burning is prohibited in the state of Louisiana (LDEQ 2006). Those landowners choosing to use burning during implementation of CPs would need to apply for a permit from LDEQ. Heavy equipment and construction vehicles used to clear vegetation, hay, mow, and remove levees, terraces, and other structures would release CO and PM10. Like tilling and burning, impacts from the use of heavy equipment is expected to be temporary and minor and limited to the immediate construction area. In the long term, positive effects would result from removing land from production by reducing emissions from tractors and other farm machinery.
Alternative A – Preferred Alternative. Implementing the Preferred Alternative would have a slight beneficial impact on the economy of the LA CREP II area. The agreement would result in an expenditure of up to $41,483,120 in the Parishes eligible for enrollment. For the region, the average net cash income was $8.14 per acre in 2002. Cost of fertilizer and chemicals averaged $27.49 per acre. The average annual expenditure on hired labor averaged $12.70 per acre. The loss of 28,000 acres from production could be anticipated to result in a reduction of $227,920 net cash income, $769,720 in chemical inputs not purchased for agricultural use, and $355,600 in labor expense. The average annual wage for persons engaged in crop and animal production was $18,440 or an average weekly wage of $356.28 (Louisiana Department of Labor [LADL] 2002). This equates roughly to 12.7 jobs at prevailing wages in the region. Current estimates indicate that agriculture employs 1,101 persons in the region so this loss would not be considered significant. Flow down models calculate the value of the direct and indirect economic impacts that a proposed action would have on a regional economy. The proposed action would result in the addition of up to $41,483,120 in annual rental payments over the duration of the 15 year contract period. As noted above, it would also result in diminished expenditures on seed and chemical inputs, likely resulting in slight reductions in employment. On balance, the overall result of the rental payments and reduced expenditures, including a multiplier effect to account for the flow of such dollars re-circulating through the economy over the years of the expenditure would have a positive future value. The current worth of that positive furture value, its net present value, would be the value of future expenditures (after considering employment loss, reduced sales and purchase of chemical inputs) discounted for inflation and expressed in terms of current dollars. This is the standard method for assessing the impacts of long term projects on economies. It is estimated that the net present value of the direct and indirect economic impacts from implementing the LA CREP II proposed action would be $27.8 million.
