closures within the state section) in the vicinity of the proposed project would 

 have little effect on grizzly bears. No permanent increases in human disturbance 

 level are expected to result from this project. The analysis area is largely 

 managed by the USPS, with some scattered parcels managed by DNRC, Plum 

 Creek Timber Company, and other private landowners. Reductions in hiding 

 cover would be additive to the reductions due to past timber harvesting in the 

 analysis area; however, most of the analysis area is providing hiding cover 

 presently. Early successional stages of vegetation occurring in harvest units could 

 provide foraging opportunities that do not exist in some mature stands. 



Sensitive Species 

 Fisher 



1. Direct and Indirect Effects 



No Action Alternative; No effects to fishers would be expected under this 

 alternative. Little change to the stands potentially providing fisher foraging 

 habitat would be expected. Habitats that are conducive to fisher travel might 

 improve due to increased tree growth and canopy closure; however, foraging 

 opportunities might gradually decline with the reduction in habitat diversity 

 components such as edge and younger age-class stands. Human disturbance and 

 potential trapping mortality are expected to remain similar to current levels. 



Action Alternative: Under this action alternative, riparian habitats along the 

 intermittent stream in the proposed project area would largely be unaffected. 

 Fisher travel habitats along the intermittent stream would continue to facilitate 

 movement. Fisher foraging and resting habitat might also be slightly reduced due 

 to the proposed overstory removal on the uplands (628 acres) adjacent to the 

 riparian areas; but much of the harvesting would avoid habitats typically preferred 

 by fishers. No long-term changes in human disturbance or potential trapping 

 mortality are anticipated with this alternative. 



2. Cumulative Effects 



No Action Alternative: Under the No-Action Alternative, fisher foraging and 

 travel habitats would be retained. Suitable fisher denning habitat appears limited 

 within the analysis area. Uplands within the analysis area are largely western 

 larch/Douglas-fir types that are not typical fisher denning habitats. Within the 

 analysis area approximately 2,000 acres (or roughly 40%) have been harvested in 

 the last 30 years, and is not suitable fisher habitat. Limited riparian areas exist 

 within the analysis area along 8.4 miles of intermittent streams and 1.2 miles of 

 permanent streams. Landscape connectivity within riparian areas is limited, and 

 although forested corridors exists, extensive use is not expected given the levels 

 of disturbance and harvesting in the analysis area. Road access within the 



43 



