United States Department of the Interior

Fish and Wildlife Service

Ecological Services

Montana Field Office

585 Shepard Way, Suite 1

Helena, Montana 59601-6287

Phone: (406) 449-5225, Fax: (406) 449-5339

In Reply refer to:

File: M19 Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest (F) 

06E11000-2014-F-0412 East Deerlodge Valley Landscape Restoration

February 20, 2015

Melany Glossa, Forest Supervisor

Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest

420 Barrett Street

Dillon, Montana 59725

Dear Ms. Glossa:

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed our August 26, 2014 consultation 

letter that was prepared in response to your biological assessment for the proposed East 

Deerlodge Valley Landscape Restoration Project. The proposed action remains unchanged from 

that previously consulted on and the effects analysis has not changed. However, upon review of 

our August 26, 2014 letter, we would like to further clarify our document. Thus, our 2014 letter 

has been revised and is superseded with this letter. 

Effects of the project were analyzed for federally listed threatened species, specifically the 

grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) and Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis). The BeaverheadDeerlodge National Forest (Forest) determined that the project may affect and is likely to 

adversely affect grizzly bears and may affect but is not likely to adversely affect Canada lynx. 

The proposed action is located on the Pintler Ranger District of the Forest. 

The proposed action includes 52 timber units totaling 2,541 acres. Treatment in timber units 

would consist of commercial salvage and/or thinning. Approximately 11.2 miles of 

temporary roads would be constructed, used, and obliterated following harvest. In addition to 

timber harvest, restoration treatments would occur including conifer encroachment treatments, 

aspen enhancement treatments, Douglas-fir thinning treatments, riparian habitat enhancement, 

and water structure installations. Approximately 1.2 miles of non-system roads would be 

added to the Forest’s transportation system, while 21.9 miles of system and non-system routes 

would be decommissioned and/or closed. In addition, trail work would occur on the Baggs 

Creek trail. Additional project information can be found in the biological assessment 

prepared for the proposed action (U.S. Forest Service 2014).

Grizzly Bear

The following paragraphs describe the relationship of the proposed action to access management 

on the Forest. On May 28, 2013, the Service issued a programmatic non-jeopardy biological 
2

opinion and incidental take statement (2013 programmatic biological opinion) regarding the 

effects of the Beaverhead-Deerlodge Revised Forest Plan on grizzly bears that may occur 

throughout the Forest (US Fish and Wildlife Service 2013). The 2013 biological opinion was 

prepared in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and focused on the effects of the Revised Forest Plan direction related to 

Forest management projects that have the potential to adversely impact grizzly bears, including: 

access management, food and attractant storage, and livestock grazing on grizzly bears. 

While not specifically termed as a first-tier biological opinion, the 2013 biological opinion on the 

Revised Forest Plan was designed as a tiered consultation framework. Second-tier consultations 

include the review of site specific projects related to access management, food and attractant 

storage, and livestock grazing that may adversely affect grizzly bears. This consultation for the 

East Deerlodge Valley Landscape Restoration project is a second-tier consultation. The intent is

to confirm that the adverse effects of the proposed action are consistent with the 2013 

programmatic biological opinion on the Revised Forest Plan. 

In the 2013 programmatic biological opinion, the effects of existing access management (i.e. 

baseline condition) were analyzed for the Forest. The 2013 effects analysis also assumed that 

future permanent and temporary road construction may occur on the Forest. If consistent with 

the Revised Forest Plan, permanent road construction would not result in changes that exceed the 

desired open motorized road and trail densities. Temporary road construction would not exceed 

70 miles over the life of the Revised Forest Plan. Therefore, the effects of motorized access 

management on grizzly bears on the Forest, including existing Forest roads and the construction 

of additional new permanent and temporary roads, were analyzed in the 2013 programmatic 

biological opinion. An incidental take statement was provided related to access management 

because the Forest provided explicit desired open motorized road and trail densities related to 

permanent access conditions as well as a maximum amount of temporary road construction that 

could occur for the life of the Revised Forest Plan. This second-tier consultation for the East 

Deerlodge Valley Landscape Restoration project illustrates how the adverse effects of the 

proposed action on grizzly bears fall within the scope of our 2013 programmatic biological 

opinion and incidental take statement. 

Several miles of existing road would be used throughout the project. The effects of these 

existing roads were considered in the baseline condition and in the first surrogate measure of 

incidental take described in the 2013 programmatic biological opinion and incidental take 

statement. The proposed action will add approximately 1.2 miles of permanent system road. 

The proposed action will also decommission and/or close 21.9 miles of system and non-system 

routes and convert 3.7 miles of motorized trail to non-motorized trail. As a result, permanent 

linear road and trail densities would improve upon completion of the proposed action. The first 

surrogate measure for incidental take described in the 2013 programmatic incidental take 

statement related to the desired open motorized road and trail densities will be met. 

In addition, 11.2 miles of temporary road will be constructed. This amount of temporary road 

construction is within the 70 miles of temporary road construction anticipated in the second 

surrogate measure for incidental take described in the 2013 programmatic biological opinion and 

incidental take statement. This is the first project constructing temporary roads under the 

Revised Forest Plan, thus leaving a balance of 58.8 miles of temporary road that were included in 
3

the analysis conducted for the 2013 biological opinion and may be constructed across the Forest 

during the life of the Revised Forest Plan. 

Project-related effects of the proposed action other than the effects related to access described 

above will not result in adverse effects to grizzly bears. Some timber harvest and restoration 

treatments may result in short-term disturbance to grizzly bears in the immediate vicinity of the 

units due to increase in human presence. However, secure habitat free from intense human 

disturbance is available within the action area, allowing for adequate displacement areas for 

grizzly bears. Thus, effects to grizzly bears from such disturbance would be insignificant. 

Design criteria were developed to provide protection to whitebark pine and any impacts to 

whitebark pine foraging habitat would be minimal and incidental. Food storage requirements are 

in place on the Forest, thus reducing the potential for human/grizzly bear conflicts. Additional 

analysis on the effects of the proposed action can be found in the biological assessment prepared 

for the proposed action (U.S. Forest Service 2014). In summary, with the exception of effects 

related to access, the remaining effects to grizzly bears as a result of the proposed action would 

be insignificant and/or discountable.

Grizzly Bear Summary

The Service has reviewed the biological assessment regarding the effects of the East Deerlodge 

Valley Landscape Restoration Project on grizzly bears. Other than access, no activities under the 

proposed action are likely to adversely affect grizzly bears. We find that the adverse effects 

related to the baseline access condition and the proposed permanent and temporary road 

construction and/or use were adequately analyzed in the 2013 programmatic biological opinion

and the proposed actions related to access conform to the 2013 incidental take statement. Our 

finding is based on: 1) both the baseline access condition and the proposed site‐specific actions 

related to access fall within the scope of the 2013 programmatic biological opinion, 2) the effects

of access management are consistent with those anticipated and analyzed in the 2013 

programmatic biological opinion, 3) the amount of incidental take anticipated in the 2013

incidental take statement has not been exceeded, and 4) the proposed action adheres to the 

appropriate terms and conditions associated with the reasonable and prudent measures identified

in the 2013 incidental take statement. Therefore, the proposed action is consistent with the 2013 

programmatic biological opinion and incidental take statement. 

In summary, we reviewed: the biological assessment and other information received during this 

consultation regarding the environmental baseline for the action area, the effects of the action, 

and the cumulative effects within the action area; the 2013 programmatic biological opinion on 

the revised Forest Plan; the information we relied upon to develop that opinion; and information 

in our files. After our review of the those documents and the status of grizzly bears, the 

environmental baseline, the effects of the action, and the cumulative effects, it is the Services 

biological opinion that the East Deerlodge Valley Landscape Restoration Project is not likely to 

jeopardize the continued existence of grizzly bears. 

As provided in 50 C.F.R. § 402.16, reinitiation of formal consultation is required where

discretionary federal agency involvement or control over the action has been retained (or is 

authorized by law) and if: (a) the amount or extent of taking specified in the incidental take

statement is exceeded; (b) new information reveals effects of the action that may affect listed 
4

species or critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not previously considered; (c) the identified

action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to the listed species or critical 

habitat that was not considered in the biological opinion; or (d) a new species is listed or critical 

habitat designated that may be affected by the identified action. 

Canada Lynx

The proposed action is located within unoccupied, secondary Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis)

habitat or a ‘secondary area’ as defined in the Canada Lynx Recovery Outline (U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service 2005) and draft Revised Canada Lynx Conservation Assessment and Strategy 

(Interagency Lynx Biology Team 2013). Secondary areas only support lynx intermittently and 

any lynx use of the action area would be considered transient. Lynx have not been verified 

within the action area and are not likely to be found in the action area during proposed activities. 

Therefore, the likelihood of disturbance to transient lynx is discountable. The Northern Rockies 

Lynx Management Direction was considered for the proposed action and will be met. 

Approximately 38 acres of snowshoe hare habitat would be affected. The proposed action would 

maintain a mosaic of forest structures and successional stages and would not impede lynx 

movement or reduce habitat connectivity. Treatments are not expected to preclude any future 

use of the area by transient lynx. Consequently, effects to lynx habitat would be insignificant.

The Service has reviewed the biological assessment and concurs with the determination that the 

proposed action is not likely to adversely affect the threatened Canada lynx. The Service bases 

its concurrence on the information and analysis in the biological assessment prepared by Jenna 

Roose, Wildlife Biologist, and information in our files. 

This project should be re-analyzed if new information reveals effects of the action that may 

affect listed species or designated or proposed critical habitat (1) in a manner or to an extent not 

considered in this letter, (2) if the action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an 

effect to a listed species or designated or proposed critical habitat that was not considered in this 

letter, and (3) if a new species is listed or critical habitat is designated that may be affected by 

this project. 

We appreciate your efforts to ensure the conservation of threatened and endangered species as 

part of your responsibilities under the Endangered Species Act, as amended. If you have 

questions or comments related to this consultation, please contact Katrina Dixon at 406-449-

5225, extension 222.

Sincerely,

Jodi L. Bush

Field Supervisor
5

References Cited:

Interagency Lynx Biology Team. 2013. Canada lynx conservation assessment and strategy. 

DRAFT 3rd edition, June 13, 2013. USDA Forest Service, USDI Fish and Wildlife 

Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management, and USDI National Park Service. Forest 

Service Publication #R1-13-XX, Missoula, Montana. 116 pages.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013. Supplement to the biological opinion (2010) on the 

effects of the 2009 revision of the Beaverhead‐Deerlodge National Forest land and 

resource management plan on grizzly bears, Beaverhead‐Deerlodge National Forest. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Helena, Montana. 122 pages.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2005. Recovery Outline: Contiguous United States Distinct 

Population Segment of Canada Lynx. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 6, 

Montana. 21 pages.

U.S. Forest Service. 2014. Biological assessment for the East Deer Lodge Valley landscape 

restoration project. Pintler Ranger District, Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest, 

Dillon, Montana. 53 pages plus maps.