09.04.2013 Views

Chapters 1 - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Chapters 1 - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Chapters 1 - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Environmental Consequences<br />

Table 5-5<br />

Summary of Potential Effects of Implementing Alternatives A, B, or C<br />

for the Seal Beach National <strong>Wildlife</strong> Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan<br />

Resource Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C<br />

Biological Resources<br />

Waterfowl, Seabirds,<br />

Shorebirds <strong>and</strong> Other<br />

Waterbirds<br />

L<strong>and</strong>birds<br />

<strong>Fish</strong> <strong>and</strong> other Marine<br />

Organisms<br />

Invertebrates, Amphibians,<br />

<strong>and</strong> Reptiles<br />

Not likely to result in<br />

any changes to the<br />

current diversity <strong>and</strong><br />

abundance<br />

Not likely to result in<br />

any changes to the<br />

current diversity <strong>and</strong><br />

abundance of these<br />

birds on the Refuge<br />

Ongoing Refuge<br />

maintenance projects,<br />

such as culvert<br />

replacement, indirectly<br />

benefits fish by<br />

improving water<br />

circulation in the<br />

marsh<br />

Presence/ distribution<br />

of invertebrates,<br />

amphibians, <strong>and</strong><br />

reptiles would be<br />

unlikely to change<br />

Habitat restoration <strong>and</strong><br />

enhancement activities<br />

would provide minor<br />

benefits to these birds<br />

Would likely result in a<br />

minor, indirect adverse<br />

effect to l<strong>and</strong>birds due to<br />

conversion of existing<br />

disturbed upl<strong>and</strong> habitat<br />

to salt marsh <strong>and</strong><br />

wetl<strong>and</strong>/upl<strong>and</strong><br />

transitional habitat<br />

Proposed restoration <strong>and</strong><br />

enhancement projects<br />

would likely result in<br />

some indirect beneficial<br />

effects to fish<br />

populations;<br />

implementing BMPs <strong>and</strong><br />

other conditions during<br />

the application of<br />

pesticides would<br />

minimize the potential for<br />

adverse effects; the use<br />

of Natular in coastal<br />

wetl<strong>and</strong>s could adversely<br />

affect fish <strong>and</strong> marine<br />

organisms<br />

Minor, indirect adverse<br />

effects could result from<br />

restoration/enhancement<br />

projects due to loss of<br />

transitional habitat;<br />

BMPs during pesticide<br />

use will minimize adverse<br />

effects from pesticides<br />

Same as Alternative B<br />

Less likely to result in a<br />

minor, indirect adverse<br />

effect to l<strong>and</strong>birds as<br />

existing disturbed<br />

upl<strong>and</strong> habitat would<br />

be converted primarily<br />

to native upl<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />

wetl<strong>and</strong>/upl<strong>and</strong><br />

transitional habitat<br />

Same as Alternative B,<br />

except Natular is not<br />

proposed for use on the<br />

Refuge under this<br />

alternative<br />

Generally the same as<br />

Alternative B, but under<br />

Alternative C a tiger<br />

beetle management<br />

plan would be<br />

implemented to protect<br />

tiger beetle populations<br />

on the Refuge<br />

Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 5-89

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!