p. 3, para. 3 



Emphasis was given in ttie Sensitive, Threatened and Endangered Wildlife Species analysis to old. late 

 successional forest, as these habitats generally provide greatest habitat value for old growth associated 

 species and require greater amounts of time to develop and replace. However, younger-aged mature 

 forest (those <150 years of age) were also considered in the context of providing habitat value for old 

 growth associated wildlife species. Some specific examples denoting where mature forest was 

 considered can be found in Appendix F (pp. F-2 Flammulated Owl; F-5 Boreal Owl and Pileated 

 Woodpecker: F-6 Fisher; F-8 Boreal Owl; F-9 Fisher; F-11 Pileated Woodpecker; F-20 Boreal Owl, 

 Pileated Woodpecker, and Fisher). 



p. 3, paras. 4 and 5 



Each subject parcel in the context of the local geographic area was given consideration for habitat that 

 would provide or contribute to corridors for wildlife (Appendix F - found under Fragmentation of Habitat 

 subsections for each parcel). Consideration of important corridors and linkage zones were also 

 discussed in summary in the Big-Game Wildlife Species section of the analysis (DEIS p. 3-5 para. 5), and 

 in the Sensitive, Threatened and Endangered Wildlife Species analysis (DEIS p. 3-24 para. 3, and p. 3-25 

 para. 2). We believe that the analyses contained in the DEIS adequately considers the impacts of the 

 proposed alternatives on biological corridors for wildlife. 



p. 3, para. 6 



Grizzly bear habitat values, including potential corridors and linkage, were considered for each subject 

 parcel included in this project (Appendix F). None of the subject lands lie within any Grizzly Bear 

 Recovery Area. However, as described in the DEIS, the subject lands to be acquired by DNRC on the 

 BCWMA are in habitat periodically used by grizzly bears, and they provide linkage for these bears to the 

 Bob Marshall Wilderness Area. Otherwise, effects to bears vary by parcel and by alternative, and all 

 identified direct and indirect effects were considered to be minor (DEIS pp. 4-34 to 4-50). All resulting 

 negative cumulative effects were considered to be minor However, moderate positive effects would 

 likely result under Alternatives B and D. Under these two alternatives, larger amounts of habitat of 

 greater importance to bears would receive greater future consideration and protection. We believe that 

 the analysis contained in the DEIS accurately depicts the impacts of the proposed alternatives on habitat 

 and corridors for grizzly bears. 



p. 3, para. 7 



The federal lynx Consen/ation Assessment and Strategy was developed to provide a consistent and 

 effective approach aimed at conserving Canada lynx on federal lands in the conterminous United States 

 (Ruediger et al. 2000: 1). While this document provides valuable information on the current 

 understanding of lynx ecology, management considerations, and guidance for federal land management, 

 the parties cooperating in this land exchange are not legally bound to provisions in this strategy. 

 Nonetheless, the lynx is a federally listed threatened species that warrants careful consideration by FWP 

 and DNRC in project analyses. Lynx habitat values, including potential corridors, were considered for 

 each subject parcel included in this project (Appendix F). Due to individual parcel location and habitat 

 type considerations, opportunities to maintain or improve habitat connectivity for lynx on any of the 

 subject parcels was considered low. We believe that the analysis contained in the DEIS accurately and 

 adequately depicts the impacts of the proposed alternatives on lynx and lynx habitat. 



p. 4, para. 1 



In the DEIS, habitat values and impacts to each of these species were considered and disclosed (see 

 Appendix F, and Sensitive, Threatened and Endangered Wildlife Species analysis Tables 4.7-1, 4. 7-2. 

 4. 7-3, 4. 7-4, 4. 7-5, and 4. 7-6). When evaluating effects for these species, habitat conditions observed 

 on lands surrounding each parcel (including conditions influenced by past logging activity) were also 



BCWMA Land Exchanges Final Environmental Impact Statement 25 



