Wildlife Specialist report

potential for other types of direct effects to this species. The potential for collision loss
does exist on Forest Service routes; however, lower traffic rates and travel speeds on
forest routes reduce this potential. Increases in road densities increases the potential for
take associated with poaching. The potential disturbance zone (253,756 acres) along
motorized routes in this analysis area continues to cause the potential for indirect effects.
Under this alternative you continue to have motorized cross country travel, dispersed
camping, and big game retrieval allowed across the Gila National Forest. These three
types of uses continue to have potential effects to deer. Additionally, these three types of
uses perpetuate the development of additional roads and motorized trails; potentially
allowing for the development of greater road densities. So under this alternative through
time the potential for the direct loss of individuals and habitat would increase, as would
the potential for disturbance effects to the species and habitat.
Action Alternatives (C, D, E, F, and G): Under all action alternatives motorized cross
country travel (see assumption) is no longer allowed. The change from the existing
condition is a 100% reduction in motorized cross country travel. Motorized dispersed
camping is reduced by 96 to 100% under all action alternatives. Area of potentially
affected habitat for motorized big game retrieval is reduced by 100% under Alternative E,
97% under Alternative D and G, 46% under Alternative F, and 19% under Alternative C.
Motorized areas are locations where we have had traditional uses like motorized camping
and OHV use. Under Alternatives D and E there is a reduction of 17 acres of potentially
affected habitat, and under the remaining action alternative there is no change from the
existing condition.
Miles of motorized routes and trails and acres of potentially affected habitat within the
analysis area are reduced by approximately 36% under Alternative E; 22% under
Alternative D; and 16% under Alternative F and G. Under Alternative C motorized
routes are increased by 2%. The greater the reduction in miles in the analysis areas the
less the potential for direct and indirect effects; the reduction in direct and indirect effects
to the species and its habitat is relative to the amount of miles reduced in the analysis
areas.
Findings:
Table 18: Mule deer Gila National Forest management indicator species determination by
alternative
Management
Indicator
Species
Alt. B
Existing Condition
Determination by Alternative
Alt. C Alt. D Alt. E Alt. F Alt. G
Mule deer NA NA NA NA NA
Rationale For
Determination
Under all action alternatives, the potential effects to deer are reduced, particularly under
alternative E. The potential to affect individuals under all action alternatives still exist; but
none will adversely affect the population levels or habitat trends. All action alternatives
reduce effects to this species and its habitat on the Gila.
*NA – Not adversely affecting the population or habitat trend of this species
30