Action Alternative : This alternative is not expected to alter grizzly bear use of the area, 

 however, some localized habitat shifts could occur for bears to take advantage of forage 

 or cover resotirces. 



C. Sensitive Species 



Pileated Woodpecker 



1 . Direct and Indirect Effects 



No Action Alternative : Under the No Action Alternative, timber harvest would not 

 occur and the existing shade-intolerant trees would continue to grow in diameter and die, 

 thus providing pileated woodpecker nesting and foraging habitat. However, as these trees 

 die out, replacement trees (shade-intolerant) would not be present in the stand barring any 

 disturbance. Therefore under this alternative, pileated woodpecker habitat would 

 increase through time, then decline as shade intolerant tree species are replaced by less- 

 preferred shade tolerant species. No short-term additional effects to pileated 

 woodpeckers would occur under this alternative. However, in the longer-term, pileated 

 woodpecker use of the area could decline. 



Action Alternative : Under the Action Alternative, approximately 62 acres of potential 

 nesting habitat on the east side of Section 16 would not be harvested, thereby retaining 

 the largest and highest potential habitat on the section. Timber harvesting would occur 

 in 92 acres of potential nesting habitat. Snags, coarse woody debris, numerous leave 

 trees, and snag recruits would be retained for feeding and nesting substrate, but quality 

 nesting habitat may decline due to the removal of the midlevel forest canopy layer and 

 reduction of overstory canopy cover. The resulting open canopy and prescribed burning 

 may allow for natural regeneration and growth of replacement shade-intolerant tree 

 species to provide nesting structure in the distant future. The retained trees would 

 increase in growth due to reduced competition, resulting in potential recruitment of large 

 snags earlier in the fUmre, than if not managed. Snag numbers may decline due to the 

 harvest operations, resulting in decreased foraging habitat. However, these losses are 

 expected to be minimized due to the logging practices proposed. The removal of 

 encroaching DF may reduce feeding opportunities in the near and distant future. Most 

 snags cut to reduce safety hazards would be left on site along with cull trees and butts. 

 These would continue to provide foraging sites for pileated woodpeckers. Snags left on 

 site are susceptible to firewood cutting, however, road closures are expected to decrease 

 snag loss. This alternative could result in moderate adverse effects to pileated 

 woodpeckers in the short-term by removing or altering 45% of the existing nesting 

 habitat, but minor positive effects in the longer-term by promoting preferred cover types 

 and large trees. 



40 



