Rehabilitation of Highway 62 West, Crater Lake National Park, Klamath County, Oregon
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
ALTERNATIVE A: NO ACTION
This section evaluates the potential impacts of the no-action alternative.
Cultural Resources
Archeological Resources
There would be no ground disturbance with the potential to disturb archeological resources. Therefore, the no-action alternative would have no impact on previously recorded archeological resources within the proposed project area.
Cumulative Impacts. All construction projects have the potential to impact archeological resources. Proposed projects, including trails rehabilitation and relocation, the reconstruction of the Rim parking lot, the waterline replacement from Munson Springs to Garfield, the lagoon project at Munson Valley, and rehabilitation of the superintendent’s house; have the potential to have long-term adverse impacts to archeological resources. Because there would be no ground-disturbing actions, the no-action alternative would not contribute to cumulative effects on archeological resources.
Conclusion. The no-action alternative would have no impact on archeological resources within the proposed project area and would not contribute to cumulative effects on cultural resources.
Because there would be no major adverse impacts to a resource or value whose conservation is (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes identified in the park’s establishing legislation, (2) key to the natural or cultural integrity of the park or to opportunities for enjoyment of the park, or (3) identified as a goal in the park’s General Management Plan or other relevant National Park Service planning documents, there would be no impairment of park resources or values.
Historic Structures
The no-action alternative would continue existing conditions. There would be no disturbance to historic structures and no impact on historic structures within the proposed project area.
Cumulative Impacts. In conjunction with the impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions including trails rehabilitation and relocation, the reconstruction of the Rim parking lot, the waterline replacement from Munson Springs to Garfield, the lagoon project at Munson Valley, and rehabilitation of the superintendent’s house, the no-action alternative would not contribute to cumulative effects on historic structures.
Conclusion. The no-action alternative would have no impact on, and no contribution to cumulative impacts on historic structures.
Because there would be no major adverse impacts to a resource or value whose conservation is (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes identified in the park’s establishing legislation, (2) key to the natural or cultural integrity of the park or to opportunities for enjoyment of the park, or (3) identified as a goal in the park’s General Management Plan or other relevant National Park Service planning documents, there would be no impairment of park resources or values.
***previous*** — ***next***
