PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES. Based on requests from the District, individual applicants and public input, two alternatives are analyzed for: a Proposed/Preferred Alternative and the No Action Alternative.
PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES. The proposed action is for the United States to execute an Agreement concerning the Administration of Water Pursuant to the Subordination of Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxxx Unit Water Rights within the Upper Gunnison River Basin (Agreement). A draft copy of this Agreement is attached. The Agreement is not a water supply contract or sale; it does not provide water to anyone; it formalizes past commitments and provides a plan on how to manage, track, record and account for water depletions. The alternative to the proposed action is the No Action alternative, which simply is not signing the Agreement. Under the No Action alternative, Reclamation would have to develop some type of system to track depletions to assure the 60,000 acre-foot allowance was not exceeded. This system could involve individual contracts with water users. The proposed Agreement provides for the following: -the depletion allowance (up to 60,000 acre-feet) for the Aspinall Unit shall be implemented only pursuant to the Agreement; -the United States agrees to subordinate the Aspinall Unit=s water rights up to 60,000 acre- feet; by subordinating to the junior water rights in the basin upstream, the United States agrees that such in-basin water users may continue to divert when the United States places a call on the Gunnison River under the Aspinall Unit=s water rights; -the depletions against which the United States foregoes its right to call under this Agreement, shall be charged by the Colorado State Engineer against the annual fills of Aspinall Unit reservoirs, and/or the exercise of the related direct flow hydropower rights (depending on which of the Aspinall Unit rights are then being exercised); -the CRWCD and the District shall monitor and quantify depletions under this Agreement; -the Aspinall Unit reservoirs cannot be used in exchange or replacement of water or for any other purpose, without the additional approval of the United States; and -the utilization of water by the water users represented by the CRWCD and the District shall be subject to the laws of the State of Colorado regarding water use.
PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES. 2.1 Alternative A – Proposed Action
PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES. Consistent with the 2019 Missile Defense Review, the DoD does not have a proposed action, budget authority, or direction to deploy a CIS and does not propose to deploy a CIS at this time; therefore, the preferred alternative is the ‘‘No Action Alternative’’—no deployment. Current sites in Alaska and California provide the necessary protection of the homeland from a ballistic missile attack by countries such as North Korea and Iran.
PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES. 2.1 Project Description
2.2 Purpose of Proposed Action
2.3 Alternatives . . AANN
PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES. The Proposed Action would implement Louisiana’s Coastal Prairie Restoration Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program. Current agricultural production practices would be discontinued on up to 28,000 acres of eligible farmland and approved conservation practices would be established on the land. This document has been prepared to analyze the potential environmental of the Proposed Action and the No Action Alternative. Under the No Action Alternative, no lands would be enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program. None of the conservation practices or rental payments described above would be implemented.
PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES. The proposed action has been submitted by Summit County. The Prime Consultant, with full involvement of the Forest Service IDT, will develop design criteria, mitigation and/or alternatives to address natural resource and social issues arising from the proposed action in order to address and mitigate all internal resource concerns prior to soliciting external public input. Data Collection. Some of the data will be collected from existing sources, and some will require surveys. Existing data sources will include maps, inventories and records related to environmental issues, including vegetation, archeological issues and historic properties, and, current state-sensitive and federal TES species lists. Because critical information and policies change frequently, the Prime Consultant is strongly encouraged to interact with WRNF resource specialists as often as needed to ensure the acquisition of the most current data available. The Forest Service will collect lynx and other wildlife data from winter monitoring transects and cameras during the 2015-2016 winter. The Forest Service will also collect fish, boreal toad and invertebrate data during the summer of 2016. Other information acquired from agencies and stakeholders will be evaluated and assimilated into the EA as appropriate. In addition, the Prime Consultant will coordinate with the WRNF technical staff to acquire site-specific information, if needed. Because of the potential for development of a second action alternative, the Prime Consultant should anticipate the need for additional survey work associated with assessing the environmental consequences of that alternative including: field verification of overstory vegetation, botany surveys, archaeological surveys, geologic hazards, hydrologic response and efficacy of drainage features, etc.
PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES a) Alternative 1 – Access via Xxxx Road (Road No. 16-6-31) and Private Road:
i) The original access proposal by Transition Management was to access their timber from the north via new construction on BLM-managed land, connecting to a private road system in Section 30 and to access their timber from the south by the South Spur (via Xxxx Road). The South Spur was constructed as a spur road for the BLM Get Ready Timber Sale.
(1) The new construction for the north access would require approximately 1,520 feet of new construction on federal land. This proposed road crosses a decommissioned spur road that is used as the North Spur in Alternative 2.
(2) The South Spur (Road No. 16-7-36), would involve re-commissioning approximately 740 feet of road and the new construction of approximately 300 feet of road.
(3) The new road construction would require the removal of approximately 1.4 acres of second-growth timber.
ii) The South Spur would be blocked to deter OHV access. This would be accomplished by gating the road and blocking the sides of the gate with boulders and/or root wads to prevent OHVs from bypassing the gates.
iii) Cross-drains would be installed in accordance with the Xxxxxx District BMPs.
iv) The construction of the north access does not constitute the most direct route for the removal of forest products from the lands of the road builder.
b) Alternative 2 – Proposed Action – Access via Xxxx Road (Road No. 16-6-31):
i) The proposed action is to re-commission (improve) two existing roads with some new construction in T16S, R7W, Sections 25 and 36 to provide access to an action on private property. Both roads were constructed as spur roads for the BLM Get Ready Timber sale.
(1) The North Spur (Road No. 16-7-25.4) would involve re-commissioning approximately 830 feet of road and the new construction of approximately 450 feet of road on Federal Land.
(2) The South Spur (Road No. 16-7-36), would involve re-commissioning approximately 740 feet of road and the new construction of approximately 300 feet of road.
(3) The new road construction would require the removal of approximately 0.4 acres of second-growth timber.
ii) The North and South Spurs would be blocked to deter OHV access. This would be accomplished by gating the roads and blocking the sides of the gates with boulders and/or root wads to prevent OHVs from bypassing the gates.
iii) Cross drains would be installed in accordance with the Xxxxxx District BMPs; specifically, a cross drain relief culver...
PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES. The Proposed Action would implement Montana’s Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program Agreement. Current agricultural production practices would be discontinued on up to 10,082 acres of eligible farmland in the Upper Xxxxx Fork River Basin from production and establish approved conservation practices on the land. Producers would enroll eligible farmland by entering into contracts of up to 15 years with the Farm Service Agency. Conservation practices would be established and maintained on enrolled lands for the contract duration. Producers would receive annual rental payments for the duration of the contracts as well as financial and technical support for implementing and maintaining the practices. For lands enrolled in the program, annual rental payments would be the sum of the base soil rental rate, an incentive payment, and an annual maintenance rate. Eligible lands exclude riparian acres that are currently targeted for Superfund remediation and restoration due to water quality degradation due to historic mining operations. It is expected that there would be both positive and temporary minor negative impacts associated with implementation of the Proposed Action. A summary of the potential impacts is given in Table ES-1. Resource Proposed Action No Action Alternative Biological Resources Beneficial long term impacts to biological resources are expected to occur. The Proposed Action is expected to contribute to vegetation and wildlife diversity and to reduce the incidence of exotic and invasive species. Grassland birds and other wildlife would benefit from additional habitat. Fisheries would benefit from increased water quantity and quality. Long term positive impacts to threatened and endangered species, species of concern, and their habitats are expected. It is possible that temporary minor impacts to vegetation, wildlife, and protected species could occur during activities associated with establishing conservation practices. Continued use of lands for range and pastureland would decrease the quality of fisheries through degraded water quality and quantity. Further habitat loss through conversion of habitat into agricultural uses decreases available habitat for wildlife, vegetation and protected species. Habitat fragmentation and land disturbing activities would continue and encourage the spread of exotic species.
PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES. The EPA and IBWC’s Proposed Action is the implementation of projects to address impacts from transboundary flows in the Tijuana River watershed and adjacent coastal areas. Because of the programmatic nature of the decisions to be made, only the Core projects could be implemented at the completion of this NEPA process. The Supplemental projects would require additional tiered review before being implemented. The Proposed Action addresses the purpose and need stated above by:
