Description of Alternatives Sample Clauses

Description of Alternatives. 2.1 Alternative A – Issuance of a Section 10(a)(1)(A) Permit for Activities Covered and Implementation of the 2020 DSL CCAA (Proposed Action) 6 2.1.1 Covered Species 6 2.1.2 Covered Area 7 2.1.3 Covered Activities 7 2.1.4 Conservation Measures 8 2.1.5 Anticipated Incidental Take 9 2.2 Alternative B – No Action 10 2.3 Alternatives Eliminated from Further Analysis 11 3.1 Introduction 12 3.1.1 Resources Analyzed in this Environmental Assessment 12 3.1.2 Resources Not Considered for Detailed Analysis 12 3.2 Covered Species 13 3.3 Hydrology and Water Resources 15 3.4 Soils 17 3.5 Vegetation 17 3.6 Wildlife 19 3.7 Listed, Proposed, and Candidate Species 20 3.8 Land Use and Ownership 21 3.9 Cultural Resources 22 4.1 Overview 24 1.1 Impact Estimation Approach 24 4.1.2 Impact Framework 24 4.1.3 Summary of Impacts 26 4.2 Covered Species 27 4.2.1 Alternative A – Proposed Action 27 4.2.2 Alternative B – No Action Alternative 29 4.3 Hydrology and Water Resources 29 4.3.1 Alternative A – Proposed Action 29 4.3.2 Alternative B – No Action Alternative 30 4.4 Soils 30 4.4.1 Alternative A – Proposed Action 30 4.4.2 Alternative B – No Action Alternative 31 4.5 Vegetation 32 4.5.1 Alternative A – Proposed Action 32 4.5.2 Alternative B – No Action Alternative 33 4.6 Wildlife 34 4.6.1 Alternative A – Proposed Action 34 4.6.2 Alternative B – No Action Alternative 35 4.7 Listed, Proposed, and Candidate Species Not Covered 35 4.7.1 Alternative A – Proposed Action 35 4.7.2 Alternative B – No Action Alternative 35 4.8 Land Use and Ownership 36 4.8.1 Alternative A – Proposed Action 36 4.8.2 Alternative B – No Action Alternative 37 4.9 Cultural Resources 37 4.9.1 Alternative A – Proposed Action 37 4.9.2 Alternative B – No Action Alternative 37 4.10 Cumulative Impacts 38 5.1 Agency Consultation 41 5.2 List of Preparers 41

Description of Alternatives. ‌ This chapter describes the alternatives considered in this EA (Alternative A —Proposed Action and Alternative B — No Action), as well as alternatives that were considered but eliminated from detailed analysis.

Description of Alternatives. 4-1 4.1 Introduction 4- 1 4.2 Water Service Agreement 4-1 4.3 On-Refuge Management 4-4 4.4 Alternative Considered But Not Analyzed in Detail 4-11

Description of Alternatives. 4.1 Introduction

Description of Alternatives appropriate goals, measures, timetables, and plans to ensure that water is being efficiently applied to beneficial uses. The plans are to be updated every 5 years. After passage of the CVPIA, a number of parties recognized the need for the development of Best Management Practices / Efficient Use Plans for the refuges to ensure that the refuge water supplies were being efficiently used in keeping with the Reclamation Reform Act. In 1996, Interior responded by directing that an Interagency Coordinated Program (ICP) be instituted to provide a common methodology for water use planning for all wetlands areas receiving water authorized by the CVPIA. In 1997, the U.S. Department of the Interior, represented by Reclamation, the Service, CDFG, and the Grassland WD assembled a Task Force for this purpose. The Task Force provided guidance and advice in the development of the report An (1) provide background information on optimum

Description of Alternatives. A preliminary project description would be developed by Ascent sufficient to support the NOP and NOI. This project description would be revised and expanded to include any project changes/refinements and further project details that are developed after scoping. To be sufficient to support the impact analysis, the project description will include locational descriptions, details of proposed project elements, construction methods, hours and season of operations, interrelationships with current operations, employment, visitation, and level of recreation. Projections of visitation generated by the project would be based on data provided by the applicant team. It is assumed that the alternatives that would receive a full analysis in each chapter of the EIR/EIS would consist of the Proposed Action Alternative, the No Action Alternative, and up to two additional action alternatives (e.g., an alternative with a modified site layout or reduced development). The analysis of each alternative would be conducted at a comparable level of detail consistent with the requirements of NEPA. The alternatives chapter will also identify alternatives that were initially considered but not evaluated further, including justification for why these alternatives were not provided a full analysis in the EIR/EIS. This chapter will assist the reader in understanding the EIR/EIS and the subsequent chapters in the document. Topics to be addressed will include: ⯈ the differences between CEQA and NEPA and the approach to addressing these differences in a joint document; ⯈ an overview of the organization, content, and approach taken in each resource analysis chapter; ⯈ the general approach taken for the cumulative effects analysis; ⯈ characterization of past and present projects that influence the existing cumulative condition; and ⯈ the list of reasonably foreseeable future projects considered in the cumulative analysis taken in the impact analysis.