eliminated and movements of wildlife hampered with vegetation 

 alteration or removal. Most of the length of Stanley Creek 

 will experience construction activity which will affect much 

 of the stream riparian zone. A well-used wildlife movement 

 corridor will be crossed by construction and ultimately bi- 

 sected by the utility corridor. Most large wildlife species 

 are displaced when construction begins. Displaced animals 

 generally do not survive; there is usually no place else to 

 move because if suitable habitat does exist, then it is 

 usually at or near carrying capacity with the same species 

 which is attempting to emigrate (Thompson 1977) . If human 

 activity causes wildlife to permanently avoid an area even 

 though suitable habitat might be available, the avoidance 

 is equivalent to a permanent reduction in carrying capacity 

 (Thompson 1977) . It is impossible to predict the extent of 

 animal losses which may result from restricted access (RAB 

 and F&WB 1979) . In addition to reduced carrying capacity on 

 over crowded ranges, construction and operation activity may 

 create stress for wildlife. Stress is a nebulous but in- 

 sidious type of impact which results from behavioral changes 

 induced by mine facility structures or human activities. 

 For example, slurry pipelines, haul roads and fences may 

 create actual and psychological barriers to normal movements. 



Expanding Human Population 



The construction phase of any development involves the 

 largest influx of workers and construction populations are 

 typically associated with more severe impacts on wildlife 

 than the permanent workforce. Extensive secondary land use 

 change due to ancillary human activities throughout the area 

 surrounding a new mine will typically cause more significant 

 impacts than the area directly involved with the mining pro- 

 cess (Klimstra et al . 1979). 



Direct wildlife mortality results from increased hunt- 

 ing pressure and increased poaching and vehicle/wildlife 

 collisions. Hunting should not be "viewed as inimical to 

 the welfare of wildlife; a harvestable surplus of animals 

 is always available if hunting is properly controlled" 

 (RAB and F&WB 1979), but Klimstra et al. (1979) points out: 



Any human population is accompanied by additional 

 hunting/fishing pressure, but the decided preference 

 of mining personnel for these forms of outdoor recre- 

 ation activities causes additional increases beyond 

 what would normally be expected for that incremental 

 increase in population. . .In the Gillette, Wyoming 

 area, the mean number of recreation days per day of 

 hunting season increased over 240 percent from 1971 

 to 1977 for antelope and by 143 percent for mule deer 

 hunting but the human population increased by only 

 112 percent. 



73 



