PERMFILE47151 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Section 779.20 (c) Continued. • Indirect impacts to wildlife following vegetation desctruction may be summarized as follows: (i) Changer in nutrient flora to "down- stream" ecosystems; and (ii) Overcrowding and increased competition for resources on adjacent unaffected areas. Changes in surface water quality and quantity both directly and indirectly affect wildlife. This may be significant and will be addressed in following sections. Significant wildlife groups inhabiting the mine plan and adjacent ~reas which may be adversely affected by mining operations would bey wild ungulates (elk and mule deer), black bear, beaver, lago- morphs, sage grouse, blue grouse and raptors. Any impacts to other wildlife species or groups would likely be relatively minor on a long term and regional basis. Impacts to the less significant wildlife groups may be inferred from the introductory discussion concerning major components of the local ecosystem as specific • information on these species are not available. Elk. Impacts to elk may come from sev:ral aspects of mining. Human activity (especially on foot) and presence (through harass- ment, poaching, and legal hunting) will contribute to mortality and emigration on a short term basis. Poaching, elk-vehicle collisions along access roads, and general mining activity (e.g., blasting and operation of machinery and equipment) will affect elk throughout the life of the mine. These activities will cause el.k to move to a distan^_e wtiE:re they can tolerate such activity. However, as dis- cussed earlier, elk appear able to adapt easily to human presence. Acclimation to mining activity may reduce their avoidance reactions, Ward and Cupal (1979), causing animals to be more prone to hunting and/or vehicle collision mortality. An additional impact on elk may be increased by local hunting pressure following mining if access into an area is improved by mining activities. • 779-242