Integrated Training Area Management EA and Final FNSI

wildlife would also cease. Elimination of the SRA program would cause moderate adverse impacts due tounintended or negligent military activity. Similarly, eliminating the TRI program would adversely impactfish and wildlife by no longer informing military personnel to avoid or use caution in sensitive areas,including wetland and riparian areas.The following table presents a summary of qualitative impacts to wildlife and fisheries resulting fromeach alternative. Descriptions of the qualitative terms are provided in Chapter 2, Description of ProposedAction and Alternatives.Table 3.5.b Summary of Impacts 1 to Wildlife and Fisheries.ITAM Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3Activity Short Term Long Term Short Term Long Term Short Term Long TermTRI Beneficial Beneficial Beneficial Beneficial Moderate ModerateLRAM Minor Beneficial Minor Beneficial Severe SevereSRA Beneficial Beneficial Beneficial Beneficial Moderate ModerateRTLA Minor Beneficial Minor Beneficial Severe SevereGIS Beneficial Beneficial Beneficial Beneficial Moderate Moderate1 Short-term impacts are defined as impacts lasting for the duration of a project (approximately ten days).Cumulative ImpactsPast activities on USARAK lands have adversely impacted wildlife and fisheries through gradual habitatloss, exposure to toxic materials, and noise (USARAK 2004). Current and new construction projectswould have additional adverse impacts on wildlife and fisheries. For more information on changes tohabitat, see Section 3.2, Vegetation. However, activities under the proposed action would add beneficiallong-term effects to the overall cumulative impacts on this resource through habitat improvement projectssuch as revegetation, vegetation management, wetlands reclamation, streambank stabilization, and otherstream habitat improvement activities. Monitoring the impacts of training activities and adaptingmanagement actions to accommodate changing conditions would also have a beneficial cumulativeimpact.3.6 FIRE MANAGEMENT3.6.1 Affected EnvironmentFires are frequent in interior Alaska and are important to many ecosystems for function and productivity.Wildfires, however, are a concern for USARAK due to the potential impact on human activities,structures, and military operations. Incendiary devices and lightning are the two major causes of fires oninstallation lands. Other less common causes are field burning, exhaust, recreation, trash burning, andwarming fires.Fire management on USARAK installations is required by the Sikes Act and Army Regulation 200-3.Additional direction regarding fire management is stated in a 1995 Memorandum of Understandingbetween the Bureau of Land Management and USARAK as well as in the Army’s wildland fire policyguidance document (Department of the Army 2002). Wildland fire management in Alaska requires multiagencycooperation and is a joint effort by USARAK and the Bureau of Land Management, Alaska FireService. The Alaska Fire Service also has a Reciprocal Fire Management Agreement with the State ofAlaska’s Department of Natural Resources, Division of Forestry (Alaska Fire Service and State of Alaska_____________________________________________________________________________________________Environmental AssessmentUnited States Army Alaska, Integrated Training Area Management ProgramManagement Plan 43