SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Appendix D ⎯ Responses to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statementconstruction and increased training activities will destroy vegetation and disturb the soil andraise the very real prospect of generating a new Dust Bowl throughout southeast Colorado.Soil structure will be permanently destroyed.Response: A lot has been learned since the Dust Bowl. Mechanized training at PCMSsince the mid-1980s has not resulted in the dire effect mentioned in the comment.Military training does not have the same soil interface disturbance asplowing the prairie for food crop production. Soil preservation has been andwill continue to be a major component of the land management practices employedby the Army at PCMS. Sustainment of the land is as much an Armyconcern as it is a general environmental one. We need to keep PCMS availableas a viable training area for the foreseeable future.113. The biological resources discussion fails to make any reference to or list any invertebratesknown to occur at PCMS. The DEIS fails to address the destruction of small mammals andtheir habitats that will likely lead to violations of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.Response: Small mammals and their habitats are doing quite well on PCMS, althoughimpacts could increase under a full, doctrinal training load. An invertebratestudy for PCMS was funded in 2007 and conducted by Texas A&M University,and will continue for two more field seasons. To date, a list of all invertebratescollected has been compiled; those not easily identifiable were sent to taxonomistsfor identification, and a collection is being established. Destruction ofsmall mammals or their habitats is not currently identified as a violation of theEagle Protection Act. Small mammal trapping on Fort Carson and PCMSsuggests that some species increase and others decrease relative to trainingrelateddisturbance. Fort Carson and PCMS are actively managed for the sustainmentof the prairie dog, the primary prey species of eagles on both installations.114. In the analysis of the biologically sensitive areas on page 3–57, there are a few BSA 3 areasthat contain intact native species. Although these species are identified as relatively common,some care should be taken to protect these areas since overall native species are in decline onOahu.Response: The Army’s Natural Resource Program takes a proactive approach to conservingHawaii’s native forest and the native species that exist on Army lands. U.S.Army Garrison Hawaii spends millions of dollars each year on programs toprotect Hawaii’s native species and understands the sensitive nature of islandecologies and the needs to protect species before they become threatened orendangered. The management of federally listed species is often done in concertwith ecosystem management of the habitat wherever possible. We thankyou for your comment and participation in this public process. Your commenthas been considered and included in the administrative record for this process.115. At the end of the first paragraph of the Noxious Weeds section on page 3–58, the word“These” is written but not followed by anything. Is this a typo or is there a sentence missing?Response: The word “These” at the end of this paragraph is a typographical error and ithas been deleted. Please refer to Section 3.1.9.1 to review the revised paragraph.Thank you for your comment.February 2008 D–37 2/25th SBCT Final EIS