PROPOSED DECISION 



This portion of the FEIS presents the joint proposed decision by Mack Long, Regional Supervisor, 

 Region 2 FWP, and Tony Liane, Area Manager, Southwestern Land Office, DNRC. 



The scope of the proposed decision is limited to actions associated with the proposed BCWMA Phase II 

 Land Exchanges. The proposed decision is site-specific to lands within the BCWMA and selected 

 scattered tracts owned by DNRC, and is not programmatic to lands outside of the project area. 



An interdisciplinary team has completed the DEIS and prepared the FEIS for the proposed land 

 exchanges. The decision makers thoroughly reviewed the DEIS, project file, public correspondence, 

 corrections and additions made by FWP and DNRC as presented in this FEIS, Department policies, 

 standards and guidelines, and appropriate management plans (including the FWP BCWMA Revised 

 Management Plan and the DNRC State Forest Land Management Plan). Subsequent to this review, Mr. 

 Long and Mr. Liane propose the following decision. 



1 . PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE SELECTION 



Four alternatives were developed and are presented in the DEIS and FEIS: 



• Alternative A-No Action. Existing activities and land ownership would continue. Plum Creek and 

 DNRC would continue to own critical winter habitats within the BCWMA, and DNRC would continue to 

 own scattered tracts interspersed within Plum Creek ownership. 



This alternative would not meet FWP objectives. The ecological integrity of the entire BCWMA would 

 be vulnerable, due to the possibility of future sale and development of Plum Creek's 3,040-acre 

 Inholdings. Also, DNRC would not be restricted from considering land developments (such as cabin 

 sites) on its holdings within the BCWMA. Such development could result in a decline of up to 70% of 

 the elk and mule deer currently present in BCWMA populations, a 10% decline in the white-tailed 

 deer population, and commensurate declines in populations of predatory and scavenging wildlife 

 species. In addition, minor adverse cumulative effects may occur to grizzly bear and wolf 

 populations, considered across the entire landscape, due to the potential development of quality 

 habitat on the BCWMA used periodically by both species. 



DNRC objectives would also not be met. These include the consolidation of small scattered tracts 

 into larger management units. Land consolidation reduces the miles of property boundary that must 

 be surveyed and maintained, and the need for legal access across non-state ownerships. It can also 

 reduce the number of miles of new road that would be constructed to access state lands. These 

 reductions in administrative costs would not be realized, if DNRC retained its scattered tracts. 



Finally, the enhancement of cooperative management of the BCWMA by FWP and DNRC would not 

 be realized at this time. The opportunity for FWP to compensate DNRC for foregoing timber and land 

 development revenues, and for DNRC to assist with forested habitat management on FWP lands, 

 would not be realized. 



• Alternative B-DNRC/Plum Creek Land Exchange. This includes the DNRC/Plum Creek land 

 exchange and the Cooperative Management Agreement between FWP and DNRC. 



This alternative would partially meet the project objectives, and could be selected. Under this 

 alternative, critical big game winter habitat owned by Plum Creek would be transferred to DNRC, in 

 exchange for scattered tracts owned by DNRC. However, DNRC would increase its holdings of 



BCWMA Land Exchanges Final Environmental Impact Statement 36 



