SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Chapter 5 – Environmental ConsequencesTable 5-36Summary of Environmental Consequences from Alternative CLocationVEC Fort Carson PCMSRelocating the4/4 th to SBMRSoil Erosion Water Resources ☼ ☼ Wildfire Management Cultural Resources Land Use and Recreation /+ ☼ ☼Traffic and Transportation /+ ☼Socioeconomics ☼ ☼ ☼Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Waste ☼ ☼Wetlands Vegetation ☼Noxious Weeds ☼ ☼ Threatened and Endangered Species Wildlife and Habitats ☼ ☼ ☼Air Quality Noise ☼ ☼ Airspace ☼ ☼Energy Demand and Generation ☼ ☼ ☼Facilities ☼ ☼ ☼ = Significant + = Beneficial Impact = Significant but mitigable to less than significant N/A = Not Applicable☼ = Less than Significant = No ImpactConstruction and training activities have the potential to impact cultural resources. Even withimplementation of ICRMP, destruction or damage to previously unknown properties of traditionalimportance could occur. Mitigation measures would minimize impacts to cultural resources; however,the loss of cultural resources is considered a significant impact.Impacts to threatened, endangered, or sensitive species could occur from continued use of Armylands. Conservation plans and mitigation measures would reduce the impacts to less than significant.The introduction or spread of noxious weeds may occur, but FTC has targeted noxious weeds forpriority control by preventing them from populating disturbed areas. Range construction would havelimited but permanent impacts on vegetation in the construction footprints. General wildlife andhabitats would sustain only less than significant impacts. No impacts to wetlands would be expected.Land use impacts, primarily from training activities would be significant. The implementation ofseveral administrative mitigation measures would reduce those impacts to less than significant.February 2008 5-131 2/25th SBCT Final EIS