Laserfiche WebLink
<br />11/g4/1g99 a4:~8 <br /> <br />7198735126 <br /> <br />U S FOREST WWSTRIE <br /> <br />PAGE 86 <br /> <br />000299 <br /> <br />Although no studies of lynx habitat relatiol7!jhips exist, <br /> <br /> <br />.snowshoe hare are associated with early successiona.l forests, <br /> <br /> <br />such as regenerating sta.nds following clear cutting. Log9i17g <br /> <br /> <br />operations in Maine's expansive northern forests produce a <br /> <br /> <br />mosa.ic of stands of mixed a.ge ilnd species composition. <br /> <br /> <br />theydo not isolate forested stands. Private. unpa.ved logging <br /> <br /> <br />roads in the State have low tralfic volumes and should not be <br /> <br /> <br />b.uriers to lynx <br /> <br />Several of these concerns Maine addressed apply to Colorado. <br /> <br />Montana's comments to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service include: <br />"Lynx in the NRMR (Northern Rocky Mountain Region) do not <br /> <br />warrant listing under the E5A, and therefore should be <br />removed from the proposed contiguous U.S. district <br /> <br /> <br />population segment. " <br /> <br /> <br />New York stated the following in their opposition to listing: <br /> <br /> <br />"Finally, authority for lynx management and conserval:ion <br /> <br /> <br />should rest with the states involved." and 'The proposed <br /> <br /> <br />rule uses anecdotal information on lynx occurrence as an <br /> <br /> <br />indication of historic range for the species." <br /> <br /> <br />Wyoming Department of Agriculture's response to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife <br /> <br /> <br />Service induded; <br /> <br /> <br />"The Department believes at this point that there is a <br /> <br /> <br />significant lack of information about how to provide <br />Page 5 <br />