SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Chapter 5 – Environmental Consequencesarea that will be used for live-fire training. SOPs and BMPs designed to minimize impacts towetlands through stormwater and erosion control would be followed.Impacts from Maneuver TrainingSignificant Impacts Mitigable To Less Than SignificantImpact 3: Introduction and spread of invasive plants and noxious weeds. The impacts from maneuverraining at SBMR, DMR, PTA, KTA, and KLOA would be expected to affect the introduction andspread of invasive species by potential fires that would put native plant species at competitivedisadvantage. Impacts from noxious weeds under Alternative D would be significant, but mitigable toless than significant.Regulatory and Administrative Mitigation 3: Mitigation measures for effects to noxious weeds frommaneuver training are the same as those described in Alternative A.Less Than Significant ImpactsImpacts to vegetation: Vegetation communities within the proposed range areas on SBMR, PTA andKTA, and KLOA would be disturbed by maneuver training. Training with existing vehicles wouldcontinue at current levels. Maneuver training would occur on established roads or trails, as well asareas designated for maneuver training throughout the installations. Vegetation resources would notbe expected to be affected by maneuvers on existing roads and trails. Maneuvers training wouldgenerally occur in unforested areas at PTA and the Keamuku Parcel that contain nonnative vegetationcommunities. Vegetation that would be impacted on SBER and KTA is also primarily nonnative.Impacts to vegetation from maneuver training under Alternative D would be less than significant.Mitigation measures for effects to vegetation from maneuver training are the same as those describedunder Alternative A.Impacts to general wildlife and habitats. No change in impacts to general wildlife and habitats isexpected from the No Action Alternative. Current maneuver training frequency and type wouldcontinue using existing vehicles. Off-road training areas would not expand, so no new habitat losswould occur. Wildlife would continue to be disturbed by noise and human presence during training,but the level of disturbance would not change from existing levels and remain a less than significantimpact.Impacts to Threatened and Endangered Species: Maneuver training would continue and under the NoAction Alternative, several range improvement projects would occur. Army use of those rangeswould produce a less than significant impact to threatened and endangered species because trainingwould occur over a larger area and at more locations. Maneuver training would continue usingexisting equipment and training methods at current off-road training areas. Continued use of Armyland for training under No Action would prolong the impact to threatened and endangered species.These impacts from continued training would remain a less than significant impact.No ImpactsImpacts to wetlands: No impacts to wetlands are expected from maneuver training under AlternativeD. No wetlands have been identified at PTA. There is one regulated wetland on SBMR (USACE2005c). The wetland, located near Mount Kaala, is within the Schofield Barracks Forest Reservewhere no training activities would occur; therefore, no impacts to wetlands are expected. On KTA,the one regulated wetland in the training area, Onion Pond, is more than two miles away from theFebruary 2008 5-227 2/25th SBCT Final EIS