Draft EIS_072312.pdf - Middle Fork American River Project ...

20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 07/23/2012
proposed actions, we recommend PCWA install signage as described in Alternative 1
because it would encourage proper visitor use and allow appropriate agencies to enforce
regulations. We anticipate this measure would reduce user conflicts and protect natural
resources at the site.
Water System Developments—Providing potable water at developed recreation
sites at the project is consistent with amenities that are typically provided at Forest
Service facilities with a development scale of 3 or higher. Visitor needs are currently
not being met at these types of project recreation facilities because some have no
potable water or the existing water systems are insufficient. In addition to bringing the
project water systems up to standard, as PCWA proposes, we also recommend PCWA
develop and provide potable water at Hell Hole boat ramp and Ahart Campground as
described in Alternative 1. This measure would benefit project visitors and provide a
water source during the winter when Ahart Campground may still be available for
public use.
Streamflow Information—Although whitewater boating use depends on the
availability of sufficient flow in the peaking reach, it is also necessary for visitors to
know the timing of these flows so they can plan their trips accordingly. Because the
project affects both quantity and timing of flows, we recommend providing outage
information and 24-hour predicted flows as described in Alternative 1. Providing this
information would provide a commensurate benefit to whitewater boaters by enabling
them to better plan their trips at little if any additional cost.
Marketing Materials—In order for visitors to take advantage of project recreation
opportunities it is necessary for them to acquire accurate and up-to-date information to
plan their trips. In addition to PCWA’s proposal to develop a visitor brochure, we
recommend PCWA also consult with BLM and Reclamation to prepare the brochure
and update this information every 6 years. These additional measures would have a
small incremental cost (estimated annual levelized cost of $410) yet provide a
significant benefit because they would ensure visitors have access to the full range of
recreational opportunities in the vicinity of the project, and the information they receive
would be accurate and current. As a result, visitors would have more enjoyable trips
because their planned trips would meet their expectations.
Stocking—Project operations isolate fish populations and create angling
opportunities in project reservoirs. We recommend that PCWA be entirely responsible
for stocking fish in the project reservoirs, as specified in Alternative 1. This measure
would appropriately mitigate for this project effect and benefit project visitors and
would be worth the estimated levelized annual cost of $61,900.
Other Project Facilities—In addition to the recreation facilities and development
proposed by PCWA, we recommend the recreation management plan address
development at a few other sites that is different from or in addition to what PCWA
proposes and consistent with the Alternative 1 Recreation Plan.
338