Environmental Assessment

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES CHAPTER 3
The cumulative effects vegetation and fuel reduction treatments on this species and its habitat are the
same as described for the northern goshawk.
No cumulatively significant effects have been identified for this species or its habitat under any of the
three alternatives.
The action alternatives would directly affect potential nesting habitat of the sharp-shinned hawk as noted
earlier. The types of forested stands in which these species prefer to nest are usually those plant
associations that pose the highest risk to insect epidemics and wildfire found in the planning area due to
tree density; the action alternatives propose treatments in these types of stands. This hawk prefers nesting
clumps of trees denser than those utilized by goshawks or Cooper’s hawks. The trees are generally a
smaller size class as well. Treatments, including: selective harvest, commercial thinning, seed tree
harvest, partial removal, and pre-commercial thinning (including fuels pre-treatments) would reduce stand
densities and, in the short-term, simplify stand structure to the extent that these stands would not provide
the characteristics of optimum nesting habitat. Prescribed fire would also reduce tree density, but it
would be much less impacting. In addition to the previously mentioned effects, the prescriptions and tree
marking guidelines would target removal of disease, primarily mistletoe infected trees, that provide
nesting structure (e.g. mistletoe brooms or forked tops). Treated stands would still provide foraging
habitat for these species post- treatment. The Opine project will treat approximately 2059 acres (35
percent of SS6 and 33 percent of SS7) acres of ponderosa pine habitat in stages 6 and 7 by Alternative 2
and approximately 2560 acres (44 percent of SS6 and 37 percent of SS7) by Alternative 3. The project
will also impact approximately 13 percent (709 ac.) of the lodgepole pine (stages 4-7) with Alternative 2
and approximately 15 percent (804 ac.) with Alternative 3.
Cover patches retained for mule deer (i.e. 10 percent in Alternative 2 and 20 percent in Alternative 3)
would provide potential nesting habitat for sharp-shinned hawks. Alternative 3 would result in more
acres of potential habitat degraded or eliminated than Alternative 2. Additionally, the PDCs would protect
any discovered nesting sites of sharp-shinned hawks. Seasonal restrictions would also prevent disturbance
during the breeding seasons of newly discovered active nests.
The indirect effect of the action alternatives would likely diminish the quality of some foraging habitats
for this species. Prey species birds that utilize denser coniferous forest that would be more open posttreatment
may have lower densities of these species. Birds that utilize more open stands should increase
and be available to sharp-shinned hawks. Mechanical shrub treatment and prescribed under burning
would promote greater plant diversity, providing habitat for a wider variety of birds, the primary prey of
the sharp-shinned hawk.
There would be long-term benefits to this species by treating potential habitat. Reducing the risk of
beetle-induced mortality and wildfire in forested stands will help develop and maintain potential habitat in
the planning area. Short-term (