SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Chapter 5 – Environmental Consequencesmaneuvers would be allowed in areas of less than 30 percent slope and would be expected to result inadverse impacts on wildlife and habitats. No SBCT maneuver training would occur at KLOA.At SBMR, KTA, and PTA, training would also occur in areas that have not been previously used foroff-road maneuver training. Impacts from trampling and an associated reduction in vegetativegroundcover would result in loss and degradation of habitat for general vegetation, wildlife, andhabitat, primarily in areas of nonnative vegetation. Habitats and wildlife would be impacts byremoving vegetation, deterring wildlife from foraging, and promulgating other general degradationeffects that would result from elevated human activity, but not to a significant degree. Habitats thatwould be impacted on SBMR and KTA are dominated primarily by nonnative vegetation. Nonnativevegetation communities and barren lava prevail at PTA.On all maneuver areas, new or existing, wildlife that does not vacate areas being used for maneuvercould sustain injuries. The most likely species to be affected by off-road maneuvers would be groundnestingbirds or small mammals.UAVs would be flown over portions of KTA, KLOA, and PTA already allowing aircraft and wouldfollow AR 95-1, Aviation Flight Regulations, which restrict elevation of UAVs about Noise SensitiveAreas to a minimum of 2,000 feet unless mission essential. This would limit the effect of UAVs onsensitive biological resources during normal operation.The increase from 60 to 66 LSV trips a year is minor. It has been shown that marine wildlife can reactadversely to the introduction of loud low-frequency sounds in their habitat (Richardson et al. 1995).Assuming that low frequency or mid-range sonars are not used from LSVs, impacts from vesseltransit is expected to be minor and not significant. These emissions typically occur off of vesselsengaged in defense training maneuvers, not transport. There is a minimal chance of ship strikes(direct hits on marine mammals) with LSVs or barges, but these are considered to be minimal becauseof the slow speed of the vessels. Less than significant impacts on marine wildlife are expected fromvessel transport between Oahu and the island of Hawaii.Measures to reduce impacts from maneuver training further are the same as those describedpreviously under Impacts from Range Construction.No ImpactImpacts to wetlands. Maneuver training would occur at SBMR, DMR, KTA, and PTA. Brigade- andbattalion-level training would primarily occur at PTA, but the frequency of maneuver training at PTAis not expected to increase above existing levels. The Keamuku Parcel would be used for maneuvertraining as well. Platoon- and company-level training would primarily occur at the other areas, andwould increase in frequency.A wetland delineation of DMR identified one jurisdictional wetland (USACE 2002c). This perchedwetland is within DMR but outside of the area that will be used for maneuver training. An additionalwetland area was also investigated at DMR. Based on an evaluation by the U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers, Honolulu District, Regulatory Branch, dated September 4, 2002, the wetland area wasdetermined to be non-jurisdictional and not regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.Therefore, no impacts to wetlands are expected at DMR from maneuver training under Alternative A.No wetlands have been identified at PTA. There is one regulated wetland near Mount Kaala onSBMR (USACE 2005c), but it would not be impacted by maneuver training. The one regulatedwetland at KTA, Onion Pond, is over two miles from where maneuver training would occur; thereforeFebruary 2008 5-54 2/25th SBCT Final EIS