Week Four Review Worksheet
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Northern Virginia Community College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
377
Subject
Geography
Date
Dec 6, 2023
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by ar1920
Week Four Review Worksheet
Must be handed in on Blackboard by 12pm this Thursday
Answer with True or False
Ecological (or environmental) impact assessments (EIA) require decisionmakers to make the
most environmentally sound choice recommended by the EIA.
False
EIAs only are required at the federal and state level.
True
EIAs can be required for the development and decommissioning of a project.
True
Fill in the blank
Populations and habitats can be considered valuable due to their cultural significance, rarity, and
__
ecological significance
________.
Certain ski resorts in Colorado end their ski season early because elk migration takes place in late
spring and their resorts are a part of the migration route. This is an example of
_____
Avoidance
____________ mitigation.
Circle or highlight the correct answer(s)
Indicator/
receptor
is the name assigned to different measures of quantity and quality of
organisms, habitat, and ecosystem functions
when conducting an EIA.
Circle or highlight the correct answer
An EIA:
Suggests alternatives
Provides opportunities for public comment
Illustrates potential consequences of the development
All of the above
Replacing lost organisms or habitat off site of the development is a mitigation tactic called:
Rescue
Reduction
Avoidance
Compensation
Answer the questions to the best of your ability
You are a contractor aiding in the development of an EIA for a proposed resort. This resort will
be built on mature forested areas about 1 mile from a local tributary. Discuss some direct,
indirect, regional, and possible positive effects you will include in the EIA. (you can come up with
some hypothetical situations and bring in some potential concepts from slide 14 and 15 of the
EIA ppt).
There are many possible ways we can look at this as there can positive and negative
effects on the status of that environment in the affected area. I believe that having the
involvement of state and local government policies towards the local tributary would be
beneficial. It’s beneficial as it can limit or prevent damages towards the tributary for example,
waste coming from that resort must be contained rather than leaking it out in the tributary.
Mitigation would be another positive in terms of using the right mitigation tactic such as
Compensation. For example, if the “acre for acre” policy were to be put in this situation, we
could reforest the specific area. We also must look at how creating a resort could possibly lead
to more severity of those species living in that habitat where the resort is. In my opinion its
hard to see how a resort can lead to anything positive towards and ecosystem/environment as
you’re basically taking that part of the habitat from its natural owners.
During the EIA process, you find that a threatened species endemic only to the area in which the
development is proposed. Describe what mitigation tactics you could employ.
Since this situation is dealing with a threat to species as an endemic or like a disease, there are
many options you could handle this. One way to take care of this situation would be
containment as you can contain that harmful disease/effects but also, we can rescue animals.
Rescuing species living in that habitat can prevent the potential spread and contact of the
threat. Lastly, reduction can be beneficial as taking it away or reducing the threat can prove to
be effective. Each tactic can work or intertwine as the main objective is to help/save the
species living in that habitable area where biodiversity is rich and valuable.
Using the provided pdf of
Comments on the Draft Supplement No. 2 To The 1982 Yazoo Area
Pump Project Final Environmental Impact Statement (October 2020),
select 3 comments and
describe the reasons they claim the EIA is lacking (include terms like ‘scope’ and ‘receptor’,
explain whether the comments address impacts that affect ecological, cultural, or other human
environments, and what their suggestions are).
You do not
need to read this entire document!
Just look for your examples, and you can peruse the rest if you’d like.
As demonstrated throughout these comments, the DSEIS contains serious flaws that severely
underestimate and obscure the significant adverse impacts of the Proposed Plan which is clearly
prohibited by the 2008 Clean Water Act § 404(c) Final Determination and the Clean Water Act
404(b)(1) Guidelines. The Conservation Organizations urge the Corps to abandon the Proposed
Plan and the deeply flawed DSEIS, and instead focus on opportunities for providing more
effective, meaningful, sustainable, and immediate benefits to the communities in the Yazoo
Backwater Area while restoring this ecologically critical region.
– This comment shows us that
conservation organizations should ditch the corrupted yet flaw DSEIS and Proposed Plan. Their
main objective should be focusing on supporting the biodiversity providing more effectiveness
towards. Looking at the receptors measuring the quantity and quality of organisms and how
their habitat functions.
In 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) used its Clean Water Act 404(c) authority to
veto construction and operation of the Yazoo Pumps because they would cause “unacceptable
damage” to “some of the richest wetland and aquatic resources in the nation.”10 This veto was
upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, ensuring that EPA’s Clean Water Act
404(c) authority would continue to provide a critical last line of defense against this egregiously
damaging project
. – From this we can see that the having authority of vetoing the construction
and operation of the Yazoo Pumps can cause significant damage to the wetlands. The
construction was vetoed as the scope of it would have caused much severity impact towards
the environment.
In clear violation of EPA’s overriding veto-authority under Clean Water Act Section 404(c), the DSEIS
recommends construction of the same 14,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) pumping station whose
purpose, structure, operation, and impacts fall squarely within the scope of the 2008 veto—which
explicitly prohibits plans that would harm more than 28,400 acres of wetlands. 2 Even the DSEIS, which
severely underestimates wetland impacts, acknowledges that the Proposed Plan will degrade more than
38,744 acres of wetlands3 ; a level of impacts that is unquestionably prohibited by the veto and the
Clean Water Act 404(b)(1) Guidelines.
– From this comment we can see that the scope of the pumping
station falls within the 2008 veto which prohibits the plan which would harm more than acres of
wetland. This comment also exemplifies that the impact of the pumping station could harm the
wetland ecosystem degrading more from the environment. It does address the ecological impact or
severity of the habitats reducing connectivity, increase fragmentation, isolation, and decreased
condition.
*OPTIONAL*: For 4 points extra credit – Click the provided YouTube link. Watch the video and
in a minimum of 250 words, summarize the Mountain Valley Pipeline issues (why this project
is a concern) and what makes an effective public comment on an EIA. Link:
https://youtu.be/mRCSEF3XrVA?si=amMhXxFHKP7HBTez
(You WON’T be tested on this – just
an extra credit opportunity)
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help