NEPA--Environmental Assessment

Selecting Alternative 2 would have both positive and negative effects for MIS. Selecting Alternative
2 would have beneficial effects for MIS because current sheep management practices would
maintain current habitat capability for MIS across much of the landscape. Alternative 2 would also
have negative effects for MIS, compared to Alternative 1, because a few localized areas would
continue to be affected by sheep grazing activities, such as near the alpine/spruce-fir interface.
Selecting Alternative 2 would be generally beneficial for MIS, but less so than selecting Alternative
1 because improvement in habitat conditions would probably occur over a longer time frame than
under Alternative 1. In general, habitat conditions are expected to continue to gradually improve in
most areas under Alternative 2 but habitat conditions for MIS would continue to be impacted in a
few localized areas.
Under current management, an average of about 27% of the habitat in the landscape for these five
MIS is considered suitable for sheep grazing. Displayed another way, about ¾ of the habitat for
these 5 species in the Silverton Landscape is considered unsuitable for sheep grazing and therefore
not likely to be significantly affected by the selection of any project alternative. Only about ¼ of the
habitat in the landscape for these 5 species might be affected by sheep grazing. For these 5 species,
the amount of habitat suitable for sheep grazing under Alternative 2 represents about 2% of their
habitat Forest-wide. For this reason, selection of Alternative 2 would not cause measurable changes
to Forest-wide habitat trends or population trends for any of these 5 species.
Population trends for elk and mule deer are controlled by annual hunter harvest and do not appear to
be correlated with the amount of available habitat on the Forest. Canada lynx populations in the San
Juan Mountains have been primarily influenced by years of releases of translocated animals by the
Colorado Division of Wildlife. The slight habitat improvements resulting from changes in sheep
grazing practices in the Silverton Landscape are unlikely to cause measurable changes in the amount
of available lynx habitat or lynx populations at the scale of the entire San Juan National Forest.
Changes in habitat capability for mountain bluebird and green-tailed towhee are likely to be very
small in comparison to the relatively large amounts of habitat available for these species at the
Forest-wide scale. Both species are widespread across the Forest and population trends and habitat
trends are stable to slightly upward. In addition, impacts of sheep grazing to foraging and nesting
habitat for these species is limited to a few localized areas and thus is unlikely to affect more than a
few individuals and would not have a measurable impact on habitat or populations trends at the
Forest-wide scale.
Alternative 3
For all MIS, Alternative 3 is expected to be less impacting than Alternative 2 due to specific project
design criteria and adaptive management actions designed to best meet or move towards the desired
objectives conditions. Alternative 2 will generally maintain current rangeland conditions, thereby
providing fewer benefits to wildlife and habitats or resulting in slower development of desired
conditions than Alternative 3. Both action alternatives may affect individuals but are unlikely to
affect local populations, and have the potential to cause minor changes in species abundance.
Neither of the action alternatives is expected to result in negative consequences to MIS populations
from the standpoint of affecting viability at the Forest-level.
Selecting Alternative 3 would be generally beneficial for MIS, although less than under Alternative
1 but more than selecting Alternative 2. The improvements in habitat conditions for MIS expected
to occur over time under Alternative 3, compared to Alternative 2 are likely to be generally small
and limited to a few localized areas where habitat conditions are being affected by sheep grazing
activities under current management practices. For example, under Alternative 3 there would be a
31% reduction in the acres of alpine and spruce-fir habitats suitable for domestic sheep grazing
(about 27,700 acres), compared to Alternative 2 (about 40,100 acres). Under Alternative 3 only 16%
90