Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Introduction 

CHAPTER 4—ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

4.1 INTRODUCTION 

This chapter evaluates potential environmental impacts that could occur from implementing management 

actions included in each of the alternatives discussed in Chapter 2 for Bureau of Land Management 

(BLM)-administered surface tracts and non-U.S. Forest Service (non-USFS) Federal mineral ownership 

(FMO) in Alabama and Mississippi1. Potential impacts considered in this chapter include ecological (such 

as the effects on natural resources and on the components, structures, and functioning of affected 

ecosystems), aesthetic, historic, cultural, economic, social, and health (40 Code of Federal Regulations 

[CFR] §1508.8) impacts. The baseline used for determining the potential impacts is the current resource 

condition described in Chapter 3. Resources are discussed in the same order that they are presented in 

Chapter 3. 

The analysis focuses on impacts that could eventually result in on-the-ground changes by planning for 

uses on surface and non-USFS FMO tracts over the next 20-years. Some BLM management actions may 

affect only certain resources and only under certain alternatives. Some impacts may be from actions that 

are common to all alternatives. If an activity or action is not addressed in a given section, no impacts are 

expected or the impact is expected to be minimal. 

4.1.1 How to Read This Chapter 

This chapter is divided into four sections: 

• Introduction (Section 4.1)—This section provides direction on How to Read This Chapter 

(Section 4.1.1), presents the approach to the analysis including types of effects (Section 4.1.2), 

and discusses availability of data and incomplete information (Section 4.1.3). 

• Direct and Indirect Impacts from BLM Management Actions in Alabama (Section 4.2)— 

This section discusses potential impacts anticipated from implementation of management actions 

under each alternative for the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach, Fort Morgan Highway, Fowl 

River, Geneva, and Jordan Lake tracts in Alabama and 313,819 acres of non-USFS FMO in 57 

Alabama counties, mostly composed of split-estate. 

• Direct and Indirect Impacts from BLM Management Actions in Mississippi (Section 4.3)— 

This section discusses the potential impacts anticipated from implementation of the management 

actions under each alternative for the Hancock County tract in Mississippi and for non-USFS 

FMO on about 517,934 acres in 79 Mississippi counties, mostly composed of split-estate. Impacts 

from the allowable uses and management actions proposed for the Hancock County Tract are 

analyzed if the Recreation and Public Purposes (R&PP) patent held by the University of 

Mississippi were to revert to BLM. 

1 In those areas where (1) the Federal land surface is administered by the USFS, and (2) planning decisions for surface 

management and for mineral leasing, pursuant to the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act of 1987 and Federal 

regulation (36 CFR 228.102), are the responsibility of USFS, and (3) BLM has responsibility for issuing and administering 

mineral leases; the RMP will not include management decisions for the Federal minerals on these lands, and BLM will carry 

out its minerals management responsibilities under the guidance of USFS land use plans. At the same time, surface and 

minerals management actions and development activities anticipated on these lands will be taken into account for purposes of 

cumulative impact analysis. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-1 
Chapter 4-Introduction Draft EIS – August 2007 

• Cumulative Impacts (Section 4.4) —This section discusses the potential cumulative impacts 

anticipated from implementation of the BLM management actions proposed for Alabama and 

Mississippi in the context of other actions occurring across the State, including other Federal 

agency and non-Federal actions. 

4.1.2 Approach to the Analysis 

This section provides the basic framework used in the impacts analysis. Definitions of types of effects and 

terminology, general types of impacts analyzed for each resource, analytical assumptions, and cumulative 

projects and activities considered in the analysis are further discussed in the following subsections. 

Types of Effects 

The analysis of the alternatives focused on identifying types of impacts and estimating their potential 

significance. Throughout this chapter, the terms “impact” and “effect” are synonymous. Although impacts 

may be perceived as positive (beneficial) or negative (adverse), those determinations are left for the 

reader of this document to make. An overview of impacts is presented in Table 4-1. 

Table 4-1. Types of Impacts 

Type Description 

Direct Impacts 

These are effects caused by the action and occur at the same time and place. For 

example, elimination of original land use through erection of a structure. Direct 

impacts may cause indirect impacts, such as ground disturbance resulting in 

resuspension of dust. 

Indirect Impacts 

These are effects that are caused by the action but occur later in time or are further 

removed in distance but are still reasonably foreseeable and related to the action by 

a chain of cause-and-effects. Indirect impacts may reach beyond the natural and 

physical environment (e.g., environmental impact) to include growth-inducing effects 

and other effects related to induced changes to resource users (e.g., social impact). 

Cumulative Impacts 

These are effects that result from the incremental impact of the action when it is 

added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless 

of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions. 

Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant 

actions that take place over time. 

For ease of reading, impacts presented are direct, broad (occurring within the larger planning area), and 

long term, unless otherwise noted as indirect, localized, or short term/temporary. Potential significant 

impacts are identified as they arise, and analysis of why an impact is considered significant is explained. 

The concept of significance requires consideration of the context, intensity, and duration of the impact. 

Context relates to environmental circumstances at the location of the impact and in the immediate 

vicinity, as well as the interests that are potentially affected. Intensity refers to the severity or extent of the 

impact or magnitude of change from existing conditions. Duration refers to the permanence and longevity 

of the impacts, which is depicted as short term or long term. Short term is defined as anticipated to begin 

and end within the first five years after the action is implemented. Long term is defined as lasting beyond 

five years to the end of or beyond the 20-year planning time frame addressed in the Resource 

Management Plan (RMP). 

4-2 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Introduction 

4.1.3 Availability of Data and Incomplete Information 

As is typical in programmatic planning efforts, site-specific data is used to the extent possible and may 

not be entirely available. The best available information that is pertinent to management actions was used 

in developing the RMP and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Considerable effort has been taken to 

acquire and convert resource data into digital format for use in the plan—both from BLM sources and 

from outside sources, such as the Natural Heritage Program and the National Resources Conservation 

Service (NRCS). 

Certain information was unavailable for use in developing this plan, usually because inventories were not 

conducted or complete. Some of the major types of unavailable data include: Native American traditional 

use areas; cultural surveys; data collection of visitor use trends; visual resource inventory (VRI); field 

inventory of soils and water conditions; and field inventory of wildlife, vegetation, and special status 

species. 

As a result, some impacts cannot be quantified given the proposed management actions. Where this gap 

occurs, impacts are projected in qualitative terms or, in some instances, are described as unknown. 

Subsequent project-level analysis will provide the opportunity to collect and examine site-specific 

inventory data required to determine appropriate application of RMP-level guidance. In addition, ongoing 

inventory efforts by BLM and other agencies within the planning area would be used to continue to 

update and refine information used to implement this plan. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-3 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

4.2 DIRECT AND INDIRECT IMPACTS FROM BLM MANAGEMENT 

ACTIONS IN ALABAMA 

This section discusses potential impacts anticipated from implementation of management actions under 

each alternative for the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach, Fort Morgan Highway, Fowl River, Geneva, 

and Jordan Lake tracts in Alabama and 313,819 acres of non-USFS FMO in 57 Alabama counties, mostly 

composed of split-estate. 

The section is organized by alternative, and then by resource. Under each resource, each management 

action is discussed, including: vegetative communities; fish and wildlife habitat; minerals; recreation and 

travel; and lands and realty. A discussion of cumulative impacts for each resource is contained in Section 

4.4.1. 

4.2.1 Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Air Quality 

Under this alternative, there is a potential for wildfire which could lead to air emissions. Since all fires 

would be suppressed, these occurrences would be short term and localized and not be anticipated to 

individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would deteriorate air quality conditions. Prescribed burning 

conducted to meet vegetation resource objectives would be short term and localized and not be 

anticipated to individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions proposed 

under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and 

protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of 

prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would deteriorate air quality conditions. Prescribed burning 

conducted to meet habitat objectives would be short term and localized and not be anticipated to 

individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Combustion processes, construction activities, and vehicle travel associated with potential oil and gas 

development and coal mining produce air emissions. Estimated emissions from the development of 20 

wells over the next 20 years on BLM-administered non-USFS FMO would produce considerably less 

emissions than the combined emissions from total planned oil and gas developments in the State 

(presented in Table 4-2). Those emissions would likely occur over a dispersed geographic area and would 

therefore not cause any noticeable or measurable effect. 

4-4 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 

Potential oil and gas leasing on BLM-administered non-USFS FMO are in close proximity to the Sipsey 

Wilderness and the Birmingham nonattainment area. These emissions could potentially deteriorate 

wilderness air quality values and jeopardize ambient air quality attainment. Since emissions would be 

dispersed over a large geographic area, air quality impacts would not be anticipated. 

On the basis of a conservative estimate, it is anticipated that 1.9 million tons of Federal coal would be 

produced annually over the next 20 years (BLM 2005b). The results are shown in Table 4-3. Since the 

analysis is qualitative and coal production data are limited throughout the State, a comparison with best 

available data from the Warrior Basin is provided. As shown in Table 4-3, BLM proposed coal mining 

activities are less in comparison to the Warrior Basin activities and will therefore produce much less 

emissions. 

Table 4-2. Maximum Potential Oil and Gas Air Emissions for BLM and Non-BLM 

Activities in Alabama (tons per year)1, 2

Emission Type/Pollutant 

Well Locations Nitrogen 

Oxides 

(NOx) 

Sulfur 

Dioxide 

(SO2) 

Particulate 

Matter 

(PM10) 

Carbon 

Monoxide 

(CO) 

Volatile 

Organic 

Compounds 

(VOC) 

BLM-Administered non-USFS 

FMO Estate in Alabama 110 1.7 35.1 111 67.1 

Other Mineral Estate Across 

Alabama 21,460 332 6,815 21,761 13,947 

1. Using conservative assumptions typical of liquid mineral wells on BLM lands. 

2. Assumption that 25 percent of wells are conventional natural gas wells and 75 percent wells are coal-bed natural gas wells 

(BLM 2005a). 

Table 4-3. Maximum Potential Coal Mining Air Emissions for BLM and Non-BLM 

Activities in Alabama (tons per year) 1, 2 

Emission Type/Pollutant Mine Locations 

NOx SO2 PM10 CO VOC 

BLM-Administered non-USFS 

FMO Estate in Alabama 61.2 6.8 48.6 108.0 5.7 

Warrior Basin 684 76 5,433 1,207 64 

1. Using EPA-approved emissions factors and conservative assumptions typical of western surface mines, because emission 

factors do not exist for eastern surface mining. Assumption that all emissions eventually are introduced into the environment 

(EPA 1995 and BLM 2004). 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Short term, localized increases in dust and emissions could potentially occur from recreation activities 

and travel on unpaved roads. Given the small amount and scattered nature of surface ownership, these 

activities would not be anticipated to individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-5 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Short term, localized increases in dust and emissions would occur from use of trucks and heavy 

equipment (bulldozers, etc.) in rights-of-way (ROW) development. These actions would be conducted in 

accordance with the Alabama State Implementation Plan (SIP) and local dust control regulations; 

however, given the small amount and scattered nature of surface ownership, lands and realty management 

actions would not be anticipated to individually deteriorate air quality conditions or violate air quality 

standards or regulations. 

Soil Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in disturbance or loss of soils. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions proposed 

under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and 

protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of 

prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in disturbance or loss of soils. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Mineral exploration, development, and operations on non-USFS FMO would include ground-disturbing 

and potential contaminant-introducing activities that could impact soils. Oil and gas development 

operations—specifically, construction of drilling pads, reserve pits, and access roads—would disturb 

topsoils and alter surface soil characteristics, which could result in both a slight decline in soil 

productivity and an increase in surface runoff. Shallow coalbed methane wells generally require small 1-2 

acre well pads. Because much of the Black Warrior River Basin has very rolling terrain up to 3 acres 

could be needed to construct a suitably flat drill pad. Cut and fill areas to support these pads and access 

routes can contribute to local soil erosion, especially when heavy or persistent rains typical of this region 

exacerbate the situation. Ground disturbing activities in areas where the soils are classified as no or slight 

to moderate erosion hazard not generally accelerate soil erosion. Since future coal development is 

anticipated to be subsurface and use existing infrastructure, these activities would not disturb the soils on 

the surface. 

Except for 8,179 acres closed to leasing by other surface managing agencies, non-USFS FMO would be 

open to leasing subject to standard lease terms and conditions (305,640 acres). The estimated 20 wells to 

be developed on non-USFS FMO in Alabama over the next 20-years would disturb approximately 105 

acres. Both Federal and State laws would require the reclamation of mined lands concurrently with 

mining operations; therefore, the required reclamation and the minimal surface that might be disturbed 

would produce only localized effects on soils. 

Operation of the oil and gas wells could also impact the surrounding soils by potential contamination 

from accidental spills or improper management of hazardous materials or waste; however, Federal, State, 

and local regulations would require site characterization and corrective action to restore soil integrity and 

productivity. 

4-6 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 

In few locations there are prime or unique farmlands on non-Forest Service FMO. Though not likely, it is 

possible that some of the 105 acres of soil disturbance could be on prime or unique farmland. In the event 

development is proposed in such an area, BLM would implement appropriate mitigation measures to 

avoid or minimize impacts as described in section 2.3.3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Allowing recreation activities, including motorized vehicle use on the surface tracts, could result in short 

term and site-specific increases in erosion. Given the limited interest in recreation and travel on the 

surface tracts, any potential effects would be minor and localized. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

If construction were to occur in new or existing ROWs, soils could be impacted by vegetation clearing 

activities and ground disturbance. Wind and water erosion, and subsequent loss in soil productivity would 

occur in disturbed areas where revegetation does not occur. These effects would be localized and short 

term in areas where revegetation is enhanced or permitted. The effect would be long term if roads or 

structures were constructed on the tracts, but would be localized. 

Water Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to water quality. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions proposed 

under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and 

protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of 

prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to water quality. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Except for 8,179 acres closed to leasing by other surface managing agencies, non-USFS FMO would be 

open to leasing subject to standard lease terms and conditions (305,640 acres). The estimated 

development of 20 wells in Alabama over the next 20 years would disturb approximately 105 non-USFS 

FMO acres. Both Federal and State laws would require the reclamation of mined lands concurrently with 

mining operations; therefore, the required reclamation and the minimal surface that might be disturbed 

would result in only localized effects on water resources. 

Mineral exploration, development, and operations would include ground-disturbing activities that increase 

surface run-off, which increases nutrient levels and turbidity and decreases water quality. These activities 

could also introduce hazardous waste or result in accidental spills that could also deteriorate surface water 

quality. Leakage of drill fluids, hazardous waste spills, or leakage from reserve pits could be introduced 

into the ground water as well. Although Federal, State and local regulations would require site 

characterization and corrective action for hazardous waste and spills, impacts to the water quality could 

be localized but long term and especially affect nonflowing waterbodies (e.g., small ponds or wetlands) 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-7 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

and ground water resources. Additionally, access roads and well pads can alter the local hydrology 

reducing surface flow to mesic areas and diverting or degrading surface water. Installation of culverts and 

diverting existing drainages around well pads help to maintain existing hydrologic systems, but the 

disturbance causes local sedimentation and can retard sheet flow. 

The preferred method of disposal of water produced from oil and gas production would be underground 

injection. Reinjection of produced water would prevent impacts to surface water quality; however, a 

critical aspect of underground injection is finding a permanent formation with a concentration of total 

dissolved solids (TDS) greater than 10,000 mg/L (Geological Survey of Alabama [GSA] 2005). At 

present, stream discharge is the most common method of water disposal produced from oil and gas 

production in the Warrior Basin.2.Although the surface discharge of produced water into water systems 

could potentially increase the salinity of surface waters and increase flow rates, result in increased soil 

erosion, operators must obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit 

(administered by Alabama Department of Environmental Management [ADEM]) to discharge produced 

water into streams in Alabama. The type of permit currently offered is a Tier II permit. This permit 

requires the monitoring of water quality in streams and limits instream TDS concentrations to 230 mg/L 

(GSA 2005). Because surface discharge of produced water would be a permitted activity requiring 

standards of water quality, direct impacts to water quality from the disposal of water produced from oil 

and gas production on non-USFS FMO would be minimized. Also, methods of disposing produced water, 

other than by reinjection, would be considered but would require preparation of additional National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) analysis that would identify conditions of approval (COAs) or 

best management practices (BMPs) to alleviate the potential for extensive harm to water quality. 

Impacts on groundwater from coal mining operations would also occur. Approximately 9,000 acres of 

new coal leases in the Warrior Basin coal field would yield an estimated average of 1.9 million tons of 

coal per year over the next 20-years. Coal development in the Warrior Basin would involve mining of 

existing underground coal mines, which would further increase the potential for groundwater 

contamination. Migration of contaminants into the surrounding soils and aquifers could degrade 

groundwater quality and thereby affect wells and springs that may serve household and domestic uses. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Managing the surface tracts as open to recreation and motorized vehicle use could result in short term and 

site-specific increases in erosion and surface run-off, which increases nutrient levels and turbidity and 

decreases water quality. Given the limited interest in recreation and travel on the surface tracts, any 

potential effects would be minor and localized. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

If construction were to occur in new or existing ROWs, vegetation-clearing activities and construction 

ground disturbance would increase soil erosion and surface run-off, which increases nutrient levels and 

turbidity and decreases water quality. Impacts would be short term in areas where revegetation was 

enhanced or permitted. The effect would be long term if roads or structures were constructed on the tracts, 

but would be localized. 

2 The term Warrior Basin is a geologic province. The Black Warrior Basin is the drainage area of the Black Warrior River. 

4-8 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 

Vegetative Communities 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, allowing vegetation manipulation to meet resources objectives 

would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed could increase the potential 

for exotic, invasive species to become established or spread on BLM surface tracts. Chinese privet is 

present and likely to continue to spread on the Coosa River tracts. The Fort Morgan highway tracts are 

vulnerable to both Cogon grass and Chinese tallow. Cogon grass in particular, once established, would 

displace native herbaceous plant species and ultimately could reduce some shrub and tree components by 

increasing the frequency of wild fires and crowding out seedlings. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, providing habitat improvements and protections under State 

wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and 

wetland enhancements, would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed 

could result in the same impacts discussed under impacts from vegetative communities management 

actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts to vegetation from oil and gas development in Alabama are dependent on the location and design 

of well pads, roads, and production facilities. Since 1983, all of the wells drilled on non-USFS FMO in 

Alabama have been in the Black Warrior River Basin, almost all in Tuscaloosa County. Typically 

vegetation in this area is dominated by oak/hickory/pine forests, much of it secondary growth managed as 

commercial timberlands. Older growth is most often found in steeper more protected terrain, areas that 

could harbor mesic forests. Shallow coalbed methane wells generally require small 1-2 acre well pads. 

Because much of the Black Warrior River Basin has very rolling terrain, up to three acres can be needed 

to construct a suitably flat drill pad. Cut and fill areas can contribute to local erosion and heavy or 

persistent rains typical of this region exacerbate the situation. This erosion can degrade the adjacent 

vegetation communities by burying herbaceous growth and stressing or killing trees by burying surface 

roots. Some sites require the installation of erosion blankets on slopes over 3:1, particularly if an adequate 

cover planting cannot be established or the well pad is close to or above a creek, river, or wetland. 

During a routine well pad installation, saleable timber would be removed from the site if logs are 

commercially viable, but otherwise it is cut and left on-site. Vegetation debris piles are stored along the 

edges of the construction site and may be buried onsite, burned, or left in place after drilling operations 

are completed. Vegetation debris is not permitted in the reserve pit, as it can disrupt future monitoring. 

During interim reclamation, the reserve pit area is graded and the surface is fertilized, seeded, and 

mulched. Although the operators are encouraged to use native seed, the final mix and tree planting is 

approved by the private landowner or surface managing agency. By policy, BLM excludes invasive 

species, although non-native grasses, particularly annual rye, Bahia and Bermuda grass are used to 

establish a quick cover on disturbed slopes. These sites typically progress through “old field” stage as 

opportunistic pioneer plant species become established. Within a few years, young sapling pine and 

hardwoods become established. Faster-growing pines generally dominate the site until gradually 

overtaken by longer-lived hardwoods. It may take 100 years or more to reestablish hardwood forests with 

similar structure and even longer before species diversity returns to near pre-disturbance levels. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-9 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Surface-disturbing activities have the potential to introduce or promote the spread of invasive, exotic 

plant species. Impacts are dependent on the species planted during restoration activities and the 

management of the site during and following restoration. Restoration activities typically include seeding 

non-native grasses, such as annual rye (during the winter months) and Bahia or Bermuda grass (during the 

summer months) to provide a quick cover for disturbed soils. Including native species in the mix 

increases diversity and provides a more natural structure. If these areas are mowed following 

abandonment, these non-native grasses are expected to persist and dominate the site; however, if the sites 

are replanted in pine or left unmowed, the areas can be expected to progress through old field type growth 

which is dominated by opportunistic native and non-native species alike. Ultimately, both Bahia and 

Bermuda grass are expected to become shaded out as a tree or heavy shrub layer becomes established. 

Japanese honeysuckle and Chinese privet can both persist in shaded situations. 

Throughout the State, some plant communities, embedded in the larger forested landscape, are 

particularly sensitive to disruption and are difficult to restore after surface-disturbing activities. Many of 

these are restricted to a narrow range of soil types such as glades and prairies; others are sensitive to 

changes in hydrography, such as bogs, forested wetlands, and seepage slope communities. Construction 

activities in these plant communities generally alter the site sufficiently to preclude the reestablishment of 

these communities in the foreseeable future. Also, because of the limited acreage of these vegetation 

communities, loss of even the small acreages from BLM-permitted oil and gas activities has a 

disproportionate effect on the plant diversity in an area. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

The coastal dune habitat associated with the Fort Morgan Beach and Highway tracts could experience 

localized vegetation damage as a result of public foot traffic at traditional beach access points at Veterans 

Road and Mobile Road. Repetitive use erodes the dunes and keeps dune vegetation from becoming 

established, excluding use by Alabama beach mouse. 

At the Coosa River, Fowl River, and Geneva tracts, which contain sensitive wetland and riverine habitat. 

Dispersed recreational use is primarily boat related and is not expected to have substantial impacts on 

vegetation. Heavier recreation use on the southern portion of the Jordan Lake tract occurs as a result of 

the adjacent camps and keeps shrubs and forbs from establishing a natural riparian zone along this portion 

of Jordon Lake. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

New ROWs for access roads and utilities could occur on the Fort Morgan Highway or Beach tracts, where 

new disturbance is likely to total less than an acre. This is most likely to occur in upland scrub or 

flatwood communities. In addition, maintenance activities in existing ROW are likely to keep native plant 

communities from establishing a shrub or tree component and would foster the spread of invasive, exotic 

plant species, particularly cogon grass and Chinese tallow, both of which occur on or near the BLM 

highway tracts. 

Fish and Wildlife 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No vegetative communities management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, allowing vegetation manipulation to meet resources objectives 

would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed could result in habitat 

degradation on any of the BLM surface tracts. The maritime forests, scrubs, and flatwoods on the Fort 

4-10 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 

Morgan Highway tracts are particularly vulnerable to cogon grass and Chinese tallow. Cogon grass could 

displace native grasses and forbs that provide foraging habitat for migratory and resident birds and would 

increase susceptibility of coastal scrub habitats to wildfire. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, providing habitat improvements and protections under State 

wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and 

wetland enhancements, would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed 

could result in the same impacts discussed under impacts from vegetative communities management 

actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Oil and gas development on non-USFS FMO is expected to result in the disturbance of 105 acres. Impacts 

would include the direct loss of habitat from the construction of drilling pads, production facilities, 

pipelines and roads, from degradation of nearby aquatic or wetland habitats through sedimentation or 

changes in hydrology, and from the surface discharge of water produced from coalbed methane wells. 

These impacts could occur in any of the oil and gas potential areas in the State, but have in the past been 

concentrated in Jefferson and Walker Counties in the Black Warrior River Basin. Wherever wells are 

constructed, impacts to general wildlife are dependent on the well pad location, design, and need for 

additional access roads. 

Impacts to many wildlife species from oil and gas development are localized and temporary. Most 

common game species and other mobile wildlife species avoid the well pad areas during construction. 

Less mobile species are directly impacted and during the spring and early summer; this can include 

nesting neotropical birds. Habitat generalists, including most game species, tend to return to surrounding 

habitats after the well is completed and construction activities have ceased; however, construction in 

high-value habitats or in areas with more narrowly adapted wildlife species can alter the overall species 

diversity. Wells and roads in areas of contiguous forests increase habitat fragmentation, reducing the 

suitability of the area for interior nesting birds and making nests more susceptible to predation and 

parasitism. Older-growth forests which provide habitat for interior forest nesting birds and a wider 

diversity of amphibians and reptiles are often located in riparian/wetland zones left as buffers during 

logging operations or in steeper, less accessible slopes. 

Oil and gas drilling continues for 24 hours a day until the well is completed. During this time most 

wildlife, including waterfowl and many song-birds, are expected to avoid the immediate area; however, 

once drilling is completed, reserve pits with water can become a hazard for waterfowl and other birds 

which can become soiled by drilling fluids. If the well is put into production, there is documentation that 

birds and bats may use open vent stacks for roosting or perching. Once in these stacks, animals can 

become trapped or asphyxiated. While much of the work documenting this problem has occurred in 

western States, the situation in Alabama is expected to be similar. 

Access roads and well pads can alter the local hydrography and reduce surface flow to mesic areas and 

divert or degrade surface water supporting wetland habitats. Installation of culverts and diversion of 

existing drainages around well pads help maintain existing hydrologic systems, but the disturbance causes 

local sedimentation and can retard sheet flow to wetland habitats. Amphibians and many reptiles 

associated with wetland communities are vulnerable to disturbance, as they are not highly mobile and 

tend to have narrow habitat requirements. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-11 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

For impacts from disposal of coal-bed methane produced waters see the special status species discussion. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

The coastal dune habitat associated with the Fort Morgan Beach and Highway tracts could experience 

localized vegetation damage and habitat loss as a result of frequent dispersed recreation use and lack of 

active recreation management. Noise and human presence associated with beach recreation could displace 

foraging shore-birds and result in reduced nesting efforts or success by beach nesting birds. Dispersed 

recreation use currently occurs on the Coosa River, Fowl River, and Geneva tracts, which contain 

sensitive wetland and riverine habitat. If recreation use became more frequent on these tracts in the long 

term, species susceptible to disturbance could be affected (such as freshwater snails, mussels, turtles, 

amphibians, migratory and shore-birds, and nesting species, as well as terrestrial wildlife, avifauna, and 

aquatic species). Recreational fishing on the Jordan Lake tract could result in surface disturbance 

resulting in damage to riparian/wetland areas and trampling of the understory that could further disturb 

riparian/wetland and aquatic species in the adjacent river. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

New or expanded ROW on the Fort Morgan Highway tracts are anticipated to result in less than an acre 

of new disturbance. This acreage is expected to be near or on existing maintained ROW, and is likely to 

occur in coastal scrub habitats. This activity could be particularly disruptive during spring and fall 

migrations, when this narrow band of vegetation can support high numbers of migrating song-birds. 

Special Status Species 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, allowing vegetation manipulation to meet resources objectives 

would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed could increase the potential 

for exotic, invasive species to become established or spread on BLM surface tracts. Cogon grass at the 

Fort Morgan Highway tracts, in particular, has the potential to alter Alabama beach mouse critical habitat 

as it forms dense stands displacing native herbaceous plants and potentially increasing fire frequency and 

intensity. 

Under this alternative, BLM would not actively promote the restoration of coastal dunes following 

damage by major storm events, which would promote sand deposition and facilitate the return of habitat 

conditions suitable for Alabama beach mouse. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, providing habitat improvements and protections under State 

wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and 

wetland enhancements, would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed 

could result in the same impacts discussed under impacts from vegetative communities management 

actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Oil and gas development on non-USFS FMO in Alabama is expected to result in the disturbance of 105 

acres, any of which could occur in habitats supporting special status species. Historically, oil and gas 

4-12 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 

drilling on non-USFS FMO has occurred in the Black Warrior River Basin, but drilling on non-USFS 

FMO could occur anywhere in the State (outside of the ten southeastern counties that do not contain nonUSFS FMO). Development interests are prompted by new oil and gas finds in the State, improvements in 

drilling and extraction technologies, and high prices. Because of this, there is some potential to impact 

almost any of the special status species in the State. Impacts to special status species could include the 

direct loss of habitat from the construction of drilling pads, production facilities, pipelines and roads, from 

degradation of nearby aquatic or wetland habitats through contamination, sedimentation or changes in 

hydrology, and from the surface discharge of water produced from coalbed methane wells. The following 

discussion focuses on the potential for these activities to affect habitats that support the majority of the 

State’s special status species. In addition, individual species with established management guidelines, 

such as gopher tortoise, red-cockaded woodpecker, and bald eagle are also discussed. No development is 

anticipated on the BLM surface tracts, many of which support Federally-listed species and contain 

designated critical habitat; however, the non-USFS FMO under those tracts could be developed through 

directional drilling. 

Given the high number and wide distribution of special status species in aquatic and wetland habitats in 

Alabama, all oil and gas activity near rivers, creeks, or wetland habitats has a high potential of affecting 

special status species in the immediate area or downstream of the disturbance. Impacts to aquatic and 

wetland habitats would occur through degradation of water quality through increased sedimentation or 

turbidity, contamination, direct loss of habitat, and changes in local hydrography. Disposal of water 

produced by coal-bed methane wells in the Black Warrior River basin also has the potential to affect 

special status species by increasing salinity and introducing other contaminants. Some special status 

species cannot tolerate increases in human activity, and could be impacted directly by increases in vehicle 

activity and construction activities. 

Sedimentation and increased turbidity are a current threat to most of Alabama’s mussels and special status 

fish species. Increases in sedimentation to streams and wetlands by oil and gas development are a factor 

of well pad design, erodibility of the soils, proximity of the disturbance, slope, and the intervening 

vegetation. The potential for sedimentation increases with prolonged or heavy rains that are typical in this 

area. Before protective plant covers have been established cut and fill slopes are particularly vulnerable to 

erosion. Intact vegetation along riparian/wetland zones and around wetlands can substantially buffer these 

areas. Research has shown that a minimum of a thirty-foot buffer of vegetation is needed to control 

sediments and maintain stream temperature; however, 100-foot buffers may be needed to protect stream 

invertebrates, and 1,000-feet or more may be needed to protect some amphibians, reptiles, and forestinterior birds (Wenger 1999). Sediments deposited in intermittent drainages and headwater streams would 

be transported downstream during periods of high water, increasing turbidity and burying aquatic 

invertebrates in higher order streams. 

Filling wetlands, including bogs, seepage slopes, wet flatwoods, and forested swamps generally alters the 

site sufficiently to preclude the reestablishment of these communities in the foreseeable future, and could 

result in direct habitat loss for a wide variety of special status species which use these habitats. Because 

so many of these species have limited ranges, the list of species potentially affected would vary by 

location. Generally, because of the limited acreage of these vegetation communities, loss from even the 

small amount of disturbance associated with BLM-permitted oil and gas activities has the potential to 

destroy or degrade habitat for special status species. For instance, there are up to 12 special status crayfish 

across the State that are vulnerable to habitat disturbance in bogs and wet flatwoods. Henslow’s sparrow 

wintering habitat and breeding habitat for Bachman’s sparrow could be lost by construction in or near 

grassy bogs or wet flatwoods. Construction activities, and particularly linear disturbances related to new 

roads and pipelines, can disrupt the local hydrography supporting seepage slopes or sheet flow to bogs 

and swamps degrading these habitats. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-13 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

In the Black Warrior River Basin, water produced from coal-bed methane wells is typically disposed of 

through surface discharge. The chemical makeup of produced waters can vary by well with salinity, 

measured as TDS, being the most limiting factor. TDS in the Black Warrior Basin varies from less than 

1,000 mg/L to more than 43,000 mg/L (U. S. Department of Energy 2003). Produced water is stored in 

ponds to precipitate out metals and to lower pH prior to discharge. NPDES permits issued by the State 

limit in-stream TDS concentrations to 230 mg/L. This threshold is approved by the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) for general wildlife habitat and is met by discharging into rivers with sufficient 

flow to dilute and meet the in-stream thresholds. NPDES permits require monitoring of pH, iron, 

manganese, biochemical oxygen demand, oil and grease, and dissolved oxygen; additional monitoring 

requirements for conductivity, chlorides, and effluent toxicity are included. Dischargers are required to 

install a diffuser on the end of their discharge pipes to minimize scouring and are required to implement a 

BMP plan. Other elements, such as trace amounts of metals, are not routinely monitored under NPDES 

permits. Thresholds for most mussels have not been studied and there is concern that the existing 

thresholds may not be sufficient to protect these bottom dwelling species. 

Karst formations support cave habitats with high numbers of special status species, including many 

endemic crayfish, salamanders, and bats and are particularly sensitive to oil and gas development. In 

caves, even minor alterations in temperature, humidity, and water quality or quantity can result in 

irreversible impacts. Caves by their nature are isolated and support highly endemic faunas often with 

extremely narrow habitat requirements. Wells drilled through cave/karst resources can result in 

contaminants, such as drilling fluids and cements, draining into the cave/karst system. Karst habitats can 

be degraded by hydrocarbons from spills or leaks from well casings, storage tanks, reserve pits, pipelines, 

and production facilities that may enter into the cave/karst systems. Additionally, cementing operations 

could affect portions of underground drainage systems by restricting groundwater flow and introducing 

pollutants into karst systems. Other possible impacts are vented or escaped gases collecting in sinkholes 

and caves. These gases can cause a die-off of plant and animal life that use the special habitat created by 

the microclimate of the cave entrances or sinkhole. 

Along the Alabama coast, there are 365 acres of non-USFS FMO within the designated critical habitat for 

Alabama beach mouse. Portions of this acreage also contain coastal beaches used by nesting loggerhead 

sea turtles and potentially by green sea turtle and Kemp’s Ridley sea turtle, as well as piping plover, 

snowy plover, and Wilson’s plover. Any disturbance of the surface from oil and gas development in this 

area is likely to adversely affect Federally-listed species. Section 7 consultations with the U. S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (USFWS) would be required prior to BLM permitting any action that could adversely 

affect these Federally-listed species or designated habitat. Subsequent actions would comply with the 

conditions established by any subsequent biological opinions (BOs). Although it is unlikely that oil and 

gas development would occur on the BLM surface tracts, non-USFS FMO could be used to consolidate 

acreage to meet State spacing requirements, prompting oil and gas activity in suitable or occupied habitat 

Alabama beach mouse and nesting sea turtle habitat. 

In the coastal plain areas, gopher tortoise could be affected by oil and gas activity in upland habitats. 

Tortoises could be impacted by the loss or damage to burrows, destruction of foraging habitat, and 

tortoises could be killed during construction or by service vehicles. Construction activities and roads 

within 600-feet of burrows could isolate individuals and reduce reproductive potential within a 

population. In many cases, the presence of gopher tortoises indicates that habitat is suitable for a host of 

species associated with dry longleaf pine forests, including the black pine snake (Pituophis melanoleucus 

lodingi). 

Red-cockaded woodpecker could be affected by oil and gas development on 888 acres of non-USFS 

FMO. Red-cockaded woodpeckers could be affected by the loss of nesting habitat within existing clusters 

and the loss of current or potential foraging habitat within 0.5 miles of existing clusters, particularly on 

4-14 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 

non-USFS FMO near the Talladega and Conecuh National Forests, which support most of the State’s 

population. 

Throughout the State, breeding and wintering bald eagles could be affected by drilling near large rivers or 

reservoirs. Bald eagles are particularly sensitive when courting, nesting, and fledging young. In Alabama 

this typically occurs between December 1 and August 1. Construction activities within 1.5 miles of nest 

sites could result in nest abandonment depending on factors such as visibility and tolerance of individual 

pairs. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

The coastal dune habitat associated with the Fort Morgan Beach tracts would continue to be trampled at 

traditional beach access points as Veterans Road and Mobile Street, damaging habitat for the Alabama 

beach mouse. Recreational use can flush foraging shore-birds and result in reduced nesting efforts or 

success by beach-nesting birds. Unmanaged recreational use of beaches could also hamper or deter 

nesting attempts by sea turtles and interfere with incubating egg clutches and the sea approach of 

hatchlings (National Marine Fisheries Service and USFWS 1991). The Fort Morgan Highway tracts, also 

designated as critical habitat, could experience loss or damage to vegetation as a result of continuing to be 

managed as open to recreation use. Dispersed recreation use of the Coosa River tracts has the potential to 

cause bald eagles to abandon nest sites. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

New ROWs for access roads and utilities could occur on the Fort Morgan Highway or Beach tracts, where 

new disturbance is likely to total less than an acre. These tracts are designated critical habitat for Alabama 

beach mouse. Any surface disturbance, mowing, or other vegetation management activities could 

adversely affect the Alabama beach mouse, destroying burrows or removing plants that could provide a 

seed source. Because these tracts are within designated critical habitat for Alabama beach mouse, 

plantings to stabilize disturbed soils would be limited to locally occurring native species. 

Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 

Suppressing all wildland fires, unless an in-place site-specific plan determines otherwise, would minimize 

immediate threats and damage to life, public safety, and developments in the wildland-urban interface 

(WUI) and to natural resource values. Allowing prescribed burning on a case-by-case basis would allow 

for a reduction in hazardous fuel conditions, improving ability to suppress wildfires while maintaining 

disturbance levels to which vegetation communities have adapted. Fire response and fuels treatments 

would apply to the 159 acres of BLM-administered surface land. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Although no specific vegetative communities actions are proposed, allowing vegetation manipulation to 

meet resources objectives under standard management common to all alternatives would serve to decrease 

vegetation density and cover (fuel load) and maintain natural fuel conditions across the surface tracts. 

This would maintain natural disturbance regimes which would be easier to manage through prescribed 

fire or other treatments. This would also decrease the frequency and intensity of wildland fires and allow 

fires to be more easily controlled, better protecting life, public safety, and property and resource values. 

However, lack of specific areas and species being managed could result in invasions and fuel 

accumulations that would increase the frequency and intensity of wildland fires. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-15 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat 

improvements and protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive 

plant species, use of prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would result in similar impacts as 

discussed under impacts from vegetative communities management actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Minerals development activities would introduce additional ignition sources throughout the non-USFS 

FMO, increasing the potential of wildland fire occurrence. Disturbance of 105 acres associated with the 

development of 20 wells on non-USFS FMO could provide increased accessibility for fire suppression 

equipment, and provide fuel breaks in the case of wildland fire events. In addition, the infrastructure 

associated with the 20 new wells would require protection in wildland fire events. Impacts from mineral 

development activities would not occur on the 8,179 acres closed to oil and gas development. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Continuing to manage the surface tracts as open to recreation use would allow for dispersed recreation 

use, which could introduce additional ignition sources and increase the probability of wildland fire 

occurrence. This would be more prevalent in areas that are more accessible. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Development of above-ground ROWs on the surface tracts, which would be managed as open to ROW 

development, would require additional efforts by firefighters to protect these areas in wildland fire events. 

Development of ROWs would also result in clearing vegetation to make way for linear features such as 

roads, pipelines, and transmission lines. ROWs could provide fuel breaks, which could help prevent the 

spread of wildland fires. ROWs could also provide firefighters with increased accessibility for fire 

suppression equipment. While more ROWs could increase suppression costs, the aspects of ROW 

development related to vegetation clearing and the potential for increased accessibility could reduce 

suppression costs. 

Cultural Resources 

Management of cultural resources provides protection from the potentially damaging effects of surfacedisturbing activities through implementation of existing laws and policy, such as Section 106 of the 

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and the Federal Lands Policy and Management Act of 1976 

(FLPMA). Federal undertakings typically require cultural resource inventories that would result in the 

identification of cultural resource sites and determination of eligibility to the National Register of Historic 

Places (NRHP). The cultural resources data acquired through inventories and evaluations would increase 

knowledge of cultural resources on BLM-administered lands and minerals in the State. Following sitespecific inventories, mitigation measures would be prescribed as necessary for eligible properties. Any 

cultural sites discovered may be considered for further evaluation to assess its eligibility for listing on the 

NRHP. Through this process, significant impacts on cultural sites eligible for the NRHP would be 

avoided or mitigated. Avoidance is BLM’s preferred measure to eliminate potential adverse effects. 

Avoidance preserves the cultural resource in place. If this is not possible under reasonable circumstances, 

scientifically valid excavation and data recovery is an alternative mitigation method. Scientifically valid 

excavation would be used as a final measure, and the extent of excavation would be determined through 

BLM consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and Tribes. 

4-16 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 

Data recovery preserves as much of the cultural record as possible through archaeological methods. Any 

mitigation effort requiring archaeological data recovery is subject to the terms outlined in a Data 

Recovery Plan and documented through a signed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the 

SHPO, tribes, and other consulting parties. While data recovery preserves as much data as possible, the 

excavated portions of the property would be lost or damaged. Removing cultural resources from a site 

using current scientific methods also reduces future scientific value if more accurate methods of analysis 

are developed. Mitigation through data recovery also reduces or eliminates other uses of cultural 

resources sites, such as traditional, public, conservation, or experimental use. The inventory and 

avoidance procedures conducted in conjunction with surface-disturbing actions would protect most 

cultural resources from significant impacts. 

Despite the best efforts to identify all cultural resources, there remains a potential for inadvertent impacts 

to previously undiscovered sites, especially buried sites with no surface indications. Following discovery 

of cultural resources, activities would stop to allow for mitigation to minimize further damage to cultural 

resources. There is a set process through Section 106 for identifying, evaluating, and treating the effects 

of inadvertent discoveries to reduce potential impacts from these discoveries. 

Wildfire and prescribed fire could impact cultural resource sites, including the eligibility characteristics of 

sites that are listed or eligible for listing on the NRHP. Impacts would be limited to the Coosa River 

tracts, as the Geneva tract contains small amounts of vegetation that maintains foliage yearlong. The other 

tracts have been inventoried for cultural resources and no sites were identified. 

Prehistoric and historic resources potentially affected by wildfire may be inorganic or organic. Generally 

speaking, organic materials are more at risk as they tend to burn or alter at lower temperatures than 

inorganic materials. Wildfire impacts on inorganic cultural resources include fracturing, shattering, and 

changes in color and internal luster, which might reduce an artifact’s ability to render information about 

the past. As a general rule, fire would not affect buried cultural materials. Studies show that even a few 

centimeters of soil cover (four inches) are sufficient to protect cultural materials (Oster N.D.). Wildfires 

that burn hot and fast through a site may have less of an effect on certain types of cultural materials than 

fires that smolder in the duff or burn for a long time period, allowing heat from the fire to penetrate the 

surface. In addition, heat from wildland fires could change the physical nature of the ground, making it 

harder to identify cultural resources. The isolated nature of vegetation on the Coosa River tracts would 

limit the potential for ignition or spread of wildland fire, and decrease the potential impacts to cultural 

resources. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would require cultural resource clearances before any 

activities were to occur; therefore, impacts would not be anticipated. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat 

improvements and protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive 

plant species, use of prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would require cultural resource 

clearances before any activities were to occur; therefore, impacts would not be anticipated. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-17 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Cultural resources on 305,640 acres of non-USFS FMO in Alabama managed as open to leasing subject 

to standard lease terms and conditions could be impacted by oil and gas development. Based on the RFD, 

oil and gas developments within these areas would impact 105 acres through the development of 20 wells 

over 20 years. Development on these acres would typically be subject to Class III cultural resource 

inventories and evaluation on a project-by-project basis prior to allowing disturbance. This would result 

in the identification and potential excavation of cultural sites. Cultural sites on 8,179 acres closed to 

leasing would be protected from oil and gas development. 

Sixty-eight known cultural resources sites exist within non-USFS FMO in the coal potential area and 66 

known sites are within one-half mile of the tracts. Based on the RFD, production of 37.6 million tons of 

coal from pre-existing underground mines over 20 years would not result in new surface disturbance; 

therefore, no impacts to cultural resources would be anticipated from coal development. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation activities on the surface tracts could result in inadvertent damage and vandalism to cultural 

sites on tracts that contain cultural resources. Although the tracts are not anticipated to be used 

extensively for recreation, many surface tracts are located in rivers, wetlands, and beach areas that are 

desirable locations for recreation and there is a high potential for cultural resources to be found. Impacts 

from travel management actions would not be anticipated, because the Coosa River and Geneva tracts that 

have not been surveyed for cultural resources are only accessible by boat and no cultural resources were 

found on all other tracts have been surveyed. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Ground-disturbing activities associated with ROW construction and maintenance could impact cultural 

resources. If a permitted ROW for an access road, utility tower, or bridge pier were approved on a surface 

tract, an appropriate level of cultural resource survey would need to be conducted. Approved activities in 

areas not previously surveyed would be subject to a ground survey and consultation requirements with the 

SHPO under NHPA Section 106 regulations prior to construction. 

A cultural resource survey would also be required if existing ROWs on the Fort Morgan Highway and 

Jordan Lake tracts were expanded or modified. Construction projects could result in inadvertent damage 

if cultural resources that were undetected during surveys were unearthed during ground-disturbing 

activities. Following discovery of cultural resources, activities would stop in accordance with the ROW 

grant which would minimize further damage to cultural resources. Therefore, impacts to cultural 

resources would be anticipated to be minimal. 

Visual Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to visual quality. Although visual quality 

would deteriorate in the short term, visual quality would improve in the long term once vegetation has 

reestablished to meet VRM class objectives. 

4-18 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions proposed 

under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and 

protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of 

prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to visual quality. Although visual quality 

would deteriorate in the short term, visual quality would improve in the long term once vegetation has 

reestablished to meet VRM class objectives. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Mineral exploration and development on non-USFS FMO tracts (313,819 acres) would result in impacts 

to visual resources on 105 acres from 20 wells. Removal of vegetation and construction of wells and well 

pads and introduction of other equipment would decrease visual quality. BLM doesn’t manage the surface 

for non-USFS FMO tracts; however, BLM can place COAs or best practices to minimize impacts to 

visual resources as needed. Impacts would not be anticipated on the 8,179 non-USFS FMO acres closed 

to leasing. Since no mineral development activities would occur on the surface tracts, there would be no 

violations of VRM class objectives. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Allowing recreation activities and motorized vehicle use on the surface tracts could result in decreased 

visual quality over time from changes to existing natural or manmade landforms and scenic vistas through 

vegetation and soil loss, particularly on tracts that are in undeveloped areas. Since the surface tracts are 

not anticipated to be used extensively for recreation and travel, these impacts would be minimal. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

If the existing ROWs that bisect the Fort Morgan Highway and Jordan Lake tracts were expanded or 

otherwise modified, visual quality would be diminished. No existing utility and road ROWs exist on the 

Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach, Geneva, and Fowl River tracts. If a new road or utility ROW were 

authorized on these tracts, visual quality would be diminished if the ROW were to dominate the view of 

the casual observer. 

Minerals 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Under this alternative, 305,640 non-USFS FMO acres would be open to leasing, subject to standard lease 

terms and conditions; 8,179 non-USFS FMO acres would be closed to leasing due to restrictions placed 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-19 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

by other Federal surface management agencies. No impacts to oil and gas minerals exploration and 

development would be anticipated from management of non-USFS FMO tracts. 

No impacts to coal leasing and development in the Warrior Basin would be anticipated. Coal production 

would continue at historical rates. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Lands and realty management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. BLM would only dispose of non-USFS FMO with no 

suspected value and, therefore, there would be no loss of opportunity. 

Recreation and Travel Management 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to recreation. Recreationists could be 

displaced from vegetation treatment areas until revegetation occurs; however, the vegetation treatments 

would benefit recreationists by improving the long-term aesthetics of an area. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat 

improvements and protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive 

plant species, use of prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve 

ground disturbing activities of a severity or extent that result in impacts to recreation. Recreationists could 

be displaced from protected areas or treated areas until revegetation occurs; however, the habitat 

improvements and protections would benefit recreationists by improving the long term aesthetics and 

wildlife viewing of an area. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Oil and gas development on non-USFS FMO tracts with surface management by other Federal agencies 

that are open to the public for recreation, as identified in Table 3-17, could be affected by the leasing of 

Federal minerals by BLM. Those areas or installations not open to recreation or leasing would not be 

affected, including National Park Service (NPS) and USFWS lands. Oil and gas development could 

provide additional opportunities for travel due to the construction of access roads. 

Since approximately 105 acres of vegetation removal and construction activities would result from the 

development of 20 oil and gas wells on non-USFS FMO there could be a decrease in nature-based 

recreational opportunities due to conflicts with the developments or in areas where the public were 

excluded. Mineral leasing in recreational areas could result in the removal of vegetation; construction of 

access roads, well pads, and other infrastructure; introduction of drilling equipment; and associated noise 

4-20 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 

and dust emissions. Effects would include a less-enjoyable recreational environment, though travel 

management opportunities could improve due to the construction of access roads. Stipulations applied 

under this alternative by other surface managing agencies could indirectly protect the recreational 

resources in areas where development would be precluded (8,179 acres). 

Since future coal development is anticipated to occur at underground sites without additional 

infrastructure, additional impacts to recreation would not be anticipated. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Allowing recreation activities and motorized vehicle use on the surface tracts would maintain existing 

recreation and travel opportunities. Allowing motorized travel uses on all surface tracts could result in 

conflicts between motorized recreationists and recreationists seeking a more natural setting or experience. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Although Lots 73 and 74 of the Fort Morgan Beach tracts would be transferred to the USFWS, these lots 

would remain within the boundaries of the Bon Secour National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) (where they are 

currently, but are not managed by the USFWS). After transfer, these lots would be managed according to 

their Comprehensive Conservation Plan. Since all surface tracts would remain in Federal ownership, 

access to recreation activity in a generally undeveloped setting would be maintained. 

If existing utility and road ROWs that bisect the Fort Morgan Highway and Jordan Lake tracts were 

expanded or otherwise modified, the recreation experience could be diminished as a result of construction 

activity, ground disturbance, and introduction of new infrastructure. No existing utility and road ROWs 

exist on the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach, Geneva, and Fowl River tracts. If a new road or utility 

ROW were authorized on these tracts, the recreation experience could be diminished as a result of 

construction activity, ground disturbance, and introduction of new infrastructure. These actions could 

provide additional opportunities for travel due to the construction of access roads. 

Lands and Realty 

Lands and realty is a resource use rather than an environmental component and impacts on lands and 

realty are a direct result of their management. Therefore, the following discussion is limited to impacts 

from lands and realty management actions for the 159 acres of BLM-administered surface ownership in 

Alabama. Impacts from disposal of FMO is discussed under impacts to Minerals from Lands and Realty 

actions. 

Under Alternative 1, all 159 acres of the surface tracts in Alabama would remain open to ROW 

applications; therefore, no impacts would be anticipated to lands and realty actions. Retaining the surface 

tracts under BLM administration would not allow for opportunities for other Federal agency or nonFederal ownership. Transferring Lots 73 and 74 of the Fort Morgan Beach tracts to the USFWS as part of 

the Bon Secour NWR would facilitate Federal management of the lots. 

Social and Economic 

Definitions and descriptions of potential Environmental Justice populations, including low income and 

ethnicity statistics were provided in Section 3.2.13. Since this four-county study area where mineral 

development is anticipated does not encompass Environmental Justice populations as defined, there 

would likely be no disproportionate effect on those populations under each alternative. Since the specific 

location of the oil and gas development is yet to be determined, Environmental Justice population 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-21 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

locations should be further considered at the implementation level to minimize the potential for 

disproportionate impacts to Environmental Justice populations and to identify any possible mitigation 

measures that may be required to reduce impacts (for example, dust, noise, traffic, ground water quality) 

to these populations. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Impacts to social and economic conditions would not be anticipated from vegetative communities 

management actions, since no actions are proposed under this alternative. Under standard management 

common to all alternatives, allowing vegetation manipulation to meet resources objectives would not be 

anticipated to be of an extent that would result in impacts to economic or social conditions. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Impacts to social and economic conditions would not be anticipated from fish and wildlife habitat 

management actions, since no actions are proposed under this alternative. Under standard management 

common to all alternatives, providing habitat improvements and protections under State wildlife 

conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and wetland 

enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing activities of a severity or extent that 

would result in impacts to economic or social conditions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Since only 20 fluid mineral wells would likely be drilled with standard lease terms and conditions over 

the next 20-years, there would be minimal economic impacts from these activities. This type of BLM 

mineral development is consistent with the development that occurred in the past, including 17 

applications for permits to drill between 1983 and 2004. Therefore, there would be minimal changes. The 

potential minimal changes include a slight increase in employment or income. Social indicators such as 

housing, education, and cost of living would not be anticipated to change under this alternative from oil 

and gas activities. 

With continued development of oil and gas resources, 105 acres of surface disturbance are anticipated for 

well pads, roads, and pipeline over the next 20 years. Disturbances from oil and gas development could 

potentially include slight increases in air emissions from construction of well pads and roads, noise from 

construction activities and trucking, contamination of soils and vegetation, habitat impacts, and 

groundwater contamination. Stakeholders who believe oil and gas activity should be constrained with 

conditions and stipulations to protect wetlands and aquatic habitat would likely feel that this alternative 

does not do enough to ensure protection of these types of resources. Additionally, oil and gas industry 

stakeholders, as well as others who value maintaining access to Federal minerals for oil and gas 

development, would likely prefer this alternative over the others. 

The anticipated amount of coal to be produced under this alternative for the next 20-years (1.9 millions 

tons per year) is consistent with coal development over the last 10 years. Currently coal produced from 

BLM-administered minerals accounts for approximately 10 percent of the total amount of coal produced 

in the State, 19.5 million tons of coal (Energy Information Agency 1999). In Alabama, mining (non oil 

and gas) accounts for approximately 6,773 employees and employee compensation of $482,361,000 

(Bureau of Economic Analysis [BEA] 2005). If 10 percent of this employment and employee 

compensation can be attributed to BLM-administered minerals, this activity provides for 677 employees 

in mining, with total mining employee compensation of $48,236,100. The average annual employee 

compensation for these workers is $71,218, compared with average annual compensation from all 

industries in the State of $34,877 (BEA 2005). Mining in the four-county study area where mineral 

4-22 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 1 

development is possible likely provides fiscal revenues to local and State governments, supporting 

community and emergency services, school, and infrastructure. Impacts on stakeholder groups from 

mining activities are likely similar to those stated in the previous paragraph concerning socioeconomic oil 

and gas impacts. Some stakeholders will support these mining activities due to the economic benefits in 

income, jobs, and government revenues, while others will be concerned that the economic benefit may not 

offset the risks to environmental and water resources from the activity. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions would not cause changes in the economic characteristics 

(employment, income, and industries) or quality of social assets (housing, education, values, and 

attitudes) in the four-county study area where mineral development is possible as there are no anticipated 

changes in recreation and travel management actions under this alternative. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

All BLM lands under this alternative would remain in Federal ownership. Additionally, new ROW may 

be developed on the surface tracts. Lands and realty management actions would not cause changes in the 

economic characteristics (employment, income, and industries) as there are very little changes anticipated 

under this alternative. Quality of social assets (demographics, housing, cost of living, education) in local 

communities linked with the remote and scattered BLM surface tracts are not likely to be affected by 

retaining these lands in Federal ownership. Stakeholders who would like to see these BLM surface tracts 

sold to either private developers or non-profit organizations for a change in management and use would 

be adversely impacted by this alternative, while those stakeholders who believe that retention of the 

Federal lands is important to maintain open space and current management would feel this alternative is 

consistent with their values. 

Hazardous Materials 

BLM-authorized activities on surface tracts and non-USFS FMO could include the use of hazardous 

materials, substances, and waste (including storage, transportation, and spills). Such activities include oil 

and gas development, coal development, and application of pesticides to improve vegetative communities 

and wildlife habitat. These activities are conducted in compliance with 29 CFR 1910, 49 CFR 100-185, 

40 CFR 100-400, Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Superfund Amendment Reauthorization Act (SARA), 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), and the Clean Water Act (CWA) and other Federal and State 

regulations and policies regarding hazardous materials management. Therefore, if a release were to occur, 

it would be immediately addressed and remediated in accordance with regulation. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-23 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 2 Draft EIS – August 2007 

4.2.2 Alternative 2 

Air Quality 

Under this alternative, there is a potential for wildfire which could lead to air emissions. Since all fires 

would be suppressed, these occurrences would be short term and localized and not be anticipated to 

individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetation treatments, including prescribed fire, and associated use of trucks and heavy equipment would 

cause short term, localized increases in dust and emissions. Given the small amount and scattered nature 

of surface ownership, these activities would not be anticipated to individually deteriorate air quality 

conditions. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Use of trucks and heavy equipment associated with proposed fish and wildlife habitat improvements, such 

as constructing dune walk-overs on the Fort Morgan Beach tract, and conducting prescribed burns to 

improve habitat on the Fort Morgan Highway tract would cause short term, localized increases in dust and 

emissions. Given the small amount and scattered nature of surface ownership, these activities would not 

be anticipated to individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Anticipated levels of oil and gas (20 wells over the next 20 years) and coal development (1.9 million tons 

produced annually over the next 20 years) and associated air emissions would be the same as 

Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Motorized travel would be closed or limited to designated routes on all tracts under this alternative. 

However, the level of activity contributing to emissions and associated air quality impacts would not be 

anticipated to change compared to Alternative 1 since these tracts are not anticipated to be used 

extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach, Fowl River, and Geneva tracts (a total of 114 acres or 71 

percent BLM surface ownership in Alabama) would be managed as ROW avoidance areas, there would 

be less potential for emissions associated with the use of trucks and heavy equipment (bulldozers, etc.) for 

ROW development compared to Alternative 1. Impacts from potential ROW development on the Jordan 

Lake and Fort Morgan Highway tracts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Soil Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions, such as removing invasive species and conducting 

prescribed fire, on surface tracts could increase site-specific erosion in the short term. Sand deposition 

would be facilitated by planting native coastal dune vegetation as part of dune restoration activities after 

4-24 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 2 

damage by major storms. Over the long term, improving vegetation communities would reduce erosion 

and overland flows. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Impacts from fish and wildlife habitat management actions would be similar to Alternative 1. In addition, 

there would be minimal short term soil disturbance from the construction of dune walk-overs on the Fort 

Morgan Beach tracts and conducting prescribed burns to improve habitat on the Fort Morgan Highway 

tracts. These soils are not prone to compaction and the construction is not expected to alter the soil 

horizons in the long term. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Anticipated levels of oil and gas development and associated impacts on 105 acres would be the same as 

Alternative 1. Applying the stipulations in Appendix D would increase the area where seasonal, 

controlled surface use (CSU) (91,702 acres), and no surface occupancy (NSO) (94,589 acres) restrictions 

would be implemented, which reduces disturbance to soils within the protected areas. Impacts to prime or 

unique farmlands would be the same as described for Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Motorized travel would be closed or limited to designated routes on all tracts under this alternative. 

However, the level of activity that could increase erosion and associated impacts to soils would not be 

anticipated to change compared to Alternative 1 since these tracts are not anticipated to be used 

extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach, Fowl River, and Geneva tracts (a total of 114 acres or 71 

percent BLM surface ownership in Alabama) would be managed as ROW avoidance areas, there would 

be less potential for ground disturbance and increased erosion associated with ROW development 

compared to Alternative 1. Impacts from potential ROW development on the Jordan Lake and Fort 

Morgan Highway tracts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Water Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions, such as removing invasive species and conducting 

prescribed fire, on surface tracts would increase site-specific erosion, which increases nutrient levels and 

turbidity and decreases water quality in the short term. Over the long term, improving vegetation 

communities would reduce erosion and overland flows. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions, such as constructing dune walk-overs on the Fort Morgan 

Beach tracts and conducting prescribed burns to improve habitat on the Fort Morgan Highway tracts, 

could increase erosion and run-off, which increases nutrient levels and turbidity and decreases water 

quality in the short term. Over the long term, improving and protecting fish and wildlife habitats would 

reduce erosion and overland flows. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-25 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 2 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Anticipated levels of oil and gas development and associated impacts on 105 acres would be the same as 

Alternative 1. A 1,000-foot NSO buffer around aquatic habitats and applying the stipulations in Appendix 

D would increase the area where seasonal, CSU (91,702 acres), and NSO (94,589 acres) restrictions 

would be implemented, which would reduce disturbance to water resources within the protected areas. 

This stipulation could be applied to an estimated 90,930 acres or 29 percent of the non-USFS FMO 

available for leasing in Alabama. This buffer is expected to prevent construction activities from 

increasing the sedimentation of local drainages and wetlands. 

Impacts from coal mining would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Motorized travel would be closed or limited to designated routes on all tracts under this alternative. 

However, the level of activity that could impact water resources would not be anticipated to change 

compared to Alternative 1 since these tracts are not anticipated to be used extensively for recreation or 

travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach, Fowl River, and Geneva tracts (a total of 114 acres or 71 

percent BLM surface ownership in Alabama) would be managed as ROW avoidance areas, there would 

be less potential for ground disturbance and impacts to water resources associated with ROW 

development compared to Alternative 1. No coastal wetland habitats or water bodies occur on or adjacent 

to the Fort Morgan Highway tracts. Development of additional transportation routes and ROWs on the 

Jordan Lake tract could contribute to the already degrading water quality of the Coosa River, located 

adjacent to the tract, as well as Jordan Lake, located about 10 miles downstream. Impacts contributing to 

decreased water quality could result from decreased soil stability and increased surface runoff caused by 

vegetation-clearing activities and construction ground disturbance. 

Vegetative Communities 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Early detection and removal of exotic plant species from the Fowl River and Coosa River tracts would 

safeguard the wetland emergent vegetation and wet flatwoods communities on this tract. On the Fort 

Morgan Highway tracts, woody exotic, invasive species such as Chinese tallow and Chinese privet would 

be removed by hand and stump treated with approved herbicides. Selective hand spraying of Cogon grass 

may be required where it is established. More active management of vegetation communities would 

provide better vegetation composition on all surface tracts than under Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

For the Fort Morgan Beach tracts, the construction of dune walk-overs would funnel foot traffic across 

sensitive dune habitats and allow sand to accrete and native dune vegetation to re-establish. On the Fort 

Morgan Highway tracts, forbs and native grasses would benefit from periodic prescribed burns of wet 

flatwoods and wetlands conducted in coordination with the Bon Secour NWR. 

4-26 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 2 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts to vegetation would be similar to Alternative 1; however, under this alternative oil and gas 

activities would be excluded from a 1,000-foot buffer around wetlands and aquatic habitats, karst areas, 

shoreline habitats, and habitats like naturally occurring prairies and glades with special status species. 

Buffering these areas would provide additional protection for high value plant communities from 

potential sedimentation or contamination from surface runoff or inadvertent leaching from the reserve pit. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Impacts from managing the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Highway, Fowl River, and Geneva tracts as open 

to recreation could result in similar impacts as in Alternative 1. Two dune walk-overs constructed at 

Veterans Road and Mobile Road would funnel visitors across sensitive dune habitat, allowing dune 

vegetation to reestablish at these traditional access points. Plantings of native coastal dune vegetation 

would restore several acres of dunes trampled at these beach access points. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

All surface tracts except the Fort Morgan Highway and Jordan Lake tracts would be managed as ROW 

avoidance areas. No new disturbance would be allowed in the existing ROW corridors on the Fort 

Morgan Highway tracts; however, maintenance activities would be permitted. These existing utility 

ROWs have been repeatedly disturbed and maintained in an early seral stage dominated by grasses and 

herbaceous growth. The continued maintenance of these utility corridors prevents the establishment of the 

scrub vegetation characteristic of this elevation. In addition, these disturbed sites are prone to the 

establishment of exotic, invasive plant species, particularly cogon grass and Chinese tallow which are 

common along the Highway 180 corridor. Cogon grass is very difficult to eradicate, and establishes dense 

stands that displace native vegetation communities. 

Fish and Wildlife 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Dune restoration activities, such as planting sea oats and other dune stabilizing natives at Fort Morgan 

would benefit a wide variety of shore-birds by providing additional areas for loafing and potential nesting 

sites. At all sites, wildlife would benefit from removal of exotic invasive plant species. Early detection 

and removal reduces the overall impact to wildlife species by limiting the amount of change to the habitat 

structure that can occur when large woody invasives are removed, and by eliminating or reducing the 

amount of herbicide needed to control herbaceous invasives. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Many of the benefits discussed under the special status species and vegetation impacts sections would 

also benefit general wildlife values. At the Fort Morgan Beach tracts, dune nesting shore-birds would 

benefit from actions to enhance and protect coastal dunes. The construction of dune walk-overs on the 

Fort Morgan Beach tracts would protect sensitive dune habitats from foot traffic and allow additional 

habitat to develop at these traditional public access points. Shorebirds benefit from funneling foot traffic 

across these sensitive habitats by reducing human intrusions on loafing and nesting areas. On all tracts, 

wildlife would benefit from early detection and removal of exotic invasive weed species, which once 

established can substantially alter habitats. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-27 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 2 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

General impacts to wildlife are expected to be the same as Alternative 1; however, under this alternative 

oil and gas activities would be excluded from high value wildlife habitats. This includes a 1,000-foot 

buffer around wetlands and aquatic habitats, avoidance of karst areas, shoreline habitats and habitats like 

naturally occurring prairies and glades with special status species. 

BMPs would be applied under this alternative to reduce potential impacts to bats, song-birds, and 

waterfowl. Reserve pits still containing water 10 days after a well is completed would be netted to 

exclude migratory birds. Other approved methods could also be used to exclude birds. Open vent 

equipment, such as heater-treaters, separators, and dehydration units would be covered with anti-perching 

cones to exclude cavity nesting birds and bats. Any powerlines would be built using approved raptor safe 

designs to prevent electrocution. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Limiting vehicle access to existing roads and authorized ROW would eliminate new use patterns from 

developing which could degrade habitats on BLM surface tracts. This would particularly benefit the Fort 

Morgan Beach tracts where even occasional vehicle use would damage dunes and destroy dune stabilizing 

vegetation. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

All surface tracts except the Fort Morgan Highway and Jordan Lake tracts would be managed as ROW 

avoidance areas. No new disturbance would be allowed in the existing ROW corridors on the Fort 

Morgan Highway tracts; however, maintenance activities would be permitted. These existing utility 

ROWs have been repeatedly disturbed and maintained in an early seral stage dominated by grasses and 

herbaceous growth. The continued maintenance of these utility corridors prevents the establishment of the 

scrub vegetation characteristic of this elevation. In addition, these disturbed sites are prone to the 

establishment of exotic, invasive plant species, particularly cogon grass and Chinese tallow which are 

common along the Highway 180 corridor. Cogon grass is very difficult to eradicate, and establishes dense 

stands that displace native vegetation communities. Maintenance activities, as well as invasive exotic 

species in the utility corridors, would deteriorate wildlife habitat. 

Special Status Species 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Alabama beach mouse and nesting shore-birds would benefit from plantings of native coastal dune 

vegetation on the Fort Morgan Beach tracts after damaging storms. These plantings promote sand 

deposition and help to reestablish the dunes more quickly. On the Fowl River, Coosa River, and Fort 

Morgan Highway tracts, woody exotic, invasive species such as Chinese tallow and Chinese privet would 

be removed by hand and stump treated with approved herbicides. Selective hand spraying of herbaceous 

growth, especially cogon grass, may be required where it has become established. Early detection and 

control of invasive plant species would reduce the amount of native vegetation displaced and minimize 

changes to structure that occurs when large amounts of invasive woody material is removed. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Alabama beach mouse and nesting shore-birds at the Fort Morgan Beach tracts would benefit from the 

installation of two dune walk-overs that would eliminate damaging foot traffic, and allow dunes and 

vegetation to recover at traditional public access areas at Veterans Road and Mobile Road. Prescribed fire 

4-28 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 2 

could be used to increase herbaceous species in flatwoods or wetlands on the Fort Morgan highway tracts. 

These burns would be conducted only in conjunction with prescribed burns on adjacent lands managed by 

the Bon Secour NWR to benefit endemic species. These actions would improve habitat for special status 

species. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Although the number of wells (20) and acres disturbed (105) would remain the same under this alternative 

as compared to Alternative 1, lease stipulations would shift surface-disturbing activities away from 

sensitive habitats with potential to support special status species. This is accomplished with NSO buffers 

or seasonal restrictions. 

To protect special status species occurring in aquatic or wetland habitats, all oil and gas development 

activities would be excluded from a 1,000-foot buffer around these habitats. In areas with slopes less than 

10 percent, the 1,000-foot buffer could be reduced to a minimum of 100-feet if the adjacent waterway or 

wetlands have been surveyed and no special status species occur within 100-yards upstream and 300-

yards downstream of the site. This stipulation could be applied to an estimated 90,930 acres or 29 percent 

of the non-USFS FMO available for leasing in Alabama. In most cases, this buffer is expected to prevent 

construction activities from increasing the sedimentation of local drainages and wetlands. 

A 250-foot NSO buffer around known caves, fractures, and sinkholes would reduce the chances of 

drilling through karst formations, providing protection for cave endemics, such as Alabama cave shrimp, 

Alabama cave fish, gray myotis, Indiana bat, and others. Some potential remains for inadvertently drilling 

through unknown karst formations and damaging connected cave habitats through introduction of lost 

drilling fluids and muds, altering temperature and moisture regimes and modifying the hydrology 

supporting the karst system. The 3,044 acres of FMO within 0.5 miles of caves known to be occupied by 

gray myotis or Indiana bat would be excluded from surface occupancy, protecting these species and their 

habitats from disturbance associated with oil and gas activity. 

Under this alternative, the 365 acres of non-USFS FMO associated with suitable and designated critical 

habitat for the Alabama beach mouse, including upland scrub sites, would be excluded from leasing. This 

would avoid potential impacts to Alabama beach mouse, nesting sea turtles, piping plover, and other 

coastal special status species including least tern, American oystercatcher, and Wilson’s plover. 

Areas with suitable soils and at least 10 percent open pine forest in southern Alabama counties, including 

Choctaw, Washington, Mobile, Baldwin, Barbour, Bullock, Butler, Clarke, Crenshaw, Coffee, Conecuh, 

Covington, Dale, Escambia, Geneva, Henry, Houston, Monroe, Montgomery, Pike, and Wilcox counties 

would require a survey for gopher tortoises prior to any surface-disturbing activities. No disturbance 

would be permitted within 600-feet of a gopher tortoise burrow. This buffer is expected to protect any 

breeding populations of gopher tortoise and maintain habitat for associated species including black pine 

snake. It would also protect habitat values in areas suitable for eastern indigo snake. 

Under this alternative, NSO would be permitted within 0.5 miles of a red-cockaded woodpecker cluster. 

This stipulation would be applied to 888 acres of FMO within known clusters, and would be applied as 

needed to potential or occupied habitat identified during site assessments conducted prior to leasing. This 

buffer is expected to contain all foraging habitat required to maintain the red-cockaded woodpecker 

cluster. There are options for oil and gas activity to occur within suitable foraging habitat, if the foraging 

requirements for the cluster are met elsewhere, for example clusters maintained on National Forests. This 

exception would require a concurrence from the USFWS and the State of Alabama. A concurrence would 

cause disturbance within the suitable foraging habitat, but if granted would not be anticipated to affect 

local populations. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-29 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 2 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Under this alternative, NSO would be permitted within 1,500-feet of a bald eagle nest and/or communal 

roost site, and no surface-disturbing activities would be permitted within 1.5 mile of bald eagle nests 

during the nesting season from December 1 through August 1. This stipulation is expected to avoid 

potential impacts to bald eagles. This buffer may be modified as needed in the future to comply with the 

most current Federal guidelines. The no surface occupancy stipulation could apply to an estimated 30 

acres of FMO within 1,500 feet of known bald eagle nests, and the seasonal restriction would apply to an 

estimated 848 acres of FMO within 1.5 miles of known bald eagle nests. These stipulations could be 

applied to additional acreage, if new nests or communal roosts are identified during site assessments 

conducted prior to leasing. 

Leases containing potential habitat for specials status plant species, including Federally-listed and 

candidate species, as well as those ranked as critically imperiled (S-1) and imperiled (S-2) by the 

Alabama Natural Heritage Program (ANHP) would require botanical surveys prior to surface-disturbing 

activities. Operations would be excluded from areas supporting these special status plant species. This 

stipulation is expected to protect most naturally occurring glades, prairies, and other habitats which 

support special status plant species. This stipulation is estimated to apply to 103 acres of FMO. This is 

based on known occurrences of special status plants on FMO, and because most of the private land 

overlaying FMO has not been inventoried for special status plants, this stipulation is expected to be 

applied more broadly at the lease stage based on site assessments conducted prior to leasing. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Closing tracts to motorized use or restricting public vehicle use to designated roads and authorized ROWs 

(depending on tract) would prevent habitat damage to occupied Alabama beach mouse habitat, as well as 

sea turtle nesting habitat and important shore bird loafing and foraging areas. These closures or 

restrictions would be consistent with Florida Department of Environmental Management requirements 

that requires permits for use of vehicles on State beaches, and would allow BLM to sign and more 

effectively enforce vehicle closures and restrictions. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Under this alternative, two Fort Morgan Beach tract lots (Lots 73 and 74) would be transferred to USFWS 

for inclusion in the Bon Secour NWR. No new disturbance would be allowed for ROWs on BLM surface 

tracts. This would include the existing ROW corridors on the Fort Morgan Highway tracts, which are 

designated as critical habitat for Alabama beach mouse, although maintenance of these existing ROWs 

would be permitted. The existing utility ROWs on the Fort Morgan Beach tracts have been repeatedly 

disturbed and maintained in an early seral stage dominated by grasses and herbaceous growth. The 

continued maintenance of these utility corridors prevents the establishment of the scrub vegetation 

characteristic of this elevation. In addition, these disturbed sites are prone to the establishment of exotic, 

invasive plant species, particularly cogon grass and Chinese tallow which are common along the Highway 

180 corridor. Cogon grass is very difficult to eradicate and establishes dense stands that displace native 

vegetation communities. Maintenance activities may introduce additional invasive exotic species in the 

utility corridors, which would adversely affect Alabama beach mouse critical habitat. Additional work 

may be needed to assess the role modified areas play in Alabama beach mouse habitat and to determine 

BMPs regarding the maintenance of this ROW corridor. 

Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 

Impacts from suppressing all wildland fires and allowing prescribed burning on a case-by-case basis 

would be the same as Alternative 1. 

4-30 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 2 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions, such as removing invasive species and conducting 

prescribed fire, on surface tracts would reduce the potential for changes in the vegetation communities 

from invasive species. As a result, the natural fire regimes would be maintained or restored. This would 

improve the ability to manage wildland fire in its natural role through application of prescribed fires. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions, such as conducting prescribed burns to improve habitat, 

would reduce the potential for changes in the vegetation communities from invasive species. Treatments 

to improve habitat conditions would maintain or restore natural fire regimes through removal of decadent 

vegetation or invasive species. This would improve the ability to manage wildland fire in its natural role 

through application of prescribed fires. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts to wildland fire ecology and management from anticipated oil and gas development and 

associated disturbance of 105 acres would be the same as Alternative 1; however, impacts would not 

occur on the closed (8,297 acres) and NSO (94,589 acres) areas created through applying the stipulations 

in Appendix D. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

The potential for increased wildland fire occurrence would decrease compared to Alternative 1 because 

travel on the surface tracts would be designated as closed or limited to designated routes. This would 

decrease the ease of accessibility to these areas and reduce the potential for additional ignition sources 

through increased human use. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach, Fowl River, and Geneva tracts would be managed as 

avoidance areas (a total of 114 acres or 71 percent BLM surface ownership in Alabama), there would be 

less potential for wildfire impacts associated with ROW development compared to Alternative 1. This 

would also decrease infrastructure needing protection, but would also decrease improvements in 

accessibility to fires and providing fire-breaks on these tracts. Impacts from potential ROW development 

on the Jordan Lake and Fort Morgan Highway tracts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Cultural Resources 

Impacts from cultural resources management and wildland fire management actions would be the same as 

Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions, such as removing invasive species and conducting 

prescribed fire, on surface tracts would increase ground disturbance and associated potential impacts to 

cultural resources. Activities to control noxious and invasive plant species on the Coosa River and 

Geneva tracts could result in surface and shallow subsurface disturbance, which could introduce organic 

materials to lower soil layers, contaminating shallow subsurface cultural resource sites containing early 

historic or prehistoric datable organics. Surface and shallow subsurface effects could also include 

horizontal and vertical displacement of the upper portion of soils which could compromise depositional 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-31 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 2 Draft EIS – August 2007 

context and integrity, and causing artifact damage. Surveys completed prior to treatments would result in 

the identification of cultural sites. Weed control with non-disturbing methods would have no impacts. 

There would be no impact to cultural resources on the Fort Morgan Beach Tracts, Fort Morgan Highway 

Tracts, Fowl River Tract, and Jordan Lake Tract as these areas have been inventoried and do not contain 

cultural sites. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions, such as conducting prescribed burns, would increase 

ground disturbance and associated potential impacts to cultural resources similar to that discussed under 

Impacts from Vegetative Management Actions. Wildlife habitat manipulation would require cultural 

resource inventories and clearance prior to ground disturbance to identify the presence of any cultural 

sites and avoid or mitigate any potential damage. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Cultural resource impacts could occur from managing 119,231 acres of non-USFS FMO as open to 

leasing subject to standard lease terms and conditions and 91,702 acres of non-USFS FMO as CSU. 

Based on the RFD, oil and gas developments within these areas would impact 105 acres through the 

development of 20 wells over 20 years. Development on these acres would typically be subject to Class 

III cultural resource inventories and evaluation on a project-by-project basis prior to allowing disturbance, 

resulting in the identification and potential excavation of cultural sites. Stipulations and BMPs applied 

under this alternative would protect and preserve cultural resources on the 94,589 acres managed as NSO 

and in areas where surface disturbance would be precluded (8,297 acres). 

Impacts to cultural resources from coal development would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although surface tracts would be closed or limited to motorized use under this alternative, the level of 

activity that could impact cultural resources would not be anticipated to change compared to Alternative 1 

since these tracts are not anticipated to be used extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach, Fowl River, and Geneva tracts (a total of 114 acres or 71 

percent BLM surface ownership in Alabama) would be managed as ROW avoidance areas, there would 

be less potential for ground disturbance and impacts to cultural resources associated with ROW 

development compared to Alternative 1. If a ROW were proposed on the Fort Morgan Highway and 

Jordan Lake tracts, an appropriate level of cultural resource survey and consultation with the SHPO under 

NHPA Section 106 regulations would need to be conducted prior to approval. A cultural resource survey 

would also be required if existing ROWs on the Fort Morgan Highway and Jordan Lake tracts were 

expanded or modified. Construction projects could result in inadvertent damage if cultural resources that 

were undetected during surveys were unearthed during ground-disturbing activities. Following discovery 

of cultural resources, activities would stop in accordance with terms and conditions in the ROW grant 

which would minimize further damage to cultural resources. Collocating ROWs where possible would 

reduce the amount of surface disturbance and potential for inadvertent damage. 

4-32 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 2 

Visual Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Undertaking actions to improve vegetation communities, such as removing invasive species, on the 

surface tracts would temporarily diminish visual quality. Visual quality would be improved in the long 

term as the condition of vegetation communities improve to meet VRM class objectives. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Undertaking actions to improve fish and wildlife habitat on the surface tracts, such as prescribed burning, 

would temporarily diminish visual quality. Visual quality would be improved in the long term as wildliferelated recreation and habitat conditions were improved to meet VRM class objectives. 

Constructing dune walk-over structures and installing sand fencing to enhance and protect existing dune 

habitat on the Fort Morgan Beach tract would introduce developments in previously undeveloped areas 

and thereby diminish visual quality if the developments were to dominate the view of the casual observer. 

Any potential impacts could be mitigated through careful placement in low-lying areas and applying 

treatments to blend any structures in with the natural setting. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Since approximately 105 acres of vegetation removal and construction activities would result from the 

development of 20 oil and gas wells (as with Alternative 1), impacts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Stipulations applied under this alternative could indirectly protect visual resources on the 94,589 acres 

managed as NSO and in areas where development would be precluded (8,297 acres). Since no mineral 

development activities would occur on the surface tracts, there would be no violations of VRM class 

objectives. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Continuing to allow recreation use on the surface tracts would result in impacts similar to those described 

under Alternative 1. Since the tracts would be managed as limited or closed to motorized vehicle use, 

impacts to visual quality would be reduced as there would be less potential for vegetation and soil 

removal from these activities. Furthermore, because the surface tracts are not currently used extensively 

for recreation, anticipated impacts would be minimal. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Managing the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach, Fowl River, and Geneva tracts (a total of 114 acres or 71 

percent BLM surface ownership in Alabama) as ROW avoidance areas would retain the visual quality on 

these tracts since ROWs would not be approved on the tract unless it met resource objectives. Making the 

Fort Morgan Highway and Jordan Lake tracts available for ROWs could further diminish visual resource 

qualities if the ROWs were to dominate the view of the casual observer; however, collocating ROWs 

could reduce the extent of impacts to visual quality. 

Minerals 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-33 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 2 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Applying the lease stipulations and BMPs in Appendix D could restrict or preclude oil and gas 

development and exploration. Impacts would not be anticipated on approximately 119,231 acres open to 

leasing subject to standard lease terms and conditions. Managing approximately 91,702 acres as open to 

leasing, subject to minor constraints and 94,589 acres as open to leasing, subject to major constraints 

would allow for recovery of resources and could increase development costs. Allowing for exceptions, 

waivers, and modifications to these stipulations could create opportunities for the discovery of new oil 

and gas resources. Closing 8,297 acres to oil and gas leasing would preclude oil and gas development and 

exploration in these areas. 

Impacts to coal leasing and development would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Lands and realty management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Recreation and Travel Management 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Undertaking actions to improve vegetation communities, such as removing invasive species, on the 

surface tracts would temporarily diminish the recreation experience since recreationists could be 

displaced from vegetation treatment areas until revegetation occurs. The recreation experience would be 

improved in the long term as the condition of vegetation communities improve by improving the longterm aesthetics of an area. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Undertaking actions to improve wildlife habitat on the surface tracts, such as prescribed burning, would 

temporarily diminish the recreation experience since recreationists could be displaced from protected 

areas or treated areas until revegetation occurs. The recreation experience would be improved in the long 

term as wildlife-related recreation and habitat conditions are improved by improving the long term 

aesthetics and wildlife viewing of an area. 

Constructing dune walk-over structures and installing sand fencing to enhance and protect existing dune 

habitat on the Fort Morgan Beach tract would enhance the recreation experience. Installing walk-overs 

and fencing would introduce developments in previously undeveloped areas, it would also introduce 

intrusions to the natural setting. While this could reduce some recreationists experience, these facilities 

are generally accepted by the public. Any potential impacts could be mitigated through applying 

treatments to blend any structures in with the natural setting. 

4-34 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 2 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Since approximately 105 acres of vegetation removal and construction activities would result from the 

development of 20 oil and gas wells on non-USFS FMO (as with Alternative 1), impacts would be the 

same as Alternative 1. Stipulations applied under this alternative could indirectly protect the recreational 

opportunities on the 94,589 acres managed as NSO and in areas where development would be precluded 

(8,297 acres) by precluding ground disturbance and infrastructure associated with oil and gas 

development. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Continuing to allow recreation use on the surface tracts would result in impacts similar to those described 

under Alternative 1. Since motorized vehicle use would be limited or closed on the surface tracts, more 

non-motorized recreation opportunities would increase while there could be a loss of travel opportunities. 

Since surface tracts are not currently used extensively for motorized travel, the anticipated impact would 

be minimal. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Impacts from the transfer of Lots 73 and 74 of the Fort Morgan Beach tracts to the USFWS would be the 

same as Alternative 1. Managing the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach, Fowl River, and Geneva tracts (a 

total of 114 acres or 71 percent BLM surface ownership in Alabama) as ROW avoidance areas would 

retain the recreation experience on these tracts. Making the Fort Morgan Highway and Jordan Lake tracts 

available for ROWs could diminish the quality of the recreation experience. These actions could provide 

additional opportunities for travel due to the construction of access roads. 

Lands and Realty 

Under Alternative 2, the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach, Fowl River, and Geneva tracts (a total of 114 

acres or 71 percent BLM surface ownership in Alabama) would be managed as avoidance areas for ROW. 

This could impose design and siting requirements and associated costs on new ROW or amended or 

renewed ROW at existing sites. There would be an increased potential for requests for new or amended 

and renewed ROW at existing sites to be denied. Making the Fort Morgan Highway and Jordan Lake 

tracts available for ROW would accommodate access and efficient energy supply (by allowing pipelines 

and transmission lines), and minimize additional costs; however, new ROW would be restricted to the 

existing ROW corridor on the Fort Morgan Highway tract and ROW would be co-located if possible on 

the Jordan Lake tract. This would affect desired placement of facilities on these tracts. 

Retaining the surface tracts under BLM administration and pursuing partnerships with other agencies and 

organizations could allow for management opportunities for other agencies and organizations, but would 

not allow for non-Federal ownership opportunities. Partnerships would allow for more efficient and 

comprehensive resource management of the surface tracts. 

Social and Economic 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

This alternative includes the removal of invasive species on three BLM land tracts and the planting of 

dune vegetation on the Fort Morgan Beach tract. Impacts from these actions on the economic indicators 

would not be anticipated from these types of vegetation management actions. Stakeholders who value 

access may be impacted by restrictions to the Fort Morgan Beach tracts from planting activities. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-35 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 2 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Impacts to social and economic conditions from fish and wildlife habitat management actions would be 

the same as impacts identified from Vegetative Communities management actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

The same number of wells and acres of surface disturbance as Alternative 1 are anticipated under this 

alternative. This alternative would apply leasing stipulations to protect sensitive species and their habitats, 

including buffers for wetland and aquatic resources. Relative to Alternative 1, the exploration and 

development costs could increase while the availability for locations for well pads could decrease. This 

alternative would also provide for the greatest amount of protection for wetland resources. Since the 

number of wells anticipated is small relative to total wells in the area, there would be minimal changes, 

with possibly slight increases in employment or income (and the same as Alternative 1). Social indicators 

such as housing, education, and cost of living would not be anticipated to change under this alternative. 

Similar disturbances from oil and gas development would occur as compared to Alternative 1, although 

potential impacts to wetlands, soils, vegetation, habitat, and wildlife would be anticipated to be reduced 

under this alternative due to the implementation of seasonal, NSO, CSU stipulations. Oil and gas 

development and production can have implications for visual and scenic qualities as well as property 

values, as described under Alternative 1. These impacts are likely less than those under Alternative 1, as 

there are more conditions and constraints on well-pad locations under Alternative 2.Industry costs and 

availability for well pad locations would likely increase under this alternative, which would result in 

adverse impacts for the oil and gas industry. 

Under this alternative, impacts would be the same as Alternative 1 for coal development. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Under this alternative, surface tracts would be open to recreational use, but designated as limited for 

OHVs, and vehicle use is only allowed on public roads and authorized ROW. Social and economic 

conditions would be similar to Alternative 1 since minimal changes in recreation and travel management 

are anticipated. However, OHV users would likely be adversely impacted if trails and roads are closed to 

this type of motorized use. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Although the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach, Fowl River, and Geneva tracts would be managed as 

ROW avoidance areas, impacts to social and economic conditions would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Hazardous Materials 

Impacts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

4-36 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 3 

4.2.3 Alternative 3 (Preferred Alternative) 

Air Quality 

Under this alternative, there is a potential for wildfire which could lead to air emissions. Since all fires 

would be suppressed, these occurrences would be short term and localized and not be anticipated to 

individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Anticipated levels of oil and gas and coal development and associated air emissions would be the same as 

Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although surface tracts would be closed or limited to motorized use under this alternative, the level of 

activity contributing to emissions would not change compared to Alternative 1 since these tracts are not 

used extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach, Fowl River, and Geneva tracts (a total of 114 acres or 71 

percent of BLM surface ownership in Alabama) would be managed as ROW avoidance areas, there would 

be less potential for emissions associated with the use of trucks and heavy equipment (bulldozers, etc.) for 

ROW development compared to Alternative 1. Impacts from potential ROW development on the Jordan 

Lake and Fort Morgan Highway tracts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Soil Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Anticipated levels of oil and gas development and associated impacts on 105 acres would be the same as 

Alternative 1. Applying the stipulations in Appendix D would increase the area where seasonal, CSU 

(117,506 acres), and NSO (43,239 acres) restrictions would be implemented, which would reduce 

disturbance to soils within the protected areas. Under this alternative, the NSO area around aquatic 

habitats identified in Alternative 2 would be reduced to 250-feet, which would reduce protections to soils 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-37 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 3 Draft EIS – August 2007 

within these areas as compared to Alternative 2. In most cases, this buffer is expected to prevent 

construction activities from increasing erosion to the point that sedimentation of local drainages and 

wetlands increases. In areas with slopes over 25 percent, additional measures may be needed to stabilize 

disturbed soils. Impacts to prime or unique farmlands would be the same as described for Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although surface tracts would be closed or limited to motorized use under this alternative, the level of 

activity and associated impacts to soil resources would not be anticipated to change compared to 

Alternative 1 since these tracts are not used extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Disposing the surface tracts under the condition that uses would be consistent with the resource 

management goals and objectives and allowable uses and management actions established under this 

alternative would limit or restrict activities that impact soils. Although development once the tracts are 

disposed could result in soil impacts from vegetation-clearing activities and construction ground 

disturbance, limitations for habitat protection and resource management would be likely to reduce the 

potential for erosion or loss in soil productivity. The effects from ground disturbance during construction, 

vegetation treatments, or habitat improvements would be short term. If permanent roads or structures are 

constructed on the tracts, the effects would be long term but localized. 

ROW management actions and associated impacts to soils would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Water Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Anticipated levels of oil and gas development and associated impacts on 105 acres would be the same as 

Alternative 1. Applying the stipulations in Appendix D would increase the area where seasonal, CSU 

(117,506 acres), and NSO (43,239 acres) restrictions would be implemented, which would reduce 

disturbance to water resources within the protected areas. Under this alternative, the NSO area around 

aquatic habitats identified in Alternative 2 would be reduced to 250-feet, which would allow development 

to occur in close proximity to water resources and the potential for impacts to occur. In most cases, this 

buffer is expected to prevent construction activities from increasing the sedimentation of local drainages 

and wetlands. In areas with slopes over 25 percent, additional measures may be needed to stabilize 

disturbed soils above wetlands or aquatic habitats to the point they aren’t impacted by increased 

sedimentation. 

Impacts from coal mining would be the same as Alternative 1. 

4-38 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 3 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although surface tracts would be closed or limited to motorized use under this alternative, the level of 

activity and associated impacts to water resources would not be anticipated to change compared to 

Alternative 1 since these tracts are not used extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Disposing the surface tracts under the condition that uses would be consistent with the resource 

management goals and objectives and allowable uses and management actions established under this 

alternative would limit or restrict activities that impact water resources. Although development of the 

tracts could involve vegetation-clearing activities and construction ground disturbance that could increase 

surface runoff and degrade water quality, limitations for habitat protection and resource management 

would be likely to reduce the potential for these impacts. The effects from ground disturbance during 

construction, vegetation treatments, or habitat improvements would be short term. If permanent roads or 

structures are constructed on the tracts, the effects would be long term but localized. 

ROW management actions and associated impacts to water resources would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Vegetative Communities 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Under this alternative oil and gas development would be excluded from a 250 foot buffer around wetland 

and aquatic habitats and could be extended up to 600 feet where slopes exceed 10 percent. This buffer 

could be reduced to 100 feet where slopes are less than 10 percent, where there are no special status 

species issues. This buffer is expected to be adequate to protect most riparian zones and wetland habitats. 

It is estimated that this stipulation would apply to 38,111 acres or about 12 percent of the FMO, versus 

90,930 or approximately 29 percent of the FMO in Alabama. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Impacts from ROWs would be the same as Alternative 2. Under this alternative the Fort Morgan, Fowl 

River, and Coosa River tracts would be available for transfer to other agencies or groups, but future 

management would be constrained by the management objectives outlined in this plan. All of the Fort 

Morgan Beach and Highway tracts would be transferred to the Bon Secour NWR, and would be managed 

as part of that refuge. Geneva County and Jordan Lake tracts would be available for transfer out of 

Federal ownership. Impacts to vegetation on the Fort Morgan, Fowl River, and Coosa River tracts would 

be the same as Alternative 2. The sale of the Geneva County tract is not expected to change the current 

uses and no impacts to vegetation are anticipated. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-39 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 3 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Fish and Wildlife 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts would be similar to those discussed under special status species. The acreage disturbed would be 

same and wells would be shifted away from sensitive habitats, although under this alternative the buffer 

would be reduced to 250-feet, with the option of increasing it to 600-feet where needed because of steep 

slopes or erosive soils. The buffer could be reduced to 100-feet where slopes are less than 10 percent and 

there are no special status species issues. These buffers are expected to be sufficient for most wildlife 

species, using wetland and aquatic habitats, but interior forest nesting birds and some amphibians and 

reptiles may be impacted by this reduced buffer through habitat disturbance. Karst habitats and most 

naturally occurring prairies and glades would be protected under this alternative. 

Under this alternative, the coastal no lease areas would be replaced with a NSO buffer. This change has 

some potential to promote offsite drilling. Disturbance of maritime habitats would contribute to the loss 

of important foraging habitats for migrating song-birds and shore-birds nesting in nearby dunes. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Impacts from ROWs would be the same as Alternative 2. No impacts to wildlife are anticipated from the 

disposal of the Geneva County tract because no land use changes are expected. 

Special Status Species 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

The number of wells (20) and acres disturbed (105) would remain the same under this alternative and 

impacts would be the same as Alternative 2, except in the following situations. 

The aquatic and wetland buffer would be reduced to 250-feet. In areas where slopes exceed 10 percent, 

the buffer could be extended up to 600-feet to provide adequate protection. In areas with slopes less than 

10 percent, the 250-foot buffer could be reduced to a minimum of 100-feet, if the adjacent waterway or 

4-40 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 3 

wetlands have been surveyed and no special status species occur within 100-yards upstream and 300-

yards downstream of the site. This stipulation could be applied to an estimated 38,111 acres or 12 percent 

of the non-USFS FMO available for leasing in Alabama. In most cases, this buffer is expected to prevent 

construction activities from increasing the sedimentation of local drainages and wetlands. In areas with 

slopes over 25 percent, additional measures may be needed to stabilize disturbed soils above wetlands or 

aquatic habitats. 

Under this alternative, the coastal no lease areas would be replaced with a NSO buffer. This change could 

affect nesting sea turtles, piping plover, and critical habitat for Alabama beach mouse, including adjacent 

upland scrub habitats. Although no surface disturbance would occur on non-USFS FMO or BLM surface 

tracts, offsite directional drilling to target these Federal minerals would be permitted under this 

alternative. Any directional wells targeting non-USFS FMO that may affect Federally-listed species or 

critical habitat would require coordination with the USFWS. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Impacts from ROW would be the same as Alternative 2. Under this alternative, the Fort Morgan, Fowl 

River, and Coosa River tracts would be available for transfer to other agencies or groups, but future 

management would be constrained by the management objectives outlined in this plan. All of the Fort 

Morgan Beach and Highway tracts would be transferred to the Bon Secour NWR and would be managed 

as part of that refuge. Alabama beach mouse, piping plover, and snowy plover would benefit from the 

same activities discussed under Alternative 2. 

Under this alternative, the Geneva and Jordan Lake tracts would be transferred out of Federal ownership. 

This tract is adjacent to Gulf sturgeon critical habitat, but no changes of use are anticipated. At the Jordan 

Lake tract, there may be opportunities to construct boat docks or other lake access facilities, but the tract 

may be too narrow to prompt the construction of additional camps. In both cases the overall use pattern is 

not expected to change and no adverse effects to special status species anticipated. 

Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 

Impacts from suppressing all wildland fires and allowing prescribed burning on a case-by-case basis 

would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts to wildland fire ecology and management from anticipated oil and gas development and 

associated disturbance of 105 acres would be the same as Alternative 1. Impacts would not occur on the 

closed (8,179 acres) and NSO (43,239 acres) areas created through applying the stipulations in Appendix 

D. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-41 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 3 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

ROW management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Cultural Resources 

Impacts from cultural resources management and wildland fire management actions would be the same as 

Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts to cultural resources from management of non-USFS FMO would be the same as Alternative 2, 

except 144,895 acres would be managed as open to leasing subject to standard lease terms and conditions, 

117,506 acres as CSU, 43,239 acres as NSO, and 8,179 acres as closed. The 105 acres of disturbance 

resulting from the anticipated 20 wells could impact cultural resources within areas managed as open to 

leasing subject to standard lease terms and conditions or CSU. Impacts to cultural resources are not 

anticipated in areas managed as NSO or closed since surface disturbance would be precluded. 

Impacts to cultural resources from coal development would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although surface tracts would be closed or limited to motorized use under this alternative, the level of 

activity and associated impacts to cultural resources would not be anticipated to change compared to 

Alternative 1 since these tracts are not used extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Making the surface tracts available for disposal could result in the removal of cultural properties from 

Federal ownership and the associated protection by laws, regulations, and policies. Before any transfer of 

management responsibilities or ownership, an appropriate level of cultural resource survey and 

consultation with the SHPO under NHPA Section 106 regulations would need to be conducted. Disposing 

the property from Federal ownership would remove protection of any cultural resources under Federal 

law; however, by applying conditions and restrictive covenants on management and use after disposal, 

damage to previously undetected cultural resources could be mitigated. 

Management actions and impacts associated with ROW development would be the same as Alternative 2. 

4-42 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 3 

Visual Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Since approximately 105 acres of vegetation removal and construction activities would result from the 

development of 20 oil and gas wells (as with Alternative 1), impacts would be similar to Alternative 1. 

Stipulations applied under this alternative could preclude oil and gas development thereby protecting 

visual resources on the 43,239 acres managed as NSO and in areas where development would be 

precluded (8,179 acres). Since no mineral development activities would occur on the surface tracts, there 

would be no violations of VRM class objectives. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts to visual resources would be the same 

as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Although the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach (Lots 13, 14, 24, 54, and 55), Fort Morgan Highway, Fowl 

River, Geneva, and Jordan Lake tracts would be available for disposal from Federal ownership, specified 

conditions on management and use after disposal to meet resource objectives would protect visual quality. 

ROW management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Minerals 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Applying the lease stipulations and BMPs in Appendix D could restrict or preclude oil and gas 

development and exploration. Under this alternative, the NSO area around aquatic habitats identified in 

Alternative 2 would be reduced to 250 feet and the no lease stipulation for Alabama beach mouse habitat 

would be NSO. Impacts would not be anticipated on approximately 144,895 acres open to leasing subject 

to standard lease terms and conditions. Managing approximately 117,506 acres as open to leasing, subject 

to minor constraints and 43,239 acres as open to leasing, subject to major constraints could increase 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-43 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 3 Draft EIS – August 2007 

development costs. Allowing for exceptions, waivers, and modifications to these stipulations could create 

opportunities for the discovery of new oil and gas resources. 

Impacts to coal leasing and development would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Lands and realty management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Recreation and Travel Management 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts to recreation and travel would be the 

same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife management actions and associated impacts to recreation and travel would be the same 

as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Since approximately 105 acres of vegetation removal and construction activities would result from the 

development of 20 oil and gas wells (as with Alternative 1), impacts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Stipulations applied under this alternative could indirectly protect the recreational opportunities on the 

43,239 acres managed as NSO and in areas where development would be precluded (8,179 acres) by 

eliminating associated ground disturbances, noise, and infrastructure. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Impacts from the transfer of Lots 73 and 74 of the Fort Morgan Beach tracts to the USFWS would be the 

same as Alternative 1. Although the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach (Lots 13, 14, 24, 54, and 55), Fort 

Morgan Highway, Fowl River, Geneva, and Jordan Lake tracts would be available for disposal from 

Federal ownership, specified conditions on management and use after disposal to meet resource 

objectives could protect recreational settings, although access could be reduced if not specifically 

included in the conditions for use or restrictive covenants. 

ROW management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

4-44 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 3 

Lands and Realty 

ROW management actions and associated impacts to lands and realty would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Under Alternative 3, the Coosa River and Fowl River tracts would be available for disposal under the 

condition that uses would be consistent with the resource management goals and objectives and allowable 

uses and management actions established under this alternative. This would allow opportunities for other 

Federal agency or non-Federal ownership, but would restrict future use of the tracts. All of the Fort 

Morgan Beach (including Lots 73 and 74) and Fort Morgan Highway tracts would be available for 

transfer to the USFWS as part of the Bon Secour NWR. This would facilitate Federal management of the 

tracts, but would not allow opportunities for other Federal agency or non-Federal ownership. The Geneva 

and Jordan Lake tracts would be available for disposal from Federal ownership, which would allow for 

opportunities for other Federal agency or non-Federal ownership without specified conditions on future 

use of the tracts. 

Social and Economic 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts to social and economic conditions 

would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Impacts to social and economic conditions from fish and wildlife habitat management actions would be 

the same as impacts identified from vegetative communities management actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

The same number of wells and acres of surface disturbance as Alternative 1 is anticipated under this 

alternative; however, this alternative places leasing stipulations to protect sensitive species and their 

habitats, including buffers for wetland and aquatic resources. Relative to Alternative 1, the exploration 

and development costs could increase while the availability for locations of well pads could decrease, 

which would result in adverse impacts to the oil and gas industry. Since the number of wells anticipated is 

small relative to total wells in the area, there would be minimal social and economic changes, possibly 

slight increases in employment or income, as compared with the current situation. Oil and gas 

development and production can have implications for visual and scenic qualities as well as property 

values. These impacts are likely less than those under Alternative 1, as there are more conditions and 

constraints on well-pad locations under Alternative 3. Social indicators such as housing, education, and 

cost of living would not be anticipated to change under this alternative. 

Under Alternative 3, impacts would be the same as Alternative 1 for coal development. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Under Alternative 3, socioeconomic impacts would be the same as those identified under Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Under Alternative 3, Lots 73 and 74 of the Fort Morgan Beach tracts would be transferred to the USFWS 

and a number of dispersed BLM surface land tracts would be available for disposal from Federal 

ownership with specified conditions on management and use after disposal to meet prescribed resource 

objectives. Although development could be allowed on these properties, it would be limited or restricted 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-45 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 3 Draft EIS – August 2007 

to activities that are consistent with prescribed resource management objectives. Since the types of 

activities on these lands are not likely to considerably change, there would be minimal impact to social 

and economic conditions under this alternative. 

Hazardous Materials 

Impacts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

4-46 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 4 

4.2.4 Alternative 4 

Air Quality 

Under this alternative, there is a potential for wildfire which could lead to air emissions. Since all fires 

would be suppressed, these occurrences would be short term and localized and not be anticipated to 

individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would deteriorate air quality conditions. Prescribed burning 

conducted to meet vegetation resource objectives would be short term and localized and not be 

anticipated to individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions proposed 

under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and 

protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of 

prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would deteriorate air quality conditions. Prescribed burning 

conducted to meet habitat objectives would be short term and localized and not be anticipated to 

individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Anticipated levels of oil and gas and coal development and associated air emissions would be the same as 

Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although surface tracts would be closed or limited to motorized use under this alternative, the level of 

activity contributing to emissions would not change compared to Alternative 1 since these tracts are not 

used extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach, Fowl River, and Geneva tracts (a total of 114 acres or 71 

percent of BLM surface ownership in Alabama) would be managed as ROW avoidance areas, there would 

be less potential for emissions associated with the use of trucks and heavy equipment (bulldozers, etc.) for 

ROW development compared to Alternative 1. Impacts from potential ROW development on the Jordan 

Lake and Fort Morgan Highway tracts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Soil Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-47 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 4 Draft EIS – August 2007 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in disturbance or loss of soils. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions proposed 

under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and 

protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of 

prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in disturbance or loss of soils. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts to soil resources from minerals management, including oil and gas and coal development, would 

be the same as Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although surface tracts would be closed or limited to motorized use under this alternative, the level of 

activity that could impact soil resources would not be anticipated to change compared to Alternative 1 

since these tracts are not used extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Disposing the tracts from Federal ownership with no restrictive covenants could increase chances for 

subsequent development and associated impacts to soil resources. This could result in impacts to soils 

from vegetation-clearing activities and construction ground disturbance, which could increase surface 

runoff and erosion. The effects from ground disturbance during construction, vegetation treatments, or 

habitat improvements would be short term. If permanent roads or structures are constructed on the tracts, 

the effects would be long term but localized. 

ROW management actions and associated impacts to soil resources would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Water Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to water quality. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions proposed 

under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and 

protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of 

prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to water quality. 

4-48 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 4 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts to water resources from minerals management, including oil and gas and coal development, 

would be the same as Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although surface tracts would be closed or limited to motorized use under this alternative, the level of 

activity that could impact water resources would not be anticipated to change compared to Alternative 1 

since these tracts are not used extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Disposing the tracts from Federal ownership with no restrictive covenants could increase chances for 

subsequent development and associated impacts to water resources, as described under the impacts to soil 

resources section. 

ROW management actions and associated impacts to water resources would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Vegetative Communities 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, allowing vegetation manipulation to meet resources objectives 

would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed could increase the potential 

for exotic, invasive species to become established or spread on BLM surface tracts. Chinese privet is 

likely to continue to spread on the Coosa River tracts, and the Fort Morgan highway tracts are vulnerable 

to both Cogon grass and Chinese tallow. Cogon grass in particular, once established, would displace 

native herbaceous plant species and ultimately could reduce some shrub and tree components by 

increasing the frequency of wild fires and crowding out seedlings. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, providing habitat improvements and protections under State 

wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and 

wetland enhancements, would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed 

could result in the same impacts discussed under impacts from vegetative communities management 

actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts from minerals management, including oil and gas and coal development, would be the same as 

Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-49 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 4 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Following disposal, it is assumed that the Fort Morgan and Fowl River tracts would be developed for 

residential or recreational use, and that recreational facilities would be constructed on the Coosa River 

and Jordan Lake tracts. It is expected that there would be some short term and long term loss of 

vegetation at all of these sites depending on the extent of the development as a result of vegetation 

removal, conversion to development, and introduction of invasive species. No impacts to vegetation are 

anticipated at the Geneva County tract as changes of use are not anticipated. 

Fish and Wildlife 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No vegetative communities management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, allowing vegetation manipulation to meet resources objectives 

would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed could result in habitat 

degradation on any of the BLM surface tracts. The maritime forests, scrubs, and flatwoods on the Fort 

Morgan Highway tracts are particularly vulnerable to Cogon grass and Chinese tallow. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, providing habitat improvements and protections under State 

wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and 

wetland enhancements, would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed 

could result in the same impacts discussed under impacts from vegetative communities management 

actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts from minerals management, including oil and gas and coal development, would be the same as 

Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Impacts from ROW actions would be similar to Alternative 2. After transfer to private ownership, the Fort 

Morgan and Fowl River tracts are expected to be developed for residential and recreational use. At Fort 

Morgan, private development of the beach tracts could result in the loss of up to 28.7 acres of habitat for 

nesting and wintering shorebirds. Additional development of the Fort Morgan highway tracts could result 

in the loss of up to 41.28 acres of maritime forest, scrub and wetland habitats. These tracts are part of a 

narrow band of habitat that provides crucial refuge for migrating songbirds, as well as resident wading 

birds, song birds and a wide variety of reptiles and amphibians, including alligators and up to eight native 

frog species. 

Development of the Fowl River tract would likely result in the loss of wetland habitats and increased 

public use that would exclude more secretive wildlife, including many species of wading birds. 

Recreational development of the Jordon Lake and Coosa River tracts is not expected to alter species 

4-50 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 4 

diversity or patterns of use at those tracts since the Jordan Lake tract is already developed for recreation 

and the Coosa River tracts are generally inaccessible islands. 

Special Status Species 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, allowing vegetation manipulation to meet resources objectives 

would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed could increase the potential 

for exotic, invasive species to become established or spread on BLM surface tracts. Cogon grass at the 

Fort Morgan Highway tracts, in particular, has the potential to alter Alabama beach mouse critical habitat 

as it forms dense stands displacing native herbaceous plants and potentially increasing fire frequency and 

intensity. 

Under this alternative, BLM would not actively promote the restoration of coastal dunes through 

plantings/sand fence installation projects following damage by major storm events. These dune 

restoration projects promote sand deposition and facilitate the return of habitat conditions suitable for 

Alabama beach mouse. Without these projects it is likely to take longer for sand to accumulate and for 

dune vegetation to become re-established, postponing the reestablishment of Alabama beach mouse 

populations after catastrophic events. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, providing habitat improvements and protections under State 

wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and 

wetland enhancements, would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed 

could result in the same impacts discussed under impacts from vegetative communities management 

actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts from minerals management, including oil and gas and coal development, would be the same as 

Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

The transfer of the BLM surface tracts to private ownership is likely to result in loss of habitat for the 

Alabama beach mouse, piping plover, snowy plover, and bald eagle, as well as potential habitat for 

Alabama red-belly turtle. Any development of the Fort Morgan Beach tracts would result in the direct 

loss of occupied critical habitat for the Alabama beach mouse. Development of the highway tracts are 

likely to result in the loss of important scrub habitats designated as critical habitat. Because the Fort 

Morgan Beach and Highway tracts are designated critical habitat, USFWS would have to authorize a 

taking permit through the Section 7 process of the Endangered Species Act to before such transfers could 

be approved. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-51 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 4 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Recreational development of the Coosa River tracts could result in abandonment of the existing bald 

eagle nest and exclude future nesting, depending on the location of facilities and intensity of public use. 

No impacts to special status species are expected as a result of anticipated development on the Fowl 

River, Jordon Lake or Geneva County tracts. At Fowl River, it is unlikely that any future development of 

the site would substantially alter the wetland characteristics of the site and render it unsuitable for redbelly turtle. The Jordon Lake tract does support any known populations of special status species. No 

development is expected to occur on the Geneva County tract, which is adjacent to critical habitat for the 

Gulf sturgeon. 

Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 

Impacts from suppressing all wildland fires and allowing prescribed burning on a case-by-case basis 

would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Although no specific vegetative communities actions are proposed, allowing vegetation manipulation to 

meet resources objectives under standard management common to all alternatives would serve to decrease 

vegetation density and cover (fuel load) and maintain natural fuel conditions across the surface tracts. 

This would maintain natural disturbance regimes which would be easier to manage through prescribed 

fire or other treatments. This would also decrease the frequency and intensity of wildland fires and allow 

fires to be more easily controlled, better protecting life, public safety, and property and resource values. 

However, lack of specific areas and species being managed could result in invasions and fuel 

accumulations that would increase the frequency and intensity of wildland fires. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed under this alternative, therefore no 

impacts would be anticipated. Under standard management common to all alternatives, providing habitat 

improvements and protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive 

plant species, use of prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would result in impacts similar to those 

discussed under impacts from vegetative communities management actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Minerals management actions and associated impacts to wildland fire ecology and management would be 

the same as Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Impacts to wildland fire ecology and management from recreation and travel management actions would 

be the same as Alternative 2 because travel designations would be the same for this alternative. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

ROW management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Cultural Resources 

Impacts from cultural resources management and wildland fire management actions would be the same as 

Alternative 1. 

4-52 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 4 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would require cultural resource clearances before activity were 

to occur; therefore, impacts would not be anticipated. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions proposed 

under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and 

protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of 

prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would require cultural resource clearances before activity 

were to occur; therefore, impacts would not be anticipated. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts to cultural resources from minerals management, including oil and gas and coal development, 

would be the same as Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although surface tracts would be closed or limited to motorized use under this alternative, the level of 

activity and associated potential impacts to cultural resources would not be anticipated to change 

compared to Alternative 1 since these tracts are not used extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Making the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach (Lots 13, 14, 24, 54 and 55), Fort Morgan Highway, Fowl 

River, Geneva, and Jordan Lake tracts available for disposal could result in the removal of cultural 

properties from Federal ownership and the associated protection by laws, regulations, and policies. Before 

any transfer of management responsibilities or ownership, an appropriate level of cultural resource survey 

and consultation with the SHPO under NHPA Section 106 regulations would need to be conducted. 

Disposing the property from Federal ownership would remove protection of any cultural resources under 

Federal law. Disposing the tracts without any specified management or use would increase the potential 

for damage or loss of previously undetected cultural resources after the transfer. 

Management actions and impacts associated with ROW development would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Visual Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to visual quality. Although visual quality 

would deteriorate in the short term, visual quality would improve in the long term once vegetation has 

reestablished to meet VRM class objectives. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-53 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 4 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions proposed 

under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and 

protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of 

prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to visual quality. Although visual quality 

would deteriorate in the short term, visual quality would improve in the long term once vegetation has 

reestablished to meet VRM class objectives. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Minerals management, including oil and gas and coal development, and associated impacts to visual 

resources would be the same as Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel managements actions and associated impacts to visual resources would be the same 

as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Making the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach (Lots 13, 14, 24, 54, and 55), Fort Morgan Highway, Fowl 

River, Geneva, and Jordan Lake tracts available for disposal from Federal ownership without conditions 

could result in changes to existing natural or manmade landforms, which would diminish visual quality if 

the use were to dominate the view of the casual observer. Following disposal, private development 

actions could create visually intrusive development. 

ROW management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Minerals 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Mineral management actions for oil and gas and coal and associated impacts would be the same as 

Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

4-54 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 4 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Lands and realty management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Recreation and Travel Management 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to recreation. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat 

improvements and protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive 

plant species, use of prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve 

ground disturbing activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to recreation. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Minerals management actions and associated impacts to recreation and travel would be the same as 

Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Impacts from the transfer of Lots 73 and 74 of the Fort Morgan Beach tracts to the USFWS would be the 

same as Alternative 1. Making the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach (Lots 13, 14, 24, 54, and 55), Fort 

Morgan Highway, Fowl River, Geneva, and Jordan Lake tracts available for disposal from Federal 

ownership without conditions could result in reduced access for recreation and travel opportunities. 

Following disposal, tracts could be made unavailable for public recreation and inaccessible to travel. 

ROW management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Lands and Realty 

ROW management actions and associated impacts to lands and realty would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Transferring Lots 73 and 74 of the Fort Morgan Beach tracts to the USFWS as part of the Bon Secour 

NWR would facilitate Federal management of the lots. Under Alternative 4, the Coosa River, Fort 

Morgan Beach, Fort Morgan Highway, and Fowl River tracts would be available for disposal from 

Federal ownership with no restrictive covenants. This would allow for opportunities for other Federal 

agency or non-Federal ownership without specified conditions on future use of the tracts; however, 

disposal would not be allowed if it would jeopardize Federally-listed species or designated critical habitat, 

which could limit some disposals. The Geneva and Jordan Lake tracts would be available for disposal 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-55 
Chapter 4-Alabama Impacts-Alternative 4 Draft EIS – August 2007 

from Federal ownership, which would allow for opportunities for other Federal agency or non-Federal 

ownership without specified conditions on future use of the tracts. 

Social and Economic 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Impacts to social and economic conditions would not be anticipated from vegetative communities 

management actions since no actions are proposed under this alternative. Standard management actions 

common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation manipulation to meet resource objectives, 

would not be anticipated to be of an extent that would result in impacts to economic or social conditions. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Impacts to social and economic conditions would not be anticipated from fish and wildlife habitat 

management actions since no actions are anticipated. Standard management actions common to all 

alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and protections under State wildlife conservation 

strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, 

would not be anticipated to be of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to economic or social 

conditions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Minerals management actions, including oil and gas and coal development, and associated impacts to 

social and economic conditions would be the same as Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Under Alternative 4, socioeconomic impacts would be the same as those identified under Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Under Alternative 4, Lots 73 and 74 of the Fort Morgan Beach tracts would be transferred to the USFWS 

and a number of dispersed BLM surface land tracts would be available for disposal from Federal 

ownership without conditions on management and use after disposal. This could result in reduced access 

for recreational activities on these lands and changes to the existing natural landscape. Additionally, 

private recreational or residential development could impact visual resources, habitat quality, and wildlife 

populations. Since development could be allowed on these properties, it is possible that the property tax 

revenues to the local counties would increase more than the Federal Payments in Lieu of Taxes, 

economically benefiting the counties and the State. It is possible that the private development of these 

tracts could slightly increase employment and income in these areas. Social indicators, such as housing, 

education, and cost of living are not expected to be influenced by the minimal development. 

Hazardous Materials 

Impacts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

4-56 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 

4.3 DIRECT AND INDIRECT IMPACTS FROM BLM MANAGEMENT 

ACTIONS IN MISSISSIPPI 

This section discusses the potential impacts anticipated from implementation of the management actions 

under each alternative for the Hancock County tract in Mississippi and for non-USFS FMO on about 

517,934 acres in 79 Mississippi counties. Impacts from the allowable uses and management actions 

proposed for the Hancock County Tract are analyzed if the R&PP patent held by the University of 

Mississippi were to revert to BLM. 

This section is organized by alternative, then by resource. Under each resource, each management action 

is discussed, including: vegetative communities; fish and wildlife habitat; minerals; recreation and travel 

management; and lands and realty. A discussion of cumulative impacts for each resource is contained in 

Section 4.4.2. 

4.3.1 Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Air Quality 

Under this alternative, there is a potential for wildfire which could lead to air emissions. Since all fires 

would be suppressed, these occurrences would be short term and localized and not be anticipated to 

individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would deteriorate air quality conditions. Prescribed burning 

conducted to meet vegetation resource objectives would be short term and localized and not be 

anticipated to individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions proposed 

under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and 

protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of 

prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would deteriorate air quality conditions. Prescribed burning 

conducted to meet habitat objectives would be short term and localized and not be anticipated to 

individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Combustion processes, construction activities, and vehicle travel associated with potential oil and gas 

development produce air emissions. Estimated emissions from the development of 10 wells over the next 

20 years on BLM-administered non-USFS FMO would produce considerably less emissions than the total 

planned oil and gas developments in the State (presented in Table 4-4). Those emissions would likely 

occur over a dispersed geographic area and would not cause any noticeable or measurable effect. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-57 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Potential oil and gas leasing on BLM-administered non-USFS FMO is in close proximity to the Sispsy 

Wilderness in Alabama and the Breton NWR in Louisiana. These emissions could potentially deteriorate 

wilderness air quality values and ambient air quality attainment. Since emissions would be dispersed over 

a large geographic area, air quality impacts would not be anticipated. 

Table 4-4. Maximum Potential Oil and Gas Air Emissions for BLM and Non-BLM 

Activities in Mississippi (tons per year)1, 2

Emission Type/Pollutant Well Locations 

NOx SO2 PM10 CO VOC 

BLM-Administered non-USFS 

FMO Estate in Mississippi 27.5 0.3 7.8 32.9 27.5 

Other Mineral Estate Across 

Mississippi 33,028 360 9,368 39,513 33,028 

1. Using conservative assumptions typical of liquid mineral wells on BLM land. 

2. Assumption that all wells are conventional natural gas wells (BLM 2005a). 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Short term, localized increases in dust and emissions could potentially occur from recreation activities 

and motorized travel. Given the small amount and marsh nature of the Hancock County tract, these 

activities would not be anticipated to individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Short term, localized increases in dust and emissions would occur from use of trucks and heavy 

equipment (bulldozers, etc.) in ROW development. These actions would be conducted in accordance with 

the Mississippi SIP and local dust control regulations and, given the small amount and marsh nature of 

the Hancock County tract, would not be anticipated to individually deteriorate air quality conditions or 

violate air quality standards or regulations. 

Soil Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in disturbance or loss of soils. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed under this alternative; therefore, 

there would be no impacts to soil resources. Under standard management common to all alternatives, 

providing habitat improvements and protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including 

control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be 

anticipated to involve ground disturbing activities of a severity or extent that would result in disturbance 

or loss of soils. 

4-58 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Mineral exploration, development, and operations on non-USFS FMO would include ground-disturbing 

and potential contaminant-introducing activities that could impact soils. Oil and gas development 

operations—specifically, construction of drilling pads, reserve pits, and access roads—would disturb 

topsoils and alter surface soil characteristics, which could result in both a slight decline in soil 

productivity and an increase in surface runoff. Increases in erosion and loss of soils due to oil and gas 

development are a factor of well pad design, slope, erodibility of the soils, proximity of the disturbance, 

and the intervening vegetation. The potential for erosion increases with prolonged or heavy rains that are 

typical in this area. Cut and fill slopes are particularly vulnerable before protective plant covers have been 

established. 

Except for 63,004 acres closed to leasing by other surface managing agencies, non-USFS FMO would be 

open to leasing subject to standard lease terms and conditions (454,930 acres). The estimated 10 wells to 

be developed on non-USFS FMO in Alabama over the next 20-years would disturb approximately 55 

acres. Both Federal and State laws would require the reclamation of mined lands concurrently with 

mining operations; therefore, the required reclamation and the minimal surface that might be disturbed 

would result in only localized effects on soils. Operation of the oil and gas wells could also affect the 

surrounding soils by potential contamination from accidental spills or improper management of hazardous 

materials or waste. Federal, State, and local regulations would require site characterization and corrective 

action that would restore soil integrity and productivity. 

In few locations there are prime or unique farmlands on non-Forest Service FMO. Though not likely, it is 

possible that some of the 105 acres of soil disturbance could be on prime or unique farmland. In the event 

development is proposed in such an area, BLM would implement appropriate mitigation measures to 

avoid or minimize impacts as described in section 2.3.3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Allowing recreation activities, including motorized vehicle use on the Hancock County tract, could result 

in short term and site-specific increases in erosion; however, given the limited interest in recreation and 

travel on the tract, any potential effects would be minor and localized. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

If new ROW construction were to occur, soils could be impacted by vegetation clearing activities and 

ground disturbance. Wind and water erosion, and subsequent loss in soil productivity would occur in 

disturbed areas where revegetation does not occur. These effects would be localized and short term in 

areas where revegetation is enhanced or permitted. The effect would be long term if roads or structures 

were constructed on the tracts, but would be localized. 

Water Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to water quality. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-59 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions proposed 

under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and 

protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of 

prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to water quality. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Except for 63,004 acres closed to leasing by other surface managing agencies, non-USFS FMO would be 

open to leasing subject to standard lease terms and conditions (454,930 acres). The estimated 

development of 10 wells on non-USFS FMO in Mississippi over the next 20-years would disturb 

approximately 55 acres. Increases in sedimentation to streams and wetlands by oil and gas development 

are a factor of well pad design, slope, erodibility of the soils, proximity of the disturbance, and the 

vegetation composition. The potential for sedimentation increases with prolonged or heavy rains that are 

typical in this area. Sediments deposited in intermittent drainages during construction can be transported 

downstream during periods of high water, increasing turbidity in higher order streams and potentially 

affecting water quality substantial distances from the construction site. Both Federal and State laws would 

require the reclamation of mined lands concurrently with mining operations; therefore, the required 

reclamation and the minimal surface that might be disturbed would result in only localized effects on 

water resources. 

Mineral exploration, development, and operations would include ground-disturbing activities that increase 

surface run-off, which increases nutrient levels and turbidity and decreases water quality. These activities 

could also introduce hazardous waste or result in accidental spills that could also deteriorate surface water 

quality. Leakage of drill fluids, hazardous waste spills, or leakage from reserve pits could be introduced 

into the ground water as well. Although Federal, State and local regulations would require site 

characterization and corrective action for hazardous waste and spills, impacts to the water quality could 

be localized but long term, especially affecting nonflowing waterbodies (e.g., small ponds or wetlands) 

and ground water resources. Additionally, access roads and well pads could alter the local hydrology 

reducing surface flow to mesic areas and diverting or degrading surface water. Installation of culverts and 

diverting existing drainages around well pads help to maintain existing hydrologic systems, but the 

disturbance causes local sedimentation and could retard sheet flow. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Managing the surface tracts as open to recreation and motorized vehicle use could result in short term and 

site-specific increases in erosion and surface run-off, which increases nutrient levels and turbidity and 

decreases water quality; however, given the limited interest in recreation and travel on the Hancock 

County tract, any potential effects would be minor and localized. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

If new ROW construction were to occur on the Hancock County tract, vegetation-clearing activities and 

construction ground disturbance could increase soil erosion and surface run-off, which increase nutrient 

levels and turbidity and decreases water quality. Impacts would be short term in areas where revegetation 

was enhanced or permitted. The effect would be long term but localized if roads or structures were 

constructed on the tracts. The hydric soils associated with the wetlands that encompass most of the tract 

could be affected by development or construction activities that would dredge or fill the wetlands, 

compacting soils and hindering natural flow through the wetlands and potentially resulting in the loss of 

these emergent wetlands. 

4-60 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 

Vegetative Communities 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, allowing vegetation manipulation to meet resources objectives 

would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed could result in increased 

potential for invasive/exotic species becoming established or spreading. This is particularly true of the 

higher elevations of the Hancock County tract located on Point Clear Island. Cogon grass and Chinese 

tallow are both known to occur in the area and if uncontrolled could substantially alter these maritime 

habitats by displacing native species and increasing the susceptibility to wildfire. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, providing habitat improvements and protections under State 

wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and 

wetland enhancements, would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed 

could result in the same impacts discussed under impacts from vegetative communities management 

actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Oil and gas development is expected to disturb 55 acres of vegetation under this alternative. The effect 

this disturbance would have on vegetation would be dependent on the location and design of well pads, 

roads and production facilities. In recent years, most wells on non-USFS FMO have been located in the 

Maxie Field in Forrest County. Typically, the vegetation most likely to be affected in this area is pine 

plantations or commercial pine forests, often loblolly pine. Understory species vary depending on how the 

stand has been managed. Once young pine plantations shade out “old field growth” at about 10 to 15 

years of age, the midstory and ground cover are generally very limited. After thinning, shrubs and young 

hardwoods become established. Use of prescribed fire in these stands favors an increase in grasses and 

native forbs. 

During a routine well pad installation, saleable timber would be removed from the site, if the stand is 

commercially viable, but is otherwise cut and left onsite. Vegetation debris piles are stored along the 

edges of the construction site and may be buried onsite, burned, or left in place after drilling operations 

are completed. Vegetation debris is not permitted in the reserve pit, as it can disrupt any future monitoring 

of the pit contents. 

During interim reclamation, the reserve pit area is graded and the surface fertilized, seeded, and mulched. 

Although the operators are encouraged to use native seed, the final mix and tree planting is approved by 

the private landowner or surface managing agency. BLM, by policy, excludes invasive species, although 

non-native grasses, particularly annual rye (during the winter months) and Bahia or Bermuda grass 

(during the summer months) are often used to provide a quick cover for disturbed soils. These sites 

typically progress through “old field” stage as opportunistic pioneer plant species become established. 

Within a few years young sapling pine and hardwoods become established. Faster growing pines 

generally dominate the site for several decades. Outside of the pine belt, pines would gradually overtaken 

by longer lived hardwoods. In areas where mature hardwood forests are removed, it may take 100 years 

or more to reestablish hardwood forests with similar structure and even longer before species diversity 

returns to near pre-disturbance levels. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-61 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Surface disturbing activities have the potential to introduce or promote the spread of invasive, exotic plant 

species. Impacts are dependent on the species planted during restoration activities and the management of 

the site during and following restoration. Cogon grass is a particular concern because it is very difficult to 

control and because of its ability to degrade native plant communities and commercial forests. Cogon 

grass displaces native species and can crowd out pine seedlings and increase susceptibility to wildfire. 

Including native species in the mix increases diversity and provides a more natural structure. If these 

areas are mowed following abandonment, these non-native grasses are expected to persist and dominate 

the site. If, however, the sites are replanted in pine or left unmowed, the areas would progress through old 

field type growth which is dominated by opportunistic native and non-native species alike. Ultimately, 

both Bahia and Bermuda grass are expected to become shaded out as a tree or heavy shrub layer becomes 

established. Japanese honeysuckle and Chinese privet can both persist in shaded situations. 

Throughout the State, some plant communities, embedded in the larger forested landscape, are 

particularly sensitive to disruption and are difficult to restore after surface disturbing activities. Many of 

these are restricted to a narrow range of soil types, such as glades and prairies; others are sensitive to 

changes in hydrography, such as bogs, forested wetlands, and seepage slope communities. Construction 

activities in or near these plant communities can alter the site sufficiently to preclude the reestablishment 

of these communities in the foreseeable future. Also, because of the limited acreage of these vegetation 

communities, loss of even the small acreages from BLM permitted oil and gas activities has a 

disproportionate effect on the plant diversity in an area. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

The Hancock County tract would be open to recreation. Although the Hancock County tract is accessible 

only by boat, the site would remain open for vehicle use. In the unlikely event that four-wheelers were 

transported to Point Clear Island, substantial damage could be done on this sensitive barrier island in a 

very short time. Repetitive use on these sandy soils would damage herbaceous growth and young shrubs 

and could introduce or promote the spread of exotic plants, particularly Chinese tallow and Cogon grass. 

Repetitive use on Point Clear would substantially degrade the maritime forest, a critically imperiled plant 

community in Mississippi. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

The Hancock County tract would remain open to ROW applications. Any ROW development could 

damage sensitive maritime forests and scrubs through ground disturbance, vegetation removal, and 

introduction of invasive species. 

Fish and Wildlife 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, allowing vegetation manipulation to meet resources objectives 

would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed could degrade habitats for 

migratory birds and other wildlife on Point Clear Island by displacing native vegetation and increasing 

susceptibility to wildfire. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, providing habitat improvements and protections under State 

wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and 

4-62 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 

wetland enhancements, would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed 

could result in the same impacts discussed under impacts from vegetative communities management 

actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Oil and gas development on non-USFS FMO is expected to result in the loss of 55 acres of habitat. The 

effect on general wildlife resources are dependent on the well pad location, design, and need for 

additional access roads. Impacts would include the direct loss of habitat from the construction of drilling 

pads, production facilities, pipelines and roads, and from degradation of nearby aquatic or wetland 

habitats through sedimentation or changes in hydrology. These impacts could occur in anywhere on nonUSFS FMO in the State, but have in the past occurred primarily in Forrest County. Impacts to many 

wildlife species from oil and gas development are localized and temporary. Most common game species 

and other mobile wildlife species avoid the well pad areas during construction. Less mobile species are 

directly impacted, and during the spring and early summer this can include nesting neotropical birds. 

Habitat generalists, including most game species, tend to return to surrounding habitats after the well is 

completed and construction activities have ceased. However, construction in high value habitats or in 

areas with more narrowly adapted wildlife species can alter the overall species diversity. Wells and roads 

in areas of contiguous forests increase habitat fragmentation, reducing the suitability of the area for 

interior nesting birds and making nests more susceptible to predation and parasitism. Older growth 

forests, which provide habitat for interior forest nesting birds and a wider diversity of amphibians and 

reptiles are often located in riparian/ wetland zones. These areas have been set aside as buffers during 

logging operations or in steeper, less accessible slopes. 

Oil and gas drilling continues for 24 hours a day until the well is completed, during this time most 

wildlife including waterfowl and many song-birds are expected to avoid the immediate area. However, 

once drilling is completed reserve pits with water can become a hazard for waterfowl and other birds, 

which can become soiled by drilling fluids. If the well is put into production, there is documentation of 

birds and bats may use open vent stacks for roosting or perching. Once in these stacks animals can 

become trapped or asphyxiated. While much of the work documenting this problem has occurred in 

western States, the situation in Mississippi is expected to be similar. 

Access roads and well pads can alter the local hydrography reducing surface flow to mesic areas and 

diverting or degrading surface water supporting wetland habitats. Installation of culverts and diverting 

existing drainages around well pads help to maintain existing hydrologic systems, but the disturbance 

causes local sedimentation and can retard sheet flow to wetland habitats. Amphibians and many reptiles 

associated with wetland communities are vulnerable to disturbance, as they are not highly mobile and 

tend to have narrow habitat requirements. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Point Clear and the surrounding marshes provide secluded areas for nesting shore-birds, wading-birds and 

song-birds. Although unlikely, the use of any vehicles, such as four-wheelers, during the spring and 

summer months is expected to increase nest/chick abandonment and could result in the loss of ground 

nesting bird nests. During the rest of the year, vehicle use is likely to flush foraging and loafing wading 

and shore-birds and could reduce their use of this critically imperiled plant community. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

The Hancock County tract would remain open to ROW applications. Any ROW development could 

damage sensitive maritime forests and scrubs through ground disturbance, vegetation removal, and 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-63 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

introduction of invasive species, which a variety of wildlife species are dependant on. Depending on the 

time of year, development activities could cause nesting shore-birds to abandon nests and could change 

use patterns of foraging shore-birds. 

Special Status Species 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, allowing vegetation manipulation to meet resources objectives 

would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed could result in increased 

potential for invasive/exotic species becoming established or spreading. This is particularly true of the 

higher elevations of the Hancock County tract located on Point Clear Island. Cogon grass and Chinese 

tallow are both known to occur in the area and if uncontrolled could substantially alter the habitats 

supporting Mississippi diamondback terrapin and tiny-leaved buckthorn. Dense stands of cogon grass 

would displace native vegetation and could make the island and adjacent marshes more vulnerable to 

frequent wildfires. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, providing habitat improvements and protections under State 

wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and 

wetland enhancements, would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed 

could result in the same impacts discussed under impacts from vegetative communities management 

actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Oil and gas development on non-USFS FMO in Mississippi is expected to result in the direct loss of 55 

acres. Based on previous oil and gas activity, the Federally-listed species most likely to be affected are 

gopher tortoise, red-cockaded woodpecker, and black pine snake in the East Gulf Coastal Plain, and bald 

eagles associated with reservoirs and rivers in the northern portion of the State. Drilling could occur 

outside of these areas and there is some potential to affect small acreages supporting special status species 

anywhere in the State, outside of three northwestern counties do not contain non-USFS FMO – Coahoma, 

DeSoto, and Sunflower. There is potential Statewide to affect Federal and State-listed aquatic species. 

Gopher tortoise could be impacted by oil and gas activity in upland areas of the East Gulf Coastal Plain 

where forest practices on private lands have maintained at least a marginally suitable habitat. Foraging 

habitat for tortoise could also be affected on non-USFS FMO associated with private in holdings in the 

Chickasawhay, DeSoto and Homochitto National Forests, which support substantial tortoise populations. 

During construction of wells pads, access roads, and production facilities, gopher tortoises could be 

impacted by the loss or damage to burrows, destruction of foraging habitat, or killed during construction 

or by service vehicles. Construction activities and roads within 600-feet of burrows could isolate 

individuals and reduce reproductive potential within a population. In many cases, the presence of gopher 

tortoises indicates that habitat is suitable for a host of species associated with dry longleaf pine forests, 

many of them special status species, such as the black pine snake (Pituophis melanoleucus lodingi), 

which could also be impacted by oil and gas activities. 

Red-cockaded woodpecker could be affected by oil and gas development through the loss of nesting 

habitat within existing clusters and through the loss of current or potential foraging habitat within 0.5 

4-64 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 

miles of existing clusters. Non-USFS FMO in areas supporting red-cockaded woodpecker is generally 

privately owned and often managed for commercial timber production. Harvest rotations on these 

properties are typically too short to sustain suitable nesting habitat for red-cockaded woodpeckers; 

however, there is potential to impact suitable foraging habitat, particularly on non-USFS FMO near the 

Chickasawhay, DeSoto, and Homochitto National Forests or Noxubee NWR, areas that support most of 

the State’s population. This stipulation would be applied to the estimated 11,710 acres of non-USFS FMO 

within 0.5 miles of known red-cockaded woodpecker clusters. 

Throughout the State, breeding and wintering bald eagles could be affected by drilling near large rivers or 

reservoirs. Bald eagles are particularly sensitive during courting, nesting, and fledging young; in Alabama 

this typically occurs between December 1 and August 1. Construction activities within 1.5 miles of nest 

sites could result in nest abandonment depending on factors such as visibility and tolerance of individual 

pairs. 

Throughout the State, oil and gas development has the potential to impact aquatic and wetland habitats. 

This could result in degradation of water quality through contamination and increased sedimentation, 

direct loss of habitat, and changes in the local hydrography supporting these systems. Increases in 

sedimentation to streams and wetlands by oil and gas development are a factor of well pad design, slope, 

erodibility of the soils, proximity of the disturbance, and the intervening vegetation. The potential for 

sedimentation increases with prolonged or heavy rains that are typical in this area. Cut and fill slopes are 

particularly vulnerable before protective plant covers have been established. While intact vegetation along 

riparian/wetland zones and around wetlands can substantially buffer these areas, the steepness of the 

intervening slopes, particularly over 25 percent can reduce the effectiveness of buffers. Research has 

shown that a minimum of a 30-foot buffer of vegetation is needed to control sediments; however, 

construction activities within 100-feet can reduce stream invertebrates, and 1,000-feet or more may be 

needed to protect some amphibians, reptiles and forest interior birds (Wenger 1999). Sediments deposited 

in intermittent drainages during construction can be transported downstream during periods of high water, 

increasing turbidity and burying aquatic invertebrates in higher order streams and potentially affecting 

special status species substantial distances from the construction site, including Louisiana quillwort 

(Isoetes louisianensis), listed as Federally endangered. 

Filling wetlands, including bogs, seepage slopes, wet flatwoods, and forested swamps, generally alters the 

site sufficiently to preclude the reestablishment of these communities in the foreseeable future, and could 

result in direct habitat loss for a wide variety of special status species. Because of the limited acreage of 

these vegetation communities, loss of even the small acreages associated with BLM permitted oil and gas 

activities has a high potential of destroying or degrading habitat for special status species. Many of these 

species have limited ranges, so the list of species potentially affected varies by location. For example, the 

Mississippi Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy (CWCS) notes 14 special status species are 

associated with pines seeps and pitcher plant bogs, including eight special status crayfish, five of which 

are endemic. Henslow’s sparrow wintering habitat and breeding habitat for Bachman’s sparrow could be 

lost by construction in or near grassy bogs or wet flatwoods. Construction activities, and particularly 

linear disturbances related to new roads and pipelines, can disrupt the local hydrography supporting 

seepage slopes or sheet flow to bogs and swamps degrading these habitats. 

There are estimated to be 65 caves in Mississippi located in the northeast corner and east central portions 

of the State. Caves by their nature are isolated and support highly endemic faunas often with extremely 

narrow habitat requirements. In Mississippi, this includes two State-listed salamanders and a number of 

bat species. Although the potential to affect these areas is low, caves are particularly sensitive to oil and 

gas development. Even minor alterations in temperature, humidity, and water quality or water quantity 

can result in irreversible impacts. Drilling through cave/karst resources can result in contaminants, such as 

drilling fluids and cements, draining into the cave/karst system. Karst habitats can be degraded by 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-65 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

hydrocarbons from spills or leaks from well casings, storage tanks, reserve pits, pipelines, and production 

facilities that may enter into the cave/karst systems. Additionally, cementing operations could affect 

portions of underground drainage systems by restricting groundwater flow and introducing pollutants into 

karst systems. 

Drilling in coastal areas would affect the 18 special status species that are associated with coastal marshes 

and maritime scrub and woodlands, including brown pelican, Wilson’s plover, Mississippi diamondback 

terrapin and saltmarsh topminnow. At least one special status plant species, tiny-leaved buckthorn 

(Sageretia minutiflora), occurs on coastal shell mounds in this area, but the potential for oil and gas wells 

being located on non-USFS FMO in these areas is low. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Because this tract is not accessible by road, few impacts are anticipated by designating the tract open to 

recreation and vehicles; however, use of four-wheelers on remote upland areas, such as Point Clear 

Island, could damage sensitive maritime forests and scrubs. Depending on the time of year, any vehicle 

use could cause nesting shore-birds to abandon nests and could change use patterns of foraging shorebirds, like piping plover, snowy plover, and American oystercatcher. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

The Hancock County tract would remain open to ROW applications. Any ROW development could 

damage sensitive maritime forests and scrubs through ground disturbance, vegetation removal, and 

introduction of invasive species. Depending on the time of year, development activities could cause 

nesting shore-birds to abandon nests and could change use patterns of foraging shore-birds, like piping 

plover, snowy plover, and American oystercatcher or damage their habitats. 

Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 

Suppressing all wildland fires, unless an in-place site-specific plan determines otherwise, would minimize 

immediate threats and damage to life, public safety, and developments in the WUI and to natural resource 

values. Allowing prescribed burning on a case-by-case basis would allow for a reduction in hazardous 

fuel conditions, improving ability to suppress wildfires while maintaining disturbance levels to which 

vegetation communities have adapted. Fire response and fuel treatments would apply to the 174 acres of 

BLM-administered surface land. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Although no specific vegetative communities actions are proposed, allowing vegetation manipulation to 

meet resources objectives under standard management common to all alternatives would generally serve 

to decrease vegetation density and cover (fuel load) and maintain natural fuel conditions across the 

Hancock County tract. This would maintain natural disturbance regimes which would be easier to manage 

through prescribed fire or other treatments. This would also decrease the frequency and intensity of 

wildland fires and allow fires to be more easily controlled, better protecting life, public safety, and 

property and resource values. However, lack of specific areas and species being managed could result in 

invasions and fuel accumulations that would increase the frequency and intensity of wildland fires. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat 

improvements and protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive 

4-66 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 

plant species, use of prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would result in impacts similar to those 

discussed under impacts from vegetative communities management actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Minerals development activities would introduce additional ignition sources throughout the non-USFS 

FMO, increasing the potential of wildland fire occurrence. Disturbance of 55 acres associated with 

development of 10 wells on non-USFS FMO could provide increased accessibility for fire suppression 

equipment, and provide fuel breaks in the case of wildland fire events. In addition, the infrastructure 

associated with the 10 new wells would require protection in wildland fire events. Impacts from mineral 

development activities would not occur on the 63,004 acres closed to oil and gas development. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Continuing to manage the Hancock County tract as open to recreation use would allow for dispersed 

recreation use, which could introduce additional ignition sources and increase the probability of wildland 

fire occurrence. This would be more prevalent in areas of the tract that are more easily accessible. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Managing the Hancock County surface tract as open for ROW applications could result in the 

development of ROWs. Development of above-ground ROWs on the Hancock County tract would require 

additional efforts by firefighters to protect these areas in wildland fire events. Development of ROWs 

would also result in clearing vegetation to make way for linear features. ROWs could provide fuel breaks, 

which could help prevent the spread of wildland fires. ROWs could also provide firefighters with 

increased accessibility for fire suppression equipment. While more ROWs could increase suppression 

costs, the aspects of ROW development related to vegetation clearing and the potential for increased 

accessibility could reduce suppression costs. 

Cultural Resources 

Management of cultural resources provides protection from the potentially damaging effects of surface 

disturbing activities through implementation of existing laws and policy, such as Section 106 of the 

NHPA and FLPMA. Federal undertakings typically require cultural resource inventories that would result 

in the identification of cultural resource sites and determination of eligibility to the NRHP. The cultural 

resources data acquired through inventories and evaluations would increase knowledge of cultural 

resources on BLM-administered lands and minerals in the State. Following site-specific inventories, 

mitigation measures would be prescribed as necessary for eligible properties. Any cultural sites 

discovered may be considered for further evaluation to assess its eligibility for listing on the NRHP. 

Through this process, significant impacts on cultural sites eligible for the NRHP would be avoided or 

mitigated. Avoidance is BLM’s preferred measure to eliminate potential adverse effects. Avoidance 

preserves the cultural resource in place. If this is not possible under reasonable circumstances, 

scientifically valid excavation and data recovery is an alternative mitigation method. Scientifically valid 

excavation would be used as a final measure, and the extent of excavation would be determined through 

BLM consultation with the SHPO and Tribes. 

Data recovery preserves as much of the cultural record as possible through archaeological methods. Any 

mitigation effort requiring archaeological data recovery is subject to the terms outlined in a Data 

Recovery Plan and documented through a signed MOU with the SHPO, tribes, and other consulting 

parties. While data recovery preserves as much data as possible, the excavated portions of the property 

would be lost or damaged. Removing cultural resources from a site using current scientific methods also 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-67 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

reduces future scientific value if more accurate methods of analysis are developed. Mitigation through 

data recovery also reduces or eliminates other uses of cultural resources sites, such as traditional, public, 

conservation, or experimental use. The standard inventory and avoidance procedures conducted in 

conjunction with surface-disturbing actions would protect most cultural resources from significant 

impacts. 

Despite the best efforts to identify all cultural resources, there remains a potential for inadvertent impacts 

to previously undiscovered sites, especially buried sites with no surface indications. There is a set process 

through Section 106 for identifying, evaluating, and treating the effects of inadvertent discoveries, 

reducing potential impacts from these discoveries. 

Wildfire, wildfire suppression efforts, and prescribed fire could impact cultural resource sites within the 

Hancock County tract, including the eligibility characteristics of sites that are listed or eligible for listing 

on the NRHP. Impacts from wildland fire vary, depending on the temperature and duration of exposure to 

heat. Generally, higher temperatures and/or longer duration of exposure to heat increases the potential for 

damage to cultural resources. The nature of wetland vegetation in this tract would result in low intensity 

wildland fires. Prehistoric and historic resources potentially affected by wildfire may be inorganic (e.g., 

lithic/rock, ceramics, cans, glass) or organic (e.g., textiles, leathern works, wooden structures). Generally 

speaking, organic materials are more at risk as they tend to burn or alter at lower temperatures than 

inorganic items. Wildfire impacts on inorganic cultural resources include fracturing, shattering, and 

changes in color and internal luster, which might reduce an artifact’s ability to render information about 

the past. As a general rule, fire would not affect buried cultural materials. Studies show that even a few 

centimeters of soil cover (four inches) is sufficient to protect cultural materials (Oster n.d.). Wildfires that 

burn hot and fast through a site may have less of an effect on certain types of cultural materials than fires 

that smolder in the duff or burn for a long time period, allowing heat from the fire to penetrate the surface. 

In addition, heat from wildland fires could change the physical nature of the ground, making it harder to 

identify cultural resources. 

Often, cultural resources are more at risk of impact due to fire suppression activities than from wildland 

fire. Potential impacts from the use of retardants would include rapid cooling and subsequent damage 

(e.g., breakage, spalling, corrosion, staining, rusting) to archaeological materials. Discoloration or 

warping of metallic surfaces could also occur. Consultation with a cultural resource specialist during 

suppression activities in areas containing sensitive cultural resources would help to minimize impacts. 

Prescribed fire typically burns at a lower temperature and duration than wildfire events, so potential 

impacts would be less severe than unmanaged wildland fire. Prescribed fire events are managed to obtain 

a smaller, more manageable, and less intense planned burn. The potential impacts from prescribed fires 

would typically have less long term impacts than those from an unmanaged wildland fire event. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would require cultural resource clearances before any 

activities were to occur; therefore, impacts would not be anticipated. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat 

improvements and protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive 

4-68 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 

plant species, use of prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would require cultural resources 

clearances before any activities were to occur; therefore, impacts would not be anticipated. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Cultural resources on 454,930 acres of non-USFS FMO in Mississippi as open to leasing subject to 

standard lease terms and conditions could be impacted by oil and gas development. Based on the RFD, oil 

and gas developments within these areas would impact 55 acres through the development of 10 wells over 

20 years. Development on these acres would typically be subject to Class III cultural resource inventories 

and evaluation on a project-by-project basis prior to allowing disturbance, resulting in the identification 

and potential excavation of cultural sites. Cultural sites on 63,004 acres closed to leasing would be 

protected from oil and gas development. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation activities on the Hancock County tract, including motorized vehicle use, could result in 

inadvertent damage and vandalism to previously undetected cultural sites. Although the tract would not 

be used extensively for recreation, the tract is located in wetlands with a high potential for cultural 

resources to occur, which could increase the potential for inadvertent damage and vandalism. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Ground-disturbing activities associated with ROW construction and maintenance could inadvertently 

damage cultural resources. Because the Hancock County tract has not been previously surveyed, 

approved activities would be subject to a ground survey and consultation requirements with SHPO under 

NHPA Section 106 regulations before construction. Therefore, impacts to cultural resources would be 

anticipated to be minimal. 

Visual Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to visual quality. Although visual quality 

would deteriorate in the short term, visual quality would improve in the long term once vegetation has 

reestablished to meet VRM class objectives. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions proposed 

under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and 

protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of 

prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to visual quality. Although visual quality 

would deteriorate in the short term, visual quality would improve in the long term once vegetation has 

reestablished to meet VRM class objectives. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-69 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Mineral exploration and development on non-USFS FMO tracts (517,934 acres) would result in impacts 

to visual resources on 55 acres from 10 wells. Removal of vegetation and construction of wells and well 

pads and introduction of other equipment would decrease visual quality. BLM doesn’t manage the surface 

for non-USFS FMO tracts; however, BLM can place COAs or best practices to minimize impacts to 

visual resources as needed. Impacts from these activities would not be anticipated on 63,004 non-USFS 

FMO acres closed to leasing. Since no mineral development activities would occur on the surface tracts, 

there would be no violations of VRM class objectives. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Allowing recreation activities, including motorized vehicle use, on the Hancock County tract could result 

in decreased visual quality over time from changes to existing natural or manmade landforms and scenic 

vistas through vegetation and soil loss, particularly on tracts that are in undeveloped areas. Since the 

surface tracts would not be used extensively for recreation, these impacts are anticipated to be minimal. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

If a new ROW were authorized on the currently undeveloped Hancock County tract, visual quality would 

be diminished if the ROW were to dominate the view of the casual observer. 

Minerals 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Under this alternative, 454,930 acres of non-USFS FMO would be open to leasing, subject to standard 

lease terms and conditions; 63,004 acres of non-USFS FMO would be closed to leasing. No impacts to oil 

and gas minerals exploration and development would be anticipated from management of non-USFS 

FMO tracts. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Lands and realty management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. BLM would only dispose of non-USFS FMO with no 

suspected value and, therefore, there would be no loss of opportunity. 

4-70 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 

Recreation and Travel Management 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to recreation. Recreationists could be 

displaced from vegetation treatment areas until revegetation occurs; however, the vegetation treatments 

would benefit recreationists by improving the long-term aesthetics of an area. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat 

improvements and protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive 

plant species, use of prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve 

ground disturbing activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to recreation. 

Recreationists could be displaced from protected areas or treated areas until revegetation occurs; however, 

the habitat improvements and protections would benefit recreationists by improving the long term 

aesthetics and wildlife viewing of an area. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Oil and gas development on non-USFS FMO tracts with surface management by other Federal agencies 

that are open to the public for recreation, as identified in Table 3-17, could be impacted by the leasing of 

Federal minerals by BLM or in areas where the public were excluded. Those areas and installations not 

open to recreation or leasing, which include NPS and USFWS lands, would not be affected. Since 

approximately 55 acres of vegetation removal and construction activities would result from the 

development of 10 oil and gas wells on non-USFS FMO there could be a decrease in nature-based 

recreational opportunities due to conflicts with the developments. Mineral leasing in recreational areas 

could result in the removal of vegetation; construction of access roads, well pads, and other infrastructure; 

drilling equipment; and associated noise and dust emissions. Impacts from these activities would include 

decreased quality of the recreational experience of the non-USFS FMO tracts; however, stipulations 

applied under this alternative by other surface managing agencies could indirectly protect the recreational 

resources in areas where development would be precluded (63,004 acres). Oil and gas development could 

provide additional opportunities for travel due to the construction of access roads. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Allowing recreation activities including motorized vehicle use on the Hancock County tract would 

maintain existing recreation and travel opportunities; however, allowing motorized travel could result in 

conflicts between motorized recreationists and recreationists seeking a more natural setting or experience. 

Since the tract is not currently used extensively for recreation or travel, these impacts are anticipated to be 

minimal. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

If a new road or utility ROW were authorized on currently undeveloped Hancock County tract, the largely 

natural recreational experiences available would be diminished as a result of construction activity, ground 

disturbance, and introduction of new infrastructure; however, these actions could provide additional 

opportunities for travel due to the construction of access roads. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-71 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Lands and Realty 

Lands and realty is a resource use rather than an environmental component and impacts on lands and 

realty are a direct result of their management. Therefore, the following discussion is limited to impacts 

from lands and realty management actions for the 174 acres of BLM-administered surface ownership in 

Hancock County, Mississippi. Impacts from disposal of FMO is discussed under impacts to Minerals 

from Lands and Realty actions. 

Under Alternative 1, the 174-acre Hancock County tract would remain open to ROW applications; 

therefore, no impacts would be anticipated to lands and realty actions. Retaining the Hancock County 

tract under BLM administration would not allow for opportunities for other Federal agency or nonFederal ownership. 

Social and Economic 

Definitions and descriptions of potential Environmental Justice populations, including low income and 

ethnicity statistics, were provided in Section 3.4.13. Since the locations of specific BLM oil and gas 

activities could not be specifically identified, the Environmental Justice analysis identified low-income 

populations and high minority populations in counties across the State. Environmental Justice population 

locations should be further considered at the implementation level to minimize the potential for 

disproportionate impacts to Environmental Justice populations and to identify any possible mitigation 

measures that may be required to reduce impacts (for example, dust, noise, traffic, ground water quality) 

to these populations. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Impacts to social and economic conditions would not be anticipated from vegetative communities 

management actions under this alternative. The proposed standard management actions common to all 

alternatives, allowing vegetation manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to 

be of an extent that would result in impacts to economic or social conditions. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Impacts to social and economic conditions would not be anticipated from fish and wildlife habitat 

management actions since no actions are anticipated. The proposed standard management actions 

common to all alternatives would provide habitat improvements and protections under State wildlife 

conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and wetland 

enhancements, which would not be anticipated to be of an extent that would result in impacts to economic 

or social conditions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Since only 10 fluid mineral wells (with standard lease terms and conditions) would likely be drilled over 

the next 20-years, there would be minimal economic impacts from these activities. This type of BLM 

mineral development is consistent with the development that occurred in the past, including seven 

applications for permits to drill between 1983 and 2004. Therefore, there would be minimal, yet slight 

increases in employment or income. For example, over the past 20 years, there have been 7,632 wells 

drilled and completed (382 wells drilled per year), with a five year annual employment average of 3,089 

employees in the support sector for mining and oil and gas. If we assume that most of this support goes to 

the drilling and development of the oil and gas wells, there are approximately 8 employees (3089/382) 

supported annually per well drilled on the BLM-administered minerals. Therefore, over the next 20 years, 

4-72 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 1 

an additional 10 BLM-administered wells will contribute to the employment of 80 people in these support 

industries. Social impacts, such as housing, education, and cost of living, would not be anticipated to 

change as a result of this activity. 

Oil and gas development and production can have implications for visual and scenic qualities as well as 

property values. Although the BLM does not own much of the surface land in Alabama on which wells 

will be drilled, the permitting of these split estate lands could impact a number of socioeconomic factors. 

The recreation literature indicates that visitors are likely to pay to view less development or development 

infrastructure in their recreation experience (Brookshire et al, 1979; Boyle and Bishop, 1984). Since the 

FMO-administered wells are mostly located on private or State lands, there could be visual impacts but 

they would likely be borne by residents, not visitors. Additionally, decreases in property values have been 

associated with the drilling phase (more dramatic) as well as the existence of operating wells (BBC 

Research and Consulting, 2001; 2006). Because these socioeconomic impacts are associated with mineral 

development, these impacts are likely greatest under Alternative 1, where standard lease conditions apply 

as compared to Alternatives 1, 2 and 3, where there are more conditions and constraints on well-pad 

locations. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

The BLM surface tract is open to dispersed recreational use, including hunting, fishing, hiking, and nature 

study, and no construction of recreational facilities is expected. Recreation and travel management actions 

provide for quality of life benefits (i.e., recreation, solitude, open space, scenic values) to local residents 

and visitors, which are often difficult to quantify. These types of limited recreation and travel 

management actions do not provide significant economic benefits in terms of employment and income 

and will not affect social assets, such as housing, education, and crime rates, in the area. Under 

Alternative 1, these types of socioeconomic impacts are assumed to continue. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Under Alternative 1, the Hancock County tract would remain in Federal ownership. Lands and realty 

management actions would not cause changes in the economic characteristics (employment, income, and 

industries) as there are very little changes anticipated under this alternative. Quality of social assets 

(demographics, housing, cost of living, education) in Hancock County are not likely to be affected by 

retaining these lands in Federal ownership. 

Hazardous Materials 

BLM-authorized activities on surface tracts and non-USFS FMO could include the use of hazardous 

materials, substances, and waste (including storage, transportation, and spills). Such activities include oil 

and gas development, coal development, and application of pesticides to improve vegetative communities 

and wildlife habitat. These activities are conducted in compliance with 29 CFR 1910, 49 CFR 100-185, 

40 CFR 100-400, CERCLA, RCRA, SARA, TSCA, and CWA and other Federal and State regulations 

and policies regarding hazardous materials management. Therefore, if a release were to occur, it would be 

immediately addressed and remediated in accordance with regulation. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-73 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 2 Draft EIS – August 2007 

4.3.2 Alternative 2 

Air Quality 

Under this alternative, there is a potential for wildfire which could lead to air emissions; however, since 

all fires would be suppressed, these occurrences would be short term and localized and not be anticipated 

to individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Undertaking actions to remove invasive plant species on the Hancock County tract and associated use of 

trucks and heavy equipment would cause short term, localized increases in dust and emissions. Given the 

small amount and remote nature of surface ownership, these activities would not be anticipated to 

individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Conducting prescribed burns to improve habitat on the Hancock County tract would cause short term, 

localized increases in dust and emissions. Given the small amount and remote nature of the tract, these 

activities would not be anticipated to individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Anticipated levels of oil and gas development and associated air emissions would be the same as 

Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although the tract would be limited to motorized boating, impacts would be the same as Alternative 1 

since this tract is not anticipated to be used extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Hancock County tract (a total of 174 acres or 100 percent of BLM surface ownership in 

Mississippi) would be managed as a ROW avoidance area, there would be less potential for emissions 

associated with the use of trucks and heavy equipment (bulldozers, etc.) for ROW development compared 

to Alternative 1. 

Soil Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Undertaking actions to remove invasive plant species on the Hancock County tract could increase sitespecific erosion in the short term. Over the long term, improving vegetation communities would reduce 

erosion and overland flows. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Impacts from fish and wildlife habitat management actions would be similar to Alternative 1. In addition, 

conducting prescribed burns to improve habitat on the Hancock County tract could increase site-specific 

erosion in the short term. Over the long term, improving marsh health would reduce erosion. 

4-74 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 2 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Anticipated levels of oil and gas development and associated impacts on 55 acres would be the same as 

Alternative 1. Applying the stipulations in Appendix D would increase the area where seasonal, CSU 

(123 acres), and NSO (184,192 acres) restrictions would be implemented, which would reduce 

disturbance to soils within the protected areas. In addition to the stipulations in Appendix D, areas within 

1,000-feet of aquatic habitats would be managed with an NSO stipulation, which would eliminate impacts 

to soils in these areas. Impacts to prime or unique farmlands would be the same as described for 

Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Motorized travel would be closed or limited to designated routes on all tracts under this alternative. 

However, the level of activity that could increase erosion and associated impacts to soils would not be 

anticipated to change compared to Alternative 1 since these tracts are not anticipated to be used 

extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Hancock County tract (a total of 174 acres or 100 percent of BLM surface ownership in 

Mississippi) would be managed as a ROW avoidance area, there would be less potential for impacts to 

soils associated with ROW development compared to Alternative 1. 

Water Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Undertaking actions to remove invasive plant species on the Hancock County tract could increase sitespecific erosion, which could increase nutrient levels and turbidity and decrease water quality in the short 

term. Over the long term, these actions would maintain the emergent wetlands, water quality, and 

groundwater recharge. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Conducting prescribed burns to improve habitat on the Hancock County tract would increase erosion and 

run-off, which increases nutrient levels and turbidity and decreases water quality in the short term. Over 

the long term, improving and protecting fish and wildlife habitats would reduce erosion and overland 

flows. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Anticipated levels of oil and gas development and associated impacts on 55 acres would be the same as 

Alternative 1. A 1,000-foot NSO buffer around aquatic habitats and applying the stipulations in Appendix 

D would increase the area where seasonal, CSU (123 acres), and NSO (184,192 acres) restrictions would 

be implemented. This would reduce disturbance to water resources within the protected areas. This 

stipulation could be applied to an estimated 168,383 acres or 33 percent of the non-USFS FMO available 

for leasing in Mississippi. This buffer is expected to prevent construction activities from increasing the 

sedimentation of local drainages and wetlands. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-75 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 2 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Motorized travel would be closed or limited to designated routes on all tracts under this alternative. 

However, the level of activity that could affect water resources would not be anticipated to change 

compared to Alternative 1 since these tracts are not anticipated to be used extensively for recreation or 

travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Hancock County tract (a total of 174 acres or 100 percent of BLM surface ownership in 

Mississippi) would be managed as a ROW avoidance area, there would be less potential for impacts to 

water resources associated with ROW development compared to Alternative 1. 

Vegetative Communities 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

The Hancock County tract would benefit from removal of woody exotic, invasive species such as Chinese 

tallow and Chinese privet which would be removed by hand, and stump treated with approved herbicides. 

Selective hand spraying of Cogon grass may be required where it is established. Any removal and 

treatment of exotic invasive plants on this tract would be coordinated with the Hancock County Marshes 

staff and/or The Nature Conservancy to improve removal of invasive species and minimize impacts to the 

marshes. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Natural fire is infrequent in these coastal marshes, and the use of prescribed fires is expected to be 

infrequent and closely coordinated as part of an overall fire plan for the Hancock County Marshes 

Preserve. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts to vegetation would be similar to Alternative 1; however, under this alternative oil and gas 

activities would be excluded from a 1,000-foot buffer around wetlands and aquatic habitats, karst areas, 

shoreline habitats, and habitats like naturally occurring prairies and glades with special status species. 

This alternative provides additional protection for riparian/wetland areas and reduces the potential for 

contaminants to leach into wetland communities. Impact to exotic invasive plant species would be the 

same as in Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Limiting the Hancock County Marshes tract to motorized boating would prevent damage to vegetative 

communities by reducing travel and access to recreation opportunities. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Hancock County tract (a total of 174 acres or 100 percent of BLM surface ownership in 

Mississippi) would be managed as a ROW avoidance area, there would be less potential for impacts to 

vegetative communities associated with ROW development compared to Alternative 1. 

4-76 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 2 

Fish and Wildlife 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Wildlife would benefit from control of invasive exotic plant species, which could substantially alter 

upland areas on Point Clear Island. Invasive species control would foster native vegetation and habitats 

that support wildlife species. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

There may be some benefits to wildlife by burning heavy mats of flotsam left by Hurricane Katrina, 

where it is hampering restoration of marsh and upland habitats. This would foster native vegetation and 

habitats that support wildlife species. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

General impacts to wildlife are expected to be similar to Alternative 1; however, under this alternative, oil 

and gas activities would be excluded from higher value wildlife habitats, including a 1,000-foot buffer 

around wetlands and aquatic habitats, shoreline habitats, and habitats like naturally occurring prairies and 

glades with special status species. 

BMPs would be applied under this alternative to reduce impacts to bats, song-birds and waterfowl. All 

pits containing water ten days after a well is completed would be netted to exclude migratory birds. Other 

approved methods could also be used to exclude birds. Open vent equipment, such as heater-treaters, 

separators, and dehydration units will be covered with anti-perching cones to exclude cavity nesting birds 

and bats. Any powerlines would be built using approved raptor safe designs to prevent electrocution 

hazards. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Designating the Hancock County tract as limited to motorized boating would benefit wildlife using these 

remote marshes and the uplands on Point Clear Island by limiting disturbance to species and their 

habitats. Any vehicle use on the narrow sand islands would flush foraging and loafing shore-birds, and 

could cause abandonment of nests. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Hancock County tract (a total of 174 acres or 100 percent of BLM surface ownership in 

Mississippi) would be managed as a ROW avoidance area, there would be less potential for impacts to 

fish and wildlife associated with ROW development compared to Alternative 1. 

Special Status Species 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Removing exotic invasive plant species, particularly cogon grass, could improve habitat conditions for the 

tiny-leaved buckthorn and Mississippi diamondback terrapin. Early detection and control of invasive 

plant species would reduce the amount of native vegetation displaced and minimize changes to structure 

that occurs when large amounts of invasive woody material is removed. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-77 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 2 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Prescribed burns could be used to remove wood debris and flotsam left from Hurricane Katrina that create 

hazards for wildlife and degrade marshes. Since natural fire is infrequent in these coastal marshes, the use 

of prescribed fires is expected to be infrequent to mimic natural conditions and closely coordinated as part 

of an overall fire plan for the Hancock County Marshes Preserve. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Although the number of wells (10) and acres disturbed (55) would remain the same under this alternative 

as compared to Alternative 1, lease stipulations would shift surface-disturbing activities away from 

sensitive habitats with potential to support special status species. This is accomplished with NSO buffers 

or seasonal restrictions. These stipulations could be applied to 211,605 acres or about 41 percent of the 

non-USFS FMO in Mississippi. 

To protect special status species occurring in aquatic or wetland habitats, all oil and gas development 

activities would be excluded from a 1,000-foot buffer around these habitats. In areas where slopes exceed 

10 percent, the buffer could be extended up to 600-feet to provide adequate protection. In areas with 

slopes less than 10 percent, the 250-foot buffer could be reduced to a minimum of 100-feet, if the adjacent 

waterway or wetlands have been surveyed and no special status species occur within 100-yards upstream 

and 300-yards downstream of the site. This stipulation could be applied to an estimated 168,383 acres or 

about 33 percent of the non-USFS FMO available for leasing in Mississippi. In most cases, this buffer is 

expected to prevent construction activities from increasing the sedimentation of local drainages and 

wetlands. In areas with slopes over 25 percent, additional measures may be needed to stabilize disturbed 

soils above wetlands or aquatic habitats. 

A 250-foot buffer around known caves, fractures, and sinkholes would reduce the chances of drilling 

through karst formations, providing protection for cave endemics, such as cave salamander and spring 

salamander. Some potential remains for inadvertently drilling through unknown karst formations and 

damaging connected cave habitats through introduction of lost drilling fluids and muds, altering 

temperature and moisture regimes, and modifying the hydrology supporting the karst systems. This 

habitat is extremely limited in Mississippi; less than 100 acres according the Mississippi CWCS, so 

potential for impacting these areas in Mississippi is low. 

Under this alternative, NSO stipulations would be applied to coastal shorelines. This buffer would be 

applied to 4,237 acres of non-USFS FMO in Mississippi located within 100 feet of mean high tide. 

Wintering piping plover, snowy plover, brown pelican, least tern, and Mississippi diamondback terrapin 

are among the many coastal species that would benefit from this buffer. Offsite directional drilling to 

target these Federal minerals would be permitted under this alternative. Any directional wells that may 

affect Federally-listed species or critical habitat would require coordination with the USFWS. 

Areas with suitable soils and at least 10 percent open pine forest in southern Mississippi counties would 

require a survey for gopher tortoises prior to any surface-disturbing activities. No disturbance would be 

permitted within 600-feet of a gopher tortoise burrow. This buffer is expected to protect any breeding 

populations of gopher tortoise and maintain habitat for associated species including black pine snake. It 

would also protect habitat values in areas suitable for eastern indigo snake and mimic glass snake. 

Under this alternative, NSO would be permitted within 0.5 miles of a red-cockaded woodpecker cluster. 

This stipulation could be applied to 11,710 acres of non-USFS FMO within 0.5 miles of known clusters 

and could be applied to additional areas as needed to protect new clusters or potential habitat identified 

during site assessments prior to leasing. This buffer is expected to contain all foraging habitat required to 

4-78 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 2 

maintain the red-cockaded woodpecker cluster. There are options for oil and gas activity to occur within 

suitable foraging habitat if the foraging requirements for the cluster are met elsewhere, for example, 

clusters maintained on National Forests. This exception would require a concurrence from the USFWS 

and the State of Mississippi. A concurrence would cause disturbance within the suitable foraging habitat, 

but if granted would not be anticipated to affect local populations. 

Under this alternative, NSO would be permitted with 1,500-feet of a bald eagle nest and/or communal 

roost site, and no surface-disturbing activities would be permitted within 1.5 miles during the nesting 

season from December 1 through August 1. This buffer complies with the current Federal guidelines for 

bald eagle protection. Based on the known nest sites in Mississippi, this stipulation could be applied to 

1,089 acres of non-USFS FMO. Oil and gas activity complying with these parameters is not expected to 

adversely affect bald eagles. New protocols have been drafted that reflect the ongoing recovery of this 

species. When finalized, the new guidelines would reduce the buffer to 660-feet for construction 

activities, although existing activities could be conducted within 330-feet of the nest outside of a more 

refined nesting season (December 15 through June 30). 

Leases containing potential habitat for special status plant species, including Federally-listed and 

candidate species as well as those ranked as critically imperiled (S-1) and imperiled (S-2) by the 

Mississippi Natural Heritage Program (MNHP), would require botanical surveys prior to surfacedisturbing activities. Operations would be excluded from areas supporting these special status plant 

species. This stipulation is expected to protect most naturally occurring glades, prairies, and other habitats 

which support special status plant species. The potential acreage affected by this stipulation is not 

available. This stipulation would be applied on a case-by-case basis based on site inspections conducted 

prior to leasing. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Limiting the Hancock County Marshes tract to motorized boating would prevent damage to sensitive 

coastal habitats for tiny-leaved buckthorn and Mississippi diamondback by limiting disturbance to species 

and their habitats. It would also retain the secluded nature of this barrier island and allow for undisturbed 

nesting and foraging of special status shorebirds, including royal tern. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Hancock County tract (a total of 174 acres or 100 percent of BLM surface ownership in 

Mississippi) would be managed as a ROW avoidance area, there would be less potential for impacts to 

special status species associated with ROW development compared to Alternative 1. 

Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 

Impacts from suppressing all wildland fires and allowing prescribed burning on a case-by-case basis 

would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Undertaking actions to remove invasive plant species on the Hancock County tract would reduce the 

potential for changes in the marsh vegetation communities from invasive species. As a result, the natural 

fire regimes would be maintained or restored. This would improve the ability to manage wildland fire in 

its natural role through application of prescribed fires, as necessary. Undesired wildfires in the marsh 

vegetation communities that are within their natural fire regimes would also be safer and less expensive to 

suppress. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-79 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 2 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Conducting prescribed burns to improve habitat on the Hancock County tract would promote marsh 

health and allow for the reintroduction of wildland fire as a natural process and maintain or restore the 

natural fire regimes. Undesired wildfires in the marsh vegetation communities that are within their natural 

fire regimes would also be safer and less expensive to suppress. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts to wildland fire ecology and management from anticipated oil and gas development and 

associated disturbance of 55 acres would be the same as Alternative 1. Impacts would not occur on the 

closed (63,004 acres) and NSO (184,192 acres) areas created through applying the stipulations in 

Appendix D. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

The Hancock County tract would be limited to motorized boating under this alternative. The potential for 

increased wildland fire occurrence would similar to Alternative 1 because the potential for travel ignition 

sources through human use is very low. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Hancock County tract (a total of 174 acres or 100 percent of BLM surface ownership in 

Mississippi) would be managed as an avoidance area, there would be less potential for wildfire impacts 

associated with ROW development compared to Alternative 1. This would also decrease infrastructure 

needing protection, but would also decrease improvements in accessibility to fires and providing firebreaks on these tracts. 

Cultural Resources 

Impacts from cultural resources management and wildland fire management actions would be the same as 

Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Undertaking actions to remove invasive plant species on the Hancock County tract would increase the 

potential for damage to cultural resource sites. Mechanical treatments are more likely to impact cultural 

resources than low intensity treatments such as chemical treatments or hand treatments. Vegetative 

communities management actions would require cultural resource inventories and clearance prior to 

ground disturbance to identify the presence of any cultural sites and avoid or mitigate any potential 

damage. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Conducting prescribed burns to improve habitat on the Hancock County tract would increase ground 

disturbance and associated potential impacts to cultural resources. Wildlife habitat manipulation would 

require cultural resource inventories and clearance prior to ground disturbance to identify the presence of 

any cultural sites and avoid or mitigate any potential damage. 

4-80 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 2 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Cultural resources could be impacted by managing 270,615 acres of non-USFS FMO as open to leasing 

subject to standard lease terms and conditions and 123 acres of non-USFS FMO as CSU. Based on the 

RFD, oil and gas developments within these areas would impact 55 acres through the development of 10 

wells over 20 years. Development on these acres would typically be subject to Class III cultural resource 

inventories and evaluation on a project-by-project basis prior to allowing disturbance, resulting in the 

identification and potential excavation of cultural sites. Stipulations and BMPs applied under this 

alternative would protect and preserve cultural resources on the 184,192 acres managed as NSO and in 

areas where surface disturbance would be precluded (63,004 acres). 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although the tract would be limited to motorized boating under this alternative, the level of activity that 

could impact cultural resources would not be anticipated to change compared to Alternative 1 since the 

tract is not anticipated to be used extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Managing the Hancock County tract as a ROW avoidance area would reduce the potential for ground 

disturbance and potential impacts to cultural resources associated with ROW development compared to 

Alternative 1. Construction of development within a ROW could result in inadvertent damage if cultural 

resources that were undetected during surveys were unearthed during ground-disturbing activities. 

Following discovery of cultural resources, activities would stop in accordance with terms and conditions 

in the ROW grant which would minimize further damage to cultural resources. 

Visual Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Undertaking actions to improve vegetation communities, such as removing invasive species, on the 

Hancock County tract would temporarily diminish visual quality. Visual quality would be improved in the 

long term as the condition of vegetation communities improve to meet VRM class objectives. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Undertaking actions to improve fish and wildlife habitat on the Hancock County tract, such as prescribed 

burning, would temporarily diminish visual quality if the developments were to dominate the view of the 

casual observer. Visual quality would be improved in the long term as wildlife-related recreation and 

habitat conditions were improved. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Since approximately 55 acres of vegetation removal and construction activities would result from the 

development of 10 oil and gas wells (as with Alternative 1), impacts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Stipulations applied under this alternative could protect visual resources on the 184,192 acres managed as 

NSO and in areas where development would be precluded (63,004 acres). 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Continuing to allow recreation use on the Hancock County tract would result in impacts similar to those 

described under Alternative 1. Since the tract would be managed as limited to motorized boating, impacts 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-81 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 2 Draft EIS – August 2007 

to visual quality would be diminished as there would be less potential for vegetation and soil removal 

from these activities. Furthermore, because the tract is not currently used extensively for recreation, this 

impact would be minimal. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Managing the Hancock County tract as a ROW avoidance area would retain the visual quality in the 

undeveloped wetland setting since ROWs would not be approved on the tract unless it met resource 

objectives. 

Minerals 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Applying the lease stipulations and BMPs in Appendix D could restrict or preclude oil and gas 

development and exploration. Impacts would not be anticipated on approximately 270,615 acres open to 

leasing, subject to standard lease terms and conditions. Managing approximately 123 acres as open to 

leasing, subject to minor constraints and 184,192 acres as open to leasing, subject to major constraints 

could increase development costs. Closing 63,004 acres to leasing would not affect oil and gas leasing 

because approximately five percent of the closed areas would be in areas of historical oil and gas 

production. Allowing for exceptions, waivers, and modifications to these stipulations could create 

opportunities for the discovery of new oil and gas resources. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Lands and realty management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Recreation and Travel Management 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Undertaking actions to improve vegetation communities, such as removing invasive species, on the 

Hancock County tract would temporarily diminish the recreation experience or eliminate the recreation 

opportunity since recreationists could be displaced from vegetation treatment areas until revegetation 

occurs. The recreation experience and opportunity would be improved in the long term as the condition of 

vegetation communities improve by improving the long-term aesthetics of an area. 

4-82 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 2 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Undertaking actions to improve wildlife habitat on the Hancock County tract, such as prescribed burning, 

would temporarily diminish or eliminate the recreation experience and opportunities for travel since 

recreationists could be displaced from protected areas or treated areas until revegetation occurs. The 

recreation experience would be improved in the long term as wildlife-related recreation and habitat 

conditions are improved by improving the long term aesthetics and wildlife viewing of an area. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Since approximately 55 acres of vegetation removal and construction activities would result from the 

development of 10 oil and gas wells (as with Alternative 1), impacts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Stipulations applied under this alternative could protect the recreational opportunities on the 184,192 

acres managed as NSO and in areas where development would be precluded (63,004 acres) by precluding 

ground disturbance and infrastructure associated with oil and gas development. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Continuing to allow recreation use on the Hancock County tract would result in impacts similar to those 

described under Alternative 1. Since motorized vehicle use would be limited to motorized boating, 

motorized recreationists opportunities would be maintained. Since the tract is not currently used 

extensively for recreation or motorized travel, this anticipated impact would be minimal. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Managing the Hancock County tract as a ROW avoidance area would retain the recreation experience in 

the undeveloped wetland setting since ROWs would not be approved on the tract unless it met resource 

objectives. 

Lands and Realty 

Under Alternative 2, the 174-acre Hancock County tract would be managed as a ROW avoidance area. 

This could impose design and siting requirements and associated costs on new ROW. There would be an 

increased potential for requests for new ROW to be denied if the ROW did not meet resource objectives 

of the tract. 

Retaining the Hancock County tract under BLM administration and pursuing partnerships with other 

agencies and organizations could allow for management opportunities for other agencies and 

organizations, but would not allow for non-Federal ownership opportunities. Partnerships would allow for 

more efficient and comprehensive resource management of the surface tracts. 

Social and Economic 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

This alternative includes the removal of invasive species on the Hancock County tract. Impacts from these 

actions on the socioeconomic indicators would not be anticipated from these types of vegetative 

communities management actions. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-83 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 2 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Impacts to social and economic conditions from fish and wildlife habitat management actions would be 

the same as impacts identified from vegetative communities management actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

The same number of wells and acres of surface disturbance is anticipated under this alternative; however, 

this alternative would apply leasing stipulations to protect sensitive species and their habitats, including 

buffers for wetland and aquatic resources. Relative to Alternative 1, the exploration and development 

costs could increase while the availability for locations for well pads could decrease. This alternative 

would also provide for the greatest amount of protection for wetland resources. Since the number of wells 

anticipated is small relative to total wells in the area, there would be minimal changes as compared with 

the current situation, possibly slight increases in employment or income (and the same as Alternative 1). 

Social indicators such as housing, education, and cost of living would not be anticipated to change under 

this alternative. 

Similar disturbances from oil and gas development would occur as compared to Alternative 1, although 

potential impacts to wetlands, soils, vegetation, habitat, and wildlife would be anticipated to be reduced 

under this alternative due to the implementation of NSO conditions on oil and gas leasing. Oil and gas 

development and production can have implications for visual and scenic qualities as well as property 

values. These impacts are likely less than those under Alternative 1, as there are more conditions and 

constraints on well-pad locations under Alternative 2. Industry costs and availability for well pad 

locations would likely increase under this alternative, which would result in adverse impacts for the oil 

and gas industry. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Under this alternative, the surface tract would be open to recreational use, but designated as limited to 

motorized boating. Social and economic conditions would be similar to Alternative 1 since minimal 

changes in recreation and travel management are anticipated. However, OHV users would likely be 

adversely impacted since the tract would not be available for this type of motorized use. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

ROW management actions and associated impacts to social and economic conditions would be the same 

as Alternative 1. 

Hazardous Materials 

Impacts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

4-84 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 3 

4.3.3 Alternative 3 (Preferred Alternative) 

Air Quality 

Under this alternative, there is a potential for wildfire which could lead to air emissions. Since all fires 

would be suppressed, these occurrences would be short term and localized and not be anticipated to 

individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Anticipated levels of oil and gas development and associated air emissions would be the same as 

Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

ROW management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Soil Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Anticipated levels of oil and gas development and associated impacts on 55 acres would be the same as 

Alternative 1. Applying the stipulations in Appendix D would increase the area where seasonal, CSU 

(3,021 acres), and NSO (92,269 acres) restrictions would be implemented, which would reduce 

disturbance to soils within the protected areas. Under this alternative, the NSO area around aquatic 

habitats identified in Alternative 2 would be reduced to 250-feet, which would reduce protections to soils 

within these areas as compared to Alternative 2. Impacts to prime or unique farmlands would be the same 

as described for Alternative 1. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-85 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 3 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although travel management would be limited to motorized boating under this alternative, the level of 

activity that could increase erosion would not be anticipated to change compared to Alternative 1 since 

these tracts are not used extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Hancock County tract (a total of 174 acres or 100 percent of BLM surface ownership in 

Mississippi) would be managed as a ROW avoidance area, there would be less potential for impacts to 

soils associated with ROW development compared to Alternative 1. 

Water Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Anticipated levels of oil and gas development and associated impacts on 55 acres would be the same as 

Alternative 1. Applying the stipulations in Appendix D would increase the area where seasonal, CSU 

(3,021 acres), and NSO (92,269 acres) restrictions would be implemented, which would reduce 

disturbance to water resources within the protected areas. Under this alternative, the NSO area around 

aquatic habitats identified in Alternative 2 would be reduced to 250-feet, which would allow development 

to occur in close proximity to water resources and the potential for impacts to water resources to occur. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although travel management would be limited to motorized boating under this alternative, the level of 

activity that could impact water resources would not be anticipated to change compared to Alternative 1. 

Therefore, the impacts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Hancock County tract (a total of 174 acres or 100 percent of BLM surface ownership in 

Mississippi) would be managed as an avoidance area, there would be less potential for impacts to water 

resources associated with ROW development compared to Alternative 1. 

Vegetative Communities 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

4-86 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 3 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts to vegetation would be similar to Alternative 1; however, under this alternative, oil and gas 

activities would be excluded from a 250-foot buffer around wetlands and aquatic habitats, karst areas, 

shoreline habitats and habitats like naturally occurring prairies and glades with special status species. 

There is the option of increasing the buffer to 600-feet where needed because of slopes over 10 percent or 

erosive soils. The buffer under this alternative is expected to be sufficient to protect wetland and riparian 

vegetation and most naturally occurring glades and prairies. Impacts to exotic invasive plant species 

would be the same as in Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Under this alternative, the Hancock County tract would be available for disposal; however, future 

management of the tract would be constrained to meet the same resource objectives as under Alternative 2 

and so impacts to vegetative communities are not anticipated. 

Since the Hancock County tract (a total of 174 acres or 100 percent of BLM surface ownership in 

Mississippi) would be managed as a ROW avoidance area, there would be less potential for impacts to 

vegetative communities associated with ROW development compared to Alternative 1. 

Fish and Wildlife 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts would be similar to those discussed under Special Status Species. The acreage disturbed (55) 

would be same, but wells would be shifted away from sensitive habitats. Under this alternative, the buffer 

would be reduced to 250-feet, with the option of increasing it to 600-feet where needed because of steep 

slopes or erosive soils. The buffer could be reduced to 100-feet where slopes are less than 10 percent and 

there are no Special Status Species issues. These buffers are expected to be sufficient for most wildlife 

species, utilizing wetland and aquatic habitats, but interior forest nesting birds and some amphibians and 

reptiles that range farther from the riparian/wetland zone would be adversely impacted by this reduced 

buffer through habitat disturbance. Karst habitats and most naturally occurring prairies and glades would 

be protected under this alternative. 

Under this alternative, the coastal no lease areas, including sea turtle nesting habitat and shorelines 

suitable for least tern, piping plover, and snowy plover would be replaced with an NSO buffer. This 

change has some potential to promote offsite drilling. Loss of even small acreages of maritime forests or 

shrub lands would result in the loss of important foraging habitats for migrating song-birds, wading-birds 

and shore-birds, as well as other species associated with these critically imperiled habitats. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-87 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 3 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Under this alternative, the Hancock County tract would be available for disposal; however, future 

management of the tract would be constrained to meet the same resource objectives as under Alternative 2 

and so impacts to fish and wildlife are not anticipated. 

Since the Hancock County tract (a total of 174 acres or 100 percent of BLM surface ownership in 

Mississippi) would be managed as a ROW avoidance area, there would be less potential for impacts to 

fish and wildlife associated with ROW development compared to Alternative 1. 

Special Status Species 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

The number of wells (10) and acres disturbed (55) would remain the same under this alternative and 

impacts would be the same as Alternative 2, except in the following situations. The aquatic and wetland 

buffer would be reduced to 250-feet. In areas where slopes exceed 10 percent, the buffer could be 

extended up to 600-feet to provide adequate protection. In areas with slopes less than 10 percent, the 250-

foot buffer could be reduced to a minimum of 100-feet, if the adjacent waterway or wetlands have been 

surveyed and no special status species occur within 100-yards upstream and 300-yards downstream of the 

site. This stipulation could be applied to an estimated 68,656 acres or 13 percent of the non-USFS FMO 

available for leasing in Mississippi. In most cases, this buffer is expected to prevent construction activities 

from increasing the sedimentation of local drainages and wetlands. In areas with slopes over 25 percent, 

additional measures may be needed to stabilize disturbed soils above wetlands or aquatic habitats. 

Under this alternative, the no lease area along the coast would be replaced with a NSO buffer. Although 

no surface disturbance would occur on non-USFS FMO or BLM surface tracts within this buffer, offsite 

directional drilling to target these Federal minerals would be permitted under this alternative. Any 

directional drilling targeting non-USFS FMO may affect Federally- or State-listed species using this 

coastal area, including piping plover, snowy plover, Wilson’s plover and American oystercatcher. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Since the Hancock County tract (a total of 174 acres or 100 percent of BLM surface ownership in 

Mississippi) would be managed as a ROW avoidance area, there would be less potential for impacts to 

special status species associated with ROW development compared to Alternative 1. 

4-88 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 3 

Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 

Impacts from suppressing all wildland fires and allowing prescribed burning on a case-by-case basis 

would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts to wildland fire ecology and management from anticipated oil and gas development and 

associated disturbance of 55 acres would be the same as Alternative 1. Impacts would not occur on the 

closed (63,004 acres) and NSO (92,269 acres) areas created through applying the stipulations in Appendix 

D. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

ROW management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Cultural Resources 

Impacts from cultural resources management and wildland fire management actions would be the same as 

Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts to cultural resources from management of non-USFS FMO would be the same as Alternative 2, 

except 259,640 acres would be managed as open to leasing subject to standard lease terms and conditions, 

3,021 acres as CSU, 92,269 acres as NSO, and 63,004 acres as closed. The 55 acres of disturbance 

resulting from the anticipated 10 wells could impact cultural resources within areas managed as open to 

leasing subject to standard lease terms and conditions or CSU. Impacts to cultural resources are not 

anticipated in areas managed as NSO or closed since surface disturbance would be precluded. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-89 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 3 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although the Hancock County tract would be managed as limited to motorized boating under this 

alternative, the level of activity and associated impacts to cultural resources would not be anticipated to 

change compared to Alternative 1 since the tract is not used extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Management actions and impacts associated with ROW development would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Visual Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife habitat management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Since approximately 55 acres of vegetation removal and construction activities would result from the 

development of 10 oil and gas wells (as with Alternative 1), impacts would be similar to Alternative 1. 

Stipulations applied under this alternative could preclude oil and gas development thereby protecting 

visual resources on the 92,269 acres managed as NSO and in areas where development would be 

precluded (63,004 acres). Since no mineral development activities would occur on the surface tracts, there 

would be no violations of VRM class objectives. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel managements actions and associated impacts to visual resources would be the same 

as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

ROW management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Minerals 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

4-90 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 3 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Applying the lease stipulations and BMPs in Appendix D could restrict or preclude oil and gas 

development and exploration. Under this alternative, the NSO area around aquatic habitats identified in 

Alternative 2 would be reduced to 250 feet and the no lease stipulation for Alabama beach mouse habitat 

would be NSO. Impacts would not be anticipated on approximately 259,640 acres open to leasing, subject 

to standard lease terms and conditions. Managing approximately 3,021 acres as open to leasing, subject to 

minor constraints and 92,269 acres as open to leasing, subject to major constraints could increase 

development costs. Closing 63,004 acres to leasing would not affect oil and gas leasing because 

approximately five percent of the closed areas would be in areas of historical oil and gas production. 

Allowing for exceptions, waivers, and modifications to these stipulations (Appendix D) could create 

opportunities for the discovery of new oil and gas resources. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Lands and realty management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Recreation and Travel Management 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts to recreation and travel would be the 

same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife management actions and associated impacts to recreation and travel would be the same 

as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Since approximately 55 acres of vegetation removal and construction activities would result from the 

development of 10 oil and gas wells (as with Alternative 1), impacts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Stipulations applied under this alternative could indirectly protect the recreational opportunities on the 

92,269 acres managed as NSO and in areas where development would be precluded (63,004 acres) by 

eliminating associated ground disturbances, noise, and infrastructure. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

ROW management actions and associated impacts to recreation and travel would be the same as 

Alternative 2. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-91 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 3 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Lands and Realty 

Lands and realty management actions and associated impacts to lands and realty would be the same as 

Alternative 2. 

Social and Economic 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions and associated impacts to social and economic conditions 

would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Impacts to social and economic conditions from fish and wildlife habitat management actions would be 

the same as impacts identified from vegetative communities management actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

The same number of wells and acres of surface disturbance as Alternative 1 is anticipated under this 

alternative; however, this alternative applies leasing stipulations to protect sensitive species and their 

habitats, including buffers for wetland and aquatic resources. Relative to Alternative 1, the exploration 

and development costs could increase while the availability for locations of well pads could decrease, 

resulting in adverse impacts to the oil and gas industry. Since the number of wells anticipated is small 

relative to total wells in the area, there would be minimal social and economic changes, possibly slight 

increases in employment or income, as compared with the current situation. Oil and gas development and 

production can have implications for visual and scenic qualities as well as property values. These impacts 

are likely less than those under Alternative 1, as there are more conditions and constraints on well-pad 

locations under Alternative 3. Social indicators such as housing, education, and cost of living would not 

be anticipated to change under this alternative. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Under Alternative 3, socioeconomic impacts would be the same as those identified under Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

ROW management actions and associated impacts to social and economic conditions would be the same 

as Alternative 1. 

Hazardous Materials 

Impacts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

4-92 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 4 

4.3.4 Alternative 4 

Air Quality 

Under this alternative, there is a potential for wildfire which could lead to air emissions. Since all fires 

would be suppressed, these occurrences would be short term and localized and not be anticipated to 

individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would deteriorate air quality conditions. Prescribed burning 

conducted to meet vegetation resource objectives would be short term and localized and not be 

anticipated to individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat 

improvements and protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive 

plant species, use of prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve 

ground disturbing activities of a severity or extent that would deteriorate air quality conditions. Prescribed 

burning conducted to meet habitat objectives would be short term and localized and not be anticipated to 

individually deteriorate air quality conditions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Anticipated levels of oil and gas development and associated air emissions would be the same as 

Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

ROW management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Soil Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in disturbance or loss of soils. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-93 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 4 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions proposed 

under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and 

protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of 

prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in disturbance or loss of soils. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts to soil resources from oil and gas development would be the same as Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although the Hancock County tract would be limited to motorized boating under this alternative, the level 

of activity that increase erosion would not be anticipated to change compared to Alternative 1 since the 

tract is not used extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Disposing the tract from Federal ownership with no restrictive covenants could increase chances for 

subsequent development and associated impacts to soil resources. However, given this tract’s remoteness 

and location in the Hancock County Marshes Coastal Preserve, development would not be anticipated. 

Since the Hancock County tract (a total of 174 acres or 100 percent of BLM surface ownership in 

Mississippi) would be managed as a ROW avoidance area, there would be less potential for impacts to 

soils associated with ROW development compared to Alternative 1. 

Water Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to water quality. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions proposed 

under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and 

protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of 

prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to water quality. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Impacts to water resources from minerals management, including oil and gas and coal development, 

would be the same as Alternative 3. 

4-94 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 4 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although the Hancock County tract would be limited to motorized boating under this alternative, the level 

of activity that impact water resources would not be anticipated to change compared to Alternative 1 since 

the tract is not used extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Disposing the tract from Federal ownership with no restrictive covenants could increase chances for 

subsequent development and associated impacts to water resources. However, given this tract’s 

remoteness and location in the Hancock County Marshes Coastal Preserve, development would not be 

anticipated. 

Since the Hancock County tract (a total of 174 acres or 100 percent of BLM surface ownership in 

Mississippi) would be managed as a ROW avoidance area, there would be less potential for impacts to 

water resources associated with ROW development compared to Alternative 1. 

Vegetative Communities 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, allowing vegetation manipulation to meet resources objectives 

would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed could result in increased 

potential for invasive/exotic species becoming established or spreading. This is particularly true of the 

higher elevations of the Hancock County tract located on Point Clear Island. Cogon grass and Chinese 

tallow are both known to occur in the area and if uncontrolled could substantially alter the vegetative 

communities. Dense stands of cogon grass would displace native vegetation and could make the island 

and adjacent marshes more vulnerable to frequent wildfires. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, providing habitat improvements and protections under State 

wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and 

wetland enhancements, would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed 

could result in the same impacts discussed under impacts from vegetative communities management 

actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Minerals management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Disposing the tract from Federal ownership with no restrictive covenants could increase chances for 

subsequent development and associated impacts to vegetative communities. However, given this tract’s 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-95 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 4 Draft EIS – August 2007 

remoteness and location in the Hancock County Marshes Coastal Preserve, development would not be 

anticipated. 

Fish and Wildlife 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, allowing vegetation manipulation to meet resources objectives 

would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed could result in habitat 

degradation on any of the BLM surface tracts. The Hancock County tract located on Point Clear Island is 

particularly vulnerable to Cogon grass and Chinese tallow. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, providing habitat improvements and protections under State 

wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and 

wetland enhancements, would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed 

could result in the same impacts discussed under impacts from vegetative communities management 

actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Minerals management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Disposing the tract from Federal ownership with no restrictive covenants could increase chances for 

subsequent development and associated impacts to vegetative communities. However, given this tract’s 

remoteness and location in the Hancock County Marshes Coastal Preserve, development would not be 

anticipated. Management of wildlife values is expected to continue in coordination with the Mississippi 

Coastal Preserve System. 

Special Status Species 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, allowing vegetation manipulation to meet resources objectives 

would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed could result in increased 

potential for invasive/exotic species becoming established or spreading. This is particularly true of the 

higher elevations of the Hancock County tract located on Point Clear Island. Cogon grass and Chinese 

tallow are both known to occur in the area and if uncontrolled could substantially alter the habitats 

supporting Mississippi diamondback terrapin and tiny-leaved buckthorn. Dense stands of cogon grass 

would displace native vegetation and could make the island and adjacent marshes more vulnerable to 

frequent wildfires. 

4-96 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 4 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed in this alternative. Under standard 

management common to all alternatives, providing habitat improvements and protections under State 

wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and 

wetland enhancements, would be allowed; however, lack of specific areas and species being managed 

could result in the same impacts discussed under impacts from vegetative communities management 

actions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Minerals management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Under this alternative, the Hancock County tract would be available for disposal from Federal ownership. 

The effect this has on special status species is not known. Its location at the center of the Hancock County 

Marsh Preserve and the presence of extensive wetlands would make development of the tract difficult. It 

is likely that special status species would continue to benefit from the tract being managed in coordination 

with the Mississippi Coastal Preserve System. 

Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 

Impacts from suppressing all wildland fires and allowing prescribed burning on a case-by-case basis 

would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Although no specific vegetative communities actions are proposed, allowing vegetation manipulation to 

meet resources objectives under standard management common to all alternatives would generally serve 

to decrease vegetation density and cover (fuel load) and maintain natural fuel conditions across the 

Hancock County tract. This would maintain natural disturbance regimes which would be easier to manage 

through prescribed fire or other treatments. This would also decrease the frequency and intensity of 

wildland fires and allow fires to be more easily controlled, better protecting life, public safety, and 

property and resource values. However, lack of specific areas and species being managed could result in 

invasions and fuel accumulations that would increase the frequency and intensity of wildland fires. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed under this alternative, therefore no 

impacts would be anticipated. Under standard management common to all alternatives, providing habitat 

improvements and protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive 

plant species, use of prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would result in impacts similar to those 

discussed under impacts from vegetative communities management actions. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-97 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 4 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Minerals management actions and associated impacts to wildland fire ecology and management would be 

the same as Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Impacts to wildland fire ecology and management from recreation and travel management actions would 

be the same as Alternative 2 because travel designations would be the same for this alternative. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

ROW management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Cultural Resources 

Impacts from cultural resources management and wildland fire management actions would be the same as 

Alternative 1. 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would require cultural resource clearances before activity were 

to occur; therefore, impacts would not be anticipated. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions proposed 

under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and 

protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of 

prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would require cultural resource clearances before activity 

were to occur; therefore, impacts would not be anticipated. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Minerals management action and associated impacts to cultural resources would be the same as 

Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Although the Hancock County tract would be limited to motorized boating under this alternative, the level 

of activity and associated potential impacts to cultural resources would not be anticipated to change 

compared to Alternative 1 since these tracts are not used extensively for recreation or travel. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Making the Hancock County tract available for disposal without any specified management or use 

conditions could have impacts if the property contained previously undetected, potentially eligible NRHP 

cultural sites. Disposing the property from Federal ownership would remove the protection of any cultural 

resources under Federal law, and not applying management or use conditions would increase the potential 

for damage of previously undetected cultural resources. Before any transfer of management 

4-98 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 4 

responsibilities or ownership, a cultural resource survey and consultation with SHPO under NHPA 

Section 106 regulations would be required, mitigating this impact. 

Management actions and impacts associated with ROW development would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Visual Resources 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to visual quality. Although visual quality 

would deteriorate in the short term, visual quality would improve in the long term once vegetation has 

reestablished to meet VRM class objectives. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions proposed 

under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and 

protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of 

prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to visual quality. Although visual quality 

would deteriorate in the short term, visual quality would improve in the long term once vegetation has 

reestablished to meet VRM class objectives. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Minerals management actions and associated impacts to visual resources would be the same as 

Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel managements actions and associated impacts to visual resources would be the same 

as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Making the Hancock County tracts available for disposal from Federal ownership without any specified 

management or use conditions if the R&PP were revoked could result in changes to the existing natural or 

manmade landforms, which would diminish visual quality if the use were to dominate the view of the 

casual observer. Following disposal, private development actions could create visually intrusive 

development. 

ROW management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Minerals 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Vegetative communities management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-99 
Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 4 Draft EIS – August 2007 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Fish and wildlife management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Mineral management actions for oil and gas and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Lands and realty management actions would not restrict or preclude mineral development and 

exploration, therefore impacts are not anticipated. 

Recreation and Travel Management 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

No specific vegetative communities management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation 

manipulation to meet resources objectives, would not be anticipated to involve ground disturbing 

activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to recreation. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

No specific fish and wildlife habitat management actions are proposed under this alternative. Actions 

proposed under standard management common to all alternatives, which would provide habitat 

improvements and protections under State wildlife conservation strategies, including control of invasive 

plant species, use of prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, would not be anticipated to involve 

ground disturbing activities of a severity or extent that would result in impacts to recreation. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Minerals management actions and associated impacts to recreation and travel would be the same as 

Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Recreation and travel management actions and associated impacts would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Making the Hancock County tract available for disposal from Federal ownership without any specified 

management or use conditions if the R&PP were revoked could result in reduced access for recreation and 

travel opportunities. Following disposal, the tract could be made unavailable for public recreation and 

become inaccessible. 

4-100 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Mississippi Impacts-Alternative 4 

Lands and Realty 

ROW management actions and associated impacts to lands and realty would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Under Alternative 4, the 174-acre Hancock County tract would be available for disposal from Federal 

ownership with no restrictive covenants. This would allow for opportunities for other Federal agency or 

non-Federal ownership without specified conditions on future use of the tract; however, disposal would 

not be allowed if it would jeopardize Federally-listed species or designated critical habitat, which could 

limit some disposals. 

Social and Economic 

Impacts from Vegetative Communities Management Actions 

Impacts to social and economic conditions would not be anticipated from vegetative communities 

management actions since no actions are proposed under this alternative. Standard management actions 

common to all alternatives, which would allow vegetation manipulation to meet resource objectives, 

would not be anticipated to be of an extent that would result in impacts to economic or social conditions. 

Impacts from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Actions 

Impacts to social and economic conditions would not be anticipated from fish and wildlife habitat 

management actions since no actions are anticipated. Standard management actions common to all 

alternatives, which would provide habitat improvements and protections under State wildlife conservation 

strategies, including control of invasive plant species, use of prescribed fire, and wetland enhancements, 

would not be anticipated to be of an extent that would result in impacts to economic or social conditions. 

Impacts from Minerals Management Actions 

Minerals management actions and the associated impacts to social and economic conditions would be the 

same as those under Alternative 3. 

Impacts from Recreation and Travel Management Actions 

Under Alternative 4, socioeconomic impacts would be the same as those identified under Alternative 2. 

Impacts from Lands and Realty Management Actions 

Under Alternative 4, the Hancock County land tract would be available for disposal from Federal 

ownership without conditions on management and use after disposal. This could result in reduced access 

for recreational opportunities on these lands. Since development could be allowed on these properties, it 

is possible that the property tax revenues to the local counties would increase more than the Federal 

Payments in Lieu of Taxes, economically benefiting Hancock County and the State. It is possible that the 

private development of these tracts could slightly increase employment and income in these areas. Social 

indicators, such as housing, education, and cost of living are not expected to be influenced by the minimal 

development. 

Hazardous Materials 

Impacts would be the same as Alternative 1. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-101 
Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts Draft EIS – August 2007 

4.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 

Cumulative impacts analysis considers the alternatives in the context of the broader human 

environment—specifically, actions that occur outside the scope and geographic area covered by the RMPEIS. The following factors are considered in the cumulative impact assessment: Federal, non-Federal, and 

private actions; the potential for synergistic effects or synergistic interaction among or between effects; 

the potential for effects to cross political and administrative boundaries; other spatial and temporal 

characteristics of each affected resource; and the comparative scale of cumulative impacts across 

alternatives. 

Past, present, and potential future actions are considered in the analysis to identify whether the 

environment has been degraded or enhanced, and to what extent; whether ongoing activities are causing 

impacts; and trends for activities and impacts in the area. Projects and activities are evaluated on the basis 

of proximity, connection to the same environmental systems, potential for subsequent impacts or activity, 

similar impacts, the likelihood a project will occur, and whether the project is reasonably foreseeable. 

Projects and activities considered in the cumulative analysis were identified through discussions with 

agency officials and review of publicly available materials and Web sites. The following projects and 

activities were identified: 

• Mineral Development: Between 1983 and 2004, 8,068 wells have been completed in Alabama. 

Of those, 17 wells were drilled to BLM-administered non-USFS FMO. BLM currently oversees 

30 active leases on BLM-administered non-USFS FMO and 106 active leases on USFS FMO in 

Alabama. An estimated 20 wells (105 acres of surface disturbance) could be developed on nonUSFS BLM-administered FMO lands in Alabama over the next 20 years. An estimated 4,000 

wells (20,811 acres of surface disturbance) could be developed on non-Federal and USFS lands in 

Alabama over the next 20 years. Future anticipated well development in Alabama is shown in 

Table 4-5. 

Table 4-5. Future Anticipated Well Development In Alabama 

Federal 

(non-USFS) 

Federal 

(USFS) Non-Federal Total 

Number of 

Wells 20 12 3,988 4,020 

Total Acres of 

Surface 

Disturbance 

105 61 20,750 20,916 

Between 1983 and 2004, 7,362 wells have been completed in Mississippi. Of those, seven wells 

were drilled to BLM-administered non-USFS FMO, two of which were drilled from other Federal 

agency surface ownership and five from non-Federal surface ownership. BLM currently oversees 

42 active leases on BLM-administered non-USFS FMO and 1,181 active leases on USFS FMO in 

Mississippi. An estimated 10 wells (55 acres of surface disturbance) could be developed on nonUSFS BLM-administered FMO lands in Mississippi over the next 20 years. An estimated 12,000 

wells (59,745 acres of surface disturbance) could be developed on non-Federal and USFS lands in 

Mississippi over the next 20 years. Future anticipated well development in Mississippi is shown 

in Table 4-6. 

4-102 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts 

Table 4-6. Future Anticipated Well Development In Mississippi 

Federal 

(non-USFS) 

Federal 

(USFS) Non-Federal Total 

Number of 

Wells 10 350 11,650 12,010 

Total Acres of 

Surface 

Disturbance 

55 1,925 57,820 59,800 

• Coal development. For the purposes of this analysis, new Federal coal leases of 9,000 acres 

could be anticipated. Approximately 37.6 million tons of Federal coal would be produced over 

the next 20 years (avg. 1.9 tons/yr.) as part of pre-existing underground mines with no new 

surface disturbance. 

• Potential development after disposal of the surface tracts. For the purposes of the cumulative 

impact analysis, assumptions were made as to the potential development of the surface tracts 

following disposal for Alternatives 3 and 4. 

Under Alternative 3, the Jordan Lake tract would likely be developed as a recreation camp 

following disposal. No development would be expected following disposal of the Geneva County 

tract. 

Under Alternative 4, the Fort Morgan Beach, Fort Morgan Highway, and Fowl River tracts would 

be developed for residential or recreational use. The Coosa River and Jordan Lake tracts would be 

developed as recreation camps following disposal. No development would be expected following 

disposal of the Geneva County tract. 

Under Alternatives 3 and 4, the Hancock Country tract in Mississippi would continue to be used 

for recreation and research site purposes with no expected development. 

• Fuels Treatments. Table 4-7 shows the fuels treatments completed in Alabama by Department of 

the Interior agencies and USFS. The BLM did not conduct any fuels treatments in Alabama over 

these four years. Over 98 percent of these treatments were completed by the USFS using 

prescribed fires approximately 90 percent of the time; the remainder were completed with 

mechanical treatments. Over 97 percent of Federal fuels treatments were applied in WUI areas. 

Table 4-7. DOI and USDA Fuels Treatment Accomplishments for Alabama (Acres) 

Year Wildland-Urban Interface 

Fire Mechanical Total Fire 

Other 

Mechanical Total 

Total 

2006 69,112 3,602 72,714 3,529 5,190 8,719 81,433 

2005 84,804 12,313 97,117 157 282 439 97,556 

2004 82,391 6,336 88,727 0 0 0 88,727 

2003 76,884 16 76,900 0 0 0 76,900 

Source: http://www.fireplan.gov/overview/States/al.html, accessed March 2, 2007 

Table 4-8 shows the fuels treatments completed in Mississippi by Department of the Interior 

agencies and USFS. The BLM did not conduct any fuels treatments in Mississippi over these four 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-103 
-

Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts Draft EIS – August 2007 

years. Over 95 percent of these treatments were completed by the USFS using prescribed fires 

approximately 80 percent of the time; the remainder were completed with mechanical treatments. 

Over 96 percent of Federal fuels treatments were applied in WUI areas. 

Table 4-8. DOI and USDA Fuels Treatment Accomplishments for Mississippi (Acres) 

Year Wildland-Urban Interface 

Fire Mechanical Total Fire 

Other 

Mechanical Total 

Total 

2006 101,385 117,052 218,437 2,847 846 3,693 222,130 

2005 256,138 18,879 275,017 10,312 27 10,339 285,356 

2004 251,924 10,496 262,420 16,820 672 17,492 279,912 

2003 264,855 605 265,460 6,598 466 7,064 272,524 

Source: http://www.fireplan.gov/overview/States/ms.html, accessed March 2, 2007 

• Soil disturbance and vegetation loss from construction projects. Other construction projects 

across the State including private development and transportation projects create soil disturbance 

and vegetation loss. The 1997 and 2003 National Resources Inventories (NRIs) provide for 

estimates of land use conversion over time. Surface disturbance for oil and gas development 

would be comparable to the NRI category of “Developed Land.” Comparison with the NRI data 

will put the proposed actions of the AL-MS RMP (e.g. the oil and gas RFD) in context for 

cumulative impact analysis. The information from the 1997 NRI (including data for the period 

1982-1997) and the 2003 NRI is briefly described below and is shown in Table 4-9. The increase 

in developed land over time can be seen by scanning down the “Developed” land column. 

The 1997 NRI data indicates that the acres of developed land in Alabama increased by 635,700 

acres from 1982 to 1997, an average of 42,380 acres per year. The 2003 NRI shows that 

Developed Land increased to 2,273,900 acres in Alabama by 2003. This is an increase of 471,600 

acres for the 6-year period 1997-2003, an annual average of 78,600 acres. 

The 1997 NRI data indicates that the acres of developed land in Mississippi increased by 353,800 

acres from1982-1997, an average of 23,587 acres per year. The 2003 NRI shows that Developed 

Land increased to 1,676,300 acres in Mississippi by 2003. This is an increase of 202,300 acres for 

the 6-year period 1997-2003, an annual average of 33,717 acres. 

Table 4-9. Developed Surface Area of Non-Federal and Federal Land and Water Areas, By 

State and Year (Data per 1,000 acres) 

Non Federal land 

State Year Federal 

land 

Water 

areas Developed Rural Total 

Total 

Surface 

Area 

1982 949.3 1,166.8 1,616.6 29,691.1 31,307.7 33,423.8 

1987 950.1 1,181.4 1,807.2 29,485.1 31,292.3 33,423.8 

1992 970.0 1,201.0 1,937.0 29,315.8 31,252.8 33,423.8 

1997 997.9 1,223.2 2,252.3 28,950.4 31,202.7 33,423.8 

Alabama 

2003 997.9 1,281.4 2,723.9 28,420.6 31,144.5 33,423.8 

Mississippi 1982 1,634.6 720.5 1,120.2 27,052.0 28,172.2 30,527.3 

1987 1,673.5 791.4 1,193.1 26,869.3 28,062.4 30,527.3 

4-104 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
-

Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts 

Non Federal land 

State Year Federal 

land 

Water 

areas Developed Rural Total 

Total 

Surface 

Area 

1992 1,751.9 829.8 1,267.6 26,678.0 27,945.6 30,527.3 

1997 1,769.7 855.0 1,474.0 26,428.6 27,902.6 30,527.3 

2003 1,794.8 884.3 1,676.3 26,171.9 27,848.2 30,527.3 

Notes: The following are definitions from the NRI: 

Developed land. A combination of land cover/use categories, Large urban and built-up areas, Small built-up areas, and Rural 

transportation land. 

Large urban and built-up areas. A Land cover/use category composed of developed tracts of at least 10 acres—meeting the 

definition of Urban and built-up areas. 

Rural transportation land. A Land cover/use category which consists of all highways, roads, railroads and associated ROW 

outside urban and built-up areas; also includes private roads to farmsteads or ranch headquarters, logging roads, and other 

private roads (field lanes are not included). 

Small built-up areas. A Land cover/use category consisting of developed land units of 0.25 to 10 acres, which meet the definition of 

Urban and built-up areas. 

Urban and built-up areas. A Land cover/use category consisting of residential, industrial, commercial, and institutional land; 

construction sites; public administrative sites; railroad yards; cemeteries; airports; golf courses; sanitary landfills; sewage 

treatment plants; water control structures and spillways; other land used for such purposes; small parks (less than 10 acres) 

within urban and built-up areas; and highways, railroads, and other transportation facilities if they are surrounded by urban 

areas. Also included are tracts of less than 10 acres that do not meet the above definition but are completely surrounded by 

Urban and built-up land. Two size categories are recognized in the NRI: areas of 0.25 acre to 10 acres, and areas of at least 

10 acres. 

Sources: USDA, 2000; USDA, 2007. 

4.4.1 Cumulative Impacts from BLM Management Actions in 

Alabama 

Air Quality 

The cumulative impacts of air quality are evaluated by comparing the BLM site emissions with 

regionwide emissions. For the State of Alabama, comprehensive emissions are only available for NOX, 

CO, and VOCs in the major urbanized areas. These emissions can be obtained from the ADEM. Using the 

best available information from ADEM, Table 4-10 shows a comparison between the Birmingham Non 

Attainment Area and the BLM induced emissions. Based on this data, emissions from activities 

associated with potential oil and gas development and minerals mining on BLM-administered non-USFS 

FMO tracts proposed in this RMP would not considerably contribute to cumulative air quality emissions 

within the region (presented in Table 4-10). Over the next 20 years, emissions from 20 wells would 

comprise less than 1 percent of the emissions associated with the estimated 4,000 wells that could be 

developed on non-Federal and USFS lands in Alabama. These impacts would be the same for all 

alternatives. 

Table 4-10. Comparison of Potential BLM Emissions with Cumulative Emissions for 

Alabama (tons per year) 1, 2

Emission Type/Pollutant Well and Mine Locations 

NOx CO VOC 

BLM-Administered FMO Estate 171 219 73 in Alabama 

Birmingham NAA 578,799 2,902,972 448,946 

1. Compared with best available 2002 data from the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM 2005). 

2. A combination of oil and gas and coal mining. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-105 
Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts Draft EIS – August 2007 

Soil Resources 

In Alabama, the disturbance of a maximum of 105 acres from oil and gas development across the State of 

Alabama comprises less than one percent of the 20,811 acres of surface disturbance anticipated from oil 

and gas development on non-Federal and USFS lands over the next 20 years. Although more than 8,000 

wells have been completed in Alabama since 1983, the minimal number of 20 additional wells identified 

in the reasonably foreseeable development scenario (RFDS) would have no long-term impacts to soil 

productivity and therefore would not contribute to significant cumulative effects. These impacts would be 

the same for all alternatives. 

Possible soil impacts associated with vegetative communities, fish and wildlife habitat, and lands and 

realty management actions including ROW development and potential development after disposal on the 

159 acres of surface tracts comprises less than one percent of the 78,600 acres disturbed annually (1997-

2003) from other construction projects across the State including private development and transportation 

projects (as estimated by the NRI data). There would be more potential for soil disturbance impacts 

associated with vegetative communities and fish and wildlife habitat management actions proposed under 

Alternatives 2 and 3 as opposed to Alternatives 1 and 4 that do not propose any actions beyond standard 

management common to all alternatives. There would be more potential for soil disturbance impacts 

associated with ROW management actions under Alternative 1, which allows ROW development on all 

surface tracts, than Alternatives 2, 3, and 4, which designates 114 acres or 71 percent BLM surface 

ownership in Alabama as ROW avoidance areas. There would be more potential for soil disturbance 

impacts associated with potential development after disposal without conditions under Alternative 4 than 

Alternatives 1, 2, and 3, which either retains the tracts (Alternatives 1 and 2) or places restrictive 

covenants on the use after disposal (Alternative 3). 

Water Resources 

Water resources located on or adjacent to Alabama surface tracts could experience change as a result of 

mineral exploration and development or construction activities. However, the BMPs and stipulations 

identified in Appendix D would minimize irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources and 

unavoidable adverse impacts. Impacts to water quality associated with possible ROW development and 

the disturbance of a maximum of 105 acres from oil and gas development across the State of Alabama 

comprises less than one percent of the 20,811 acres of surface disturbance anticipated from oil and gas 

development on non-Federal agency and USFS lands would not contribute to significant cumulative 

impacts to water resources within the State of Alabama. Although more than 8,000 wells have been 

completed in Alabama since 1983, the minimal number of 20 additional wells identified in the RFDS 

would have no long-term impacts to soil stability or water quality and would limit the likelihood of 

leakage of drill fluids, hazardous waste spills, or leakage from reserve pits (if established) that could 

impact surface water and groundwater quality. Thus, significant cumulative impacts would not be 

anticipated. Potential development after disposal on the 159 acres of surface tracts comprises less than 

one percent of the 78,600 acres disturbed annually (1997-2003) from other construction projects across 

the State including private development and transportation projects (as estimated by the NRI data). 

Coal mining activities within the Warrior Basin would be expanded to include 9,000 acres of new coal 

leases that would yield an estimated average of 1.9 million tons of coal per year over the next 20-years. 

Although this increased mining would be limited to existing underground coal mines, the potential for 

groundwater contamination would cumulatively increase as a result of the increased mining activities. 

Migration of contaminants into the surrounding soils and aquifers could degrade groundwater quality and 

4-106 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts 

thereby affect wells and springs that may serve household and domestic uses. These impacts would be the 

same for all alternatives. 

Vegetative Communities 

The continuation of mineral development (totaling approximately 4,000 wells with 20,811 acres of 

surface disturbance) and soil disturbance and vegetation loss from other construction projects in the State 

(approximately 78,600 acres of surface disturbance annually) has a high potential of affecting vegetative 

communities, such as glades and prairies, that are sensitive to disruption and difficult to restore after 

surface disturbing activities. These activities also have the potential to introduce and promote the spread 

of invasive, exotic plant species. 

Throughout the State, some vegetative communities, embedded in the larger forested landscape, are 

particularly sensitive to disruption and are difficult to restore after surface-disturbing activities. Many of 

these are restricted to a narrow range of soil types such as glades and prairies; others are sensitive to 

changes in hydrography, such as bogs, forested wetlands and seepage slope communities. Construction 

activities in these plant communities generally alter the site sufficiently to preclude the reestablishment of 

these communities in the foreseeable future. Also, because of the limited acreage of these vegetative 

communities, loss of even small acreages has a disproportionate effect on the plant diversity in an area. 

Surface disturbing activities have the potential to introduce or promote the spread of invasive, exotic plant 

species. Impacts are dependent on the species planted during restoration activities and the management of 

the site during and following restoration. Restoration activities typically include seeding non-native 

grasses, such as annual rye (during the winter months) and Bahia or Bermuda grass (during the summer 

months) to provide a quick cover for disturbed soils. Including native species in the mix increases 

diversity and provides a more natural structure. If these areas are mowed following abandonment, these 

non-native grasses are expected to persist and dominate the site. If, however, the sites are replanted in 

pine or left unmowed, the areas can be expected to progress through old field type growth which is 

dominated by opportunistic native and non-native species alike. Ultimately, both Bahia and Bermuda 

grass are expected to become shaded out as a tree or heavy shrub layer becomes established. Japanese 

honeysuckle and Chinese privet can both persist in shaded situations. 

Although effects to vegetative communities from surface disturbing activities and the introduction of 

invasive, exotic plant species would likely occur as a result of the reasonably foreseeable actions 

identified for this analysis, BLM activities would have a minimal contribution to these effects on plant 

communities due to the small amount of acreage that would be disturbed under BLM management 

alternatives and BLM policies on BMPs for mineral development reclamation and control of noxious, 

exotic species. 

Fish and Wildlife 

The continuation of mineral development (totaling approximately 4,000 wells with 20,811 acres of 

surface disturbance) and soil disturbance and vegetation loss from other construction projects across the 

State (approximately 78,600 acres of surface disturbance annually) has a high potential of affecting 

wildlife and associated habitat through displacement, habitat degradation, and direct habitat loss. 

Impacts to many wildlife species from oil and gas development are localized and temporary. Most 

common game species and other mobile wildlife species avoid the well pad areas during construction and 

maintenance. Less mobile species are directly impacted and during the spring and early summer; this can 

include nesting neotropical birds. Habitat generalists, including most game species, tend to return to 

surrounding habitats after the well is completed and construction and maintenance activities have ceased. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-107 
Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts Draft EIS – August 2007 

Intermittent maintenance and inspection activities conducted on the established pad for the life of the well 

are not expected to alter the overall use of the area by wildlife. However, construction in high value 

habitats or in areas with more narrowly adapted wildlife species can alter the overall species diversity. 

Wells and roads in areas of contiguous forests increase habitat fragmentation, reducing the suitability of 

the area for interior nesting birds and making nests more susceptible to predation and parasitism. Older 

growth forests which provide habitat for interior forest nesting birds and a wider diversity of amphibians 

and reptiles are often located in riparian zones left as buffers during logging operations or in steeper, less 

accessible slopes. 

Oil and gas drilling continues for 24 hours a day until the well is completed. During this time, most 

wildlife including waterfowl and many songbirds are expected to avoid the immediate area. However, 

once drilling is completed, reserve pits with water (which can become soiled by drilling fluids) can 

become a hazard for waterfowl and other birds. If the well is put into production, there is documentation 

of birds and bats using open vent stacks for roosting or perching. Once in these stacks, animals can 

become trapped or asphyxiated. While much of the work documenting this problem has occurred in 

western States, the situation in Alabama is expected to be similar. 

Roads and other construction projects across the State can alter the local hydrography reducing surface 

flow to mesic areas and diverting or degrading surface water supporting wetland habitats. Installation of 

culverts and diverting existing drainages help to maintain existing hydrologic systems, but the disturbance 

causes local sedimentation and can retard sheet flow to wetland habitats. Amphibians and many reptiles 

associated with wetland communities are vulnerable to disturbance, as they are not highly mobile and 

tend to have narrow habitat requirements. 

Impacts would also include the direct loss of habitat from the general construction projects, including 

private development and transportation projects, from degradation of nearby aquatic or wetland habitats 

through sedimentation or changes in hydrology. 

Although significant habitat degradation and loss would likely occur as a result of the reasonably 

foreseeable actions identified for this analysis, BLM activities would have a minimal contribution to these 

effects on wildlife due to management protection provided under all alternatives, with Alternatives 2, 3, 

and 4 providing more stringent protection than Alternative 1. In the long term, depending on the location 

and intensity of construction and minerals development, it is likely that public lands containing viable 

habitats for wildlife would continue to be utilized by these species. 

Special Status Species 

Given the high number and dispersed distribution of special status species in aquatic and wetland habitats 

in Alabama, the continuation of mineral development (totaling approximately 4,000 wells with 20,811 

acres of surface disturbance) and soil disturbance and vegetation loss from other construction projects 

across the State (approximately 78,600 acres of surface disturbance annually) near rivers, creeks, or 

wetland habitats has a high potential of affecting special status species in the immediate area or 

downstream of the disturbance. 

Impacts to aquatic and wetland habitats would occur through degradation of water quality through 

increased sedimentation or turbidity, contamination, direct loss of habitat, and changes in local 

hydrography. Sedimentation and increased turbidity is listed as a current threat to most of Alabama’s 

mussels and special status fish species. The potential for sedimentation increases with prolonged or heavy 

rains that are typical in this area. Cut and fill slopes associated with other construction projects across the 

State are particularly vulnerable before protective plant covers have been established. Intact vegetation 

along riparian zones and around wetlands could substantially buffer these areas. Sediments deposited in 

4-108 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts 

intermittent drainages and headwater streams would be transported downstream during periods of high 

water, increasing turbidity and burying aquatic invertebrates in higher order streams. 

Filling wetlands, including bogs, seepage slopes, wet flatwoods, and forested swamps for construction 

and maintenance of well pads for oil and gas development and/or other construction projects across the 

State generally alters the site sufficiently to preclude the reestablishment of these communities in the 

foreseeable future, and could result in direct habitat loss for a wide variety of special status species which 

use these habitats. Because so many of these species have limited ranges, the list of species potentially 

affected varies by location. Generally, because of the limited acreage of these vegetation communities, 

loss from even the small amount of disturbance has the potential of destroying or degrading habitat for 

special status species. Construction and maintenance activities and other construction projects across the 

State could disrupt the local hydrography supporting seepage slopes or sheet flow to bogs and swamps 

degrading these habitats. 

Karst formations support cave habitats with high numbers of special status species, including many 

endemic crayfish, salamanders, and bats and are particularly sensitive to oil and gas development. In 

caves, even minor alterations in temperature, humidity, and water quality or water quantity could result in 

irreversible impacts. Caves by their nature are isolated and support highly endemic faunas often with 

extremely narrow habitat requirements. Wells drilled through cave/karst resources could result in 

contaminants, such as drilling fluids and cements, draining into the cave/karst system. Karst habitats 

could be degraded by hydrocarbons from spills or leaks from well casings, storage tanks, reserve pits, 

pipelines, and production facilities that may enter into the cave/karst systems. Additionally, cementing 

operations could affect portions of underground drainage systems by restricting groundwater flow and 

introducing pollutants into karst systems. Other possible impacts are vented or escaped gases collecting in 

sinkholes and caves. These gases could cause a die-off of plant and animal life that use the special habitat 

created by the microclimate of the cave entrances or sinkhole. 

Although significant habitat degradation and loss would likely occur as a result of the reasonably 

foreseeable actions identified for this analysis, BLM activities would have a minimal contribution to these 

effects on special status species due to the minimal numbers of oil and gas development anticipated (20 

wells) and management protection provided for these species under all alternatives, with Alternatives 2, 3, 

and 4 providing more stringent protection than Alternative 1. BLM would also be required to consult with 

USFWS to identify and establish specific conservation actions that could be taken to mitigate the 

potential effects of land management activities. 

Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 

In addition to the ignition sources associated with development of 20 new oil and gas wells noted in the 

impact analysis, there are over 8,000 existing oil and gas wells throughout Alabama. An additional 4,000 

oil and gas wells would be developed on non-Federal and USFS FMO over the next 20 years. 

Cumulatively, the potential increases in wildland fires from the addition of 20 wells compared to 12,000 

existing and potential wells would not significantly increase the risk of fire in Alabama. Likewise, the 

infrastructure associated with oil and gas or ROW developments would no significantly improve access or 

provide fuels breaks compared to the cumulative developments and current rate of 78,600 acres of land 

developed annually (1997-2003) in Alabama. 

The cumulative effect of proposed vegetation treatments on the 159 acres of surface tracts would be in 

addition to 86,154 acres of vegetation treatments by other Federal agencies, as well as prescribed burns 

performed by State and local agencies and private or corporate forestry operations. The proposed 

treatments would help maintain or restore small areas to their natural regimes, as well as improve the 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-109 
Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts Draft EIS – August 2007 

ability to protect WUI areas from wildfire. Cumulatively, the implementation of all these treatments 

would reduce the cost of suppressing wildfires. 

Cultural Resources 

While cultural resources on USFS FMO and non-USFS FMO enjoy legal protection, similar protection 

from surface disturbing activities does not apply to cultural resources from private actions on private 

lands. Oil and gas development in areas with private surface and FMO still require compliance with 

cultural resource laws. However, oil and gas development in areas of private surface and private mineral 

ownership, or non-mineral developments in areas with private surface FMO, could result in cumulative 

impacts to cultural resources throughout Alabama. This could result in unmitigated damage and loss of 

cultural sites and artifacts in areas of private surface and mineral ownership where oil and gas wells are 

developed. Cumulatively, Alternative 2 provides the greatest level of protection from cumulative impacts 

due to the largest number of closed and NSO acres. Alternatives 3 and 4 provide the next greatest level of 

protection. In these areas, the potential for inadvertent damage and loss of cultural resources is the lowest. 

An additional 105 acres associated with development of 20 wells on non-USFS FMO and 20,811 acres 

associated with development of an estimated 4,000 additional wells on non-Federal mineral estate and 

USFS FMO would be added to the existing disturbance from development of over 8,000 oil and gas wells 

in Alabama over the past twenty years. Acreage developed on USFS FMO would receive protections 

from Federal law, regulation, and policy. Developments in those areas would be required to comply with 

NHPA and Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) in inventorying areas and determining 

eligibility of sites for the NRHP. Additional developments on USFS FMO would result in the 

identification of more cultural sites during inventories. Excavation of sites as part of mitigating impacts 

from development on USFS FMO would enable scientific retrieval and study of cultural resources, using 

today’s technology and methodology. While data recovery preserves as much data as possible, the 

excavated portions of the property would be lost or damaged. Removing cultural resources from a site 

using current scientific methods also reduces future scientific value if more accurate methods of analysis 

are developed. 

Combined with disturbance from mineral development, other Federal agencies perform over 86,000 acres 

of vegetation treatments throughout Alabama annually. Approximately 92 percent of the treated acres 

(79,219 acres) would be treated by prescribed fire. Additional acreages would be treated by State and 

local agencies and private individuals. Treatments by Federal agencies would require cultural inventories 

prior to implementation, identifying and protecting cultural sites. However, treatments by State and local 

agencies and private individuals could impact cultural resources through burning and suppression efforts. 

Cumulatively, the alternatives would have little effect on these impacts as the levels of treatment and 

BLM surface acreage are very small in comparison, although Alternatives 3 and 4 would have the greatest 

cumulative effect as it proposes the greatest levels of vegetation treatment to support other resources. 

Development of BLM surface tracts would not be permitted until disposal, which would only occur under 

Alternatives 3 and 4. Protection measures in Alternative 3 would protect cultural resource sites from 

damage or loss. However, under Alternative 4 it is assumed that the Coosa River, Fort Morgan Beach, 

Fort Morgan Highway, Fowl River, and Jordan Lake tracts would all be developed. All the tracts except 

the Coosa River tracts have been inventoried, so potential impacts would be limited to those 42 acres. 

Following disposal, developments on these tracts would no longer require cultural inventories or 

mitigation, which could result in the damage or loss of cultural sites. Cumulatively, this would be in 

addition to an approximate 78,600 acres of development per year on private land, which could similarly 

impact cultural sites. 

4-110 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts 

The number of sites anticipated to be cumulatively damaged resulting from actions proposed in this RMP 

combined with other cumulative projects and activities is unknown because most areas have not been 

surveyed for cultural resources. 

Visual Resources 

Cumulative impacts on visual resources would occur primarily from activities that affect the visual 

quality of the area. Such impacts would result from mineral development activities, ROW development, 

increased recreational activity, and actions associated with management of vegetative communities and 

fish and wildlife habitat. Surface disturbing activities associated with mineral development and ROWs 

would create visual intrusions that could alter the landscape setting and degrade visual quality. The 

possible ROW development and disturbance of a maximum of 105 acres from oil and gas development 

across the State of Alabama comprises less than one percent of the 20,811 acres of surface disturbance 

anticipated from oil and gas development on non-Federal and USFS lands. Although more than 8,000 

wells have been completed in Alabama since 1983, the minimal number of 20 additional wells identified 

in the RFDS would not significantly diminish visual quality. Closing or limiting areas to motorized 

recreation uses and implementing restrictions designed to protect sensitive resources would help to 

maintain the visual quality in restricted areas. Efforts to maintain and improve vegetative communities 

and fish and wildlife habitat would indirectly enhance visual quality through improvement of the visual 

landscape. 

Cumulative impacts would be similar among the four alternatives, as the same level of development is 

expected under all alternatives. However, Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 provide for specific actions to improve 

vegetative communities and fish and wildlife habitat, thereby enhancing visual quality. In addition, 

implementing an NSO stipulation within 1,000 feet of aquatic habitats under Alternative 2 would preserve 

the visual quality within these areas. Impacts would likely be greatest under Alternative 4, as 

development of the tract is expected to occur subsequent to disposal, which would add to the visual 

intrusions of development on adjacent lands for some tracts, such as the Fort Morgan tracts. 

Minerals 

In Alabama, no cumulative impacts would be anticipated to minerals exploration and development as a 

result of BLM-administered surface tract and non-USFS FMO land use allocations and management 

actions since the RMP would not restrict or preclude mineral development and exploration. An 

irretrievable commitment of oil and gas and coal would result from mineral extraction via 20 wells 

developed over the next 20 years in Alabama and continued leasing of 1.9 tons of coal per year over the 

next 20 years (37.6 million tons of Federal coal) on non-USFS FMO in the Warrior Basin. These impacts 

would be the same for all alternatives. 

Recreation and Travel Management 

Most of Alabama is not managed by the Federal government, and recreation and travel opportunities are 

often dependant on whether the private landowner allows access or travel access the private surface. 

Therefore, maintaining Federal ownership of public lands under Alternatives 1 and 2 would maintain 

limited opportunities for public recreation and travel. Under Alternatives 3 and 4, opportunities for travel 

and recreation could be precluded after disposal, cumulatively adding to the current restrictions on private 

lands throughout the State. Although BLM management actions and disposal actions under the 

alternatives could have localized impacts to recreation experience and travel opportunities, no significant 

cumulative impacts would be anticipated because of the small size and scattered nature of BLMadministered surface tracts. Much of the access to the scattered BLM tracts is controlled by other surface 

owners. Cumulative projects and activities (continued mineral development and other construction 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-111 
Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts Draft EIS – August 2007 

projects) could lead to more travel opportunities associated with increased route construction to support 

mineral development, but there would also be a reduction in primitive/non-motorized recreation 

opportunities. Minerals development on non-USFS FMO lands open to recreation and leasing could result 

in unavoidable adverse impacts to recreation through detracting from the recreational setting. Mineral 

exploration and development activities would have short term effects on the quality of the setting because 

of drilling equipment and long term impacts from road construction and vegetation removal. 

Development assumed to occur on disposed tracts under Alternative 4 could change the recreation 

opportunities from dispersed in nature to more developed on the Coosa River, Jordan Lake, Fort Morgan 

Beach and Highway and Fowl River tracts. In these areas, recreational developments would reduce 

opportunities for dispersed recreation, as well as reducing travel in these areas of private development. 

Under Alternative 3, this impact would be limited to the Jordan Lake tract. 

Lands and Realty 

Increasing development leads to a greater demand for lands and realty actions, creating the need for 

additional ROWs for roads, pipelines and powerlines. Restrictions on ROWs under Alternatives 2, 3, and 

4 would have a negligible cumulative effect by reducing routing options and possibly increasing 

construction costs for ROW development since there is only 159 acres of BLM administered lands 

scattered across the State. Increasing development also leads to a greater demand for additional available 

land. 

Social and Economic 

BLM-administered minerals comprise a very small proportion of oil and gas development in Alabama. 

Twenty new oil and gas wells in Alabama constitute less than one percent, 0.5 percent, of the 4,000 

anticipated oil and gas wells on USFS and non-Federal agencies lands. Historically, BLM has permitted 

17 wells on BLM-administered FMO in Alabama, representing 0.2 percent of the 8,068 total wells 

permitted over the past 20 years. In Alabama, with the anticipated well projections, BLM FMO would 

represent slightly more of the total wells, compared to the previous 20 years; however, the BLMadministered FMO wells are half of one percent and still relatively a very small percentage. 

Overall, the rate of oil and gas development in Alabama is expected to decrease, from 8,068 wells 

(average of 403 wells per year) to 4,000 anticipated over the next 20 years (average of 200 wells per 

year). This is a decrease in oil and gas development by 50 percent (from the last 20 years to the next 20 

years). 

Many of the cumulative socioeconomic impacts associated with oil and gas development are already 

occurring in the region and would be perpetuated in the future. For instance, oil and gas activity is 

generating employment opportunities and labor earnings for communities that support these types of 

activities. However, the employment and income from BLM-administered oil and gas is likely very low 

since it represents such a small proportion of the total development and production in Alabama. Overall, 

however, with slight decreases in oil and gas development expected to occur across the State, there would 

be decreases in tax revenue to local, State and federal government entities. With the decreases in overall 

oil and gas development in the State, socioeconomic characteristics and trends, such as infrastructure and 

community services, may be slightly decreasing as a result of decreasing fiscal revenues that often 

support these types of services within the State. 

In general, the pace and timing of mineral development activities is dependent on a variety of factors 

beyond the management decisions of BLM. This includes national and international energy demand and 

prices, production factors within the planning area and business strategies of operators. Because the pace 

4-112 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts 

of development in the planning area is only an estimate, actual cumulative impacts may vary if the oil and 

gas activity across the State changes over the planning period. 

Coal development is expected to only occur on the Alabama BLM-administered minerals, with potential 

development of 1.9 million tons of coal produced per year, in essence an extension of the BLM coal 

production rates which have occurred in the past 10 years. The existing two leases are expected to be 

mined out, while new development could occur on four additional leases. In 1999, the 1.9 million tons of 

coal produced from BLM-administered minerals represented 9.7 percent of the coal produced in Alabama 

of 19.5 million tons (Energy Information Agency). Between 1990 and 1999, coal production in the State 

decreased by an average annual rate of 4.3 percent. If this decreasing production continues in the future, 

coal production from BLM-administered minerals would likely represent a larger portion of the total coal 

produced from the State. Coal production supports employment and employee compensation in the State 

(677 employees and $48 million in employee compensation); with decreasing production across Alabama, 

it is likely that overall, employment and earnings are also decreasing in the coal mining industry and in 

industries that support coal mining. This also suggests that royalty revenues from BLM-administered coal 

mining may be increasing as a proportion of total coal mining, which could influence the relocation of 

industries that support coal development closer to these BLM-administered minerals. There are likely 

some slight fiscal revenue declines since the production levels are decreasing across the State, which 

could also have impacts for infrastructure, social services, school funding, and other related government 

services. 

A number of the alternatives in this Draft RMP-EIS consider Federal disposal of various tracts of surface 

lands. Under Alternative 4, there are three tracts (Fort Morgan Beach, Fort Morgan Highway, and Fowl 

River) available for recreational or residential development in Alabama comprising 117 acres, while one 

additional tract (Jordan Lake) could be developed as recreational camps (4 acres). In total, 121 acres 

could potentially be developed for recreational or residential use in Alabama. The State of Alabama 

comprises 33.5 million acres of surface land, of which BLM manages 159 acres (less than one percent) 

and the USFS manages 667,000 acres (2 percent). The disposal of these 159 acres and subsequent 

development of 117 acres of surface lands is not likely to have cumulative socioeconomic impacts as the 

disposal acres represent such a small portion of BLM lands, Federal lands, and private lands within the 

State. For the socioeconomic impacts of the individual alternatives, please see section 4.2. 

Environmental Justice 

There were no Environmental Justice populations identified within the four-county area where mineral 

development is anticipated in Alabama. Therefore, there would be no anticipated cumulative impacts on 

these populations. Since the additional expected oil and gas activity locations for the BLM-administered 

FMO have not been specified, impacts to these to these populations should be considered at the time of 

implementation. 

Hazardous Materials 

BLM-authorized activities on surface tracts and non-USFS FMO could include use of hazardous 

materials, substances, and waste (including storage, transportation, and spills). Such activities include oil 

and gas development, coal development, and application of pesticides to improve vegetative communities 

and wildlife habitat. These activities are conducted in compliance with 29 CFR 1910, 49 CFR 100-185, 

40 CFR 100-400, CERCLA, RCRA, SARA, TSCA, and the CWA and other Federal and State regulations 

and policies regarding hazardous materials management. Therefore, if any releases were to occur, it 

would be immediately addressed and remediated in accordance with regulation and cumulative impacts 

are not anticipated. Contribution of hazardous materials, substances, and waste could occur from other 

sources on adjacent lands that could lead to cumulative impacts on BLM lands. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-113 
Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts Draft EIS – August 2007 

4.4.2 Cumulative Impacts from BLM Management Actions in 

Mississippi 

Air Quality 

The cumulative impacts of air quality are evaluated by comparing the BLM site emissions with 

regionwide emissions. For the State of Mississippi, comprehensive emissions are only available for NOX, 

CO, and VOCs. These emissions can be obtained from the Mississippi Department of Environmental 

Quality (MDEQ). Using the best available data from MDEQ, Table 4-11 shows a comparison between the 

Statewide sources and the BLM induced emissions. Based on this data, emissions from activities 

associated with potential oil and gas development and minerals mining on BLM-administered non-USFS 

FMO tracts proposed in this RMP would not considerably contribute to cumulative air quality emissions 

within the region (presented in Table 4-11). Over the next 20 years, emissions from 10 wells would 

comprise less than 1 percent of the emissions associated with the estimated 12,000 wells that could be 

developed on non-Federal and USFS lands in Alabama. These impacts would be the same for all 

alternatives. 

Table 4-11. Comparison of Potential BLM Emissions with Cumulative Emissions for 

Mississippi (tons per year) 1, 2 

Emission Type/Pollutant Well and Mine Locations 

NOx CO VOC 

BLM-Administered FMO Estate 

in Mississippi 89 141 23 

Other Mineral Estate Across 

Mississippi 295,456 1,301,914 272,897 

1. Compared to best available 2002 data from the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ, 2005). 

2. Combination of oil and gas and coal mining. 

Soil Resources 

In Mississippi, the disturbance of a maximum of 55 acres from oil and gas development across the State 

of Mississippi comprises less than one percent of the 59,745 acres of surface disturbance anticipated from 

oil and gas development on non-Federal and USFS lands over the next 20 years. Although more than 

7,000 wells have been completed in Mississippi since 1983, the minimal number of 10 additional wells 

identified in the RFDS would have no long-term impacts to soil productivity and therefore would not 

contribute to significant cumulative effects. These impacts would be the same for all alternatives. 

Possible soil impacts associated with vegetative communities, fish and wildlife habitat, and lands and 

realty management actions including ROW development and potential development after disposal on the 

174-acre Hancock County tract comprises less than one percent of the 33,717 acres disturbed annually 

(1997-2003) from other construction projects across the State including private development and 

transportation projects (as estimated by the NRI data). There would be more potential for soil disturbance 

impacts associated with vegetative communities and fish and wildlife habitat management actions 

proposed under Alternatives 2 and 3 as opposed to Alternatives 1 and 4 that do not propose any actions 

beyond standard management common to all alternatives. There would be more potential for soil 

disturbance impacts associated with ROW management actions under Alternative 1, which allows ROW 

development on the Hancock County tract, than Alternatives 2, 3, and 4, which designates the tract as a 

ROW avoidance area. The potential for soil disturbance impacts associated with lands and realty disposal 

4-114 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts 

actions would be the same under all alternatives, since the Hancock Country tract would continue to be 

used for recreation and research site purposes with no expected development. 

Water Resources 

The emergent wetlands that comprise the Hancock County tract would change as a result of mineral 

exploration and development or construction activities. However, BMPs and stipulations identified in 

Appendix D would minimize irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources and unavoidable 

adverse impacts. Also, the disturbance of a maximum of 55 acres from oil and gas development across the 

State of Mississippi comprises less than one percent of the 59,745 acres of surface disturbance anticipated 

from oil and gas development on non-Federal and USFS lands. Although more than 7,000 wells have 

been completed in Mississippi since 1983, the minimal additional 10 wells identified in RFDS would 

have no long-term impacts to water resources and, therefore, would not contribute to cumulative effects. 

These impacts would be the same for all alternatives. 

Vegetative Communities 

The continuation of mineral development (totaling approximately 12,000 wells with 59,745 acres of 

surface disturbance) and soil disturbance and vegetation loss from other construction projects across the 

State (approximately 33,717 acres of surface disturbance annually) has a high potential of affecting plant 

communities, such as glades and prairies, that are sensitive to disruption and difficult to restore after 

surface disturbing activities. These activities also have the potential to introduce and promote the spread 

of invasive, exotic plant species. 

Throughout the State, some plant communities, embedded in the larger forested landscape, are 

particularly sensitive to disruption and are difficult to restore after surface disturbing activities. Many of 

these are restricted to a narrow range of soil types such as glades and prairies; others are sensitive to 

changes in hydrography, such as bogs, forested wetlands, and seepage slope communities. Construction 

activities in these plant communities generally alter the site sufficiently to preclude the reestablishment of 

these communities in the foreseeable future. Also, because of the limited acreage of these vegetation 

communities, loss of even small acreages has a disproportionate effect on the plant diversity in an area. 

Surface disturbing activities have the potential to introduce or promote the spread of invasive, exotic plant 

species. Impacts are dependent on the species planted during restoration activities and the management of 

the site during and following restoration. Restoration activities typically include seeding non-native 

grasses, such as annual rye (during the winter months) and Bahia or Bermuda grass (during the summer 

months) to provide a quick cover for disturbed soils. Including native species in the mix increases 

diversity and provides a more natural structure. If these areas are mowed following abandonment, these 

non-native grasses are expected to persist and dominate the site. If, however, the sites are replanted in 

pine, or left unmowed the areas can be expected to progress through old field type growth which is 

dominated by opportunistic native and non-native species alike. Ultimately, both Bahia and Bermuda 

grass are expected to become shaded out as a tree or heavy shrub layer becomes established. Japanese 

honeysuckle and Chinese privet can both persist in shaded situations. 

Although effects to vegetative communities from surface disturbing activities and the introduction of 

invasive, exotic plant species would likely occur as a result of the reasonably foreseeable actions 

identified for this analysis, BLM activities would have a minimal contribution to these effects on plant 

communities due to the small amount of acreage that would be disturbed under BLM management 

alternatives and BLM policies on BMPs for mineral development reclamation and control of noxious, 

exotic species. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-115 
Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts Draft EIS – August 2007 

Fish and Wildlife 

The continuation of mineral development (totaling approximately 12,000 wells with 59,745 acres of 

surface disturbance) and soil disturbance and vegetation loss from other construction projects across the 

State (approximately 33,717 acres of surface disturbance annually) has a high potential of affecting fish 

and wildlife and associated habitat through displacement, habitat degradation, and direct habitat loss. 

Impacts to many wildlife species from oil and gas development are localized and temporary. Most 

common game species and other mobile wildlife species avoid the well pad areas during construction and 

maintenance. Less mobile species are directly impacted and during the spring and early summer; this can 

include nesting neotropical birds. Habitat generalists, including most game species, tend to return to 

surrounding habitats after the well is completed and construction and maintenance activities have ceased. 

Intermittent maintenance and inspection activities conducted on the established pad for the life of the well 

are not expected to alter the overall use of the area by wildlife. However, construction in high value 

habitats or in areas with more narrowly adapted wildlife species can alter the overall species diversity. 

Wells and roads in areas of contiguous forests increase habitat fragmentation, reducing the suitability of 

the area for interior nesting birds and making nests more susceptible to predation and parasitism. Older 

growth forests which provide habitat for interior forest nesting birds and a wider diversity of amphibians 

and reptiles are often located in riparian zones left as buffers during logging operations or in steeper, less 

accessible slopes. 

Oil and gas drilling continues for 24 hours a day until the well is completed. During this time, most 

wildlife, including waterfowl and many song-birds, are expected to avoid the immediate area. However, 

once drilling is completed, reserve pits with water (which can become soiled by drilling fluids) can 

become a hazard for waterfowl and other birds. If the well is put into production, there is documentation 

of birds and bats using open vent stacks for roosting or perching. Once in these stacks animals can 

become trapped or asphyxiated. While much of the work documenting this problem has occurred in 

western states, the situation in Mississippi is expected to be similar. 

Roads and other construction projects across the State can alter the local hydrography reducing surface 

flow to mesic areas and diverting or degrading surface water supporting wetland habitats. Installation of 

culverts and diverting existing drainages help to maintain existing hydrologic systems, but the disturbance 

causes local sedimentation and can retard sheet flow to wetland habitats. Amphibians and many reptiles 

associated with wetland communities are vulnerable to disturbance, as they are not highly mobile and 

tend to have narrow habitat requirements. 

Impacts would also include the direct loss of habitat from the general construction projects, including 

private development and transportation projects, from degradation of nearby aquatic or wetland habitats 

through sedimentation or changes in hydrology. 

Although significant habitat degradation and loss would likely occur as a result of the reasonably 

foreseeable actions identified for this analysis, BLM activities would have a minimal contribution to these 

effects on wildlife due to management protection provided under all alternatives, with Alternatives 2, 3, 

and 4 providing more stringent protection than Alternative 1. In the long term, depending on the location 

and intensity of construction and minerals development, it is likely that public lands containing viable 

habitats for wildlife would continue to be utilized by these species. 

Special Status Species 

The continuation of mineral development (totaling approximately 12,000 wells with 59,745 acres of 

surface disturbance) and soil disturbance and vegetation loss from other construction projects across the 

4-116 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts 

State (approximately 33,717 acres of surface disturbance annually) has a high potential of affecting 

special status species through habitat loss or degradation and species displacement. 

The Federally-listed species most likely to be affected are gopher tortoise, red-cockaded woodpecker, and 

black pine snake in the East Gulf Coastal Plain, and bald eagles associated with reservoirs and rivers in 

the northern portion of the State. There is some potential to affect the small acreages supporting special 

status species anywhere in the State and a potential statewide to affect Federal- and State-listed aquatic 

species. 

Gopher tortoise could be impacted by surface disturbing activities, including mineral exploration and 

development and other construction projects across the State, in upland areas of the East Gulf Coastal 

Plain where forest practices on private lands have maintained at least marginally suitable habitat. 

Foraging habitat for tortoise could also be affected on non-USFS FMO associated with private inholdings 

in the Chickasawhay, DeSoto and Homochitto National Forests, which support substantial tortoise 

populations. During general construction projects across the State, including private development and 

transportation projects, and construction of wells pads, access roads, and production facilities, gopher 

tortoises could be impacted by the loss or damage to burrows, destruction of foraging habitat, or killed 

during construction or by service vehicles. Construction activities and roads within 600-feet of burrows 

could isolate individuals and reduce reproductive potential within a population. In many cases, the 

presence of gopher tortoises indicates that habitat is suitable for a host of species associated with dry 

longleaf pine forests, many of them special status species, such as the black pine snake (Pituophis 

melanoleucus lodingi), which could also be impacted by activities. 

Red-cockaded woodpecker could be affected by oil and gas development and other general construction 

projects across the State, including private development and transportation projects, through the loss of 

nesting habitat within existing clusters, and through the loss of current or potential foraging habitat within 

0.5 miles of existing clusters. Non-USFS FMO in areas supporting red-cockaded woodpecker is generally 

privately owned and often managed for commercial timber production. Harvest rotations on these 

properties are typically too short to sustain suitable nesting habitat for red-cockaded woodpeckers, 

however there is potential to impact suitable foraging habitat, particularly on non-USFS FMO near the 

Chickasawhay, DeSoto, Homochitto National Forests, or Noxubee NWR, areas that support most of the 

State’s population. 

Throughout the State, breeding and wintering bald eagles could be affected by drilling and other general 

construction projects across the State, including private development and transportation projects, near 

large rivers or reservoirs. Bald eagles are particularly sensitive during courting, nesting, and fledging 

young; in Alabama this typically occurs between December 1 and August 1. Construction activities 

within 1.5 miles of nest sites could result in nest abandonment depending on factors such as visibility and 

tolerance of individual pairs. 

Throughout the State, oil and gas development and other general construction projects, including private 

development and transportation projects, has the potential to impact aquatic and wetland habitats. These 

could result in degradation of water quality through contamination and increased sedimentation, direct 

loss of habitat, and changes in the local hydrography supporting these systems. Increases in sedimentation 

to streams and wetlands by oil and gas development are a factor of well pad design, slope, erodibility of 

the soils, proximity of the disturbance, and the intervening vegetation. The potential for sedimentation 

increases with prolonged or heavy rains that are typical in this area. Cut and fill slopes associated with 

other construction projects across the State are particularly vulnerable before protective plant covers have 

been established. While intact vegetation along riparian zones and around wetlands could substantially 

buffer these areas, the steepness of the intervening slopes, particularly over 25 percent can reduce the 

effectiveness of buffers. Research has shown that a minimum of a 30-foot buffer of vegetation is needed 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-117 
Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts Draft EIS – August 2007 

to control sediments. However, construction activities within 100-feet can reduce stream invertebrates, 

and 1,000-feet or more may be needed to protect some amphibians, reptiles and forest interior birds 

(Wenger 1999). Sediments deposited in intermittent drainages during construction can be transported 

downstream during periods of high water, increasing turbidity and burying aquatic invertebrates in higher 

order streams and potentially affecting special status species substantial distances from the construction 

site, including Louisiana quillwort (Isoetes louisianensis), listed as Federally endangered. 

Filling wetlands, including bogs, seepage slopes, wet flatwoods, and forested swamps for construction 

and maintenance of well pads for oil and gas development and/or other construction projects across the 

State generally alters the site sufficiently to preclude the reestablishment of these communities in the 

foreseeable future, and could result in direct habitat loss for a wide variety of special status species. 

Because of the limited acreage of these vegetation communities, loss of even the small acreages has a 

high potential of destroying or degrading habitat for special status species. Many of these species have 

limited ranges so the list of species potentially affected varies by location. For example, the Mississippi 

CWCS notes 14 special status species are associated with pines seeps and pitcher plant bogs, including 

eight special status crayfish, five of which are endemic. Henslow’s sparrow wintering habitat and 

breeding habitat for Bachman’s sparrow could be lost by construction in or near grassy bogs or wet 

flatwoods. Construction and maintenance activities and other construction projects across the State could 

disrupt the local hydrography supporting seepage slopes or sheetflow to bogs and swamps degrading 

these habitats. 

There are estimated to be 65 caves in Mississippi located in the northeast corner and east central portions 

of the State. Caves by their nature are isolated and support highly endemic faunas often with extremely 

narrow habitat requirements. In Mississippi, this includes two State-listed salamanders and a number of 

bat species. Although the potential to affect these areas is low, caves are particularly sensitive to oil and 

gas development. Even minor alterations in temperature, humidity and water quality or water quantity 

could result in irreversible impacts. Drilling through cave/karst resources could result in contaminants, 

such as drilling fluids and cements, draining into the cave/karst system. Karst habitats could be degraded 

by hydrocarbons from spills or leaks from well casings, storage tanks, reserve pits, pipelines, and 

production facilities that may enter into the cave/karst systems. Additionally, cementing operations could 

affect portions of underground drainage systems by restricting groundwater flow and introducing 

pollutants into karst systems. 

Construction in coastal areas could affect the 18 special status species that are associated with coastal 

marshes and maritime scrub and woodlands, including brown pelican, Wilson’s plover, Mississippi 

diamondback terrapin, and saltmarsh topminnow. Impacts would occur from direct habitat loss, 

destruction of foraging and nesting habitat, and habitat abandonment. 

Although significant habitat degradation and loss would likely occur as a result of the reasonably 

foreseeable actions identified for this analysis, BLM activities would have a minimal contribution to these 

effects on special status species due to the minimal numbers of oil and gas development anticipated (10 

wells) and management protection provided for these species under all alternatives, with Alternatives 2, 3, 

and 4 providing more stringent protection than Alternative 1. BLM would also be required to consult with 

USFWS to identify and establish specific conservation actions that can be taken to mitigate the potential 

effects of land management activities. 

Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 

In addition to the ignition sources associated with development of 10 new oil and gas wells noted in the 

impact analysis, there are over 7,362 existing oil and gas wells throughout Mississippi. An additional 

12,000 oil and gas wells would be developed on non-Federal and USFS FMO over the next 20 years. 

4-118 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts 

Cumulatively, the potential increases in wildland fires from the addition of 10 wells compared to 19,362 

existing and potential wells would not significantly increase the risk of fire in Mississippi. Likewise, the 

infrastructure associated with oil and gas or ROW developments would not significantly improve access 

or provide fuels breaks compared to the cumulative developments and current (1997-2003) rate of 33,717 

acres of land developed annually in Mississippi. 

The cumulative effect of proposed vegetation treatments on the 174 acres of the Hancock County surface 

tract would be in addition to 264,981 acres of vegetation treatments by other Federal agencies, as well as 

prescribed burns performed by State and local agencies and private or corporate forestry operations. The 

proposed treatments would help maintain or restore small areas to their natural regimes, as well as 

improve the ability to protect WUI areas from wildfire. Cumulatively, the implementation of all these 

treatments would reduce the cost of suppressing wildfires. 

Cultural Resources 

As noted in the Alabama cumulative impacts, cultural resources on private surface do not enjoy the same 

legal protections as sites on USFS FMO and non-USFS FMO. As such, oil and gas development in areas 

of private surface and private mineral ownership, or non-mineral developments in areas with private 

surface and FMO, could result in cumulative impacts to cultural resources throughout Mississippi. This 

could result in unmitigated damage and loss of cultural sites and artifacts in areas of private surface and 

mineral ownership where oil and gas wells are developed. Cumulatively, Alternative 2 provides the 

greatest level of protection from cumulative impacts due to the largest number of closed and NSO acres. 

Alternatives 3 and 4 provide the next greatest level of protection. In these areas, the potential for 

inadvertent damage and loss of cultural resources is the lowest. 

An additional 55 acres associated with development of 10 wells on non-USFS FMO and 59,745 acres 

associated with development of an estimated 12,000 additional wells on non-Federal mineral estate and 

USFS FMO would be added to the existing disturbance from development of over 7,000 oil and gas wells 

in Alabama over the past twenty years. Acreage developed on USFS FMO would receive protections 

from Federal law, regulation, and policy. Developments in those areas would be required to comply with 

NHPA and ARPA in inventorying areas and determining eligibility of sites for the NRHP. Additional 

developments on USFS FMO would result in the identification of more cultural sites during inventories. 

Excavation of sites as part of mitigating impacts from development on USFS FMO would enable 

scientific retrieval and study of cultural resources, using today’s technology and methodology. While data 

recovery preserves as much data as possible, the excavated portions of the property would be lost or 

damaged. Removing cultural resources from a site using current scientific methods also reduces future 

scientific value if more accurate methods of analysis are developed. 

Combined with disturbance from mineral development, other Federal agencies perform approximately 

227,720 acres of vegetation treatments throughout Mississippi annually. Approximately 86 percent of the 

treated acres (227,720 acres) would be treated by prescribed fire. Additional acreages would be treated by 

State and local agencies and private individuals. Treatments by Federal agencies would require cultural 

inventories prior to implementation, identifying and protecting cultural sites. However, treatments by 

State and local agencies and private individuals could impact cultural resources through burning and 

suppression efforts. Cumulatively, the alternatives would have little effect on these impacts as the levels 

of treatment and BLM surface acreage are very small in comparison, although Alternatives 2 and 3 would 

have the greatest cumulative effect as it proposes the greatest levels of vegetation treatment to support 

other resources. 

Development throughout Mississippi disturbs approximately 33,717 acres annually. Disposal and 

development of the BLM surface tract in Hancock County would only be permitted in Alternative 4, 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-119 
Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts Draft EIS – August 2007 

although it would have to be managed in a manner to protect Federally listed species and associated 

wetland/aquatic habitat. The potential to disturb, damage or lose cultural resources would be low in these 

instances, but there would be no protections specifically for cultural resources if transferred from Federal 

ownership. Cumulatively, however, management of a disposed Hancock County tract would not result in 

significant additions to the annual disturbances throughout Mississippi. Alternatives 1, 2, and 3 would 

protect any cultural sites in the Hancock County tract. 

The number of sites anticipated to be cumulatively damaged resulting from actions proposed in this RMP 

combined with other cumulative projects and activities is unknown because most areas have not been 

surveyed for cultural resources. 

Visual Resources 

Cumulative impacts on visual resources would occur primarily from activities that affect the visual 

quality of the area. Such impacts would result from mineral development activities, ROW development, 

increased recreational activity, and actions associated with management of vegetative communities and 

fish and wildlife habitat. Surface disturbing activities associated with mineral and ROW development 

would create visual intrusions that could alter the landscape setting and degrade visual quality. The 

disturbance of a maximum of 55 acres across 517,934 acres of Mississippi FMO and possible ROW 

development as a result of management actions would not contribute to significant cumulative impacts. 

Although more than 7,000 wells have been completed in Mississippi since 1983, the minimal number of 

10 additional wells identified in the RFDS would not significantly diminish visual quality. Closing or 

limiting areas to motorized recreation uses and implementing restrictions designed to protect sensitive 

resources would help to maintain the visual quality in restricted areas. Efforts to maintain and improve 

vegetative communities and fish and wildlife habitat would indirectly enhance visual quality through 

improvement of the visual landscape. 

Cumulative impacts would be similar among the four alternatives, as the same level of development is 

expected under any of the alternatives. However, Alternatives 2 and 3 provide for specific actions to 

improve vegetative communities and fish and wildlife habitat, thereby enhancing visual quality. In 

addition, implementing an NSO stipulation within 1,000 feet of aquatic habitats under Alternative 2 

would preserve the visual quality within these areas. No visual impacts are anticipated under all 

alternatives from lands and realty disposal actions since the Hancock Country tract would continue to be 

used for recreation and research site purposes with no expected development. Given the remote marsh 

nature of the tract, any development on adjacent lands would be minimal and the disposal would not 

cumulatively contribute to land development in the area. 

Minerals 

In Mississippi, no cumulative impacts would be anticipated to minerals exploration and development as a 

result of BLM-administered surface tract and non-USFS FMO land use allocations and management 

actions since the RMP would not restrict or preclude mineral development and exploration. In addition, 

an irretrievable commitment of oil and gas would occur from mineral extraction from 10 wells developed 

over the next 20 years in Mississippi. These impacts would be the same for all alternatives. 

Recreation and Travel Management 

Most of Mississippi is not managed by the Federal government, and recreation and travel opportunities 

are often dependant on whether the private landowner allows access or travel access the private surface. 

Therefore, maintaining Federal ownership of public lands under Alternatives 1, 2 and 3 would maintain 

limited opportunities for public recreation and travel. Under Alternative 4, opportunities for travel and 

4-120 Alabama and Mississippi RMP 
Draft EIS – August 2007 Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts 

recreation could be precluded after disposal, cumulatively adding to the current restrictions on private 

lands throughout the State. Although BLM management actions and disposal actions under the 

alternatives could have localized impacts to recreation experience and travel opportunities, no significant 

cumulative impacts would be anticipated because of the small size of the BLM-administered surface tract. 

Cumulative projects and activities (continued mineral development and other construction projects) could 

lead to more travel opportunities associated with increased route construction to support mineral 

development, but there would also be a reduction in primitive/non-motorized recreation opportunities. 

Minerals development on non-USFS FMO lands open to recreation and leasing would result in 

unavoidable adverse impacts to recreation through detracting from the recreational setting. Mineral 

exploration and development activities could have short term effects on the quality of the setting because 

of drilling equipment and long term impacts from road construction and vegetation removal. 

Lands and Realty 

Increasing development leads to a greater demand for lands and realty actions, creating the need for 

additional ROWs for roads, pipelines and powerlines. Restrictions on ROWs under Alternatives 2, 3, and 

4 would have a negligible cumulative effect by reducing routing options and possibly increasing 

construction costs for ROW development since there is only 174 acres of BLM administered lands 

scattered across the State. Increasing development also leads to a greater demand for additional available 

land. 

Social and Economic 

The greatest potential for cumulative socioeconomic impacts is associated with increasing oil and gas 

development throughout Mississippi. The following information indicates that overall Mississippi is 

expected to experience an increase in oil and gas development of 63 percent (between the last 20 years 

and the next 20 years). Overall, there were 7,362 wells permitted over the past 20 years (average of 368 

wells per year) to an anticipated 12,000 total wells over the next 20 years (average of 600 wells per year). 

In Mississippi, the estimated development of 10 new oil and gas wells from the BLM-administered FMO 

constitute less than a tenth of one percent (0.08 percent) of the total wells projected for the State over the 

20 year planning period. Historically, the BLM-administered wells in Mississippi have comprised about 

the same percentage (0.09 percent), indicating a relatively constant although very small proportion of oil 

and gas development over time. Since the BLM-administered FMO oil and gas wells comprise so little of 

the total wells in the Mississippi, there are very little cumulative socioeconomic impacts that could be 

attributed with this anticipated BLM development. 

Many of the cumulative socioeconomic impacts associated with oil and gas development are already 

occurring in the State and would be perpetuated in the future. For instance, oil and gas activity is 

generating employment opportunities and labor earnings for communities that support these types of 

activities. However, the employment and income from BLM-administered oil and gas is likely very low 

since it represents such a small proportion of the total development and production in Mississippi. With 

the increases in overall oil and gas development, socioeconomic characteristics and trends, such as 

infrastructure and community services, may be slightly increasing and better funded as fiscal revenues 

often support these types of services within the State. 

The pace and timing of mineral development activities is dependent on a variety of factors beyond the 

management decisions of BLM. This includes national and international energy demand and prices, 

production factors within the planning area, and business strategies of operators. Because the pace of 

development in the planning area is only an estimate, actual cumulative impacts may vary if the oil and 

gas activity across the two states changes over the planning period. 

Alabama and Mississippi RMP 4-121 
Chapter 4-Cumulative Impacts Draft EIS – August 2007 

Alternative 4 in this Draft RMP-EIS considers Federal disposal of the 174-acre Hancock County tract and 

this tract is likely to be used for recreation and research site purposes, with limited to no development 

occurring. The disposal of this tract of land would not likely have cumulative socioeconomic impacts as 

the acres represent such a small portion of total lands within the State, and the general management of the 

lands is not expected to change. For the socioeconomic impacts of the individual alternatives, please see 

Section 4.13. 

Environmental Justice 

Since the additional expected oil and gas activity locations for the BLM-administered non-USFS FMO 

have not been specified, impacts to these to these populations should be considered at the time of 

implementation. For Mississippi, Section 3.4.13 in Chapter 3 indicates the counties that comprise the 

largest low-income and minority populations. Once oil and gas development locations have been 

specified, Environmental Justice population locations should be revisited to assess any potential 

cumulative impacts to these populations. 

Hazardous Materials 

BLM-authorized activities on surface tracts and non-USFS FMO could include use of hazardous 

materials, substances, and waste (including storage, transportation, and spills). Such activities include oil 

and gas development, coal development, and application of pesticides to improve vegetative communities 

and wildlife habitat. These activities are conducted in compliance with 29 CFR 1910, 49 CFR 100-185, 

40 CFR 100-400, CERCLA, RCRA, SARA, TSCA, and the CWA and other Federal and State regulations 

and policies regarding hazardous materials management. Therefore, if any releases were to occur, it 

would be immediately addressed and remediated in accordance with regulation and cumulative impacts 

are not anticipated. Contribution of hazardous materials, substances, and waste could occur from other 

sources on adjacent lands that could lead to cumulative impacts on BLM lands. 

4-122 Alabama and Mississippi RMP