Chapters 1 - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Environmental Consequences
interested parties, such as local historical societies, would likely be interested parties in this
process and would be invited to participate in the MOA. Following this procedure would ensure
compliance with all applicable federal policies related to the protection of historic properties;
however, additional NEPA analysis would be required prior to removal if the structure were to be
deemed eligible for listing on the NRHP. If the structure is removed before 2014 or it is
determined that the structure does not meet the criteria for eligibility to the NRHP, then no
adverse effects related to cultural resources would result from the removal of this structure.
Public Use
There is little potential for ground disturbing activities to occur in association with an increase in
the Refuge’s limited public use program; therefore, no adverse effects to cultural resources are
anticipated under Alternative C. As described under Alternative A, Refuge staff would continue to
work with the Navy to assess potential effects to CA-ORA-298 as a result of conducting special
bird watching outings on the Refuge.
Constructing the proposed observation tower could result in some ground disturbance associated
with site preparation and footings, therefore, a map indicating the project’s APE along with a
detailed project description would be submitted for review to the Service’s Cultural Resources
Program, as well as appropriate Navy cultural resources staff. Based on this information, Service
and Navy staff will determine the appropriate measures to be implemented to protect cultural
resources. It is anticipated that an archaeological monitor, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s
Guidelines, would be required to be present during all ground-disturbing activities.
5.7 Effects to the Social and Economic Environment
This section examines the effects of the three management alternatives to the social and economic
environment in which the Refuge is located, including effects related to: land use; public safety;
traffic circulation; public utilities/easements; vectors and odors; economics/employment; and
environmental justice.
With regard to land use, this section analyzes the potential land use conflicts between the habitat
management and public use proposals presented in each alternative and the existing and planned
land uses in the immediate vicinity of the Refuge. Adverse effects related to land use would be
considered significant if:
Substantial incompatibility between proposed uses or activities and adjacent existing uses
would occur.
Substantial changes in use or the intensity of use are proposed, where the resulting activity
or use pattern would create significant noise, traffic, public safety, or similar environment
impacts that would adversely affect the existing or future the use of adjacent areas.
The analysis of impacts related to public safety considers the level to which various current and
past activities on or adjacent to the Refuge could pose a hazard to Refuge visitors and/or
personnel. Adverse effects related to public safety would be considered significant if:
Refuge visitors or personnel are present in areas identified by the Navy as potentially
hazardous due to the presence or potential presence of ordnance or active small arms fire.
The analysis of impacts related to traffic circulation considers the estimated level of traffic that
could be generated by the implementation of the strategies proposed under each alternative. Also
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 5-71