TE-AA 2024-2029_Hood_INRMP_Final.pdf

2024-2028

Fort Cavazos Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan

Directorate of Public Works Environmental Division Fort Cavazos, Texas

FORTCAVAZOSINTEGRATEDNATURAL

RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN

This Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) has been developed by III Corps and Fort Cavazos, Texas, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. The signatures below indicate the mutual agreement of the parties concerning the conservation, protection, and management of the installation's natural resources as presented in this plan.

APPROVAL BY:

Lakicia R. Stokes Colonel, US Army Garrison Commander

AMY LUEDERS Digitally signed by AMY LUEDERS . Date: 2024.09 04 14:56·28 -06'00'

A.my Lueders Southwest Regionl'l l Di1-ector

U.S. Fi~h :md Wildlife Scr\'icc y_t:7 ~ bw id Yoskowitz

Executive Director Texas Park and Wildlife Department

Date: 0 2 OCT 2024

Date:

Note: This document is updaredarm11ally for minor changes, and 110 less rhan ewry 5 years for operation and effecr.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department only sign this document during major revisions.

Fort Cavazos Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan

ES-1

Executive Summary

This Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) is for Fort Cavazos and the U.S. Department of the Army in accordance with the Sikes Act Improvement Act, as amended; Department of Defense (DoD) Instruction 4715.03 (Natural Resources Conservation Program); Army Regulation (AR) 200-1, (Environmental Protection and Enhancement); and the most recent Department of the Army and DoD Sikes Act and INRMP guidance memoranda, to include DoDM 4715.03. The purpose of an INRMP is to provide guidance for the implementation and management of natural resources on Fort Cavazos during the 5-year period from 2024 through 2028. This INRMP uses an integrated, adaptive, ecosystem management approach for sustainability and consistency with the military missions on Fort Cavazos. The DoD with the assistance of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) are responsible under the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a-670f, as amended) for carrying out programs and implementing management strategies to conserve and protect biological resources on Fort Cavazos lands. INRMP implementation is imperative for increasing mission capabilities, minimizing military training constraints, and maintaining maximum flexibility.

Integrated natural resources management in an ecosystem framework promotes overall environmental quality and provides for recreational uses while protecting biological diversity and allowing military training access to the resources needed to maintain a high degree of combat readiness at Fort Cavazos. Effective sustainable use of natural resources accomplishes no net loss in the capability of the installation to support the military mission.

This INRMP provides a description of Fort Cavazos and its surrounding environments and presents various management practices designed to mitigate potential negative impacts and enhance the positive effects of the installation’s mission on the regional ecosystem. These management practices complement the requirements of Fort Cavazos to accomplish mission requirements at the highest possible level of efficiency. To obtain an accurate assessment of Fort Cavazos’s environmental impact, environmental analyses were completed to determine the physical and biotic nature of the installation and to determine the potential impacts of operational activities upon the natural environment.

This INRMP is a practical guide for the management, sustainment, and stewardship of all natural resources present on Fort Cavazos, thus helping to ensure no net loss in mission capabilities.

This INRMP uses an interdisciplinary approach whereby scientific information is compiled from a variety of sources.

This INRMP represents a major revision of the 2019-2023 INRMP, reviews the natural resources activities undertaken at Fort Cavazos since implementation of the 2019 INRMP, and proposes new projects and initiatives for the years 2024 through 2028. This revised INRMP includes the procedural requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and DoD Instruction 4715.03 and strives to fully integrate and coordinate the natural resources program with other Fort Cavazos plans and activities.

This INRMP establishes goals that represent a long-term vision for the health and quality of Fort

ES-2

Cavazos’s natural resources. From these goals, objectives and management actions have been identified that follow DoD and USFWS guidance. The INRMP goals and management actions are revised over time to reflect changing missions and environmental conditions.

Actions proposed in this INRMP are subject to NEPA compliance.

This INRMP undergoes internal, NEPA, and interagency review on a regular basis to ensure compliance and integration with other installation management plans including Army guidance and regulations and State and Federal natural resources conservation plans. This INRMP was developed in cooperation with the USFWS and the TPWD. These agencies are partners with the U.S. Army and Fort Cavazos for the conservation of the natural resources that occur on Fort Cavazos. These agencies are stakeholders and signatories for this INRMP along with Installation Command and indicate their consent for the natural resources management program as outlined herein on Fort Cavazos.

i

Table of Contents

Chapter 1 Management Overview ........................................................................ 1-1

1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE .................................................................................. 1-1

1.2 MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY ........................................................................ 1-1

1.3 MISSION AND NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT HISTORY ........................ 1-2

1.4 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ............................................................................. 1-3

1.5 REVIEW, REVISION AND REPORTING ............................................................. 1-7

Chapter 2 Installation Overview .......................................................................... 2-1

2.1 MAPS ........................................................................................................ 2-1

2.2 GENERAL INSTALLATION INFORMATION ....................................................... 2-1

2.2.1 Location ............................................................................................ 2-1

2.2.2 Training Facilities and Ranges ............................................................. 2-6

2.2.3 Regions ............................................................................................. 2-6

2.3 LOCAL AREA LAND USE AND SETTING ......................................................... 2-9

2.4 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT .......................................................................... 2-10

2.5 INSTALLATION HISTORY ........................................................................... 2-11

2.5.1 Pre-Military Land Use ....................................................................... 2-11

2.5.2 Installation Military History ............................................................... 2-11

2.6 CURRENT MILITARY MISSIONS .................................................................. 2-13

2.7 PUBLIC AND AFFILIATES ACCESS ............................................................... 2-15

Chapter 3 Integration Overview .......................................................................... 3-1

3.1 AUTHORITIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ........................................................... 3-1

3.2 EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS ......................................................................... 3-7

3.3 INTERNAL INTEGRATION ............................................................................. 3-9

3.3.1 Installation Plans ................................................................................ 3-9

3.3.2 Internal Coordinating Offices ............................................................. 3-10

Chapter 4 Program Elements ............................................................................... 4-1

4.1 GEOSPATIAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS ........................................................... 4-1

4.2 CONSERVATION LAW ENFORCEMENT ............................................................ 4-4

4.3 CLIMATE RESILIENCE ................................................................................. 4-7

4.4 SOIL, EROSION, AND SEDIMENTATION ........................................................ 4-16

4.5 GEOLOGY ................................................................................................ 4-25

4.6 WATER RESOURCES .................................................................................. 4-27

4.7 SENSITIVE SPECIES ................................................................................... 4-35

4.7.1 Threatened and Endangered Species .................................................... 4-35

4.7.2 Species of Concern ............................................................................ 4-41

4.8 MIGRATORY BIRDS .................................................................................. 4-48

4.8.1 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act Species ..................................... 4-57 ii

4.9 FISH AND WILDLIFE ................................................................................. 4-57

4.9.1 Recreation ........................................................................................ 4-58

4.9.2 Fisheries Management ....................................................................... 4-61

4.9.3 Game Management ............................................................................ 4-63

4.9.4 Non-Game Management ..................................................................... 4-67

4.10 VEGETATION ........................................................................................... 4-74

4.10.1 Flora and Habitat ............................................................................ 4-74

4.10.2 Forest/Woodland ................................................................................. 4-81

4.10.3 Wildland Fire .................................................................................... 4-84

4.10.4 Grounds ........................................................................................... 4-88

4.10.5 Agricultural Leases......................................................................... 4-94

4.11 INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT .............................................................. 4-99

4.12 NOXIOUS WEEDS AND INVASIVE SPECIES ................................................. 4-102

4.13 WILDLIFE AIRCRAFT STRIKE HAZARD ...................................................... 4-105

4.14 COMPATIBLE USE BUFFERS AND CONSERVATION EASEMENTS .................... 4-108

4.15 OTHER PROGRAMS ................................................................................. 4-110

4.15.1 Integrated Training Area Management (ITAM) .......................... 4-110

4.15.2 ITLM Program ........................................................................... 4-114

4.15.3 Cultural Resources ....................................................................... 4-115

Chapter 5 Implementation ................................................................................... 5-1

5.1 ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS .................................................................... 5-1

5.2 NATURAL RESOURCES STAFF AND TRAINING ................................................ 5-4

5.3 KNOWLEDGE AND INFORMATION GAPS ......................................................... 5-5

5.3.1 Pending Issues.................................................................................... 5-5

5.3.2 Unresolved Issues ............................................................................... 5-6

5.4 FUNDING ................................................................................................... 5-7

Chapter 6 Five-Year Implementation Plan .......................................................... 6-1

Chapter 7 National Environmental Policy Act Compliance and Integration ........ 7-1

7.1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 7-1

7.2 INRMP AND NEPA INTEGRATION ............................................................... 7-1

7.3 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION ...................................... 7-2

7.4 SCOPE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT .............................................. 7-3

7.5 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES ........................ 7-4

7.5.1 Proposed Action ................................................................................. 7-4

7.5.2 No Action .......................................................................................... 7-4

7.5.3 Alternatives Eliminated from Further Consideration .............................. 7-4

7.6 STATEMENT OF PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ................................................... 7-8

7.7 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES .................. 7-8

iii

7.7.1 Land Use .......................................................................................... 7-10

7.7.2 Soils ................................................................................................. 7-10

7.7.3 Water Resources ................................................................................ 7-10

7.7.4 Sensitive Species ............................................................................... 7-11

7.7.5 Fish and Wildlife................................................................................ 7-12

7.7.6 Vegetation ........................................................................................ 7-12

7.7.7 Cultural Resources ............................................................................ 7-13

7.7.8 Cumulative Effects ............................................................................ 7-13

7.8 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES AND CONCLUSIONS ................................... 7-14

7.9 INTERAGENCY COORDINATION AND REVIEW ............................................... 7-15

Appendix A. References

A1. LIST OF ACRONYMS

A2. LIST OF LITERATURE CITED

A3. SUMMARY OF CHANGES TO INRMP

Appendix B. Associated and Component Plans

Appendix C. Native Species on Fort Cavazos

C1. BIRD SPECIES

C2. FISH SPECIES

C3. AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES

C4. MAMMAL SPECIES

C6. VASCULAR PLANTS

Appendix D. Agency and Public Correspondence

Appendix E. Finding of No Significant Impact

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1-1. Mission Activities and Potential Effects .................................................................. 1-3 Table 1-2. Goals and Objectives Aligned with Sikes Act Requirements ................................. 1-5 Table 2-1. Fort Cavazos Land Uses .......................................................................................... 2-5 Table 2-2. Physical Characteristics of Regions ........................................................................ 2-5 Table 2-3. Installation Users and Primary Missions ............................................................. 2-12 Table 3-1. Authorities and Responsibilities ............................................................................. 3-4 Table 3-2. External Stakeholders .............................................................................................. 3-7 Table 3-3. Installation Plan Integration ..................................................................................... 3-9 Table 3-4. Additional Internal Coordination .......................................................................... 3-10 Table 4-1. GIS Data to Date ..................................................................................................... 4-1 Table 4-2. Goals and Objectives for the GIS Program ............................................................ 4-3 Table 4-3. Goals and Objectives for Conservation Law Enforcement ..................................... 4-5 Table 4-4. Goals and Objectives for Climate Change ................................................... 4-9 Table 4-5. Summary of Measured Variables in Western Training Area ............................. 4-14 Table 4-6. Goals and Objectives for Soil, Erosion, and Sedimentation ............................... 4-16 iv

Table 4-7. Goals and Objectives for Water Resources .......................................................... 4-27 Table 4-8. Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species ........................................ 4-29 Table 4-9. Goals and Objectives for Threatened and Endangered Species Management ..... 3-34 Table 4-10. Species of Concern ............................................................................................... 4-35 Table 4-11. Goals and Objectives for Species of Concern ..................................................... 4-39 Table 4-12. Migratory Bird Future Research Goals and Timeframes .................................... 4-43 Table 4-13. DoD Species Ranking and Occurrence on Fort Cavazos .................................... 4-43 Table 4-14. Goals and Objectives for Migratory Birds ........................................................... 4-49 Table 4-15. Goals and Objectives for Recreation ................................................................... 4-53 Table 4-16. Fish Stocking Record ............................................................................. 4-55 Table 4-17. Goals and Objectives for Fisheries Management ................................................ 4-55 Table 4-18. Goals and Objectives for Game Management ...................................................... 4-60 Table 4-19. Results of Milkweed Stem Count Survey ................................................. 4-62 Table 4-20. Goals and Objectives for Non-Game Management ............................................. 4-66 Table 4-21. Goals and Objectives for Vegetation Monitoring ................................................ 4-72 Table 4-22. Goals and Objectives for Forest/Woodland Management ................................... 4-76 Table 4-23. Goals and Objectives for Wildland Fire Management ......................................... 4-79 Table 4-24. Native Plant List for Landscaping on Fort Cavazos ............................................ 4-82 Table 4-25. Goals and Objectives for Grounds Maintenance ................................................. 4-86 Table 4-26. Animal Unit Equivalents ...................................................................................... 4-87 Table 4-27. Stocking Rates and Calculations for each Fort Cavazos GMU .......................... 4-88 Table 4-28. Grazing Management Units by Training Area and Acreage .............................. 4-90 Table 4-29. Goals and Objectives for Agricultural Leases (Grazing) ..................................... 4-90 Table 4-30. Goals and Objectives for Pest Management ......................................................... 4-93 Table 4-31. Goals and Objectives for Invasive Species Management .................................... 4-97 Table 4-32. Goals and Objectives for WASH Prevention .................................................... 4-100 Table 4-33. Goals and Objectives for the Army REPI Program .......................................... 4-103 Table 5-1. Fort Cavazos Natural Resources Management Staff ............................................... 5-4 Table 7-1. Road Map Indicating NEPA Analysis and Corresponding INRMP Section ......... 7-2 Table 7-2. Potential Environmental Effects of the Alternatives ........................................... 7-15

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2-1. Installation Map ..................................................................................... 2-2 Figure 2-2. Constraints Map ..................................................................................... 2-3 Figure 2-3. Local Community Map ............................................................................ 2-4 Figure 2-4. Region Map ............................................................................................................. 2-6 Figure 4-1. Soil Types Map .................................................................................................... 4-10 Figure 4-2. Water Erosion Potential Map ............................................................................... 4-12 Figure 4-3. Topography Map .................................................................................................. 4-19 Figure 4-4. Watersheds Map ................................................................................................... 4-22 Figure 4-5. Endangered Species Habitat Map ......................................................................... 4-30 Figure 4-6. Hunting Areas Map .............................................................................................. 4-58 Figure 4-7. Military Monarch Initiative NFC Proposed Area Map ........................................ 4-63 Figure 4-8. Vegetative Cover Types Map ............................................................................... 4-69 Figure 4-9. Forest Cover Change (2000-2016) Map ................................................................ 4-74 Figure 4-10. Grazing Management Units Map ........................................................... 4-89

1-1

Chapter 1 Management Overview

1.1 Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) is to guide the natural resources management program at Fort Cavazos, Texas, from fiscal year (FY) 2024 to 2028, in accordance with the Sikes Act Improvement Act (SAIA), as amended through 2003;

Department of Defense (DoD) Instruction 4715.03 (Natural Resources Conservation Program, 1996); Army Regulation (AR) 200-1, (Environmental Protection and Enhancement, 2007); and the most recent Department of the Army and DoD Sikes Act and INRMP guidance memoranda.

This INRMP is the principle guiding document for land management activities on Fort Cavazos, is a major revision of the 2019-2023 INRMP, and has been restructured based on the INRMP Template issued by the U.S. Army Environmental Command. This INRMP allows Fort Cavazos to achieve its goal of ensuring the sustainability of desired future conditions while maintaining ecosystem viability. In addition, this INRMP ensures that natural resources conservation measures and Army activities on Fort Cavazos lands are integrated and consistent with Federal stewardship requirements.

This INRMP addresses the geographic area associated with the contiguous properties of Fort Cavazos, with particular emphasis on the training areas. It provides management measures that were developed through consideration of various alternatives for meeting resource-specific goals and objectives at Fort Cavazos. This INRMP also provides rationale for why certain management measures have been selected for implementation and others have not, which are supported by analysis of resource-specific screening criteria. This INRMP is based on the philosophy of ecosystem management with the intent of demonstrating the interdependency between the military mission and natural resources management.

1.2 Management Philosophy

The management measures and strategies that will be implemented at Fort Cavazos have been developed with consideration for the interrelationships between the individual components of the ecosystem, the requirements of the military mission, and other land use activities. The focus is on maintaining the structure, diversity, and integrity of biological communities, while recognizing that the Soldiers and military mission are a vital component of the ecosystem.

An adaptive management strategy has been incorporated into this INRMP to monitor the temporal and spatial dynamics of the ecosystem and to adjust the management measures and strategies based on improved knowledge and data. Monitoring programs will generate the data needed to determine whether the management measures and strategies are effective in achieving their intended goals and objectives. This management approach will preserve and enhance the natural resources while providing the optimum environmental conditions required to sustain the military mission and realistic training conditions at Fort Cavazos. Management measures in this INRMP were developed based on current conditions of the resources, the military mission, and activities as they are anticipated.

1-2

1.3 Mission and Natural Resources Management History

The Army recognizes that a healthy and viable natural resources base is required to support the military mission. Areas that are deemed unusable for training affect the military mission. This INRMP ensures that environmental considerations are an integral part of planning activities at Fort Cavazos and that natural resources are protected in accordance with Army regulations and policies.

Military operations performed at Fort Cavazos have the potential to alter the environmental setting and condition of the natural resources. The absence of long-term, collaborative management measures to properly conserve and restore natural resources could potentially impede Fort Cavazos’s ability in continuing to adequately train Soldiers. Environmental damage can place other artificial constraints on training, such as the following:

• Loss of training acreage,

• Decreased tactical maneuverability,

• Increased land and natural resources maintenance costs,

• Increased safety hazards, and

• Civil or criminal liability.

The Soldiers who utilize Fort Cavazos are trained to be aware of the environmental effects of their operations and to recognize that their actions in the field directly affect the long-term sustainability of the training lands and their ability to continue training. Training the Soldiers to understand their environmental stewardship responsibilities assists in preventing environmental degradation during training activities.

The primary mission of Fort Cavazos is to conduct readiness training, promote survivability of Soldiers, and provide combat-ready forces for worldwide deployment. Environmental initiatives and plans are typically considered secondary and should not inhibit military mission requirements. In most instances, environmental initiatives and plans are in agreement with military requirements and are generally transparent to commanders in the field. For instances with apparent disagreement, discussion amongst trainers, commanders, and subject-matter-experts often resolves differences. It is important to consider limitations due to the presence of naturally occurring resources that cannot be altered, as well as limitations resulting from natural resources that have already been affected.

Existing natural resources on Fort Cavazos can influence the manner in which the military mission is executed. Not only is proper management of natural resources and their use by the military a sound environmental practice, but it also directly supports the Fort Cavazos mission to provide sustainable training opportunities. This INRMP considers the effects of such natural resources on the mission. Examples of training activities and their effects on the environment, as well as examples of how degradation to natural resources adversely affects the military mission, are provided in Table 1-1.

Fort Cavazos Regulation 200-1, Environment and Natural Resources, dated April 2014, prescribes policies, assigns responsibilities, and establishes procedures for protecting the environment while preserving natural and cultural resources. Commanders are responsible for

1-3 integrating environmental management principles and environmental protection activities and programs, to the fullest extent possible, into the planning and execution of the mission.

Table 1-1. Mission Activities and Potential Effects

Activity/Use

Potential Effects on:

Natural Resources Training/Combat Readiness

Vehicles operated off-road

Degradation of soil, water, and vegetation

Loss of training realism

Erosion gullies

Safety hazards in eroded areas

Soil compaction Contamination of soils could limit availability of training

Soil and water contamination from field maintenance

Increased maintenance costs

Foxholes Defilades

Soil displacement

Erosion; eroded soils unable to support vegetation

Safety hazards in eroded

Bivouac areas Soil compaction and/or erosion

Loss of vegetation understory and overstory

Loss of camouflaging for vehicles and troop locations

Limit usable training areas Range firing Soil compaction, erosion, and inversion Immobilized vehicles mired in mud

Loss of vegetation understory and overstory

Potential administrative restrictions as a result of disturbance to Federally protected species or habitat

Wildfires from pyrotechnics, tracer ammunition, or shell detonation

Accidental fires result in loss of usable training areas

Artillery training produces a heavy metals residue

May result in administrative restrictions

1.4 Goals and Objectives

The strategic goals of this INRMP conform to the goal of the Conservation Program of the DoD, which is to support the military mission by:

Providing for sustained use of its land and air resources, Protecting valuable natural and cultural resources for future generations, Meeting all legal requirements, and

1-4

Promoting compatible multiple uses of those resources.

Fort Cavazos’s Natural and Cultural Resources Management Branch (NCRMB) has identified a number of objectives necessary to achieve these goals. Table 1-2 aligns Sikes Act requirements with Fort Cavazos’s objectives and program elements.

The ability to achieve these goals depends directly on the health and condition of the natural resources. Protecting the ecological and biological integrity of the training lands ensures that those lands will continue to provide the vegetation, soil, and water resources necessary for sustainable military training. Such protection will also preserve popular outdoor recreational activities at Fort Cavazos, such as hunting, fishing, birding, boating, and hiking. Implementation of ecosystem management principles will provide the quantity and diversity of fish and game for enjoyable hunting and fishing experiences. Proper management of the ecosystem will maintain water quality at a level that can support quality fisheries and presents no potential risks to human health.

1- 5 F or t C av az os I nt eg ra te d N at ur al R es ou rc es

M an ag em en t

Pl an

T ab le

-2 . G oa ls a nd

O bj ec ti ve s

A lig ne d w it h Si ke s

A ct

R eq ui re m en ts

G oa l O bj ec tiv es

IN

R M

P 1.

N o ne t l os s in t he c ap ab ili ty o f m ili ta ry in st al la tio n la nd s t o su pp or t t he m ili ta ry m is sio n of th e in st al la tio n.

M ag e al l r es ou rc es to su pp or t l on g-te rm su sta in m en t o f t he in sta lla tio n’ s tra in in g m is sio

C ha pt er s 1 -6

2.

E st ab lis hm en t o f s pe ci fic n at ur al r es ou rc m ag em en t g oa ls an d ob je ct iv es a nd ti m e fr am fo r pr op os ed a ct io

Im pl em en t a n at ur al re so ur ce s m an ag em en t p ro gr am th at re fle ct s th e pr in ci pl es o f e co sy ste m m an ag em en t.

C ha pt er s 1 , 4 an d

3.

I nt eg ra tio n of

, a nd c on si st en cy a m on g, th e va ri ou s ac tiv iti es c on du ct ed u nd er th e pl an

U se a da pt iv e te ch ni qu es to p ro vi de fl ex ib ili ty o f m an ag em en t s tra te gi ba se d on in cr ea se d kn ow le dg e an d da ta g ai ne d fro m m on ito rin g pr og ra m s an d sc ie nt ifi c lit er at ur e.

ha pt er

4.

P ro vi de fo r fis h an d w ild lif e m an ag em en t, la nd ag em en t, fo re st m an ag em en t, an d fis h an d w ild lif e-or ie nt ed r ec re at a.

S ee k to m ai nt ai n or in cr ea se th e le ve l o f b io di ve rs ity o f n at iv e sp ec ie s.

b.

P ro te ct se ns iti ve a nd e co lo gi ca lly si gn ifi ca nt h ab ita ts lo ca te d on

F or t C av az os c.

P ro te ct w oo dl an d re so ur ce s fro m u na cc ep ta bl e da m ag e an d de gr ad at io n re su lti ng fr om in se ct s an d di se as e, a ni m al d am ag e, n on

-n at iv e in va siv e sp ec ie s, an d w ild fir e;

a nd m an ag e th e re so ur ce s in a m an ne r t ha t s up po rts th e m ili ta ry m is d.

ro te ct so il re so ur ce s f ro m e ro si on a nd d es ta bi liz at io n th ro ug h pr ev en tio n an d re sto ra tio n ef fo rts e.

P ro te ct a nd p re se rv e cu ltu ra l r es ou rc es

C ha pt

5.

ro vi de fo r fis h an d w ild lif e ha bi ta t e nh an ce m en t or m od ifi ca ag e w ild lif e an d fis he rie s r es ou rc es w ith in th e pr in ci pl es a gu id el in es o f e co sy st em m an ag em en t t o m ai nt ai n pr od uc tiv e ha bi ta ts vi le p op ul at io ns o f n at iv e sp ec ie s.

Se ct io n

4.

6.

W et la nd p ro te ct io n, e nh an ce m en t, an d re st or at io n w he re n ec es sa ry fo r su pp or t o f f is h an d Pr ev en t t he d eg ra da tio n of w at er q ua lit y, p ro te ct a qu at ic a nd ri pa ria n ha bi ta ts, a nd id en tif y an d re sto re d eg ra de d ha bi ta ts.

Se ct io ns

.6

7.

P ub lic a cc es s to th e m ili ta ry in st al la tio n th at is ne ce ss ar y or a pp ro pr ia te s ub je ct to r eq ui re m ts ss ar y to e ns ur e sa fe ty a nd m ili ta ry se cu ri ty a.

P ro vi de q ua lit y co ns um pt iv e an d no n-co ns um pt iv e re cr ea tio na l op po rtu ni tie s w hi le a vo id in g im pa ct s on tr ai ni ng a nd m ai nt ai ni ng ba la nc ed a nd d iv er se e co sy st em b.

P ro vi de a p os iti ve c on tri bu tio n to th e co m m un ity b y of fe rin g in fo rm at iv e an d ed uc at io na l i ns tru ct io n an d op po rtu ni tie s.

Se ct io n

1- 6 F or t C av az os I nt eg ra te d N at ur al R es ou rc es

M an ag em en t oa l O bj ec tiv

IN

M

P 8.

S us ta in ab le u se b y th e pu bl ic o f na tu ra l r es ou to t he e xt en t su ch u se i s no t in co ns is te nt w ith t he ed s o f fis h an d w ild lif e re so ur ce s m an ag em en t.

M on ito r o ut do or re cr ea tio na l o pp or tu ni tie s to e ns ur e th ey d o no t c on fli w ith n at ur al re so ur ce s o r t he m ili ta ry m is sio n on th e in sta lla io n

4.

9.

E nf or ce m en t o f a pp lic ab le n at ur al r es ou rc es la w s an d re gu la tio ns

M ai nt ai n an a de qu at e nu m be r o f C on se rv at io n La w E nf or ce m en t O ff ic er s to p ro te ct th e na tu ra l r es ou rc es o f F or t C av az os b y en fo rc in g la w s an d re gu la tio ns

Se ct io n

4.

. R ev ie w o f I N

R M

P as to o pe ra tio n an d ef fe ct b y th e pa rt ie s on a r eg ul ar b as is, b ut n ot le ss o ft en th an e ve ry ye ar s.

a.

A llo ca te fu nd s f or

IN

R M

P re vi ew a nd u pd b.

on tin ue c oo rd in at io n w ith U

.S . F is h an d

W ild lif e

Se rv ic e an d

Te xa s Pa rk s an d

W ild lif e

D ep ar tm en t.

Se ct io n

1.

. P ro te ct a nd p ro vi de a b en ef it to th re at d en da ng er ed s pe ci es a.

P ro vi de sp ec ia l p ro te ct io n an d m an ag em en t t ha t l ea ds to th e re co ve ry o f th re at en ed a nd e nd an ge re d sp ec ie s an d co ns er ve s s pe ci es o f c on ce rn ei r h ab ita ts so th at n ew s pe ci es a re n ot li ste b.

ro te ct ra re a nd u ni qu e pl an t s pe ci es id en tif ie d as s ta te o r l oc al ly ra re bu t w ith ou t l eg al p ro te ct io n sta tu s, to th e ex te nt p ra ct ic al w ith ou t re str ic tio ns o n op er at io ns c.

E xe m pt c ri ti ca l h ab it at d es ig na ti on b y pr ov id in g a be ne fi t t o th e sp ec s.

io n

4.

A pp en di x B

1-7

1.5 Review, Revision and Reporting

The Sikes Act specifies that a formal review by the stakeholders must be completed no less often than every five years; however, DoD policy (specifically DODI4715.05) requires installations to review INRMPs with regard to operation and effect annually. These reviews are intended to determine whether the existing INRMP is being implemented to meet the requirements of the Sikes Act and contributing to the conservation and rehabilitation of natural resources on Fort Cavazos. In accordance with these regulations and AR200-1, this INRMP will be reviewed and updated as appropriate in concert with installation needs to obtain mutual agreement in coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD), and other internal and external stakeholders. A 5-year update will not be required if circumstances have not changed.

Interagency Coordination. In June 2015, the USFWS published Guidelines for Coordination on Integrated Natural Resources Management Plans. In July 2015, the DoD released Guidelines for Streamlined INRMP Review. Additionally, The INRMP Implementation Manual (DOD Manual 4715.03) was published in December 2017. These documents clarify and describe a streamlined process for reviewing and updating existing INRMPs. The goal of using a streamlined approach for updating INRMPs is to reduce the workload for all parties, ensure INRMPs are current, and sustain mission flexibility. This guidance calls for all proposed changes be outlined in a text, table, or matrix format so that reviewing agencies may expedite review times. A table outlining the updates in this INRMP is included as Appendix A3.

Annual reviews will be conducted between Fort Cavazos, the USFWS field offices (Austin and Arlington, TX), and the TPWD. Annually, formal agency consultation letters are e-mailed to the USFWS and the TPWD. These letters officially notify USFWS and TPWD of Fort Cavazos’s intent to prepare an INRMP and associated National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation (if needed). Fort Cavazos distributes the draft update to the USFWS and TPWD for review and comment. Once comments are incorporated, Fort Cavazos distributes the final update to the TPWD and to both the USFWS field offices (Austin and Arlington, TX) and the USFWS Regional Sikes Act Coordinator (Albuquerque, NM). Any additional comments are incorporated into the final version of the INRMP. Once signed by all parties, the updated INRMP is considered reviewed for operation and effect and will restart the 5-year window for compliance. Previous NEPA documentation is assessed to ensure that the effects of the natural resources management practices in future INRMP updates have been adequately addressed. A Draft Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI) is prepared, if appropriate. Applicable notes and written records documenting consultations is maintained in the official Administrative Record.

1-8

This page intentionally left blank.

2-1

Chapter 2 Installation Overview

2.1 Maps

Figure 2-1 depicts the installation boundary with major landmarks and features, including the impact area, training areas, cantonment and recreation areas, and leased areas.

Figure 2-2 depicts the impact and surface danger zone areas, restricted areas, parks and open spaces, and major wetlands/waters that are considered (or are likely considered) “waters of the U.S” by the U.S Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).

Figure 2-3 depicts the Installation in relation to other land uses, Army Readiness and Environmental Protection Integraton (Army REPI) priority areas, parcels in easements, and other regional opportunities or constraints.

Note: All maps in this INRMP were prepared by NCRMB GIS staff utilizing 2018 data.

2.2 General Installation Information

2.2.1 Location

Fort Cavazos Military Reservation is located in central Texas within Bell and Coryell Counties adjacent to the City of Killeen. Fort Cavazos lies between the major cities of Waco, 39 miles to the northeast, and Austin, 60 miles to the south. Food Cavazos is bounded on the east by Belton Lake and on the south by the cities of Copperas Cove, Killeen, and Harker Heights.

The City of Gatesville is located north of the installation.

The installation has three cantonment areas (designated the Main Cantonment Area, West Fort Cavazos, and North Fort Cavazos), two instrumented airfields, and maneuver and live-fire training areas (see Figure 2-1). The Main Cantonment Area is at the southern edge of the large, central portion of the installation and is adjacent to the City of Killeen. West Fort Cavazos cantonment area is between the Cities of Copperas Cove and Killeen, in the center of the southern extension of the installation (south of Highway 190 / Interstate 14). North Fort Cavazos (NFC) cantonment area is near the City of Gatesville, in the northernmost part of the installation.

Fort Cavazos is one of the Army’s premier installations, providing training facilities for the full range of mission requirements, including maneuver exercises for units up to brigade level, firing of live weapons, and aviation training. Fort Cavazos’s mission is to provide an efficient and effective power projection platform—training, mobilization, deployment, and sustainment support—to produce the world’s best trained and most effective Soldiers. Fort Cavazos provides state-of-the-art facilities to support the full spectrum of training requirements of today's modern armed forces. Installation lands and ranges provide excellent training opportunities for mechanized maneuver and small unit exercises, combined arms training, and live-fire training.

Many different types of military units conduct a variety of training on Fort Cavazos.

Representative units and their subsequent missions are outlined in Section 2.6.

2-2

2-3

Figure 2-1. Installation Map

2-4

Figure 2-2. Constraints Map

2-5

Figure 2-3. Local Area (Region) Map

2-6

2.2.2 Training Facilities and Ranges

Fort Cavazos encompasses just over 218,823 acres (342 square miles) of land, consisting of 132,525 acres of maneuver training area and 64,272 acres of range Live-Fire T r a i n i n g Area (LTA). Maneuver training land comprises roughly 61 percent of the installations total land acreage. Table 2-1 lists the breakdown of current land use on Fort Cavazos.

Table 2-1. Fort Cavazos Land Use Primary Land Uses Acreage Percent

Training and Live-Fire Areas 196,797 89.9 Maneuver Land 132,525 60.6 Live-Fire Areas 64,272 29.4

Cantonment Areas and Belton Lake Outdoor Recreation Area

22,026 10.1

Total Acreage 218,823 100.0 Source: USAG Fort Cavazos Fact Sheet (5 January 2018)

2.2.3 Regions

For ease of allocating resources (staff and funding) for this INRMP, Fort Cavazos’s NCRMB has divided the installation into functional regions The regions are listed in Table 2-2, and a map of the regions is included as Figure 2-4.

Table 2-2. Physical Characteristics of Regions Land Cover Streams Water Bodies

Regions Bare Ground* Vegetation Stream Miles

Acres Percent

Area Acres Acres Percent Acres Percent

Live-Fire Area 62,882 3,210 5.1 58,841 93.6 307.9 9.1 0.01

North Fort Cavazos 5,885 156 2.7 4,645 78.9 38.8 22.9 0.39

Northeast 27,062 366 1.4 26,673 98.6 142.0 4.5 0.02

Northwest 36,298 1,621 4.5 34,593 95.3 184.9 52.6 0.14

South 17,528 467 2.7 15,117 86.2 76.2 61.4 0.35

Southeast 23,514 787 3.3 22,139 94.2 92.2 134.1 0.57

Southwest 31,697 1,754 5.5 29,511 93.1 198.9 220.6 0.70

ALL REGIONS 204,866 8,361 4.1 191,519 93.5 1040.9 505.2 0.25

*Bare Ground is defined as areas devoid of vegetation. Source: NCRMB GIS Data 2018

Live-Fire Training Area The LTA and impact areas do not host much maneuver training and traffic is limited primarily to vehicles moving to and from the ranges. Access to the impact area is restricted due to danger from direct and indirect fire from active ranges and unexploded ordnances.

The LTA has the second-largest acreage of endangered species habitat of any region. In addition, the LTA region has 252 miles of streams, including Cowhouse Creek, which empties

2-7 into Belton Lake, the drinking water supply for Fort Cavazos and surrounding municipalities.

Figure 2-4. Regions/ Management Units Map

Because very little maneuvering occurs in the LTA, this region is not subjected to the same potential degradation as other areas, such as the Northwest and Southwest regions in the Western M a n e u v e r Area (discussed b e l o w ) . Although the restricted nature of the area precludes access to a s i g n i f i c a n t portion of the LTA region, most of the high-priority management activities are implemented to t h e highest practical extent.

South The South region includes the West Fort Cavazos cantonment. West Fort Cavazos consists of Robert Gray Army Airfield (AAF), the Ammunition Supply Point, research and administrative facilities for the Operation Testing Command, support facilities, and housing for military personnel, which accommodates both families and unaccompanied troops. The South region is used primarily by small, mechanized units, dismounted infantry training, and for logistical training.

The low-impact training that occurs in the South region results in minimal potential

2-8 degradation of the resources in the area. Habitat management is a key activity in this location due to the amount of endangered species habitat.

Southwest The Southwest region constitutes the southern portion of the Western Maneuver Area. Training in this region consists of battalion- and brigade-level training, which is conducted year-round.

Of all the regions o n t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n , t h e S o u t h w e s t region h a s t h e g r e a t e s t p e r c e n t a g e o f a r e a r e c e i v i n g training disturbance. The level of training and associated disturbance causes the Southwest region to have the largest number of acres and percentage of bare ground of any of the regions.

Because of the large amount of bare ground, management activities focus on stabilizing the soils, increasing the vegetative cover, minimizing erosion, and improving the sustainability of the training area. The Southwest region contains many streams; therefore, aquatic habitat, fisheries, and water quality are at risk from sedimentation. The endangered species habitat in the Southwest REGION is minimal in comparison to other regions.

Northwest The Northwest region constitutes the northern portion of Fort Cavazos’s Western Maneuver Area, and training in this area is similar to the training that occurs in the Southwest region. The Northwest REGION has the most extensive gully network of all the regions on the installation.

Sediment from sheet and rill erosion in the Northwest region is transported into the various streams associated with Cowhouse Creek and eventually settle into Belton Lake.

The degradation of the vegetative cover in the Northwest region has resulted in an extensive gully network that requires significant resources for repair, as well as to prevent further erosion and sediment loading in streams. Gully plugs have significantly reduced gully erosion in these areas. A primary focus for the Northwest region is revegetation of bare areas and increasing the density of the vegetative cover.

Furthermore, the Northwest region contains the largest area of black-capped vireo habitat on the Installation. Management activities have and will continue to focus on maintaining the ecological integrity of the habitat to ensure that Fort Cavazos continues to monitor the species in accordance with the post-delisting monitoring plan. Habitat for the golden-cheeked warbler is also located in this area.

North Fort Cavazos Activities at NFC are similar to those of the main cantonment area. Nearly a third of the region is cantonment area; the remaining area consists of deciduous forest and woodlands. The Leon River forms the northern border, and there are potential jurisdictional wetlands within the floodplain.

The NFC region receives relatively little disturbance from training and therefore degradation is minimal. Endangered species habitat is found in this area and represents less than 1 percent of the total endangered species habitat on the installation. The primary focus for management on the NFC region is to maintain ecological integrity.

2-9

Northeast The Northeast region is heavily vegetated and cross-compartmentalized by terrain features, providing limited value as a mechanized maneuver area. The area is used year-round primarily for vehicle maneuvering, dismount operations, and military police training. The Northeast region contains a significant amount of endangered species habitat. It has restrictive terrain and vegetation, and therefore training is normally conducted on roads and trails.

The Northeast region has the most contiguous and the greatest quantity of golden-cheeked warbler (Setophaga chrysoparia) habitat. In addition, the Northeast region has the highest known concentration of karst habitat and features compared to any other regions on Fort Cavazos. Significant effort is expended to protect these sensitive habitats and the species inhabiting them. In addition, surveys will continue for additional caves and the endemic karst/cavernicole species inhabiting them. Invasive species identification/control will continue in the Northeast region to minimize their impact on the sensitive habitats and species within the area.

A significant portion of this region is bordered by water, including Belton Lake. As a result, it is important to maintain vegetated watersheds and riparian buffers to protect water quality, aquatic habitat, and biological communities, including fisheries.

Southeast The southeast region is used year-round for tracked-vehicle maneuver and dismounted training.

This region is heavily vegetated and contains a significant amount of endangered species habitat. The northern border consists of Cowhouse Creek and Belton Lake. The Belton Lake Outdoor Recreation Area (BLORA), Fort Cavazos’s premier outdoor recreation area, is within the Southeast region.

The majority of the habitat within the Southeast region is golden-cheeked warbler habitat.

The Southeast region contains some karst habitat, which will continue to be monitored and protected. Surveys for additional caves and species will continue in this area.

Cowhouse Creek and Belton Lake compose the northern border of this region. As with the Northeast region, it is important to maintain vegetated watersheds and riparian buffers to protect water quality, aquatic habitat, and biological communities, including fisheries.

2.3 Local Area Land Use…