SU0004149 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

C') The project site's 142 acres, although not actively farmed, would represent approximately 0.04% of the total acreage for apricots in the County. Using the 1995 estimates for production/yield, and cost, the project site, if actively farmed, would have contributed roughly $151,158 or 0.0001% of the total gross value of agricultural production in the 'I } County. As previously indicated, the proponent has proposed agriculture as the post-reclamation 'I use for the 88-acre it floor. The remaining area would be occupied b the p g p y e pit slopes and the processing plant site (which-would not be excavated). The success of agricultural i production on the post-reclamation land is unknown and should therefore be considered tentative at best. This is a significant impact. 4 . Alternative 4. No Project Implementation of Alternative 4 (No Project)would result in the continued use of the project { site for existing uses, and may even result in an increase in total production (as those areas which were historically used for agriculture could potentially be brought back into production).. ' Mitigation Measure 4.3-3a (Alternatives 1, 2, and 3) !I i' The proponent shall reclaim the project site to agricultural uses, consistent with the requirements and performance standards (CCR Section 3707) set forth in SMARA. j! Post-reclamation agricultural activities shall be at a productivity level equal to or ;i i greater than pre-mining levels or to levels based upon productivity levels for similar j crops- in .the area. The proponent shall incorporate the proposed agricultural performance standards for the project site into the reclamation plan and re-submit the II plan-to the County for review and approval. To demonstrate successful reclamation, the productivity levels proposed in the revised reclamation plan shall be maintained iI . : over two consecutive growing seasons. 0 Mitigation Measure 4.3-3b (Alternatives 1, 2, and 3) The proponent shall implement Mitigation Measures 4.2-8a, 4.2-8b, and 4.2-8c. Level of Significance After Mitigation: Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.3-3a, in conjunction with Mitigation Measures 4.2-8a through 4.2-8c, would reduce the effects on agricultural productivity to a less- I than-significant level.- I€ II Draft Environmental Impact Report 4-33 ER-96-3 , it �I II