Chapters 1 - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Environmental Consequences however significantly contribute to cumulative water quality impacts or benefits in the general area. Impacts from the operation of construction equipment associated with development, facilities improvements or maintenance, and restoration, although relatively short in duration, would contribute incrementally to the overall concentration of fugitive dust and particulate matter in the air, as well as incrementally contribute to temporary increases in ozone levels within the Region. These operations would also result in the generation of GHG emissions. The cumulative effect of these temporary increases in air emissions is difficult to quantify because the projects would be implemented at different times, with only a portion of the projects occurring at any given time. Because the generation of fugitive dust, particulate matter, ozone, and GHGs as a result of implementing the restoration proposals included in the Seal Beach NWR CCP would be relatively low and only generated for a limited time, the cumulative contributions from this project to the local, regional, and global environment are not considered significant. Implementation of the Seal Beach NWR CCP would not result in any measurable increases in the existing operational emissions associated with Refuge management, nor would Refuge operations exceed regional pollutant emission thresholds of significance. Therefore, the proposal would not contribute cumulatively to long term regional air quality impacts or the production of long-term GHG emissions. 5.9.2 Cumulative Effects to Biological Resources The majority of the development projects proposed in the vicinity of the Refuge are redevelopment projects that are not expected to impact significant biological resources. A few projects are proposed in or adjacent to sensitive habitat areas and could result in disturbance to wildlife, impacts to native habitat, or impacts to the marine environment. The restoration projects proposed in the area could result in temporary impacts to biological resources; however, these impacts would be minimized by avoiding construction activity during the breeding seasons, while other impacts would be offset by the benefits of restoration. Any adverse effects to biological resources as a result of the implementation of the CCP would be minor and would not represent a significant cumulative effect to biological resources. 5.9.3 Cumulative Effects to Cultural Resources Adherence to the policies and regulations pertaining to the protection of cultural resources would avoid or mitigate any significant adverse effects as a result of implementing the various projects listed above; therefore, the proposed project would not result in any adverse cumulative impacts to cultural resources. 5.9.4 Cumulative Effects to the Social and Economic Environment Although several of the projects being considered for development in the vicinity of the Refuge would generate traffic volumes that could have cumulative effects on the local and regional circulation systems, the minor increases in the already low levels of traffic generated as a result of Refuge activities would not contribute cumulatively to localized or regional traffic impacts. Although the development proposals in the vicinity of the Refuge would result in a cumulative increase in the demand for water, sewer, and energy, the proposals in the CCP would not result in any increases in the long-term demand for water, sewer, or energy on the Refuge. A number of restoration proposals are under consideration in the project vicinity which when implemented could provide habitat for various vectors, primarily salt marsh mosquitoes. The restored conditions on these sites would however be less likely to support the diversity and Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 5-85
Chapter 5 abundance of mosquitoes currently supported within disturbed wetland areas. Therefore, the restoration proposals on the Refuge, as well as those proposed in the general project vicinity, would not result in a significant cumulative impact related to vectors. The proposals included in the CCP would have no effect on issues related to environmental justice; therefore, the implementation of the CCP would not contribute to any impacts related to environmental justice that may result from the implementation of the other projects under consideration in the general vicinity of the project. 5.10 Summary of Effects Provided in Table 5-5 is a summary of the potential effects associated with each of the alternatives evaluated as part of the Seal Beach NWR CCP. Table 5-5 Summary of Potential Effects of Implementing Alternatives A, B, or C for the Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan Resource Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C Physical Environment Topography Visual Quality No changes to the existing topography on the Refuge occur as a result of implementing ongoing Refuge activities No adverse effects to the existing visual quality of the Refuge lands occur as a result of implementing ongoing Refuge activities Proposed restoration efforts would change the topography and elevations on approximately 36 acres of the Refuge; these changes would not result in any adverse effects to the existing topographic character on the Refuge Temporary, minor adverse effects to visual quality would occur during site preparation for habitat restoration; the long-term effect of the restoration process would be improved visual quality within the restoration sites Same as Alternative B Same as Alternative B; the installation of an elevated observation platform would alter the visual character of the area near the intersection of Kitts Highway and Bolsa Avenue, however, this change in visual character would not represent a significant impact on the environment 5-86 Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge
Page 1 and 2:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Seal
Page 3 and 4:
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Seal B
Page 5 and 6:
Abstract The issues addressed in t
Page 7 and 8:
Reader’s Guide Appendix A, Compa
Page 9 and 10:
Table of Contents 2.8 Alternative
Page 11 and 12:
Table of Contents 4.3.4.1 Birds ..
Page 13 and 14:
Table of Contents 5.4.2 Alternativ
Page 15 and 16:
Table of Contents ─────
Page 17 and 18:
Table of Contents ─────
Page 19 and 20:
Ventura County Hopper Mt. NWR P a c
Page 21 and 22:
Chapter 1 The development of this
Page 23 and 24:
Chapter 1 document, or administrat
Page 25 and 26:
Chapter 1 e) The use is consistent
Page 27 and 28:
Chapter 1 area now meets the defin
Page 29 and 30:
Chapter 1 Additional ecosystem pla
Page 31 and 32:
Chapter 1 Goal 2: Protect, manage,
Page 33 and 34:
Figure 1-3. Artist’s Rendition of
Page 35 and 36:
Chapter 2 recovery, and wildlife-d
Page 37 and 38:
Chapter 2 2.5 Management Concerns/
Page 39 and 40:
Chapter 2 Refuge Access The Refuge
Page 41 and 42:
Chapter 2 approved CCP will be imp
Page 43 and 44:
San Gabriel River California Nevada
Page 45 and 46:
Chapter 3 implementation of the fo
Page 47 and 48:
Chapter 3 activities at NWSSB are
Page 49 and 50:
Chapter 3 Alternative C a larger p
Page 51 and 52:
Chapter 3 3.4.2.2 Features Common
Page 53 and 54:
Pacific Co ast H wy A n a h e i m B
Page 55 and 56:
Chapter 3 For the California least
Page 57 and 58:
Chapter 3 requires that all pestic
Page 59 and 60:
Chapter 3 species habitat; the sea
Page 61 and 62:
Chapter 3 Wildlife Photography. Ca
Page 63 and 64:
l Bolsa Ave. Seal Beach National Wi
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Chapter 3 BMPs that further define
Page 69 and 70:
Chapter 3 greater than three miles
Page 71 and 72:
Chapter 3 6. Increase Efforts to I
Page 73 and 74:
Chapter 3 The upland areas to the
Page 75 and 76:
Chapter 3 Native American subsiste
Page 77 and 78:
Chapter 3 One proposal that would
Page 79 and 80:
Chapter 3 clean sand suitable for
Page 81 and 82:
Chapter 3 Improve Public Access on
Page 83 and 84:
Issue Raised During Scoping Habitat
Page 85 and 86:
Figure 4-1. Seal Beach NWR - Site P
Page 87 and 88:
Figure 4-2. Historical (1894) Coast
Page 89 and 90:
Figure 4-4. Aerial View of Anaheim
Page 91 and 92:
Chapter 4 With the exception of th
Page 93 and 94:
im Bay California Nevada Seal Beach
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Chapter 4 The results of studies c
Page 99 and 100:
Figure 4-10. Anaheim Bay-Huntington
Page 101 and 102:
Figure 4-11. Tidal and Freshwater C
Page 103 and 104:
Chapter 4 lead to a breach in the
Page 105 and 106:
Chapter 4 salinity, and alternatel
Page 107 and 108:
Chapter 4 “beneficial uses.” T
Page 109 and 110:
Chapter 4 Station Location East of
Page 111 and 112:
Chapter 4 address issues related t
Page 113 and 114:
Chapter 4 The CALFED Independent S
Page 115 and 116:
Chapter 4 Within the South Coast A
Page 117 and 118:
Chapter 4 while also preparing a s
Page 119 and 120:
Chapter 4 Site Number Table 4-4 Su
Page 121 and 122:
Chapter 4 At present, there are ap
Page 123 and 124:
Chapter 4 The Shorebird Plan ident
Page 125 and 126:
Chapter 4 acres within the Refuge
Page 127 and 128:
Chapter 4 roots and rhizomes of th
Page 129 and 130:
Chapter 4 following a period of si
Page 131 and 132:
Chapter 4 A variety of foraging ha
Page 133 and 134:
Chapter 4 Harbor seals (Phoca vitu
Page 135 and 136:
Chapter 4 Wandering Skipper. A but
Page 137 and 138:
Chapter 4 artificial containers, a
Page 139 and 140:
Chapter 4 Mollusk communities in s
Page 141 and 142:
Chapter 4 The data collected durin
Page 143 and 144:
Chapter 4 sand, in which one to fo
Page 145 and 146:
Chapter 4 experienced late rain sh
Page 147 and 148:
Chapter 4 stems is pulled over and
Page 149 and 150:
Chapter 4 condition that could be
Page 151 and 152:
Chapter 4 individuals are also obs
Page 153 and 154:
Chapter 4 north as Alaska (Southwe
Page 155 and 156:
Chapter 4 The 2008 report encompas
Page 157 and 158:
Chapter 4 Presented in Table 4-12
Page 159 and 160:
Chapter 4 Protection Plan for Nava
Page 161 and 162:
Chapter 4 mobile early occupants.
Page 163 and 164:
Chapter 4 German immigrants from S
Page 165 and 166:
Chapter 4 date for sites located t
Page 167 and 168:
Chapter 4 ability for the public t
Page 169 and 170:
Figure 4-16. Land Use in the Vicini
Page 171 and 172:
Chapter 4 City of Seal Beach excee
Page 173 and 174:
Chapter 4 Table 4-15 Economic/Empl
Page 175 and 176:
Chapter 4 household income in 1999
Page 177 and 178:
Chapter 5 Hydrology - An adverse
Page 179 and 180:
Chapter 5 liquefaction, settlement
Page 181 and 182:
Chapter 5 Surflan AS, with the act
Page 183 and 184:
Chapter 5 sea level rise in the ge
Page 185 and 186:
Chapter 5 per week. The sum of the
Page 187 and 188:
Chapter 5 contaminants related to
Page 189 and 190:
Chapter 5 erosion at the project s
Page 191 and 192:
Chapter 5 would ensure that no sig
Page 193 and 194:
Chapter 5 Spray applications will
Page 195 and 196:
Chapter 5 The USEPA (2008b) descri
Page 197 and 198:
Chapter 5 Measures shall be imple
Page 199 and 200:
Chapter 5 Equipment will be calib
Page 201 and 202:
Chapter 5 Refuge. Removal of concr
Page 203 and 204:
Chapter 5 Public Use Expanding the
Page 205 and 206:
Chapter 5 GHG emissions. Therefore
Page 207 and 208:
Chapter 5 restoration/creation usi
Page 209 and 210: Chapter 5 Replacement of the exist
Page 211 and 212: Chapter 5 5.3.3 Alternative C (Pro
Page 213 and 214: Chapter 5 An action would result
Page 215 and 216: Chapter 5 conducted once a month,
Page 217 and 218: Chapter 5 Methoprene applied at le
Page 219 and 220: Chapter 5 in mammals, methoprene i
Page 221 and 222: Chapter 5 associated with the appl
Page 223 and 224: Chapter 5 moderately toxic to fish
Page 225 and 226: Chapter 5 impacts on nontarget spe
Page 227 and 228: Chapter 5 alternative as described
Page 229 and 230: Chapter 5 The removal of the drop
Page 231 and 232: Chapter 5 established on NASA Isla
Page 233 and 234: Chapter 5 Pest Management Herbicid
Page 235 and 236: Chapter 5 Pest Management Implemen
Page 237 and 238: Chapter 5 Public Use No adverse or
Page 239 and 240: Chapter 5 Proposals to better unde
Page 241 and 242: Chapter 5 Pest Management The anal
Page 243 and 244: Chapter 5 Section 800.5(1) Criteri
Page 245 and 246: Chapter 5 An archaeological monito
Page 247 and 248: Chapter 5 included in this section
Page 249 and 250: Chapter 5 that extends along Bolsa
Page 251 and 252: Chapter 5 Table 5-4 Economic Impac
Page 253 and 254: Chapter 5 residents and visitors.
Page 255 and 256: Chapter 5 5.7.3.5 Effects Related
Page 257 and 258: Chapter 5 Harmony Cove Residential
Page 259: Chapter 5 desalination facility ut
Page 263 and 264: Chapter 5 Table 5-5 Summary of Pot
Page 269 and 270: Chapter 6 6.2 Refuge Goals, Object
Page 271 and 272: Chapter 6 Objective 1.1 - Californ
Page 273 and 274: Chapter 6 affecting reestablishmen
Page 275 and 276: Chapter 6 Objective 1.6 - Protect
Page 277 and 278: Chapter 6 Objective 2.3 - Control
Page 279 and 280: Chapter 6 Objective 2.6 - Restore
Page 281 and 282: Chapter 6 for migratory birds thro
Page 283 and 284: Chapter 6 Alternative A B C
Page 285 and 286: Chapter 6 Goal 4: Further strength
Page 287 and 288: Chapter 6 public outreach at on- a
Page 289 and 290: Chapter 6 describes when and how m
Page 291 and 292: Chapter 6 Native American Graves P
Page 293 and 294: Chapter 6 (The Service lands and w
Page 295 and 296: Chapter 6 Water Quality Conservati
Page 297 and 298: Chapter 6 CCP, additional staff wi
Page 299 and 300: Chapter 6 Table 6-3 (continued) Pr
Page 301 and 302: 7 References Cited Anderson, J., F.
Page 303 and 304: References Cited California State W
Page 305 and 306: References Cited Extension Toxicolo
Page 307 and 308: References Cited Kus, B.E. 1990. St
Page 309 and 310: References Cited National Marine Fi
Page 311 and 312:
References Cited Robinson, W.W. 197
Page 313 and 314:
References Cited Underwood, J. and
Page 315 and 316:
References Cited U.S. Fish and Wild
Page 317:
Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge
show all

Chapters 1 - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?