DOCSLIB.ORG

Keystone Resort Dercum Mountain Improvements Project Environmental Assessment I Table of Contents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Keystone Resort Dercum Mountain Improvements Project Environmental Assessment I Table of Contents DERCUM MOUNTAIN IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FEBRUARY 2014 USDA Forest Service White River National Forest Dillon Ranger District The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PURPOSE AND NEED ................................................................................................................................. 1-1 A. Document Structure ..................................................................................................................................... 1-1 B. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1-2 C. The NEPA/EA Process ................................................................................................................................ 1-3 D. Purpose and Need for Action ...................................................................................................................... 1-4 E. Scope of Analysis ........................................................................................................................................ 1-8 F. Identification of Issues ................................................................................................................................ 1-8 Human Environment ........................................................................................................................................ 1-9 Physical and Biological Environment ............................................................................................................ 1-10 G. Consistency with the WRNF’s 2002 LRMP ............................................................................................. 1-12 H. Other Necessary Permits, Licenses, Entitlements and/or Consultation ..................................................... 1-13 2. DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES ....................................................................................................... 2-1 A. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 2-1 B. Alternatives Considered in Detail ............................................................................................................... 2-1 Alternative 1 – No Action ................................................................................................................................. 2-1 Alternative 2 – the Proposed Action ................................................................................................................ 2-3 Modifications Made to The Proposed Action ................................................................................................... 2-7 C. Comparison of Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 2-7 D. Management Requirements Designed to Minimize/Avoid Environmental Effects ................................... 2-13 3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES .................................... 3-1 A. Recreation ................................................................................................................................................... 3-2 Scope of Analysis ............................................................................................................................................. 3-2 Affected Environment ....................................................................................................................................... 3-2 Direct and Indirect Environmental Consequences........................................................................................... 3-8 Cumulative Effects ......................................................................................................................................... 3-11 B. Scenery Resources ..................................................................................................................................... 3-12 Scope of Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 3-12 Management of the Scenic Envrionment on National Forest System Lands .................................................. 3-12 Affected Environment ..................................................................................................................................... 3-14 Direct and Indirect Environmental Consequences......................................................................................... 3-17 Cumulative Effects ......................................................................................................................................... 3-19 C. Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................................... 3-20 Scope of Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 3-20 Affected Environment ..................................................................................................................................... 3-20 Direct and Indirect Environmental Consequences......................................................................................... 3-21 Cumulative Effects ......................................................................................................................................... 3-21 D. Economic Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 3-22 Scope of Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 3-22 Affected Environment ..................................................................................................................................... 3-23 Direct and Indirect Environmental Consequences......................................................................................... 3-28 Cumulative Effects ......................................................................................................................................... 3-30 E. Wildlife and Aquatic Species .................................................................................................................... 3-32 Scope of Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 3-32 Affected Environment ..................................................................................................................................... 3-32 Direct and Indirect Environmental Consequences ........................................................................................ 3-46 Cumulative Effects ......................................................................................................................................... 3-55 F. Vegetation ................................................................................................................................................. 3-62 Scope of Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 3-62 Affected Environment ..................................................................................................................................... 3-62 Direct and Indirect Environmental Consequences ........................................................................................ 3-67 Cumulative Effects ......................................................................................................................................... 3-70 Keystone Resort Dercum Mountain Improvements Project Environmental Assessment i Table of Contents G. Soil Resources ........................................................................................................................................... 3-71 Scope of Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 3-71 Forest Plan Direction .................................................................................................................................... 3-71 Existing Conditions .......................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2005 Town of Breckenridge Overview
    2005 Town of Breckenridge Overview The Breckenridge Overview 2005 Prepared by the Community Development Department P.O. Box 168 Breckenridge, Co. 80424 Town Council Ernie Blake, Mayor Larry Crispell J.B. Katz Eric Mamula Rob Millisor Jeffrey Bergeron Jim Lamb Planning Commission Ken Boos, Chair Herman Haering Ron Schuman Dave Pringle Chris Kulick Mike Khavari Rob Millisor A special thank you to all those involved in the 2005 Overview Table of Contents Introduction ……………………………………1 Location ……………………………………1 Size …..…………………………….….1 Topography ……………………………………1 Climate ….………………………………...2 Historical Overview ……..………………………….… 2 Recreation, Activities, and Cultural Resources ..…..7 Breckenridge Ski Resort ……………………7 Population/Demographics …………………. 16 Housing ..…………………17 Affordable Housing ...………………...19 Commercial Development ……..……………20 Business Licenses …………………..22 Commercial Square Footage by Business Sector ..…22 Visitors ……………...…………………...23 Skier Visits …….…….………………………24 Employment ……...………………………...…24 Comparative Growth …………………..25 Building Permits ..…………………26 Town Government and Budget …………………..28 Public Infrastructure ...………………...35 Other Community Resources ……….………….36 Town and Urban Services …………………..37 Town Documents and Projects …………………..39 Cover Photo: “Colorado River Rock Bridge” installed in 2004 by the Breckenridge Public Art Commission. The piece is by local artist Steuart Bremner and is located at the Town’s Whitewater Park near the Breckernidge Recreation Center. Other public art is located at various sites throughout Town. Tables Table 1 Ski Resort Statistics pg.8 Table 2 Permanent and Peak Population pg.16 Table 3 Breckenridge Housing Units pg.18 Table 4 Upper Blue Housing Units pg.18 Table 5 Commercial Development pg.20 Table 6 Retail Square Footage, Trade and Sales Tax pg.21 Table 7 Commercial Businesses by Sector pg.22 Table 8 Commercial Square Footage by Business Sector pg.23 Table 9 Taxable Revenue Analysis pg.23 Table 10 Skier Visits pg.24 Table 11 Comparative Growth pg.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement of Dan Gibbs Executive Director Colorado Department Of
    Statement of Dan Gibbs Executive Director Colorado Department of Natural Resources Before The Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands of The House Natural Resources Committee April 2, 2019 Chairwoman Haaland, Ranking Member Young, and Members of the Subcommittee: On behalf of Governor Polis and the State of Colorado, we appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony on the Colorado Outdoor Recreation and Economy Act (H.R. 823). We strongly support the CORE Act and hope Congress will move swiftly to enact it. Governor Polis would have liked to be here today with his former colleagues to express his strong support for this legislation. As you know, as a member of Congress, Governor Polis had sponsored the Continental Divide Recreation, Wilderness and Camp Hale Legacy Act, which has now been incorporated into the broader CORE Act. Introduction This legislation—the product of years of collaboration among elected officials, businesses, community members, and a myriad of other interested and affected stakeholders across Colorado—would protect some of the most beloved public lands in Colorado for their unsurpassed recreation, scenery, wildlife, watersheds, historic, and other unique values. As the Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, I support this bill because it will benefit our wildlife by protecting critical habitat and migration corridors; it will protect the outstanding recreational experiences that bring people from across Colorado—and the world—to these special places; it will help safeguard Colorado’s water resources by protecting key watersheds and all water rights; it strikes the right balance by protecting key public lands from development, while protecting all existing mineral rights and leaving other appropriate lands available for mining, oil, and gas development; and because it complements the values and opportunities associated with our state lands.
    [Show full text]
  • Cycling-Utah-Rocky-Mountain-Tour-Race-Guide-2012
    ROCKY MOUNTAIN TOUR & RACE GUIDE Volume 5 Editor’s February, 2012 NOTES Publisher Seattle Publishing Jay Stilwell, President With the 2012 season well underway, the focus of some of the Ryan Price, Vice-President David Ward, CU Publisher nation’s best elite athletes is on the upcoming Olympics. Among Dave Iltis, CU Editor those that are still in the hunt for a ticket to London, many are from Associate Publisher / Editor the Rocky Mountain region. Boulder, Colo., could be well repre- Claire Bonin sented should track specialist Cari Higgins, mountain bikers Jeremy Assistant Editor Horgan-Kobelski and Heather Irmiger as well as road and track Darren Dencklau hopeful Taylor Phinney make the national team cut. Willow Rockwell Contributors (Durango), Georgia Gould (Fort Collins) and Katie Compton Claire Bonin Darren Dencklau (Colorado Springs) are also contenders for the available women’s Katie Hawkins mountain bike positions. Based on performances during the past sea- Dave Iltis son and so far this year, David Zabriskie from Salt Lake City, Utah, Art / Production could also find his way to London, representing the country in the Amy Beardemphl time trial event. Photography Bicycle Paper However, the vast majority of cyclists do not have such grandiose Mitchell Clinton Photography aspirations. For most, riding locally and discovering new routes and Dave Iltis/cyclingutah.com rides is what matters. In the fifth installment of the Rocky Mountain WheelsinFocus/Amara Edwards Tour and Race Guide you will find more than 1,245 rides and races, Sales Claire Bonin many you may be familiar with, but there is a fair amount of new Darren Dencklau events listed as well.
    [Show full text]
  • San Luis Valley Conservation Area Land Protection Plan, Colorado And
    Land Protection Plan San Luis Valley Conservation Area Colorado and New Mexico December 2015 Prepared by San Luis Valley National Wildlife Refuge Complex 8249 Emperius Road Alamosa, CO 81101 719 / 589 4021 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 6, Mountain-Prairie Region Branch of Refuge Planning 134 Union Boulevard, Suite 300 Lakewood, CO 80228 303 / 236 8145 CITATION for this document: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015. Land protection plan for the San Luis Valley Conservation Area. Lakewood, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 151 p. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service policy, an environmental assessment and land protection plan have been prepared to analyze the effects of establishing the San Luis Valley Conservation Area in southern Colorado and northern New Mexico. The environmental assessment (appendix A) analyzes the environmental effects of establishing the San Luis Valley Conservation Area. The San Luis Valley Conservation Area land protection plan describes the priorities for acquiring up to 250,000 acres through voluntary conservation easements and up to 30,000 acres in fee title. Note: Information contained in the maps is approximate and does not represent a legal survey. Ownership information may not be complete. Contents Abbreviations . vii Chapter 1—Introduction and Project Description . 1 Purpose of the San Luis Valley Conservation Area . 2 Vision for the San Luis Valley National Wildlife Refuge Complex . 4 Purpose of the Alamosa and Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuges . 4 Purpose of the Baca national wildlife refuge . 4 Purpose of the Sangre de Cristo Conservation Area .
    [Show full text]
  • WHITE RIVER NATIONAL FOREST Adam Mountain (8,200 Acres)
    WHITE RIVER NATIONAL FOREST Adam Mountain (8,200 acres) ........................................................................................................ 3 Ashcroft (900 acres) ........................................................................................................................ 4 Assignation Ridge (13,300 acres) ................................................................................................... 4 Baldy Mountain (6,100 acres) ......................................................................................................... 6 Basalt Mountain A (13,900 acres) .................................................................................................. 6 Basalt Mountain (7,400 acres) ........................................................................................................ 7 Berry Creek (8,600 acres) ............................................................................................................... 8 Big Ridge to South Fork A (35,400 acres) and Big Ridge to South Fork B (6,000 acres) ............. 9 Black Lake East (800 acres) and Black Lake West (900 acres) ................................................... 11 Blair Mountain (500 acres) ........................................................................................................... 12 Boulder (1,300 acres) .................................................................................................................... 13 Budges (1,000 acres) ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Unaweep Tabeguache Byway Corridor Management Plan
    UNAWEEP-TABEGUACHE SCENIC AND HISTORIC BYWAY CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT PLAN UNAWEEP-TABEGUACHE SCENIC AND HISTORIC BYWAY CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT PLAN Embrace and maintain the area’s history, lifestyles, cultures and unique community spirit. Embrace and protect the natural beauty, outdoor experiences and recreation opportunities. Increase the economic viability and sustainability of Byway communities. Facilitate synergy and collaboration with all Byway communities, partners and governing agencies. The UTB Mission September 12, 2013 Advanced Resource Management, Inc. Advanced Resource Management, Inc.706 Nelson The Park National Drive Longmont, Trust CO 80503 for Historic 303-485-7889 Preservation Whiteman Consulting UNAWEEP-TABEGUACHE SCENIC AND HISTORIC BYWAY CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT PLAN Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary……. ....................................................................... 3 2. Byway Overview……. ............................................................................. 6 3. Updating the CMP .................................................................................. 8 4. Intrinsic Qualities .................................................................................. 10 A. Archaeological Quality ..................................................................................... 11 B. Cultural Quality ................................................................................................ 12 C. Historic Quality ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Primitive Areas Gore Range-Eagles Nest And
    OC1 LO STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS PRIMITIVE AREAS OHIO GEOLOGICAL SURVEt OCT 2 r iQ70 GORE RANGE-EAGLES NEST AND VICINITY, COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1319-C f* MINERAL RESOURCES of the GORE RANGE-EAGLES NEST PRIMITIVE AREA and VICINITY, COLORADO Crest of Gore Range and head of middle fork of Black Creek. View is westward. Mount Powell (alt 13,534 ft) is massive peak at right of cen­ ter. Eagles Nest Mountain is at far right. Duck Lake is in right foreground. Trough above right end of lake marks fault zone of north-northwest trend. Dark area on steep front of rock glacier at left in photograph is typical "wet front" suggesting ice core in rock glacier. Mineral Resources of the Gore Range-Eagles Nest Primitive Area and Vicinity, Summit and Eagle Counties, Colorado By OGDEN TWETO and BRUCE BRYANT, U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, and by FRANK E. WILLIAMS, U.S. BUREAU OF MINES c STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS PRIMITIVE AREAS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1319-C An evaluation of the mineral potential of the area UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. WASHINGTON : 1970 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WALTER J. HICKEL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY William T. Pecora, Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. 78-607129 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 ^. STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS PRIMITIVE AREAS The Wilderness Act (Public Law 88-577, Sept. 3, 1964) and the Conference Report on Senate bill 4, 88th Congress, direct the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Bureau of Mines to make mineral surveys of wilderness and primitive areas.
    [Show full text]
  • In This Issue
    CRMSColorado Rocky Mountain School Newsletter Issue 3 Spring 2017 IN THIS ISSUE Tick Ridge Update Interim Photos Class Notes Luci Belakova ’17 performs an original song at Senior Recital -2- HEAD OF SCHOOL LETTER LETTER FROM THE HEAD OF SCHOOL Jeff Leahy In recent years we have expanded multiple interactions between the had an organic garden, a ranch, and Colorado Rocky Mountain School’s our fiber-optic network throughout student and the faculty members. It is an extensive art program through history with modern technology is the campus from the original three important to our sense of community which our students learn about relatively brief, and is in large part buildings to 17 and have established that we remain connected to people responsibility and the value of hard due to the passions and interests a reliable and stable wireless and not solely through our devices. work. These programs teach us of two individuals – Katherine network. With this substantial Our current student body may have about our inner selves and the world Ross, who began our first computer progress, we decided it was time access to a campus-wide wireless that surrounds us. In short, these programming course, and Eric to engage an outside technology network, but access is managed programs capture the mission of Krimmer, our current Director of consultant with a wide-ranging thoughtfully, is monitored at all the school, and it is why they are so Technology. In addition to these two knowledge of independent schools. times, and the extent of a student’s important to us. tremendous faculty members, we also With his guidance, we established a access is controlled.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Granby Fishery Management Report Jon Ewert, Aquatic Biologist, Colorado Parks and Wildlife February 2019
    Lake Granby Fishery Management Report Jon Ewert, Aquatic Biologist, Colorado Parks and Wildlife February 2019 Introduction Lake Granby, approximately 7,250 surface acres when full, is one of the largest coldwater reservoirs in the state. It is the main storage reservoir in the west slope portion of the Colorado-Big Thompson Project which supplies water to the northern Front Range through the Adams Tunnel at Grand Lake. It is a focal point of the Grand County tour- ism economy and offers many amenities. Recreational access is managed by the U.S. Forest Service as part of the Arapaho National Recreation Area. The recreational fishery of Granby is dominated by lake trout (aka mackinaw) and hosts the highest density of the species that has been documented in Colorado. Kokan- ee salmon have been stocked in Granby since 1951 to pro- vide recreational opportunity, a prey base to produce tro- phy lake trout, and spawning adults are captured annually to provide eggs for restocking. Rainbow trout of various sizes are also stocked and there is a moderate density of self-sustaining brown trout. Suckers and mottled sculpin Figure 1. Lake Granby are also present. Lake Granby also contains a dense population of mysis separate from the aggregate bag limit of other species. shrimp, which are an excellent prey source for smaller Due to reasons described above, the lake trout fishery in (<24”) lake trout. The high density of lake trout is a result Lake Granby is healthiest when a generous amount of har- of the availability of this prey base. However, the mysis vest is occurring.
    [Show full text]
  • 36 CFR Ch. II (7–1–13 Edition) § 294.49
    § 294.49 36 CFR Ch. II (7–1–13 Edition) subpart shall prohibit a responsible of- Line Includes ficial from further restricting activi- Colorado roadless area name upper tier No. acres ties allowed within Colorado Roadless Areas. This subpart does not compel 22 North St. Vrain ............................................ X the amendment or revision of any land 23 Rawah Adjacent Areas ............................... X 24 Square Top Mountain ................................. X management plan. 25 Troublesome ............................................... X (d) The prohibitions and restrictions 26 Vasquez Adjacent Area .............................. X established in this subpart are not sub- 27 White Pine Mountain. ject to reconsideration, revision, or re- 28 Williams Fork.............................................. X scission in subsequent project decisions Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, Gunnison National Forest or land management plan amendments 29 Agate Creek. or revisions undertaken pursuant to 36 30 American Flag Mountain. CFR part 219. 31 Baldy. (e) Nothing in this subpart waives 32 Battlements. any applicable requirements regarding 33 Beaver ........................................................ X 34 Beckwiths. site specific environmental analysis, 35 Calamity Basin. public involvement, consultation with 36 Cannibal Plateau. Tribes and other agencies, or compli- 37 Canyon Creek-Antero. 38 Canyon Creek. ance with applicable laws. 39 Carson ........................................................ X (f) If any provision in this subpart
    [Show full text]
  • Profiles of Colorado Roadless Areas
    PROFILES OF COLORADO ROADLESS AREAS Prepared by the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region July 23, 2008 INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 2 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS ARAPAHO-ROOSEVELT NATIONAL FOREST ......................................................................................................10 Bard Creek (23,000 acres) .......................................................................................................................................10 Byers Peak (10,200 acres)........................................................................................................................................12 Cache la Poudre Adjacent Area (3,200 acres)..........................................................................................................13 Cherokee Park (7,600 acres) ....................................................................................................................................14 Comanche Peak Adjacent Areas A - H (45,200 acres).............................................................................................15 Copper Mountain (13,500 acres) .............................................................................................................................19 Crosier Mountain (7,200 acres) ...............................................................................................................................20 Gold Run (6,600 acres) ............................................................................................................................................21
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Annual Report
    ANNUAL REPORT Dear Friends, Let’s build a bridge - a bridge to the future. Like any bridge designed to stand the test of time, our bridge needs a strong foundation. LETTER FROM BOARD OF At Team Summit Colorado, our mission promotes a strong foundation in DIRECTORS - our athletes by elevating their sense of responsibility, integrity, and ex- cellence while they pursue their personal best in their chosen athletic PRESIDENT discipline. We believe these values provide direction and purpose to the whole athlete youth who participate in our programs. By providing the whole team opportunity to succeed on and off the mountain, whole community our athletes will grow to be- come outstanding individuals, supportive team members, and the future leaders in their communities. The lessons they learn along the way build a foundation for the bridge to the future. We welcome you to join us as we build this bridge. Jay Long Board President Dear Friends, U14’s in North America. Other highlights were the many podiums at LETTER FROM both the Age Class and Youth Ski League races, proof that TSC has a The last twelve months at Team very bright future. EXECUTIVE Summit Colorado (TSC) have been a time of rebuilding, growth, invest- The past season saw a revamping of programs, as we fully committed DIRECTOR ment, community awareness and overall to providing competitive programs that will enable our athletes to accomplishments. To start the fiscal year, elevate and reach their personal podiums. For those competing in li- we began investing in our future by hiring an censed events, we provided the opportunity to train a minimum of two Office Manager and a Business Development days per week for little or no additional cost to the family.
    [Show full text]