Draft Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report
San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project: Spartina
Control Program
April 2003
|
Table 3.3-1: Summary of Potential Biological
Resources Effects |
|||||||
|
Impact |
Manual Removal |
Mechanical |
Pruning, Hand-mowing, and
Smothering |
Flooding |
Burning |
Herbicide |
Beneficial Effects |
|
BIO-1.1: Effects on |
All Alternatives:
Local, short-term minor adverse |
All Alternatives: Minor to moderate adverse impacts could
occur |
All Alternatives: Minor adverse |
All Alternatives: Not applicable: method not feasible for
existing infestation, generally |
All Alternatives: Not applicable: method not feasible for
existing infestation, probably |
Alternatives 1, 3: Potential local, persistent (to 2-3 year), adverse impact due to spray drift effect on non-target emergent marsh vegetation. Alternative 2: No impact. |
Alternatives 1 & 2: Alternative 3: Short-term benefits of continued uncoordinated contyrol efforts; no long-term benefits. |
|
BIO-1.2: Effects on tidal
marsh plant communities affected by Atlantic smooth cordgrass and its hybrids. |
Alternative 1: Minor to moderate short-term local adverse impacts due to incidental trampling by crews. Alternative 2: Alternative 3: |
Alternative 1: Alternative 2: Alternative 3: |
Alternative 1: Alternative 2: Alternative 3: |
Alternative 1: Alternative 2: Alternative 3: |
Alternatives 1-3A: Local, short-term adverse impacts Alternative 3: |
Alternatives 1, 3A: Local, moderately persistent adverse
impacts of herbicide spray drift on tidal marsh vegetation adjacent to
treated areas could occur from manual and normal helicopter application. Minimal
non-target impacts to vegetation could occur from wick/ Alternative 2, |
Alternatives 1: Alternatives 2-3: Temporary local benefits from Alternative 3: Short-term benefits of continued uncoordinated contyrol efforts; no long-term benefits. |
|
BIO-1.3: Effects on tidal
marsh plant communities affected by Chilean cordgrass. |
Alternative 1: Alternative 2: Alternative 3A: |
All Alternatives: Unlikely methods for known infestations
of this high salt marsh species.
Local, short-term minor to moderate adverse impacts could occur |
Alternatives 1, 3A: Local, short-term minor adverse Alternative 2: |
All Alternatives : Not applicable: method not feasible for
existing |
All Alternatives: Minor to moderate local and short-term adverse impacts due to marginal impacts to non-target salt marsh vegetation. Limited applicability of this method for known infestations. |
Alternative 1: Alternative 2: |
Alternative 1: Probably fastest regional eradication, lowest risk of regional spread. Greatest significant long-term benefit. Alternatives 2, 3 Possibly slower but feasible regional eradication and arrested spread. Significant long-term benefit. |
|
BIO-1.4: Effects |
Alternative 1: Alternatives 2& 3: No impact. . |
Alternative 1: Alternatives 2 & 3: No impact. |
All Alternatives: minimal adverse impact. Leaf litter from
mowing could raft on high tides and deposit in pans, causing one Alternative 2: No impact. |
All Alternatives: |
All Alternatives: |
All Alternatives: |
Alternatives 1-2: Short-term Alternative 3: |
|
BIO-2: Effects on |
Alternative 1: Local, short-term potentially significant impacts to soft-bird's beak due to incidental trampling or disturbance, only with removal of known saltmeadow and Chilean cordgrass infestations. Alternative 2: Greater impact than Alternative 1. Alternative 3: Less impact than |
Alternative 1: Local, short-term potentially saignificant impacts to soft-bird's beak due to incidental trampling or disturbance, only with removal of known saltmeadow and Chilean cordgrass infestations. Alternative 2: Greater impact than Alternative 1. Alternative 3: Less impact than |
Alternative 1: Local, short-term minor adverse effects may
occur if Alternative 2: Greater impact than Alternative 1. Alternative 3: Less impact than |
All Alternatives: This method is unlikely to be |
All Alternatives: This method is unlikely to be . |
Alternative 1: Alternative 2: Alternative 3: |
Alternative 1: Alternatives 2, 3: short- to moderate-term benefits, probably no long-term benefits. |
|
BIO-3: Effects on shorebirds
and waterfowl. |
Alternative 1: Alternative 2: Greater impact than Alternative 1. Alternative 3. |
Alternative 1: Alternative 2: Greater impact than Alternative 1. Alternative 3: |
Alternative 1: Alternative 2: Greater impact than Alternative 1. Alternative 3: |
Alternative 1: Alternative 2: Greater impact than Alternative 1. Alternative 3: Low or no adverse impact if used. |
Alternative 1: Alternative 2: Greater impact than Alternative 1. Alternative 3: |
Alternative 1: Alternative 2: Alternative 3: |
Alternative 1: Alternatives 2, 3: Relatively short-term (ca. 10 yr)
increase of primary foraging and |
|
BIO-4.1: Effects on the
salt marsh harvest mouse and tidal marsh shrew |
Alternative 1: Eradication of non-native cordgrass in high marsh may have significant short-term adverse impacts in few locations, but usually minor or none. Local, short-term minor to moderate adverse impacts due to incidental trampling or disturbance. Alternative 2: Alternative 3: |
Alternative 1: Eradication of non-native cordgrass in high marsh may have significant short-term adverse impacts in few locations, but usually minor or none. Local, short-term minor to moderate adverse impacts due to incidental trampling or disturbance. Alternative 2: Alternative 3: |
Alternative 1: Eradication of non-native cordgrass in high marsh may have significant short-term adverse impacts in few locations, but usually minor or none. Local, short-term minor to moderate adverse impacts due to incidental trampling or disturbance. Alternative 2: Alternative 3: |
Alternative 1: Method probably not applicable to high marsh habitat of small tidal marsh mammal species; minor impacts of feasible applications. Alternative 2: Alternative 3: Method probably infeasible without regionally coordinated mitigation for scale of wildlife impacts; low or no adverse impact if used. |
Alternative 1: Eradication of non-native cordgrass in high marsh may have significant short-term adverse impacts in few locations, but usually minor or none. Local, short-term minor to moderate adverse impacts due to incidental trampling or disturbance. Alternative 2: Alternative 3: |
Alternative 1: Eradication of non-native cordgrass in high marsh may have significant short-term adverse impacts in few locations, but usually minor or none. Local, short-term minor to moderate adverse impacts due to incidental trampling or disturbance. Alternative 2: Alternative 3: |
Alternative 1: Alternatives 2, 3: Temporary local benefits from individual eradication projects, not long-term or significant (invasion likely to overtake eradication). |
|
BIO-4.2: Effects on
resident harbor seal colonies of San Francisco Bay. |
Alternative 1: Alternative 2: Alternative 3: |
Alternative 1: Alternative 2: Alternative 3: |
Alternative 1: Alternative 2: Alternative 3: . |
Alternative 1: Alternative 2: Alternative 3: |
Alternative 1: Alternativ | ||