Alternative C: This project would not have any effect on noise or cause any electrical 

 disturbance. 



Land Use: 



Alternative A: No action would not ensure that cun'ent land uses would be maintained 

 in the future. 



Alternative C: Current agricultural uses would be maintained. Increased recreational 

 use of the area would partially offset the economic benefits derived from the current 

 agricultural operation (see attached socio-economic review). 



Risk/Health Hazards: 



Alternative A: No action would probably maintain the status quo associated with risks 

 and health hazards that are typical of most agricultural operations. If residential 

 subdivision were to occur, local automobile traffic levels would probably increase. 



Alternative C: The proposed action includes the likelihood of chemical noxious weed 

 control. Whenever chemicals are used, there is some potential for a small scale spill. 

 To reduce that potential, herbicides would only be applied by a licensed applicator 

 following label instructions and taking all precautions to prevent an accidental 

 discharge. 



Community Impact : 



Alternative A: No action would not ensure that the current agricultural and recreational 

 nature of the property would be maintained in the future. 



Alternative C: The proposed action will maintain about 116 acres in an 

 agriculture/wildlife base and will alter a growing trend toward rural residential 

 development. The proposed action will affect location and distribution but not rate or 

 density of human population growth. There would be positive effects to tourism, 

 primarily in wildlife viewing and hunting opportunities. Open space and undeveloped 

 lands will become more valuable in the future as residential development encompasses 

 more and more rural lands. Any reduction in the vitality of the local economy would be 

 at least partially offset by increases in retail merchandise, food, lodging and travel 

 supplies associated with wildlife-related recreation. See attached Socio-Economic 

 Review for further detail. 



Public Services: 



Alternative A: No action would not prevent residential subdivision and subsequent 

 home-site development from occurring. An increased public services demand on local 

 governments would then be anticipated. 



8 



