break up sight distance until such time as naturally regenerating trees 

 will have grown to sufficient height as to provide denser screening 

 cover (McTague and Patton 1989). Thus, there would be low risk of 

 direct or indirect effects to elk as a result of the No Action alternative. 



4.3.3.3.1.2 Cumulative Effects of Alternative A: No Harvest 

 (No Action) 



Under this alternative, there would be no additional disturbance 

 created or cumulative effect on elk winter range effectiveness or 

 security. 



4.3.3.3.1.3 Alternative B: Harvest 



Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks (MT FWP) has 

 expressed concern, in a draft revision of their Elk Management Plan, 

 for the elk population in this portion of Hunting District 292. 

 Specifically, this area is one of reduced elk security due to past timber 

 harvest and recent fires. MT FWP has observed low bull survival and 

 chronic, lowered calf recruitment, which decreases the capacity of this 

 population to rebound from a severe winter or other future 

 environmental event. The proposed action would not further reduce 

 thermal or security cover, as the proposed harvest would remove trees 

 that were killed by a high intensity fire, and is located within 0.5 mile 

 of an open road. However, such action would increase sight distance 

 (see discussion under No Action regarding the merits of tree boles) in 

 an area that would have high quality forage for several years post-fire. 

 This increased sight distance would gradually be reduced over a 20- 

 year period as the forest regenerates and saplings grow to sufficient 

 height to provide an effective visual screen. Thus, the proposed action 

 would have low risk of direct effects and low to moderate indirect 

 effects for elk through a short-term (20 year) increase in sight distance 

 on approximately 200 to 300 acres. 



4.3.3.3.1.4 Cumulative Effects of Alternative B: Harvest 



Cumulative effects to elk are contingent upon past timber harvest on 

 private industrial land, the proposed Dirty Ike Roads project, and this 

 proposed action. As discussed above, regarding direct and indirect 

 effects, MT FWP is concerned with the reduction in elk habitat 

 security, bull survival, and lowered calf recruitment. Currently, 

 approximately 17.6% of the analysis area is elk security cover, due to 

 the abundance of open roads and the effects of recent timber harvest. 

 The proposed Dirty Ike Roads project would construct approximately 

 1.5 miles of new road within the project area, and be part of a road 

 system currently controlled by a gate within section 2. In the past, this 

 gate has been ineffective at restricting the access of ATV's. However, 

 that project is proposing to re-locate the gate to a location that would 



Dirty Ike Salvage Environmental Assessment 4-24 



