Tom: We have done some survey work as part of the preparation for the active THP that covers some of the proposed fuel break area. In regards to the fisher, I have attached a document that we submit with our THPs that adequately covers us under the CEQA process. We have also done some bait station work in the project area with no detections of fishers. Mike

Item 32a:

Fisher Sighting

If a fisher is sighted in a harvest unit during timber operations, all vegetation disturbing activities will be suspended within that unit and company biologists will be notified. If a den or habitation of a fisher is discovered, all operations (per PRC Section 4527) will additionally be suspended within a 375-foot radius buffer around the den or habitation. The Department of Fish and Wildlife and Department of Forestry and Fire Protection will then be immediately notified.

Pacific Fisher Take Avoidance Measures

In any year the Pacific Fisher is a candidate or listed species pursuant to CESA, the following will apply:

Definitions

A potential den structure for inland Forest Districts is any hardwood with visible indicators of cavity formation (dead or alive) ≥15 inches DBH, a conifer snag ≥22 inches DBH, or a live green cull or green wildlife conifer ≥22 inches DBH. A potential den structure for the Coast Forest District is any hardwood with visible indicators of cavity formation (dead or alive) ≥18 inches DBH, a conifer snag ≥ 30 inches DBH, or a live green cull or green wildlife conifer ≥30 inches DBH. A live green cull is a conifer tree with less than 25% merchantable wood by volume. A green wildlife conifer is considered a potential den structure when it has mistletoe brooms, large rest branches, and visible signs of fungus or other indications of cavity formation or visible cavity openings.

During the Natal den period of March1 to May 15

  • Potential den trees will not be felled.

During the Maternal den period of May 16 to July 31

  • Potential den trees will not be cut until the day after all other trees intended to be felled within a ten acre area(a 375’ radius) have been felled. If a fisher has kits in a den tree within the area, this will allow her additional time to remove her young from the area.

SPI’s RPF will specifically instruct the LTO detailing these take avoidance measures including the LTO’s required implementation of these felling restrictions with their employees and timber fallers.

DFW consultation

  • Contact CDFW for consultation if site-specific avoidance measures are needed that differ from those described above.
  • After such consultation a minor amendment to the THP reflecting the protection agreed between the plan submitter and the Department of Fish and Wildlife shall be filed with Director of the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Any additional site specific avoidance measures developed through consultation with CDFW will provide greater or equal protection to those stated here.

Discussion

SPI’s snag retention policies provide additional year round protection to most snags unless they are a safety hazardand in many areas operators do not harvest hardwoods as there is no commercial market for them.SPI operators do not normally fall trees that meet the characteristics of potential den structures. In the few cases where silvicultural objectives, overall density of either green culls or hardwoodsand/or hardwood markets dictate the need, potential natal den structures will only be felled consistent with the above described avoidance strategy (that is outside the period March 1 to May 15 and comply with the additional day provision until July 31). Through July 31 of any such year, falling and harvest operations will commence progressively through harvest areas in such a fashion that allows a potential fisher denning in a proposed harvest area to move their young ahead of and away from those operations. These measures should avoid impacts to the already minimal risk of a direct take of fishers. These avoidance measures are supported by a report on natal den use by fishers in the SPI Shelf Binder (Binder #3, Tab 8) located at each CDF Review Team Office.

Issues related to longer term and landscape impacts to fisher denning habitat and structures are beyond the requirements of CESA take avoidance, but they are addressed in this THP. Under Question 38, SPI’s wildlife tree retention, hardwood retention and recruitment standards are detailed and the trees necessary to meet those standards have either been designated for retention by being individually marked by an RPF or his designee or protected by inclusion in an SPI habitat retention island. Also the long term potential impacts of our harvests under our Option A on denning habitat for fisher is discussed in our cumulative impacts discussion regarding Habitat Form 4.