SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Chapter 5 – Environmental Consequencesexpected to be less than significant because alternate areas on FRA and USARAK lands outside ofDTA would still be available for access and subsistence activities.Increased training area access closures would affect primarily subsistence users’ taking of furbearers,small game and upland birds. This impact is expected to be less than significant because alternateareas on DTA would still be available for access to subsistence resources including wildlife, fish, andplants.Impacts to the Availability of Subsistence Resources. The Army would use more of DTA formaneuver training than is currently used by the IBCT. Wildlife populations would be able to toleratesome disturbance from vehicular traffic; however, information available currently is insufficient todetermine the extent of population-wide effects. Wildlife would be closely monitored by USARAK’secosystem management program to understand better the impacts and the extent of disturbanceresulting from increased road use and development.Alternative B could affect populations of wildlife. Increases in training frequency and intensity couldtemporarily affect the distribution of moose. Moose appear well adapted to multiple use management(forestry, hunting, and military activities), and military training seems no more detrimental to moosepopulations than other land uses (Andersen et al. 1996). Impacts to moose populations are potentiallysignificant if winter habitats were degraded. However, moose are readily adaptable to the creation ofnew early succession habitat. Overall, the availability of moose to subsistence hunters would be lessthan significant.Maneuver training would also result in less than significant impacts to fisheries. Expected increases intraining levels could lead to higher rates of erosion and sedimentation, as well as an increasedpotential for petroleum spills during refueling. However, such impacts would be localized withinwaterways. Fires could also be a result of increased training frequency, contributing to potentialerosion into streams, ponds and waterways, and thus potentially affecting waterfowl and fisheriesresources. Increased levels of chemical components from unexploded or partially exploded ordnanceare also a potential impact to subsistence resources under. Studies conducted on USARAK impactareas and adjacent waterways have shown that aquatic concentrations of residues are negligible(Ferrick et al. 2001).Additional personnel stationed at FRA might participate in recreational hunting and fishing activitiesand could impact current availability of subsistence resources on or near DTA. An increase in sporthunting interest would compete with existing recreational hunters for fixed-quantity permits and forharvest take where unlimited open entry permits are available. The ADFG manages harvest throughits permit system and impacts harvest through early closures and or regulation changes. However, theadditional personnel would represent an increase of less than 1% compared to the existing populationand would thus result in a small change in the number of fisher and hunter populations. Impacts to theavailability of subsistence resources are expected to be less than significant.A slight increase in frequency of closures is expected. Overall impacts on subsistence may occurbecause of the expected increase in access closures and the potential disruption or partial migration ofwildlife. Overall effects on subsistence are expected to be less than significant.5.3.17 Impacts of Relocating an IBCT from Fort Richardson to Schofield BarracksSelection of Alternative B would require that the 4/25 th IBCT currently stationed at FRA be relocatedto Hawaii. The 4/25 th consists of 530 more Soldiers and 275 more wheeled vehicles than the 2/25 thID (L) as referenced in Table 2-16. Training requirements of the 4/25 th are similar to the 2/25 th IDFebruary 2008 5-122 2/25th SBCT Final EIS