Environmental Impact Statements:Full-Text & Digests

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires that U.S. federal agencies or anyone receiving federal funding prepare detailed analyses of any of their actions that significantly affect the quality of the environment. Almost all developments, such as roads, houses and airports, have an impact on the environment. Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) are documents that help the government and the general public understand the effects of developments on the environment and to decide whether developments should go ahead. NEPA does not prohibit the federal government or its licensees/permittees from harming the environment, but requires that the prospective impacts be understood and disclosed in advance and may mandate various modifications and safeguards designed to protect the environment.

In recent years, EISs have looked increasingly at biodiversity. Most EIS documents will include a description of major habitats and a list of the plant and animal species present. They also pay particular attention to the presence of threatened species. Where the effects are considered significantly harmful to threatened species, an additional document, the Species Impact Statement (SIS), may also be prepared

CSA has produced EIS Digests since 1985 and as a result has indexed records and synopses of all the EIS full-text records included in this file. Currently, the full-text, including maps and SIS, is available for statements issued in and since 2003. By adding the full-text to these records, CSA has provided a single source where users can find the full-text of all EIS statements and be able to search using words from the full-text as well as unified and systematic indexing terms.

EIS Digests records from 1985 to date are also included in this collection to assure a complete search for any topic. EIS extracts the key issues from complex government-released environmental impact statements, converting massive documents into concise, readable abstracts. Each entry includes a clear description of the project, sections on positive impact and negative consequences, and legal mandates.

Subject Coverage

Major areas of coverage include:

Air Transportation
Defense Programs
Energy
Hazardous Substances
Land Use
Parks, Refuges, and Forests
Research and Development
Roads and Railroads
Urban and Social Programs
Water

Full-Text (2003-Current) & Digests (1985 - Current)

Quarterly

Digests: approximately 10,000 records
Full-Text: approximately 1,700 documents

Environmental Impact Statements filed with the US Environmental Protection Agency

CSA
7200 Wisconsin Avenue
Bethesda, MD 20814 USA
Voice: 800-843-7751 (in N. America)
Voice: +1 301-961-6700 (worldwide)
Fax: +1 301-961-6720
Email: sales@csa.com

Database:

EIS FT: Full-Text of Environmental Impact Statements

Title:

BAR T BAR AND ANDERSON SPRINGS ALLOTMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN, MOGOLLON RIM AND MORMON LAKE RANGER DISTRICTS, COCONINO NATIONAL FOREST, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA. [Part 4 of 15]

Source:

EPA number: 030544, 415 pages and maps, November 28, 2003

Descriptors:

Burning (Prescribed); Forests; Grazing; Impact Monitoring Plans; Lakes; Livestock; Range Management; Ranges; Vegetation; Vegetation Surveys; Wetlands; Wildlife Habitat; Wildlife Management; Wildlife Surveys; Arizona; Coconino National Forest; Soldier Lake; National Forest Management Act of 1976, Compliance

Search Term(s) in Context:

... section below are the total acres, and the two vegetation types are split between this acreage total. Stand boundaries are indiscrete. Grasslands gradually transition into pinyon-juniper stands that gradually transition into ponderosa pine stands. At lower elevations and on drier sites, pinyon pine, Utah juniper, one-seed juniper, alligator juniper, and Rocky Mountain juniper occur. These sites are also characterized by a high percentage of rock in the soil, which further reduces available moisture. As available moisture increases, ponderosa pine and Gambel oak increase. Grassland Grassland occurs

PURPOSE: The revision of the allotment management plans (AMPs) for the Bar T Bar and Anderson Springs allotments within the Mogollon Rim and Mormon Lake ranger districts of the Coconino National Forest, Coconino County, Arizona is proposed. The allotments, which encompass 237,666 acres, are located near Flagstaff east of Mormon Lake, south of Interstate 40 between Twin Arrows and Winslow, and northeast of Clint's Well at the intersection of Highway 87 and Forest Highway 3 (Lake Mary Road). Key issues identified during scoping include those related to livestock grazing practices that may result in declines in pronghorn antelope populations in the analysis area and grazing practices that may negatively affect wetlands. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 2), which would eliminate livestock grazing on the allotments, are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative 3) would establish an objective-driven livestock grazing system to be implemented on both allotments. Approximately 49,462 acres of grassland maintenance and restoration would be implemented, and additional fences and water developments would be provided. Permitted livestock numbers on the Bar T Bar Allotment would be set at up to 18,050 head months (HMs) each year. Permitted livestock numbers on the Anderson Springs Allotment would be set at up at up to 6,036 HMs each year. To assist with implementing the proposal, the following range improvements would be implemented: 53 miles of new fencing, four miles of fence reconstruction, nine miles of fence replacement, and 20 miles of fence removal. Vegetation treatments would be provided on 49,642 acres within the pinyon-juniper ecosystem. The treatments would include 41,560 acres of grassland maintenance, 7,786 acres of grassland restoration, and 116 acres of wildlife corridor creation. Prescribed burning could occur on up to 11,061 acres within the Anderson Springs Allotment. The plan would include 37 miles of road maintenance. Riparian concerns at Soldier Lake would be addressed. The preferred alternative (Alternative 5) would be designed to reduce the number of fences impeding the movements of pronghorn antelope movement in antelope habitat and maintain current livestock numbers. Alternative 5 would establish an objective-driven livestock grazing system to be implemented on both allotments. Approximately 49,462 acres of grassland maintenance and restoration would be implemented, and additional fences and water developments would be provided. Permitted livestock numbers on the Bar T Bar Allotment would be set at up to 18,050 head months (HMs) each year. Permitted livestock numbers on the Anderson Springs Allotment would be set at up at up to 6,036 HMs each year. To assist with implementing the proposal, the following range improvements would be implemented: 30 miles of new fencing, four miles of fence reconstruction, nine miles of fence replacement, and 20 miles of fence removal. Vegetation treatments would be provided on 49,642 acres within the pinyon-juniper ecosystem. The treatments would include 41,560 acres of grassland maintenance, 7,786 acres of grassland restoration, and 116 acres of wildlife corridor creation. Prescribed burning could occur on up to 11,061 acres within the Anderson Springs Allotment. The plan would include 37 miles of road maintenance. Riparian concerns at Soldier Lake would be addressed. Monitoring plots for pronghorn antelope and wetlands would be incorporated into the AMPs. Estimated present net values of the proposed action and the preferred alternative would result in losses of $1.9 million and $823,029, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would provide for a comprehensive plan to address more than domestic livestock grazing. In particular, the plan would address concerns about: increased canopy densities in pinyon-juniper and ponderosa pine stands; competition for forage, between domestic livestock and wild ungulates, particularly competition for cool season plant species; decreasing pronghorn antelope populations and antelope habitat quality on summer and winter range; livestock grazing and waterfowl nesting on wetlands that produce emergent vegetation. In terms of economic returns for allotment permittees, the proposed action would represent the second most beneficial of the alternatives AMPs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Increases in area fencing would negatively impact antelope movements, thereby, impeding access to forage, though the preferred alternative minimizes the extent of new fencing. Road and fence construction and other intrusive management actions would result in the destruction of vegetation and the compaction of soils. Prescribed burning would destroy vegetation and degrade air quality locally in the short-term. LEGAL MANDATES: National Forest Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 1600 et seq.)
Corporate Author:	Department of Agriculture, Forest Service
Agency:	Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Happy Jack, Arizona; DA
EPA Number:	030544
Publication Type:	Report
Status:	Draft
Notes:	Draft. Preparation date: November 28, 2003
Publication Year:	2003
Classification:	Parks, Refuges and Forests
Update:	200605
Article's Accession Number:	10521
Accession Number:	10521-030544_0004

Field Codes

The following field codes are found in the records of this database. Here they are listed in alphabetical order by two-letter code.

AB = Abstract	NU = Other Numbers
AG = Agency	PT = Publication Type
AN = Accession Number	PY = Publication Year
CA = Corporate Author	SO = Source
CL = Classification	ST = Status
DE = Descriptors	TI = Title
EU = EPA Number	UD = Update
FT = Fulltext	XF = PDF Report Part
NA = Article's Accession Number	ZF = Downloadable Full Report
NT = Notes

Environmental Impact Statements: Full-Text & Digests