SNFPA Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

June 2003

Chapter 3: Affected Environment

3.2.3. Management Indicator Species

Management Indicator Species (non-TEPS)

Management Indicator Species (MIS) were assessed under numerous different heading in the FEIS. To make evaluation of effects in this document easier to interpret, individual species were grouped into categories based upon a habitat association that has the potential to be affected by implementation of either Alternatives S1 or S2. For this evaluation, the MIS list from each affected forest was reviewed. Federally listed threatened, endangered, and proposed species and Forest Service sensitive species were excluded from this evaluation because they are considered in more detail in the FEIS and in this SDEIS. Of the remaining species, the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships personal computer database (CA Dept. Fish and Game, 2002) was reviewed to assign each species to one or several general habitat associations. In some cases, individual national forests assigned their MIS to habitat associations. This evaluation independently assigned habitat associations so they may not match those of the individual national forests.

Further review was conducted by several fisheries biologists (Phil Strand, Marty Yamagiwa, and Melanie McFarland) to assess whether or not there was new information that would lead one to believe 1) something had physically or biologically changed for each of the fish species and 2) if changes had occurred, would those changes require additional analysis beyond what was provided in the FEIS. It was determined by the reviewing fisheries biologists that there was no pertinent new information and because the Aquatic Management Strategy remains unchanged, the effects of the alternatives in the SEIS would be within the range of effects provided in the FEIS. Therefore, it was determined that it is not necessary to conduct further analysis beyond what was represented in the FEIS.

Table 3.2.3a displays the list of remaining non-TESP MIS being assessed in this draft SEIS. Each species has been placed in its representative habitat assemblage based upon potential for effects.

Table 3.2.3a. Management Indicator Species and corresponding habitat assemblage.

Select to access Table 3.2.3a.

It is unlikely that the alternatives in the SDEIS would affect the aquatic and cliff, caves, talus and rock outcrops habitat associations. Since the land allocations and desired conditions remain largely unchanged between the FEIS and the SDEIS, the change in effects to species associated with the other habitat associations are expected to be limited. However, because there are changes to the standards and guidelines between alternatives in the SEIS, those other habitat associations will be evaluated in Chapter 4 to assess the magnitude and direction of those changed effects.

Citation:

California Department of Fish and Game. 2002. California Wildlife Habitat Relationship Version 8 Personal Computer Program. California Interagency Wildlife Task Group. Sacramento, CA.

USDA Forest Service · Pacific Southwest Region