Brettski, that is wonderful news. It seems that you are getting some good advise. The advise you are getting is pretty standard and I think should be explained a bit more.
There really isn't such a thing as "wildlife". There are just plants and animals. All of these plants and animals live and are competitive in different environmental conditions. In a changing environment, there are always winners and loosers. In our modern world, the winners are the generalist that live in edge habitat. The loosers are the specialist that live in large, pure habitats of some type.
In general, there are two huge loosers in this country. One is the plants and animals that live in thick, mature forests. The other is the plants and animals that live in large prairie areas. The plants and animals that need these two types of habitat are in a huge decline.
The whole country is becoming edge habitat. Your plan will certainly increase the numbers of these types of species. I'm not saying this is bad. It's a lot like putting a dam over a creek. The winners are the species that live in a lake. The loosers are the species that needed the stream to live in. Lake species are very common while species that need streams to live in are in decline.
I hope this explains the concept of "wildlife habitat" a bit more.
