Wildlife Specialist report

area is 98,052 acres. Within this potential disturbance zone motorized routes continue to
cause the potential for disturbance, displacement, avoidance and harassment. Increase in
the level of use on these routes through time would increase 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 effect cavity nesting birds. Additionally, these
three types of uses perpetuate the development of additional roads and motorized trails;
potentially allowing for the development of higher road densities. Under the no action
alternative through time the potential for the direct loss of individuals and habitat would
increase, as would the potential for disturbance affects to these species.
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 95 to 100% under all action alternatives. Motorized big game
retrieval is reduced by 100% under Alternative E, 96% under Alternative D and G, 33%
under Alternative F, and 11% under Alternative C.
Motorized areas are locations where we have had traditional uses like motorized camping
and OHV use. In this analysis area currently there are 9 acres of habitat being affect by a
motorized area. Alternative E and D eliminate these acres of affected habitat, and the
remaining action alternatives propose no change from the existing condition.
Under Alternative D, E, F, and G miles of motorized routes and trails and acres of
potentially affected habitat are reduced, respectively by 30%, 48%, 20%, and 21% in this
analysis area. Under Alternative C miles of motorized routes and trails and acres of
potentially affected habitat are increased by 1%.
For the focal species and their associated analysis areas Alternative E adds 0 miles of
routes; Alternatives D adds 8 miles, Alternative F 22 miles, Alternative G 23 miles, and
Alternative C adds 53 miles of unauthorized routes. None of the action alternatives allow
for an actual increase in the total miles of routes through the associated analysis areas,
except Alternative C which allows for a 1% increase. Because the Gila currently allows
cross country travel some proposed routes even though unauthorized are currently being
used.
92