Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Perry and Overly 1976, Rost 1975, Rost and Bailey 1974, 1979, Thiessen 1976, Ward <br />1976, Ward et.al. 1973, Edge and Mazcum 1991, 1985, Edge et.al, 1987, Lyon 1979, <br />1983). With only two miles of road open to vehicular traffic per square mile, the area <br />impacted can easily exceed half of available elk habitat (Lyon 1983). Available habitat is <br />only partially used, and is thus less effective than it would have been in the absence of <br />roads. This concept helps define the term habitat effectiveness. Habitat effectiveness is a <br />measure of potential use of suitable habitat which is specific to elk. It is the "degree to <br />which a physical wildlife habitat is free from man-caused disturbances, and therefore <br />attractive to wildlife occupancy" (Forest Plan Appendix D, pg D-8). <br />Direction on page III-76 of the Forest Plan States that the Forest Service manage public <br />motorized use on roads and trails to maintain or enhance effective habitat for elk. The <br />objective level of habitat effectiveness for elk within each fourth order watershed is at <br />least 40%. The level of habitat effectiveness is determined by evaluating in combination, <br />hiding and thermal cover, forage and road density and human activity on roads. The <br />HabCap model accomplishes this analysis. The Forest Plan does not state an objective <br />level of habitat effectiveness for deer. <br />An analysis using [he HabCap model was conducted in 1995 and 1998 and documented <br />in the EAs for MCC's Coal Exploration Program (MCC 1996 and 1998 EAs). The <br />current proposal [o drill five GVB's and construct/recons[ruct 2.5 miles of road will <br />maintain the current percentage of elk habitat effectiveness in the analysis area. The <br />proposed access routes can be classified as secondary roads (receiving between 1-5 <br />vehicles per day) during the time of drilling (50 days for 5 GVB sites). The HabCap <br />model assigns a coefficient of .7 % to this category of mileage. Therefore the 2.5 miles <br />of road is calculated in the HabCap model as 1.75 miles. This amount of additional road <br />does not change the current elk habitat effectiveness value. The current habitat <br />effectiveness percentages for elk are 40% during the summer season and 34% during the <br />fall season. Once these sites are drilled, these roads will be used to monitor the drill sites <br />once per week for approximately 2 years. Again, this will not change the current level of <br />elk habitat effectiveness due to the infrequent amount of use on the road. After 2 years <br />these roads aze to be obliterated if new, or reclaimed to the condition [hey were in prior to <br />activities. <br />Habitat effectiveness has the potential to decrease if more roads are <br />constructed/reconstructed and/or the amount of use on those roads and existing roads and <br />trails increases. This will result in azeas which provide security to elk and other wildlife <br />being negatively impacted. Reconstruction reopening ofroutes improves the standard <br />and width of the route and can attract additional motorized use to the area. In many <br />instances the larger [he route the more attractive it is [o people. For this reason it is <br />imperative to maintain effective temporary closures while MCC needs the routes for <br />access and even more important to successfully obliterate roads when access is no longer <br />needed. <br />Under this alternative the placement of a temporary road in Long Draw will be more <br />difficult to obliterate because of the open nature of the vegetation and concave vs. sloped <br />17 <br />