United States Biological Evaluation Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

August 2017

Black Butte Wild & Scenic River Comprehensive Management Plan Environmental Assessment

Prepared by: Cassandra Hagemann, Wildlife Biologist Covelo Ranger District, Mendocino National Forest Mendocino County, California

Table of Contents Executive Summary ...... 2 Project Summary ...... 2 Purpose and Need ...... 2 Analysis Area ...... 2 Alternative 1 – No Action ...... 3 Alternative 2 – Proposed Action ...... 3 Species Evaluations ...... 3 Threatened, Endangered, and Proposed Species ...... 3 Northern Spotted Owl...... 4 Northern Spotted Owl Critical Habitat ...... 6 Forest Service Sensitive Species ...... 7 Northern Goshawk ...... 9 Bald Eagle ...... 10 Townsend’s Big-Eared Bat ...... 11 North American Wolverine ...... 12 Pacific Marten ...... 13 Fisher ...... 14 Fringed Myotis ...... 15 Foothill Yellow-Legged Frog ...... 16 Western Pond Turtle ...... 16 Cumulative Effects on Forest Service Sensitive Species ...... 17 Management Indicator Species ...... 17 Acorn Woodpecker ...... 18 Black-Tailed Deer ...... 19 California Thrasher ...... 20 Douglas Tree Squirrel ...... 21 Peregrine Falcon ...... 21 Pileated Woodpecker ...... 22 Tule Elk ...... 23 Western Gray Squirrel ...... 23 Cumulative Effects to MIS ...... 24

Migratory Birds ...... 24 Determinations ...... 25 Literature Cited ...... 26 Appendix A...... 30

Table 1 ESA Endangered, Threatened, or Proposed species within the Black Butte Wild & Scenic River project area ...... 4 Table 2 Forest Service Sensitive Species identified for the Mendocino National Forest ...... 7 Table 3 Management Indicator Species that have been identified for habitats on the Mendocino National Forest...... 17 Table 4 Seral stages ...... 30

Executive Summary This biological evaluation is intended to describe the effects to threatened, endangered, and sensitive species (TES), management indicator species (MIS), and migratory birds associated with the Black Butte Wild and Scenic River Comprehensive River Management Plan on the Mendocino National Forest.

The following is a summary of the findings in this biological evaluation on the effects of the proposed action:

1. The No Action alternative will have no effect on northern spotted owls and their habitats or the 2012 designated critical habitat. 2. The No Action alternative will not cause a trend towards listing on Forest Service Sensitive Species or their habitats. 3. The No Action alternative will have no impact on Mendocino Management Indicator Species or their habitats. 4. The No Action alternative will have no adverse impacts on migratory birds. 5. The Proposed Action alternative will have no effect on the northern spotted owl or its habitat. 6. The Proposed Action alternative will have no effect on designated northern spotted owl critical habitat. 7. The Proposed Action alternative will not cause a trend toward listing on Forest Service Sensitive Species or their habitats. 8. The Proposed Action alternative will have no impact on Mendocino Management Indicator Species or their habitats. 9. The Proposed Action will have no adverse impacts on migratory birds.

Project Summary Purpose and Need The purpose of this project is to adopt a comprehensive river management plan to protect and enhance the values for which the river was designated (free-flowing, water quality, and outstandingly remarkable values), and identify and implement Forest Service management actions needed to protect these values within the Black Butte River and Cold Creek corridor. Section 3 of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 USC 1274, as amended) specifies that a comprehensive management plan will be developed for the designated river corridor. Analysis Area For planning and analysis, the project area is the designated wild and scenic river corridor which is approximately 6,579 acres. The project area follows the identified boundary from the 2006 Northern California Coastal Wild Heritage Wilderness Act that includes all land within 440 yards (0.25 mile) from the ordinary high water mark on both sides of the river for the designated 21 miles of the corridor.

Detailed legal description of the project area:

T23N, R11W, sections 27, 28, 34, 35, 36 T22N, R11W, sections 1, 12 T22N, R10W, sections 6, 7, 8, 15, 16, 17, 21, 22, 26, 27, 35, 36

T21N, R10W, sections 1, 2, 12, 13, 24 T21N, R9W, sections 5, 6, 20, 29

For the analysis area, adjoining National Forest System lands and private lands are considered, especially in the context of potential impacts from activities in the surrounding vicinity and/or cumulative effects for the environmental assessment. The analysis area (approximately 103,587 acres) is the Black Butte Watershed (5th field watershed, HUC# 1801010401). Alternative 1 – No Action Under the No Action alternative, current management plans would continue to guide management of the project area. The corridor boundary would be located approximately ¼ mile from the banks of the river. No additional management strategies would be implemented to accomplish the purpose of the Wild and Scenic River designation. The direction from the Mendocino National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended, including direction for Prescription 10 (Wild and Scenic Rivers) and other plans would remain unchanged. Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Alternative 2 would recommend a permanent boundary and adopt a comprehensive river management plan (CRMP) to include the Forest Plan Prescription 10 (Wild and Scenic Rivers), Standard and Guidelines for Key Watersheds (which Black Butte is part of) while identifying management strategies and projects to address key issues and achieve purpose of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.

The full CRMP can be found in Appendix 1 of the Environmental Assessment.

Species Evaluations This biological evalution was prepared in accordance with Forest Service Manual (FSM) direction 2620, 2630, 2670, 2672, 2672.42 and meets legal requirements set forth under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended [19 U.S.C. 1536 (c, 50 CFR 402.12 (f) and 402.14(c); the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940, as amended; Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (as amended); Executive Order 13186 (migratory birds); National Environmental Policy Act, 1969; National Forest Management Act, 1976 (as amended); Northwest Forest Plan; and Mendocino National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, 1995, as amended. Threatened, Endangered, and Proposed Species The species thought to occur on the Covelo Ranger District and analyzed in this document include the Northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) and the 2012 Designated Critical Habitat for northern spotted owl (Table 1).

Table 1 ESA Endangered, Threatened, or Proposed species within the Black Butte Wild & Scenic River project area

Suitable Likelihood of Species Carry Species Occurrence Habitat Present Occurring in Action Forward in Species Status on Forest in Action Area Area Analysis

California red- legged frog (Rana draytonii) Threatened No Yes Unlikely No

Northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) Threatened Yes Yes Likely Yes

Western snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus) Threatened No No Very unlikely No

Yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) Threatened No Yes Very unlikely No Northern spotted owl 2012 Designated Critical Habitat Critical Habitat Yes Yes Likely Yes

California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) was not carried forward in analysis of this project because it is not currently present in any streams in Mendocino or Glenn Counties. The California red-legged frog is found primarily in coastal drainages of central California from Marin County south to northern Baja California, Mexico (USFWS 2002).

Western snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus) was not carried forward in analysis of this project because the plover breeds along the Pacific coast from Damon Point, Washington, south to Bahia Magdalena, Baja California, Mexico and winters in coastal areas from southern Washington to Central America (USFWS 2007). There are no coastal areas within the project area.

Yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) was not carried forwarded in analysis of this project because the cuckoo occurs in isolated sites in the Sacramento Valley of northern California, and along the Kern and Colorado River systems in southern California (Hughes 2015). Northern Spotted Owl Existing Condition The northern spotted owl inhabits forests from southwest British Columbia through the Cascade Mountains and coastal ranges in Washington, Oregon, and California, as far south as Marin County. In June of 1990 the owl was listed under the Endangered Species Act as threatened because of widespread

habitat loss throughout its range. Along with past habitat loss, current habitat loss is also a threat to spotted owl, but loss due to timber harvest on Federal lands has reduced since the listing of the spotted owl. Current threats to the owl are loss of habitat due to harvest, loss or alteration of habitat from stand replacing fires, loss of genetic diversity, and competition with barred owls (USFWS 2011b).

Within the Black Butte watershed there have been no recent surveys conducted to the 2011 protocol for the northern spotted owl. Current NRIS data shows that there are 30 Activity Centers within the watershed. Thirteen activity centers do not have data since the 1990s, 16 have data from the 2000s, and the most recent activity center data is from 2010. There are barred owl observations near the watershed so it is likely that barred owls are using habitat within the watershed boundaries.

Within the Wild and Scenic corridor there is one Activity Center near the southern end. This Activity Center was last visited in 1991 and was occupied by a single male.

Habitat Spotted owls rely on mature and old-growth forests throughout its range. These habitats contain structures and characteristics required for nesting, roosting, and foraging. Characteristics that support nesting and roosting include 60-90% canopy closure; multi-layered, multi-species canopy with >30” DBH trees; large trees with deformities such as cavities, broken tops, or other evidence of decadence; large snags; accumulations of large woody debris; and sufficient open space below the canopy for flight. Foraging habitat has similar habitat characteristics to nesting and roosting habitat but may not support reproductive pairs. Dispersal habitat stands provide adequate tree size and canopy cover for protection from predators and foraging opportunities (USFWS 2011b). The Recovery Plan for the spotted owl (2011) mentions that owls may be found in younger forests provided that these forests have structural elements of older forests or retained characteristics from the previous forest.

Current vegetation maps show that there are 17,914 acres of dispersal, 13,227 acres of foraging, and 8,912 acres of nesting and roosting habitat for the northern spotted owl within the Black Butte watershed. Within the proposed Wild & Scenic River corridor there is about 1100 acres of nesting/roosting, foraging, and dispersal habitat based on the Mendocino existing vegetation layer. The corridor is mostly steep slopes that are grassland and oak woodlands. Based on field observations there is limited quality nesting habitat with the actual WSR corridor.

Prey Habitat use by spotted owl is also influenced by prey availability. Flying squirrels are the most common prey for the owls in Douglas-fir and western hemlock forests and dusky-footed woodrats are most common in the Oregon Klamath, California Klamath, and California Coast provinces. Other prey items include deer mice, tree voles, red-backed voles, gophers, snowshoe hare, bushy-tailed woodrats, birds, and insects, depending on geographic location (USFWS 2011b).

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on northern spotted owl. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Cumulative Effects Taking no action will not result in direct or indirect effects and therefore will not result in any cumulative effects on northern spotted or its habitat.

Determination The no action alternative will have no effect on northern spotted owl or its habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Adopting the CRMP for the Black Butte WSR will not have any direct or indirect effects on the northern spotted owl or its habitat. Although the CRMP calls for fire management activities to minimize landscape alteration and land disturbance, the Plan does not propose any treatments. Any future projects proposed within the designated corridor will be subject to NEPA and effects from those projects will then be analyzed for the northern spotted owl and its habitat. The proposed action only identifies a wild and scenic corridor for the identified segments of the Black Butte River and Cold Creek and will not change management of northern spotted owl or its habitat. Standards and Guidelines from the Mendocino LRMP regarding the Northern spotted owl will still be in place to assure that viable populations are maintained.

Cumulative Effects Implementation of the proposed action will not result in direct or indirect effects therefore it will not result in any cumulative effects on northern spotted or its habitat.

Determination By adopting the Black Butte Wild & Scenic River Comprehensive Management Plan there will be no effect to northern spotted owl or its habitat. Northern Spotted Owl Critical Habitat Existing Condition Critical habitat is defined by USFWS as geological areas essential to the conservation of the species. Within the designated critical habitat for a species there are Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) defined for the critical habitat. These PCEs are physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the species, for which special management may be required (77 Fed. Re. 71877, 71897). PCEs are defined as forest types that support the northern spotted owl itself (PCE 1), nesting and roosting habitat (PCE 2), foraging habitat (PCE 3), and dispersal habitat (PCE 4).

Northern spotted owl PCEs are described in the Federal Register.

Within the Black Butte watershed there is 45,456 acres of 2012 designated Critical Habitat for the northern spotted owl. Within the proposed corridor there is no Critical Habitat.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on 2012 designated critical habitat for the northern spotted owl. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Cumulative Effects Taking no action will not result in direct or indirect effects and will not result in any cumulative effects on northern spotted or its habitat.

Determination The no action alternative will have no effect on 2012 designated critical habitat for the northern spotted owl.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Adopting the CRMP for the Black Butte WSR will not have any direct or indirect effects on 2012 Critical Habitat. The Plan does not propose any treatments. Any future proposed treatments or projects will be subject to NEPA and effects to critical habitat will be analyzed at that time. The proposed action only identifies a wild and scenic corridor for the identified segments of the Black Butte River and Cold Creek and will not change management of critical habitat for the northern spotted owl.

Cumulative Effects Implementation of the proposed action will not result in direct or indirect effects therefore the Black Butte WSR Plan will not result in any cumulative effects on designated northern spotted owl critical habitat.

Determination By adopting the Black Butte Wild & Scenic River Comprehensive Management Plan there will be no effect to 2012 Designated Critical Habitat for the northern spotted owl. Forest Service Sensitive Species Table 2 Forest Service Sensitive Species identified for the Mendocino National Forest

Suitable Likelihood of Habitat Species Species Occurrence Present in Occurring in Carry Forward on Forest Action Area Action Area in Analysis Species Habitat Northern goshawk Mature, dense conifer (Accipiter gentilis) Yes forests Yes Likely Yes

Willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii) No Riparian Yes Unlikely No

Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) Yes Riparian Yes Likely Yes Variety of habitats including grasslands, shrublands, woodlands, and forests from seas level through Pallid bat mixed conifer, most (Antrozous common in open, dry pallidus) Yes habitats with rocky areas Yes Likely Yes

Suitable Likelihood of Habitat Species Species Occurrence Present in Occurring in Carry Forward on Forest Action Area Action Area in Analysis Species Habitat

Townsend's big- eared bat (Corynorhinus Subalpine and alpine townsendii) Yes habitats Yes Likely Yes Douglas-fir, mixed conifer, red fir, lodgepole, wet North American meadow, and montane wolverine (Gulo riparian habitats from gulo luscus) No 1600-4800 ft Yes Unlikely Yes Mixed evergreen forest with >40% crown closure with large trees and snags, red fir, lodgepole pine, subalpine conifer, mixed Pacific marten conifer, Jeffrey pine, and (Martes caurina) Yes eastside pine Yes Likely Yes Intermediate to large-tree stages of coniferous forests and deciduous-riparian Fisher (Pekania habitat with high canopy pennanti) Yes closure Yes Likely Yes pinyon-juniper, valley Fringed myotis foothill hardwood, and (Myotis hardwood conifer from thysanodes) Yes 4000-7000 ft Yes Likely Yes

Rocky streams in valley- foothill hardwood, valley- foothill hardwood-conifer, valley-foothill riparian, ponderosa pine, mixed Foothill yellow- conifer, coastal scrub, legged frog (Rana mixed chaparral, and wet boylii) Yes meadow habitats. Yes Likely Yes

Western pond permanent or nearly turtle (Emys permanent water in a marmorata) Yes variety of habitat types Yes Likely Yes

Grasslands and rocky Karin's checkerspot outcrops, nutrient-poor butterfly serpentintic soils with (Euphydryas editha native grasses, Hull karinae Yes Mountain Yes Unlikely No

The willow flycatcher is absent from most of California with the only known breeding locations restricted to Sierra Nevada/Cascade region; near Buelton, Santa Barbara County; Prado Basin riparian forest, Riverside County; and several locations in San Diego County (Sedgwick 2000).

Karin’s checkerspot butterfly will not be carried forward in analysis because the only known population is located on Hull Mountain, south the Black Butte watershed (Baughman and Murphy 1998). Northern Goshawk Existing Condition The northern goshawk breeds throughout Alaska, Canada, and mountains of western United States and Mexico and winters to central-eastern United States and northern Mexico (Squires and Reynolds 1997, AOU 1998). Goshawks nest in forested habitat across their range and across all elevations (Squires and Reynolds 1997). Northern Goshawks nest in areas with larger diameter trees, higher canopy closure, and understory clear of debris (Squires and Ruggiero 1996, Squires and Reynolds 1997).

There were three goshawk nests located near Salmon Creek in 1981. It is unknown if these nests are still active let alone available for use.

Habitat California Wildlife Habitat Relationship System (CWHR) lists the following as reproductive habitat for northern goshawks across California, not all of the listed habitats occur within the Black Butte analysis area: aspen, Douglas-fir, eastside pine, Jeffrey pine, juniper, Klamath mixed conifer, lodgepole pine, montane hardwood, montane hardwood-conifer, montane riparian, pinyon juniper, ponderosa pine, red fire, Sierran mixed conifer, subalpine conifer, and white fir.

The Mendocino LRMP describes optimum habitat for goshawks as Conifer/hardwood 4N/G, 5N/G; mixed conifer 4N/G, 5N/G; red fir 4N/G, 5N/G; and white fir 4N/G, 5N/G; and sub-optimum habitat is described as conifer/hardwood 4P; mixed conifer 4P, 3N/G; red fir 3N/G; and white fir 3N/G.

Prey Northern goshawk prey species include squirrels, rabbits, woodpeckers, jays, and grouse (Reynolds et al. 1992). Important features for these prey species include snags, brushfields, and understory structure for their life cycle needs.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on northern goshawk. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Adopting the CRMP for the Black Butte WSR will not have any direct or indirect effects on the northern goshawk or its habitat. The proposed action only identifies a wild and scenic corridor for the identified segments of the Black Butte River and Cold Creek and will not change management of northern goshawk or its habitat. Standards and Guidelines in the Mendocino LRMP will still apply in the Wild and Scenic River corridor.

Bald Eagle Existing Condition Bald Eagles breed primarily across northern North America and occur during migration and the non- breeding season south through northern Mexico (AOU 1998, Buehler 2000). Bald eagle breeding and wintering distributions are continuous, but year round populations are patchy and distributed mainly near large bodies of water. Bald eagles in California and Nevada breed in large conifers near freshwater lakes and along large rivers that provide adequate fish resources for feeding young, and they winter primarily in coastal estuarine habitats where fish are abundant (Small 1994, Buehler 2000). Most nests are located within 1.6 km of a large body of water (Lehmann 1979, Anthony et al. 1982). In northern California nest territories were comprised of ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) and sugar pine (Pinus lambertiana, (Lehmann 1979). In California, large diameter trees were used for nesting (average of 43 in. DBH) and for roosting (ranging from 17-41 in. DBH) with an age from 131-311 years (Anthony et al. 1982).

Habitat California Wildlife Habitat Relationship System (CWHR) lists the following as reproductive habitat for bald eagles across California, not all of the listed habitats occur within the Black Butte analysis area: blue oak-foothill pine, blue oak woodland, coastal oak woodland, desert riparian, Douglas-fir, eastside pine, eucalyptus, Jeffrey pine, Klamath mixed conifer, montane hardwood, montane hardwood-conifer, montane riparian, ponderosa pine, red fir, Sierran mixed conifer, subalpine conifer, valley foothill riparian, valley oak woodland, and white fir.

The Mendocino LRMP describes optimum habitat for bald eagles as Conifer/hardwood 4S/P, 5S/P; Douglas-fir 4S/P, 5S/P; mixed conifer 4S/P, 5S/P; ponderosa pine 4S/P/, 5S/P; and sub-optimum habitat is described as conifer/hardwood 4N, 5N; Douglas-fir 4N, 5N; mixed conifer 4N, 5N; and ponderosa pine 4N, 5N.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on bald eagle. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Adopting the CRMP for the Black Butte WSR will not have any direct or indirect effects on the bald eagle or its habitat. The proposed action only identifies a wild and scenic corridor for the identified segments of the Black Butte River and Cold Creek and will not change management of bald eagle or its habitat. Standards and Guidelines for the bald eagle that are found in the Mendocino LRMP will still apply in the corridor. Pallid Bat Existing Condition The pallid bat occurs in western North America, from southern British Columbia to central Mexico and east to central Texas (NatureServe 2011). Within its range, it is associated with a variety of low elevation arid communities and at higher elevation conifer communities; its abundance is greatest in xeric

conditions (Rambaldini 2005). Throughout California, the Pallid bat is usually found in low to middle elevation habitats below 6000 feet (Barbour and Davis 1969; Philpott 1997), however, the species has been found up to 10,000 feet in the Sierra Nevada Mountains.

Habitat California Wildlife Habitat Relationship System (CWHR) lists the following as reproductive habitat for pallid bats across California, not all of the listed habitats occur within the Black Butte analysis area: blue oak-foothill pine, blue oak woodland, chamise-redshank chaparral, coastal oak woodland, coastal scrub, eucalyptus, Klamath mixed conifer, mixed chaparral, Sierran mixed conifer, urban, valley oak woodland, and white fir.

There are no habitat descriptions for the pallid bat in the Mendocino LRMP.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on pallid bats. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Adopting the CRMP for the Black Butte WSR will not have any direct or indirect effects on the pallid bat. The proposed action only identifies a corridor along the Black Butte River and Cold Creek and does not change management of the pallid bat or its habitat. Townsend’s Big-Eared Bat Existing Condition The Townsend's big-eared bat occurs throughout western North America, from southern British Columbia to central Mexico and east into the Great Plains, with isolated populations occurring in the south and southeastern United States (Pierson and Rainey 1998; Sherwin 1998; NatureServe 2011). In California, the range is nearly state-wide, including all the National Forests within Region 5, except the highest peaks of the Sierra Nevada Mountains (CWHR 2008).

Historically, the Townsend’s big-eared bat was found throughout California as a scarce, but widespread species (Barbour and Davis 1969). It ranges from sea level to 3,300 meters in elevation in a wide range of vegetation types (Sherwin 1998; Barbour and Davis 1969; Philpott 1997; CWHR 2008). Its distribution is strongly correlated to geomorphic features such as natural and man-made caves, buildings, and bridges (Pierson et al. 1999; Ellison et al. 2003a and 2003b; Sherwin et al. 2003; Gruver and Keinath 2006). Caves and mine tunnels typically are used as hibernacula by both sexes (Piaggio 2005). These, along with old buildings, bridges, and large trees may be used as roost sites (Piaggio 2005).

Habitat This bat is associated with a wide range of vegetative types, including forests, desert scrub, pinyon- juniper woodlands, and agricultural development (Gruver and Keinath 2006; Kunz and Martin 1982; Piaggio 2005; CWHR 2008). Roost structure is believed to be more important than the local vegetation (Gruver and Keinath, 2006; Pierson and Rainey 1998) and the presence of suitable caves or cave-like structures defines the distribution of this species more so than does suitable foraging habitat (Barbour

and Davis 1969; Pierson and Rainey 1998; Piaggio 2005; Gruver and Keinath, 2006). In California, this bat is known to use lava tubes, man-made structures, some limestone caves (Kunz and Martin 1982), and large trees (Piaggio 2005).

Wildlife habitat associations in California are broad. These bats are often associated with forest edges, open forests, shrub and scrub habitats, grasslands, and riparian areas (CWHR 2008; or drier habitats where there is free water (Geluso 1978). Free water is an important habitat feature for this bat as it has a relatively poor urine-concentrating ability; it can meet some of its water needs metabolically (Geluso 1978).

Within the Black Butte watershed there are several rock outcrops and features that may be used by Townsend’s big-eared bats. The WSR corridor itself also contains significant rock outcrops and large boulders in the river that could provide roosting habitat.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on Townsend’s big-eared bat. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects There are no direct or indirect effects to the Townsend’s big-eared bat because the proposed action does not propose any treatments to habitat. The proposed action designates a corridor for the Wild and Scenic portions of the Black Butte River and Cold Creek. The implication of the CRMP is a non- degradation policy thus protecting any roosting features available to bats in the corridor. Implementing the proposed action will not change management of Townsend’s big-eared bat. North American Wolverine Existing Conditions Wolverines are distributed across the circumpolar northern hemisphere (Banci 1994; USFWS 2011a) and their range extends south along connected mountain ranges (Pasitschniak-Arts and Larivière 1995). Historically in North America, they were found from Alaska to eastern Canada (Banci 1994; Pasitschniak- Arts and Larivière 1995) and south across the Canada-US border provinces and states, and extended south along the Rocky Mountains to Arizona and New Mexico and along the west coast and Sierra Nevada Mountains (Banci 1994; Pasitschniak-Arts and Larivière 1995). The southern extent of the wolverine’s range is discontinuous and is found in mountainous terrain. In the contiguous US, wolverines are found in, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and, recently, California (Moriarity et al. 2009) and Colorado (USFWS 2010). On the west coast, wolverine population probably existed in two centers – the Northern Cascades and the Sierra Nevada Mountains (USFWS 2010).

Habitat Wolverines are restricted to boreal forests, tundra, and western mountains. The vegetation zones occupied by wolverines include the arctic tundra, subarctic-alpine tundra, boreal forest, northeast mixed forest, redwood forest, and coniferous forest (Banci 1994).

Within the Black Butte Watershed there is about 58,854 acres of reproductive habitat types for the wolverine. It is unlikely that these habitats actually provide suitable denning for wolverines as they require cold areas that maintain deep, persistent snow cover into the warm season for successful denning (USFWS 2010).

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on wolverine. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Implementing the proposed action will have no direct or indirect effects to the wolverine. The proposed action only designates a corridor for the Wild and Scenic River portions of the Black Butte River and Cold Creek and does not change the management of the wolverine or its habitat. Pacific Marten Existing Conditions Martens are found from Newfoundland and Nova Scotia to Alaska and south into the Rocky Mountains and California. They are found sporadically in New York, Michigan, Minnesota, Maine, and Wisconsin (Ellis 1999). Martens are uncommon to common as a permanent resident of North Coast regions and Sierra Nevada, Klamath, and Cascade Mountains (CWHR 2008).

There are five marten sightings within the Black Butte watershed. The most recent recorded sighting being from 1998.

Habitat Martens primarily inhabit mature forests of lodgepole pine, Douglas-fir, spruce, and mixed hardwood forests. They use structurally complex, mature forests, and can occur at all elevations where this habitat is available. They den in hollow trees, crevices, or vacant ground burrows (Ellis 1999).

The California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System lists the following habitats as suitable for martens, not all of these habitats exist within the Black Butte watershed: aspen, barren, Douglas-fir, eastside pine, Jeffrey pine, Klamath mixed conifer, lodgepole pine, montane hardwood-conifer, montane riparian, pasture, perennial grassland, ponderosa pine, red fir, Sierran mixed conifer, subalpine conifer, wet meadow, and white fir.

The Mendocino LRMP describes optimum habitat for the marten as seral stages of 4 and 5 for denning and resting and 3, 4, and 5 for foraging with canopy closures of greater than 70% and 41-70%, respectively. Snags are important denning features and for optimum habitat the LRMP suggests more than 3 snags per acre that are greater than 24” DBH and 2-3 snags at 24” DBH for sub-optimum habitat.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on marten. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Implementing the proposed action will have no direct or indirect effects to Pacific marten. The proposed action only designates a corridor for the Wild and Scenic River portions of the Black Butte River and Cold Creek and does not change the management of the marten or its habitat. Fisher Existing Conditions Fisher distribution is across sub-boreal Canada and the eastern US, and extends south into the US along mountain ranges in the west (Lofroth et al. 2010; Patterson et al. 2007). In California, Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia the fisher is found generally west of the Cascade Range and coastal and Sierra Nevada mountains. Within its range, the distribution of the fisher is reduced from its former extent. In California there are two isolated populations. One is in the Klamath-Siskiyou Mountains in southern Oregon and northern California, and the Coast Range. Adjacent to this area on the east and southeast is the southern Cascades and northern Sierra Nevada. The second population identified is in the southern Sierra Nevada (Lofroth et al. 2010). There are three subspecies, separated geographically; genetic separateness is not currently settled: in eastern North America, M. p. pennanti; in the Rocky Mountains, M. p. columbiana; and in western Canada south to California, M. p. pacifica (Lofroth et al. 2010). In 2004, the USFWS published a proposed rule that listed population on the western coast and Sierra Nevada Mountains as a Distinct Population Segment (USFWS 2004). The fisher was petitioned for listing as threatened or endangered last in 2010, and in 2012 the USFWS concluded that listing may be warranted, but is precluded. It remains in Candidate status. Habitat In northern California, fisher habitat consists of old and closed canopy forest, sapling and poles, and seedlings stands. Fisher habitat at the home range scale contains a diversity of vegetation types. Conifers generally dominate the forested stands, but hardwoods become more present in southern parts of its range. Because hardwoods, especially large, branching oaks and cottonwoods, form suitable den and rest structures, these trees are important where they are rare. Hardwoods are particularly important in California fisher home ranges. Where oaks are present, the mast they produce is important for fisher prey and may result in smaller home ranges where oaks are a significant part of the landscape (Lofroth et al. 2010).

Fishers use a wider array of vegetation and structural stages when foraging than when resting. Structural stage use reflects that of prey habitat, and will include stages other than late-successional habitat. Also, foraging sites more often than not have more coarse woody debris and were more

structurally complex than unused sites, again a reflection of fisher prey habitat selection (Lofroth et al. 2010).

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on fisher. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Implementing the proposed action will not have any direct or indirect effects on fishers. The CRMP designates a corridor for the Wild and Scenic River portions of the Black Butte River and Cold Creek and does not change the management of the fisher or its habitat. Fringed Myotis Existing Conditions The fringed myotis is found in western North America from south-central British Columbia to central Mexico and to the western Great Plains (Natureserve 2012). In California, it is distributed statewide except the Central Valley and the Colorado and Mojave Deserts (CWHR 2008).

Habitat The fringed myotis uses caves, crevices, mines, and buildings for roosting, hibernacula, and maternity colonies (Keinath 2005; CWHR 2008). They day and night roost under bark and in tree hollows, and in northern California they day roost in snags. Medium to large diameter snags are important day and night roosting sites (Weller and Zabel 2001). There is increased likelihood of occurrence of this species as snags greater than 30 cm in diameter increases and percent canopy cover decreases. Large snags and low canopy cover, typical of mature, forest habitat types, offer warm roost sites. Decay classes preffered were two to four in ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and sugar pine (Keinath 2005).

In California, this species is found from 1300 to 2200 meters in elevation in pinyon-juniper, valley foothill hardwood and hardwood-conifers (CWHR 2008). There are several features within the Black Butte watershed and within the WSR corridor that may provide suitable cave structure for fringed myotis roost, hibernacula, and maternity colonies.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on fringed myotis. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Implementing the proposed action will not have any direct or indirect effects on the fringed myotis. The CRMP designates a corridor for the Wild and Scenic River portions of the Black Butte River and Cold

Creek and does not change the management of the fringed myotis or its habitat. Standards and Guidelines for bats found within the Mendocino LRMP will still apply to the corridor. Foothill Yellow-Legged Frog Existing Conditions The foothill yellow-legged frog is found in most of northern California west of the Cascade Mountains crest, in the Coast Ranges from the California-Oregon border south to the Transverse Mountains in Los Angeles County and along the western slope of the Sierra Nevada Mountains south to Kern County. Isolated populations have been reported from the San Joaquin Valley and the mountains in Los Angeles County. This frog can be found from near sea level to 1940m (6370 ft) where habitat is suitable (Morey 2000).

The foothill-yellowed was added to the California Endangered Species Act in 2017 but remains a Forest Service Sensitive Species.

Habitat Foothill yellow-legged frogs are found in partially shaded rocky streams in a variety of habitats including: valley-foothill hardwood, valley-foothill hardwood-conifer, valley-foothill riparian, ponderosa pine, mixed conifer, coastal scrub, mixed chaparral and wet meadows and appear to be highly dependent on free water for all life stages (Morey 1990).

The Black Butte River is suitable reproductive habitat for the foothill yellow-legged frog. On site visits during the week of July 24, 2017, there were frogs and tadpoles present in the river.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on foothill yellow-legged frog. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Implementing the proposed action will not have any direct or indirect effects on the foothill yellow- legged frog. The CRMP does not proposed management actions and only proposes a corridor for the Wild and Scenic portions of the Black Butte River and Cold Creek. The Plan is a non-degradation policy that will not affect the frogs or their habitat with the goal to maintain the river at or above existing conditions. Western Pond Turtle Existing Conditions The western pond turtle (Emys marmorata) is found on the west coast of North America. Disjunct populations have been documented in the Truckee, Humboldt and Carson Rivers in Nevada, Puget Sound in Washington, and the Columbia Gorge on the border of Oregon and Washington (Lovich and Meyer 2002). Modern distribution is limited to parts of Washington, Oregon, California and northern Baja California (Buskirk 2002).

Habitat The western pond turtle inhabits a Mediterranean climate defined by mild, wet winters and long hot, dry summers. In the northern portion of its range winters are colder with more rainfall than in southern areas (Germano and Rathbun 2008). Aquatic habitats include lakes, natural ponds, rivers, oxbows, permanent streams, ephemeral streams, marshes, freshwater and brackish estuaries and vernal pools. Additionally, these turtles will also utilize man-made waterways (Buskirk 2002). Turtles favor areas with offshore basking sites including floating logs, snags, protruding rocks, emergent vegetation and overhanging tree boughs, but also will utilize steep and/or vegetated shores. Hatchlings additionally require shallow, eutrophic, warm areas which are typically at the margins of natural waterways (Buskirk 2002). Turtles have been documented to overwinter under litter or buried in soil in areas with dense understories consisting of vegetation such as blackberry, poison oak, and stinging nettle which reduces the likelihood of predation (Davis 1998).

A majority of the habitat within the Black Butte watershed is likely suitable for western pond turtles.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on western pond turtle. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Implementing the proposed action will have no direct or indirect effects on the western pond turtle. The CRMP does not change management of the turtle or its habitat but aims to maintain the river at or above existing condition. Cumulative Effects on Forest Service Sensitive Species Implementation of the proposed action will not result in direct or indirect effects to Forest Service Sensitive Species and therefore the Black Butte CRMP corridor will not result in any cumulative effects.

Management Indicator Species Table 3 Management Indicator Species that have been identified for habitats on the Mendocino National Forest.

Species Occurrence on Likelihood of Species Forest General Habitat Occurring in Action Area Species Status

Acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus) MIS Yes snags, hardwoods Very Likely Bald eagle* MIS Yes Riparian Likely

riparian, Black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hardwoods, hemionus columbianus) MIS Yes meadow, brush field Very Likely

California thrasher (Toxostoma redivivum) MIS Yes brush field Likely

Douglas tree squirrel ( MIS Yes Snags, true fir Very Likely Old growth, snags, riparian, dead & Fisher* MIS Yes down Likely Old growth, snags, riparian, dead & Northern goshawk* MIS Yes down Likely Old growth, snags, riparian, dead & Marten* MIS Yes down Likely Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) MIS Yes Riparian, lithic areas Very Likely

Pileated woodpecker Old growth, snags, (Dryocopus pileatus) MIS Yes dead & down Very Likely Old growth, snags, Northern spotted owl* MIS Yes dead & down Likely riaprian, hardwoods, Tule elk (Cervus elaphus) MIS Yes meadow Likely

Western gray squirrel (Sciurus griseus) MIS Yes snags, hardwoods Very Likely

* Bald eagle, fisher, northern goshawk, marten, and northern spotted owl are discussed in previous sections of this BE. Acorn Woodpecker Existing Conditions The acorn woodpecker is a management indicator species for snags and hardwoods on the Mendocino National Forest.

The acorn woodpecker is common in foothill and montane woodlands from northwestern Oregon, California, the American Southwest, and western Mexico through the highlands of Central America to

the northern Andes in Chile. This woodpecker is closely associated with oaks and is most commonly found in pine-oak woodlands (Koenig et al. 1995).

Habitat In the Mendocino LRMP the acorn woodpecker’s optimum habitat types are: black oak 4S/P; blue oak- grassland savanna 4S/P/N; and conifer/hardwood 4S/P, and suboptimum are: black oak 3S/P; blue oak- grassland savanna 3S/P/N; conifer/hardwood 3S/P; mixed hardwoods 3S/P, 4S/P; and mixed conifer 4S.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on acorn woodpecker, snags, or hardwoods. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Adopting the CRMP will not have any direct or indirect effects on the acorn woodpecker, snags or hardwoods. The CRMP simply designates a corridor for the Wild and Scenic portions of the Black Butte River and Cold Creek. It does not change the management of the acorn woodpecker or the habitat it was designated for as a management indicator species. Standards and Guidelines for snags and hardwoods from the Mendocino LRMP will still be applied to the Wild and Scenic River corridor. Black-Tailed Deer Existing Conditions All of the Black Butte Watershed is habitat for the black-tailed deer. Key summer ranges are found on Etsel Ridge, Bald Mountain, portions of Wells Cabin/Plaskett, and Broadtree. Key winter range is found along portions of the Black Butte River. The deer is a management indicator species for riparian habitat, hardwoods, meadows, and brush fields.

The black-tailed deer, a subspecies of mule deer, is common to abundant with widespread distribution throughout most of California. Deer use early to intermediate successional stages of most forest, woodland, and brush habitats but they prefer a mosaic of various-aged vegetation that provides woody cover, meadow and shrubby openings, and free water (CWHR 2008).

Habitat The Mendocino LRMP describes optimum forage habitat for black-tailed deer as: black oak 1, 2; blue oak-grassland savanna 1, 2; conifer/hardwood 1, 2; mixed hardwoods 1, 2; mixed conifer 1, 2; chaparral 1, 2; chamise 1, 2; miscellaneous shrubs 1; shrub hardwoods 1; streamside shrubs; grass; and herbaceous plants. Optimum cover habitat types include: black oak 3P/N, 4P/N; blue oak-grassland savanna 3 P/N, 4 P/N; conifer/hardwood 3 P/N, 4P/N; mixed hardwoods 3P/N, 4P/N; mixed conifer 3P/N, 4P/N; chaparral 3; chamise 3; miscellaneous shrubs 3; shrub hardwoods 3; streamside shrubs; grass; and herbaceous plants.

Hardwood density for key range habitat in the LRMP is described as: conifer hardwood 35 sq ft/ac or retain 75% of existing if <35 sq ft/ac and mixed conifer 15 sq ft/ac or retain 75% of existing is <15 sq ft/ac.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on black-tailed deer, riparian habitat, hardwoods, meadows, or brush fields. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat or key ranges.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Adopting the CRMP will not have any direct or indirect effects on black-tailed deer, riparian habitat, hardwoods, meadows, or brush fields. There will no direct or indirect effects to key summer or winter ranges. The CRMP does not change management of the deer or the habitat for which it is a management indicator species. Standards and Guidelines for cooperating with state agencies which manage game species will still be applicable to the black-tailed deer within the Wild and Scenic corridor. California Thrasher Existing Conditions California thrashers are common in the foothills and lowlands in cismontane California. The thrasher ranges from the Mexican border north to Shasta, Trinity, and south Humboldt Counties and into the Shasta Valley of Siskiyou County. Along the coastal fog belt of San Francisco the bird only occurs on drier sites (CWHR 2008).

California thrasher is a Management Indicator Species of brush fields.

Habitat The thrasher inhabits moderate to dense chaparral and thickets in young or open valley foothill riparian habitats but avoids dense tree canopy (CWHR 2008). The Mendocino LRMP describes optimum habitat for the California thrasher as chamise 2, 3; shrub 2, 3; and hardwoods 2, 3. Sub-optimum habitat includes blue oak-grassland savanna; miscellaneous shrubs 2, 3; and streamside shrubs.

A majority of habitat suitable for the California thrasher is located in the northern part of the watershed.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on California thrasher or brush field habitat. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Adopting the CRMP will have no direct or indirect effects on the California thrasher or brush field habitats. The Comprehensive River Management Plan only designates a corridor for the Wild and Scenic portions and does not propose any treatments or change management of the species or its habitat.

Douglas Tree Squirrel Existing Conditions Douglas tree squirrels are found along the Pacific coast in northern California, west and central Oregon, western Washington, and southwestern British Columbia (Pfau 2004).

Douglas tree squirrel inhabit conifer forests and may also inhabit mixed conifer and subalpine forests. In California they are year-long residents of conifer, hardwood conifer, and riparian areas. Preferred habitat is open and closed sapling-pole, large sawtimber, and old growth in stands 55-315 years old. Within their habitat squirrels use tree cavities, hollow trees and logs, and ground burrows as shelters. These squirrel can be found from sea level to 11,000 feet elevation. Douglas tree squirrel diet consists of mostly conifer seeds but also fungi, cambium, twigs, sap, leaves, buds, acorns and other nuts, mushrooms, fruits, and berries (Pfau 2004).

The Douglas tree squirrel is a management indicator species for snags and true fir habitat.

Habitat The California Wildlife Habitat Relationship System lists the following as habitats suitable for Douglas tree squirrel, not all of these habitats are found within the Black Butte Watershed: aspen, Douglas-fir, eastside pine, Jeffrey pine, Klamath mixed conifer, lodgepole pine, montane hardwood, montane hardwood-conifer, montane riparian, pinton-juniper, ponderosa pine, red fir, redwood, Sierran mixed conifer, subalpine conifer, and white fir.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on Douglas tree squirrel or snags and true fir habitat. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Adopting the CRMP will have no direct or indirect effects on the Douglas tree squirrel or the habitats in which it is a management indicator species. The Comprehensive River Management Plan only designates a corridor for the Wild and Scenic portions and does not propose any treatments or change management of the species or its habitat. Peregrine Falcon Existing Conditions Peregrine Falcons breed throughout North America and the world (White et al. 2002).

The Peregrine falcon is a Management Indicator Species for riparian and lithic areas.

Habitat Peregrine Falcons breed across a wide range of biomes in the Americas, though no habitat type appears to be preferred (White el al. 2002).

The Mendocino LRMP does not mention any specific habitat type for Peregrine falcon but give specific cliff conditions for optimum and suboptimum habitat. Optimum and suboptimum habitat would be a cliff with a vertical face 75-300 feet high with abundant ledges >10 square feet, or deep caves with commanding views.

There are several large rock outcrops within the Black Butte Watershed that may be suitable for use by Peregrine falcons.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on peregrine falcon or riparian and lithic areas. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Implementing the proposed action will not have any direct or indirect effects on the peregrine falcon or riparian and lithic areas. Standards and Guidelines from the Mendocino LRMP will be applied to the Wild and Scenic River corridor. The CRMP does not change management of the Peregrine falcon or its habitat for which it is a management indicator species. Pileated Woodpecker Existing Conditions In California the pileated woodpecker is an uncommon, yearlong resident of mature, montane habitats in the North Coast, Klamath, Cascade, and Sierra Nevada Ranges (CWHR 2008). Pileated woodpeckers are commonly heard and seen on the Mendocino National Forest (personal observation).

The pileated woodpecker is a management indicator species for old growth, snags, and dead and down.

Habitat Pileated woodpeckers use late successional stages of coniferous or deciduous forests, and younger forests that have large, dead trees (Bull and Jackson 2011).

The Mendocino LRMP gives optimum and sub-optimum habitat types for the pileated woodpecker as the following: Douglas-fir 4N/G/P, 5N/G; mixed conifer 4N/G/P, 5N/G; ponderosa pine 4N/P, 5N; red fir 4N/G/P, 5N/G; white fir 4N/G/P, 5N/G; and conifer/hardwood 4N/G, 5N/G.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on pileated woodpecker or the habitats for which it is a management indicator species. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Implementing the proposed action will not have any direct or indirect effects on the pileated woodpecker. Standards and Guidelines from the Mendocino LRMP will be applied to the Wild and Scenic River corridor. The CRMP does not change management of the pileated woodpecker or the habitats for which it is a management indicator species. Tule Elk Existing Conditions Tule elk are endemic to California and were historically found throughout central California. Their range once extended from east of the Sierra Nevada foothills west to the California coast and north from the Sacramento River headwaters south to the Tehachapi Mountains. Today there are 21 herds of elk with numbers estimated around 3,800 but the Tule elk populations are isolated (CDFW 2017).

Tule elk are a management indicator species for riparian, hardwood, and meadow habitats.

Habitat The Mendocino LRMP describes optimum forage habitat for Tule elk as black oak 1, 2; blue oak- grassland savanna 1, 2; chaparral 1; chamise 1; streamside shrubs; grass; and herbaceous plants and optimum cover as black oak 3P/N, 4P/N; blue oak-grassland savanna 3P/N, 4P/N; conifer/hardwood 3P/N, 4P/N, mixed hardwoods 3P/N, 4P/N; mixed conifer 3P/N, 4P/N; chaparral 3; chamise 3; miscellaneous shrubs 3; shrub hardwoods 3; streamside shrubs; grass; and herbaceous plants.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on Tule elk or the habitat for which it is a management indicator species. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Implementing the proposed action will not have any direct or indirect effects on the Tule elk. Standards and Guidelines from the Mendocino LRMP will be applied to the Wild and Scenic River corridor. The CRMP does not change management of the Tule elk or the habitat for which it is a management indicator species. Standards and Guidelines for cooperating with state agencies which manage game species will still be applicable to Tule elk within the Wild and Scenic corridor. Western Gray Squirrel Existing Conditions In California, the western gray squirrel is fairly common in mature stands of most conifer, hardwood, and mixed hardwood-conifer habitats in the Klamath, Cascade, Transverse, Peninsular, and Sierra Nevada Mountain Ranges; it is also found in the Sacramento Valley in riparian stands, and in other suitable habitats (CWHR 2008).

Western gray squirrels are a management indicator species of snags and hardwood habitat.

Habitat Western gray squirrels inhabit woodlands and coniferous forests up to 8200 feet in elevation. They feed primarily on seeds of pinecones in coniferous forests and nuts and acorns in hardwood habitats. They also eat berries, fungus, bark, sap, and insects (Crane 2002).

The Mendocino LRMP describes optimum and sub-optimum habitat for the western squirrel as black oak 3P/N, 4P/N; blue oak-grassland savanna 3P/N, 4P/N; conifer-hardwood 3P/N, 4P/N; mixed conifer 3P/N, 4P/N; mixed hardwoods 3P/N, 4P/N; and ponderosa pine 4P/N.

Environmental Consequences No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative will have no direct or indirect effects on western gray squirrel or snags and hardwood habitat. This alternative does not propose a CRMP for the Black Butte River and therefore no change in management of the habitat.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Implementing the proposed action will not have any direct or indirect effects on the western gray squirrel or snags and hardwood habitat. Standards and Guidelines from the Mendocino LRMP will be applied to the Wild and Scenic River corridor. The CRMP does not change management of the western gray squirrel or its habitat. Cumulative Effects to MIS Implementation of the proposed action will not result in any direct or indirect impacts therefore the Black Butte WSR corridor will not result in any cumulative impacts on Mendocino Management Indicator Species. Migratory Birds Under the National Forest Management Act (NFMA), the Forest Service is directed to “provide for diversity of plant and animal communities based on the suitability and capability of the specific land area in order to meet overall multiple-use objectives.” (P.L. 94-588, Sec 6 (g) (3) (B)). The January 2000 USDA Forest Service (FS) Landbird Conservation Strategic Plan, followed by Executive Order 13186 in 2001, in addition to the Partners in Flight (PIF) specific habitat Conservation Plans for birds and the January 2004 PIF North American Landbird Conservation Plan all reference goals and objectives for integrating bird conservation into forest management and planning.

In late 2008, a Memorandum of Understanding between the USDA Forest Service and the US Fish and Wildlife Service to Promote the Conservation of Migratory Birds was signed and this MOU was extended through to December 31, 2017. An MOU extension is being considered, and in the interim the intent of the EO 13186 will be followed. This includes strengthening migratory bird conservation through enhanced collaboration and cooperation between the Forest Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service as well as other federal, state, tribal and local governments. Within the National Forests, conservation of migratory birds focuses on providing a diversity of habitat conditions at multiple spatial scales and ensuring that bird conservation is addressed when planning for land management activities.

The Mendocino National Forest is proposing to manage lands on the Covelo Ranger District and located in the Black Butte watershed. Proposed management is intended to implement direction contained within the Mendocino National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP, USFS 1996). Determinations By adopting the Black Butte Wild & Scenic River Comprehensive Management Plan there will be no effect to northern spotted owl or its habitat.

By adopting the Black Butte Wild & Scenic River Comprehensive Management Plan there will be no effect to 2012 Designated Critical Habitat for the northern spotted owl.

By adopting the Black Butte Wild & Scenic River Comprehensive River Management Plan there are no direct or indirect effects Species and therefore will not cause a trend toward listing to any Forest Service Sensitive.

By adopting the Black Butte Wild & Scenic River Comprehensive River Management Plan there are no direct or indirect effects and will have no impact on any Management Indicator Species for the Mendocino National Forest.

The project will not adversely impact migratory landbird species or their associated habitats. The Black Butte CRMP does not change the management of migratory bird or their habitats.

Literature Cited American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1998. Check-list of North American Birds, 7th Edition. American Ornithologists’ Union. Washington D.C.

Anthony, R. G., R. L. Knight, G. T. Allen, B. R. McClelland, and J. I. Hodges. 1982. Habitat use by nesting and roosting bald eagles in the Pacific Northwest. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 47:332–342.

Banci. V. 1994. Wolverine. In: The scientific basis for conserving forest carnivores: American marten, fisher , lynx, and wolverine in the western United States. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. General Technical Report RM-254. Fort Collins, CO.

Barbour, R.W. and W.H. Davis. 1969. Bats of America. University Press of Kentucky. 283 pp.

Baughman, J.F, and D.D. Murphy. 1998. Differentiation in a Widely Distributed, Polytypic Butterfly Genus: Five New Subspecies of California Euphydryas (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). In: Emmel, T.C. [Ed.]. 1998. Systematics of Western North American Butterflies. Mariposa Press, Gainesville, FL. pp 397-406.

Buehler, D. A. 2000. Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). The Birds of North America Online (P. G. Rodewald, ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology [accessed September 20, 2016]. Available from https://birdsna.org/Species- Account/bna/species/baleag.

Bull, Evelyn L. and Jerome A. Jackson.(2011).Pileated Woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus), The Birds of North America (P. G. Rodewald, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America: https://birdsna.org/Species-Account/bna/species/pilwoo

Buskirk, J. 2002. The western pond turtle, Emys marmorata. Radiata 11(3): 3-30.

California Department of Fish and Game, California Interagency Wildlife Task Group. 2008. CWHR version 8.2 personal computer program. Sacramento, CA.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2017. Tule Elk. (2016). Retrieved August 01, 2017, from https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/conservation/mammals/elk/tule-elk#341091208-distribution--range

Crane, S. 2002. "Sciurus griseus" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed February 14, 2018 at http://animaldiversity.org/accounts/Sciurus_griseus/

Davis, C.J. 1998. Western pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata). Master’s Theses. Paper 1694. http://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/etd_thesis/1694.

Ellis, E. 1999. "Martes americana" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed August 01, 2017 at http://animaldiversity.org/accounts/Martes_americana/

Ellison, L., T. O’Shea, M. Bogan, A. Everette, and D. Schneider. 2003a. Existing data on colonies of bats in the United States: Summary and Analysis of the U.S. Geological Survey’s Bat Population Database. In: O’Shea, T.J. and Bogan, M.A., eds., Monitoring trends in bat populations of the United States and territories: problems and prospects: U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Discipline, Information and Technology Report, USGS/BRD/ITR--2003–0003, 274 p.

Ellison, L., M. Wunder, C. Jones, C. Mosch, K. Navo, K. Peckham, J. Burghardt, J. Annear, R. West, J. Siemers, R. Adams, and E. Brekke. 2003b. Colorado bat conservation plan. Colorado Committee of the Western Bat Working Group. Available at: http://www.wbwg.org/conservation/conservationplans.html.

Fellers, G.M. 2005. Rana boylii Amphibiaweb account. In: Amphibiaweb . Downloaded on 26 June 2012.

Geluso, K. 1978. Urine concentrating ability and renal structure of insectivorous bats. Journal of Mammalogy 59(2).

Germano, D.J. and Rathbun, G.B. 2008. Growth, population structure, and reproduction of western pond turtles (Actinemys marmorata) on the central coast of California. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 7(2): 188-194.

Greenwald, D. N., D. C. Crocker-Bedford, L. Broberg, K. F. Suckling, and T. Tibbitts. 2005. A review of northern goshawk habitat selection in the home range and implications for forest management in the western United States. Wildlife Society Bulletin 33:120–128.

Gruver, J.C. and D.A. Keinath. 2006. Townsend’s Big-eared Bat (Corynorhinus townsendii): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/townsendsbigearedbat.pdf.

Jennings, M. R. and Hayes, M. P. 1994. Foothill yellow-legged frog Rana boylii Baird 1854. In: Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern in California. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California.

Keinath, D.A. 2005. Fringed myotis (Myotis thysanodes): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/fringedmyotis.pdf.

Koenig, Walter D., Peter B. Stacey, Mark T. Stanback and Ronald L. Mumme.(1995).Acorn Woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), The Birds of North America (P. G. Rodewald, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America: https://birdsna.org/Species-Account/bna/species/acowoo

Kunz, Thomas H., and Robert A. Martin. "Plecotus townsendii." Mammalian species 175 (1982): 1-6.

Lehman R. N. 1979. A survey of selected habitat features of 95 Bald Eagle nest sites in California. Wildlife Management Branch Administrative Report 79-1, California Department of Fish and Game.

Lofroth, E., C. Raley, J. Higley, R. Truex, J. Yaeger, J. Lewis, P. Happe, L. Finley, R. Naney, L. Hale, A. Krause, S. Livingston, A. Myers, and R. Brown. 2010. Conservation of Fishers (Martes pennanti) in South-Central British Columbia, Western Washington, Western Oregon, and California–Volume I: Conservation Assessment. USDI Bureau of Land Management, Denver, Colorado, USA.

Loomis,R.B. 1965. The yellow-legged frog, Rana boylii, from the Sierra San Pedro Martir, Baja California Norte, Mexico. Herpetologica 21(1): 78-80.

Lovich, J. and Meyer, K. 2002. The western pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata) in the Mojave River, California, USA: highly adapted survivor or tenuous relict? Journal of Zoology London 256: 537-545.

Morey, S. and Papenfuss, T. 1990. Foothill yellow-legged frog Rana boylii. In: California’s Wildlife. Vol. I. Amphibians and Reptiles. D. C. Zeiner, W. F. Laudenslayer Jr., K. E. Mayer, and M. White. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California.

Moriarty, K., W. Zielinski, A. Gonzales, T. Dawson, K. Boatner, C. Wilson, F. Schlexer, K. Pilgrim, J. Copeland, and M. Schwartz. 2009. Wolverine confirmation in California after nearly a century: native or long-distance migrant? Northwest Science. 83(2).

NatureServe. 2006. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 4.7. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://www.natureserve.org/explorer.

NatureServe. 2011. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. (Accessed: December 22, 2011).

NatureServe. 2012. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe. Arlington, Virginia. Available http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. (Accessed: October 17, 2012).

O'Shea, Thomas J., Michael A. Bogan, and Laura E. Ellison. "Monitoring trends in bat populations of the United States and territories: status of the science and recommendations for the future." (2003).

Pasitschniak-Arts, M. and S. Larivière. 1995. Gulo gulo. In: Mammalian Species. No. 499. Pp. 1-10.

Patterson, B. D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M. F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B. E. Young. 2007. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 3.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Pfau, J. 2004. "Tamiasciurus douglasii" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed August 02, 2017 at http://animaldiversity.org/accounts/Tamiasciurus_douglasii/

Philpott, W. 1997. Summaries of the life histories of California bat species. Sierra National Forest, Pineridge Ranger District. Unpublished doc.

Piaggio, A. 2005. Species account for the Townsend’s big-eared bat (2005 update on the 1998 account by R. Sherwin). Western Bat Working Group.

Pierson, E.D., and W.E. Rainey. 1998. Distribution, status, and management of Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) in California. California Department of Fish and Game, The Resources Agency, Sacramento, California.

Pierson, E., M. Wackenhut, J. Altenbach, P. Bradley, P. Call, D. Genter, C.. Harris, B. Keller, B. Lengus, L. Lewis, B. Luce, K. Navo, J. Perkins, S. Smith, and L. Welch. 1999. Species conservation assessment and strategy for Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii townsendii and Corynorhinus townsendii pallescens). Idaho Conservation Effort, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, ID.

Rambaldini, D. 2005. Species account for the pallid bat (2005 update on the 1998 account by R. Sherwin). Western Bat Working Group.

Reynolds, Richard T.; Graham, Russell T.; Reiser, M. Hildegard; and others. 1992. Management recommendations for the northern goshawk in the southwestern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-217, Ft. Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 90 p.

Sedgwick, James A.(2000).Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii), The Birds of North America (P. G. Rodewald, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America: https://birdsna.org/Species- Account/bna/species/wilfly

Sherwin, R. "Townsend’s big-eared bat, Corynorhinus townsendii." Ecology, Conservation, and Management of Western Bat Species: Bat Species Accounts. Unpublished document distributed at the Western Bat Working Group Workshop. 1998.

Sherwin, R., W. Gannon, and J. Altenbach. 2003. Managing complex systems simply: understanding inherent variation in the use of roosts by Townsend’s big-eared bat. Wildlife Society Bulletin (31(1).

Small, A. 1994. California birds: their status and distribution. Ibis Publishing Co., Vista, CA.

Squires, J. R., and L. F. Ruggiero. 1996. Nest-Site Preference of Northern Goshawks in Southcentral Wyoming. The Journal of Wildlife Management 60:170–177.

Squires, J. R. and R. T. Reynolds. 1997. Northern Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis). The Birds of North America Online (P. G. Rodewald, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology [accessed September 20, 2016]. Available from https://birdsna.org/Species-Account/bna/species/norgos.

Squires, J. R., and P. L. Kennedy. 2006. Northern Goshawk ecology: an assessment of current knowledge and information needs for conservation and management. Studies in Avian Biology 31:8–62.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Recovery Plan for the California Red-legged Frog (Rana aurora draytonii). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. Viii + 173 pp.

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2004. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-month Finding for a Petition To List the West Coast Distinct Population Segment of the Fisher (Martes pennanti ); Proposed Rule. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 8. Sacramento, California.

U.S. Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2010. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the North American Wolverine as Endangered or Threatened. Federal Register. Vol. 75, No. 239, 78030-78061.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011b. Revised Recovery Plan for the Northern Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. Xxvi + 250 pp.

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2012. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Revised Critical Habitat for the Northern Spotted Owl. Federal Register, 77 FR 71875. 194 pp.

Weller, Theodore J., and Cynthia J. Zabel. "Characteristics of fringed myotis day roosts in northern California." The Journal of wildlife management(2001): 489-497.

White, C. M., N. J. Clum, T. J. Cade and W. G. Hunt. 2002. Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus), The Birds of North America (P. G. Rodewald, ed.) [cited December 5, 2016]. Available from https://birdsna.org/Species- Account/bna/species/perfal.

Appendix A. Table 4 Successional Stages and their respective forest vegetation types found on page E-3 of the Mendocino LRMP

Successional Stage Forest Vegetation Types Grass/forb PL Shrub/seedling/sapling 1 Poles/small trees, <40% crown closure 2S, 3S, 2P, 3P Poles/small trees, 40+% crown closure 2N, 2G, 3N, 3G Medium/large trees, <40% crown closure 4S, 4P Medium/large trees, 40-70% crown closure 4N, 5N, 6N Medium/large trees, >70% crown closure 4G, 5G, 6G