SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Chapter 5 – Environmental Consequences• Develop and maintain a wetlands database for each USARAK post that includes the spatialdistribution of wetland types and historical damage levels. This would provide natural resourcesmanagers with information to help monitor and conserve wetland resources.• Complete a survey of USARAK wetlands, including wetland type and location, to aid militaryoperation coordinators in planning field exercises away from these areas. This would ensureconservation of wetlands.• Conduct a detailed study to assess impacts of recreational vehicles to wetlands. This study wouldprovide managers with information to be used for future conservation efforts.Additional Mitigation 1: The following measures currently in place to respond to new or increasingwetland impacts, and are continually reviewed and revised.• Continue to use and update environmental limitations overlays.• Conduct planning-level surveys, wetlands management, and revegetation plans.• Continue implementation of INRMPs, with specific actions for management of wetlands.• Continue to obtain wetland permits.• Continue damage control measures.• Continue implementation of recreational vehicle use policy, which places the same limitations onrecreational access as those that already apply to military vehicles.Less Than Significant ImpactsImpacts to vegetation. Construction of ranges would result in alteration or loss of disturbed, nonnativevegetation at the ranges to be upgraded. No new areas would be disturbed. Impacts to rareecotypes or species of concern are not expected to occur. Impacts to vegetation from rangeconstruction would be less than significant.Impacts to general wildlife and habitats. Construction of new ranges at FRA would not result inadditional long-term or permanent loss of habitat. Construction noise and related human presencewould disrupt the normal activities of animals. Mortality may occur to individual animals that aresmall or less mobile. Because range construction would occur in existing range footprints, therewould be no increase in habitat fragmentation. Construction and development of ranges wouldprovide habitat for species that prefer edge habitat, open areas, or early succession. Forest-dwellingspecies would not be affected. Construction activities could affect water quality, but any impacts areexpected to be short-term and minor. Following construction of the proposed ranges, the Army wouldseed disturbed areas with native or noninvasive vegetation. Overall, the short-term impacts of rangeconstruction would be minor. Range construction would have the long-term impact of limiting theavailable habitat for some species; however, the relatively small size of the proposed rangeimprovements compared to available habitat resources is less than significant.To minimize impacts to general wildlife and habitats, USARAK would continue to implement theINRMP developed to address wildlife and habitat impacts from Army actions. The INRMP containsspecific actions to inventory, maintain, and improve wildlife habitat. Effects of military training onselect wildlife species (especially herd animals, migratory birds, and waterfowl) during criticalseasons such as breeding, rearing of young, and migration would be monitored. Managementstrategies to minimize disturbance to priority wildlife would also benefit general wildlife.Coordination between natural resources and range managers would design training schedules thatFebruary 2008 5-106 2/25th SBCT Final EIS