Recovery Plan for the Northern Spotted Owl - DRAFT

Tables 1.8 through I. 10 clearly demonstrate the difficulty of finding areas thatcurrently support at least 20 pairs of owls on federal lands. This reflects thefragmented condition of owl populations and owl habitat in the landscape.Based on current owl locations in the GIS, 1 1 such areas are included in theDCA network; 9 in the HCA network; 18 in the LSOG + owl addition strategy;and 11 in the LSOG strategy. Again, it should be noted that these numbersare based solely on GIS analysis and do not include updates that were made totables in Appendix J or tables presented in Thomas et al. (1990). Numberswere used straight from the GIS to provide the most valid basis for comparisonacross options.Table I. 11 presents information on other species locations within each of theconservation area networks. The numbers of locations (nest sites, areas ofobservation) for bald eagles, marten, and fisher did not vary much among thedifferent options. The number of goshawk nest sites varied from 82 to 122,and the largest number of these sites was in the DCAs of the recovery plan.The number of occupied murrelet sites varied from 155 to 227, and the largestnumber of these sites was in the DCAs of the recovery plan. The lowestnumber of occupied sites for murrelets was in the HCAs. Most of the additionalbenefits to murrelets occur on the Oregon coast where 60 murrelet siteswere in one DCA. The number of miles of streams with fish stocks at riskvaried from 1,189 for the late successional old-growth option to 2,118 for theHCAs. The DCAs of the recovery plan included 2,047 miles of stream with fishstocks at risk. Most of the stream reaches included in the options were in theupper parts of the drainages, and many of these streams will likely requireadditional attention in the future.591