bum, with water clarity returning to approximately 90% by the third 

 year, post-bum (J. Collins, MT DNRC, personal communication, 

 October 2003). As a result of the nutrient influx into the streams, there 

 would likely be an increase in algae and aquatic insects (e.g., harlequin 

 duck food). However, within stand replacement bum areas, terrestrial 

 vegetation would require 5 to 10 years to recover and provide suitable 

 vegetative stmcture in which harlequin ducks would nest. Thus, the 

 proposed action, would remove fire- and insect-killed timber during 

 this time period, but would not enter riparian zones where harlequin 

 ducks would most likely nest. The proposed action would not prolong 

 or increase sediment input into streams due to location of roads and 

 harvest unit design (see Soils report). Thus, there would be low risk of 

 direct and indirect effects to harlequin ducks as a result of the 

 proposed action. 



4.3.3.3.1.4 Cumulative Effects of Alternative B: Harvest 



The proposed action would not enter SMZ's, where harlequin ducks 

 are most likely to nest, or increase sedimentation levels above natural 

 background levels (see Soils report). Thus, there would be low risk of 

 cumulative effects to harlequin ducks as a result of the proposed 

 action. 



4.3.3.4 Big Game 



4.3.3.4.1 White-tail Deer, Elk, and Moose 



4.3.3.4.1.1 Alternative A: No Harvest (No Action) 



With Altemative A: No Harvest (No Action), there would be no 

 change from current conditions. The Fish Creek Complex removed 

 security cover and thermal cover within Deer Creek and portions of 

 Thompson Creek that experienced stand replacing fire, making white- 

 tailed deer, elk, and moose more vulnerable to overharvest during the 

 hunting season. Without road closures, it is expected that the 2003 

 hunting season would result in overharvest that would affect hunting 

 recreation opportunities for many years (BAER Team Fish and 

 Wildlife Report 2003). Thus, there would be moderate risk of direct or 

 indirect effects to big game species as a result of this altemative. 



4.3.3.4.1.2 Cumulative Effects of Alternative A: Deferred 

 Harvest (No Action) 



With no action, effects to white-tailed deer, elk, and moose would 

 have the compounding effect of the loss of thermal and security cover 

 with potential overharvest during the hunting season. Thus, there 

 would be moderate risk of cumulative effects to these big game 

 species as a result of this altemative. 



Fish Creek Salvage Environmental Assessment 4-31 



