United States Department of Agriculture

Yaak River Suction Dredging

Environmental Assessment

 Forest Service

Kootenai National Forest Three Rivers Ranger District June 2020
For More Information Contact: 

Kirsten Kaiser

Three Rivers Ranger District

12858 US Hwy 2

Troy, MT 59935

Phone: 406-295-4693

Email: kirsten.a.kaiser@usda.gov

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil 

rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions 

participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on 

race, color, national origin, sex, religious creed, disability, age, political beliefs, or reprisal or 

retaliation for prior civil rights activity in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA. 

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program 

information (e.g. Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.), should contact 

the Agency (State or local) where they applied for benefits. Individuals who are deaf, hard of 

hearing or have speech disabilities may contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 

877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than 

English.

To file a program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program Discrimination 

Complaint Form, (AD-3027) found online at: How to File a Complaint, and at any USDA office, 

or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in 

the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed 

form or letter to USDA by: 

(1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights

1400 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, D.C. 20250-9410;

(2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or 

(3) email: program.intake@usda.gov.

This institution is an Equal Opportunity Provider.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

i

Contents

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3

Project Location .......................................................................................................................... 3

Purpose and Need for the Proposal ................................................................................................. 4

Proposed Action and Alternatives................................................................................................... 4

Proposed Action with Design Features....................................................................................... 4

Design Features....................................................................................................................... 5

Topics and Issues Addressed........................................................................................................... 9

Environmental Impacts.................................................................................................................... 9

Past Actions................................................................................................................................. 9

Ongoing, and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions.......................................................................... 9

Effects to Aquatic Resources.................................................................................................... 10

Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 10

Environmental Consequences ............................................................................................... 11

Summary ............................................................................................................................... 15

Consistency with Relevant laws, Regulations, and Policy.................................................... 16

Conclusion............................................................................................................................. 21

Effects to Cultural Resources.................................................................................................... 21

Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 21

Environmental Consequences ............................................................................................... 22

Consistency with Relevant Laws, Regulation, and Policy .................................................... 22

Other Agencies and Individuals Consulted ........................................................................... 25

Conclusion............................................................................................................................. 25

Effects to Recreation and Wild and Scenic River Classification .............................................. 26

Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 26

Resource Indicators and Measures........................................................................................ 26

Environmental Consequences ............................................................................................... 26

Consistency with Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policy................................................... 27

Conclusion............................................................................................................................. 27

Effects to Wildlife..................................................................................................................... 27

Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 29

Resource Indicators and Measures........................................................................................ 29

Environmental Consequences ............................................................................................... 30

Consistency with Relevant Laws, Regulation, and Policy .................................................... 31

Land and Resource Management Plan .................................................................................. 31

Other Relevant Laws, Regulation, or Policy ......................................................................... 34

Conclusion............................................................................................................................. 36

Required Monitoring ..................................................................................................................... 36

Agencies or Persons Consulted ..................................................................................................... 36

Public Involvement and Comments.......................................................................................... 36

Tribes and Other Agencies........................................................................................................ 37

References..................................................................................................................................... 37

Tables

Table 1. Forest Service roads accessing Yaak River mining claims. .............................................. 5

Table 2. Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions within and adjacent to the project area.9

Table 3. Resource condition indicators and measures for assessing effects.................................. 11

Table 4. Spawning and incubation seasons for spring and fall spawners*.................................... 19

Table 5. Resource condition indicators and measures for assessing recreational effects.............. 26
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

ii

Table 6. PTES Plants Guiding Documents.................................................................................... 28

Figures

Figure 1. Map of proposed dredging area........................................................................................ 3
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

3

Introduction

The Kootenai National Forest (KNF) Three Rivers Ranger District has received three Plans of 

Operation to conduct small-scale suction dredging activities in the Yaak River. The operations 

would occur on four mining claims spanning approximately two miles of the Yaak River. 

The Three Rivers Ranger District has prepared this environmental assessment (EA) to determine 

whether implementation of small-scale suction dredging activities may affect the quality of the 

human environment and thereby require the preparation of an environmental impact statement

(EIS) or determine a finding of no significant impact (FONSI).

Project Location

The project area is located approximately 12 miles northwest of Troy, MT in the Yaak River. It is 

approximately five miles upstream of the Kootenai and Yaak River confluence and three miles 

downstream of Yaak River Falls. Specifically, the operations are located in sections 17, 18, and 

19, Township 33 North, Range 33 West, Lincoln County, Montana.

Figure 1. Map of proposed dredging area.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

4

Purpose and Need for the Proposal

The purpose of this Federal action is for the Forest Service to analyze effects and possibly

identify changes to the operators’ Plan, as necessary to meet Forest Service regulations, within the 

context of the claim owners’ rights under the Federal mining laws. The agency is responsible for

considering and responding to the operators’ Plans under applicable laws and regulations. The 

claimants have rights under the 1872 Mining Law to prospect for minerals on National Forest 

System (NFS) lands. If the proposed use is reasonably incident to properly staged exploration or 

mining and milling activities, and does not violate other laws, it is in accordance with Forest 

Service mining surface management regulations as per 36 CFR 228A. 

This action would meet the goals and desired condition for minerals outlined in the 2015 

Kootenai National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan), which states, “The 

Forest continues to contribute to the economic strength and demands of the nation by supplying 

mineral and energy resources while assuring that the sustainability and resilience of other 

resources are not compromised or degraded.” It also meets the expectations of the Mining and 

Minerals Policy Act of 1970 (30 USC §21a.), which states, “...it is the continuing policy of the 

Federal Government in the national interest to foster and encourage private enterprise in (1) the 

development of economically sound and stable domestic mining, minerals, metal and mineral 

reclamation industries, (2) the orderly and economic development of domestic mineral resources, 

reserves, and reclamation of metals and minerals to help assure satisfaction of industrial, security 

and environmental needs...” 

Proposed Action and Alternatives

This section describes the proposed action. When there are no unresolved conflicts concerning 

alternative uses of available resources ("Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions 

of the National Environmental Policy Act," 1993), the EA need only analyze the proposed action 

and proceed without consideration of additional alternatives (36 CFR 220.7(b)(2)(i)). Through 

analysis, design features were developed that minimize or negate any resource impacts.

Proposed Action with Design Features

The proposed action is defined as approving the proponents’ Plans of Operation to suction dredge 

for minerals, as modified to meet Forest Service terms and conditions (including desired resource 

conditions). The Forest Service has prepared this EA in accordance with 36 CFR 228.5a(5) and 

proposes to approve the modified Plans of Operations. These modifications would align with

Forest Service mining requirements and other applicable laws and regulations including the 

Kootenai Forest Plan. By approving the Plans, the Forest Service would require the operators’ to

formally incorporate the design features of this EA and subsequent decision into their Plans of 

Operations.

The owners of “Snipetown Pat”, “Lower Snipetown”, “Snipetown”, and “Stone Chest” claims,

propose to pan, sluice, and suction dredge for gold instream and on gravel bars. The applicants 

would each use a suction dredge with intake diameters of four inches or less operated by 

individuals situated in the stream. Each operation includes one dredge used to suction up stream 

bottom material that is passed over a sluice box stationed on a floating platform. Operations 

would occur between July 15 and September 30.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

5

Forest Service Roads (FSR) 2370 and 2370A provide access to Snipetown Pat from State 

Highway 508. FSR 2378 to 2378A accesses the Stone Chest claim. FSR 2378 also provides 

access to Snipetown and Lower Snipetown. This road is an open to motorized use yearlong, 

unimproved, two track road with native material that intersects State Highway 508. Operators of 

the Lower Snipetown claim may also use FSR 14706 and 14320B (closed to motorized use 

yearlong) to access the river by foot. Table 1 describes road access to each mining claim. 

Table 1. Forest Service roads accessing Yaak River mining claims.

Road Status Claim

2370 Open During Bear Season Snipetown Pat

2370A Open During Bear Season Snipetown Pat

2378 Open During Bear Season Stone Chest

2378A Open During Bear Season Stone Chest

2378 Open During Bear Season Snipetown/Lower Snipetown

14706 Barriered/Legally No Administrative Use Lower Snipetown

14320B Barriered/Legally No Administrative Use Lower Snipetown

The operators propose to camp on NFS lands during the operating season. They would

intermittently occupy the dispersed camp sites at the end of 2370A, 2378A, and at the gravel pit 

located at the junction of 14706 and 14320. Design features define camping requirements.

The following design features address potential resource concerns. These reasonable and 

necessary modifications to the operators’ Plans minimize the potential for adverse environmental

impacts, per 36 CFR 228.8 regulations. The operators would formally incorporate these additions 

to their Plans of Operations prior to Forest Service approval.

Design Features

1. Fire Regulations

The operators would meet State and Federal fire requirements including the Forest Fire Rules and 

Regulations as stated in Appendix A.

A muffler or spark arrester satisfactory to the Forest Service would be maintained on the exhausts 

of all vehicles, off-road vehicles, or other internal combustion engines.

2. Archaeological-Paleontological Discoveries

Disturbance, removal, or destruction of any archaeological materials, objects, or features is 

prohibited. Excavation outside of the approved locations within the Yaak River channel is 

prohibited. These provisions apply to both known and previously unrecorded cultural resources. 

In the event of an inadvertent discovery of previously unrecorded cultural resources, operators 

would cease project activities and immediately notify the District Ranger. Project activities in the 

area of the inadvertent discovery could resume once the resource has been assessed by Kootenai 

National Forest Heritage personnel and appropriate resource protection measures implemented.

3. Length of Stay for Operations.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

6

In accordance with Title 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 261.58(a) and Northern Region 

Order #R1-2015-01, operators would camp on National Forest land “...for a period no longer 

than 16 consecutive days.” The operators would observe that “...after leaving the location, a 

minimum of 7 days is required before any group or persons from that group may reoccupy the 

original locations.” The operators would remove all equipment and personal property including 

fuel, tools, and personal gear (with exception of their suction dredge). If occupancy is conducted 

in segments of stay (i.e. for a weekend), then camp will be set up and taken down at the beginning 

and ending of each segment of occupancy. Appendix B describes camping regulations.

4. Waste

A portable camp toilet to dispose of human waste located at least 300 feet from any water body

would be required. 

5. Area Maintenance

A clean, neat, and orderly camp and dredge area would be maintained. Trash, debris, etc., would 

be disposed of promptly and the camp area restored at the end of each camping period. 

6. Food/Garbage/Refuse

In accordance with Kootenai National Forest Food Storage and Sanitation Special Order 

(Appendix C), the operators would pack out or remove all refuse from NFS land. 

7. Signage

No additional signage is permitted that may detract from the Wild and Scenic integrity of the 

Yaak River corridor as determined by the Forest Service. 

8. Access

Any brush cutting or access maintenance would require advance written Forest Service approval.

9. Bond

The activities could require a reclamation bond. Anticipated reclamation costs to the government 

would dictate bond amount should the operators fail to perform adequate reclamation. 

10. Other Permits*

The operators will obtain all applicable permits for suction dredge activities from local, State, and 

Federal agencies including but not limited to Montana Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(MPDES), Stream Protection Act (SPA) 124, 310 (Natural Streambed and Land Preservation 

Act), and United States Forest Service approved Plan of Operation.

11. Other Equipment

Each Plan of Operation is valid for one dredging unit; other powered equipment for conducting 

operations is not authorized nor would it be authorized.

12. Hazardous Materials

The operators would not use mercury, cyanide, or other hazardous or refined substance on NFS

land. If the operators encounter more than a few droplets of mercury from the dredging process, 
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

7

they would cease operations, report to the District Ranger, and disposed of in a proper waste 

facility. 

Personal vehicles would transport quarts of oil and fuel (in up to five-gallon containers) to the 

site. All oil and fuel would be stored in no-spill fuel canisters at least 300 feet from any stream 

channel. The operators would refuel and conduct all engine maintenance on land and no closer 

than 10 feet from the stream. Refueling dredges would occur over a containment system

sufficient in size to completely accommodate the full volume of all fuel and lubricants without 

overtopping or leaking. The operators would maintain a spill kit including absorbent cloth on 

streambank for any accidental spill. The cloth would be adequate to handle the volume of oil and 

fuel on site. The operators would notify the District Ranger immediately of any spills reportable 

to Montana Department of Environmental Quality. All oil and fuel would be removed from NFS

land when operators are not present.

13. Dredging Location

The operators would not conduct any ground disturbing activities other than instream suction 

dredging. No highbanking and no dredging outside the wetted channel would be permitted. If 

operations cause disturbance to the vegetation or soil, the operators would notify the District 

Ranger and conduct appropriate restoration according to Forest Service specifications. The 

operators would be financially responsible for restoration.

14. Noxious Weeds

Any grass seed used to reclaim a disturbed site would come from a KNF approved seed source.

15. Dredge Specifications*

The water intake hose would be four inches or less in diameter and the pump intake hose would 

be screened with 3/32-inch mesh to prevent intake of fish.

16. Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS)*

Suction dredge and other instream equipment would be treated for AIS prior to immersing in the 

Yaak River. The operators would wash instream equipment at Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks 

watercraft inspection stations and provide the Forest Service representative documents verifying 

inspection (closest station is at the junction of US highway 2 and highway 56 neat Troy, MT). If 

operators remove instream equipment during the dredging season, they need to wash equipment 

again before returning it into the Yaak River. This would include removing dirt, animal, and plant 

parts from the equipment that may carry AIS.

17. Stream Channel Protection

Stream bottom dredging would occur in cracks and crevices of shallow bedrock and in river 

cobble up to a depth of two feet. Bedrock would not be broken from the stream bottom and 

adjacent banks by any means including pry bars. Boulders greater than 12 inches would be left instream where they are found. The operators would not move cobbles in the stream course to the 

extent that the deepest and fastest portion of the stream channel (thalweg) is altered or diverted. 

No diversion channels or settling ponds would be created. The operators would not remove or 

disturb instream down woody material.

18. Operational Period
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

8

All instream dredging activities would be conducted during daylight hours only, and between July 

15 and September 30 to avoid disturbing trout eggs and fry and protect migrating fish. 

19. Aquatic Protection

Upon locating dead, injured, or sick bull trout, or upon observing destruction of redds, operators

would notify the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Montana Field Office (406-758-6878),

Montana Ecological Service’s Helena Field Office (406-449-5225), and the District Ranger 

within 24 hours. Operators would record the date, time, location of the fish when found, and if 

possible, the cause of injury or death. Operators would provide these records to the above listed 

agencies.

If western pearlshell mussels are encountered, operators would move the mussel away from the 

intake hose or avoid dredging in that area. Operators will demonstrate to the Forest Service 

official their ability to recognize pearshell mussels (Appendix D).

20. Water Quality Protection

Operators would comply with their Montana Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (MPDES)

permit. 

Operators would, where possible, run effluent from the dredge over a gravel bar along the edge of 

the channel to reduce the amount of suspended sediment returned to the active water channel.

21. Instream Reclamation

Operators would return the dredged area to the original grade each day when dredging in shallow 

areas (1 to 2 feet of water), and would not fill natural pools in the stream with material from 

dredging activities. All tailings would be dispersed to avoid accumulation of unstable spawning 

gravels. 

22. Conditions of Operation

The Plans of Operation are not transferable and would include all individuals participating in

dredging. Operators would retain a copy of the Plan of Operations onsite. 

23. Plan Amendments

Plans of Operation may be amended at any time subject to the approval of the Forest Service. 

Proposed revisions would be in writing and reference the applicable section of the current 

approved Plan. 

24. Noncompliance

Operators’ failure to comply with approved Plans of Operation could result in the suspension of 

all or part of the operation and the issuance of a non-compliance as stated in 36 CFR 228 Subpart 

A regulations. The Forest Service could elect to use a reclamation bond (if required) to restore 

resources disturbance caused by unauthorized activity.

25. Signage

The Forest Service will post appropriate multi-use signage so other forest user are not 

discouraged from recreating in the area. 

*Documentation required at the beginning of each operating season.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

9

Topics and Issues Addressed

In response to the proposed action, the Three Rivers Ranger District received two comment 

letters concerning the potential impact suction dredging and associated activities may have on 

archaeological resources, fish habitat, water quality, riparian vegetation and stream biota. 

Through the design features and monitoring plan, the proposed action addresses the concerns of 

these comment letters while meeting the claimants’ rights and complying with standards outlined 

in the National Forest Management Act (NFMA), Clean Water Act (CWA), Endangered Species 

Act (ESA), and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). 

Environmental Impacts

The Forest Service resource specialists analyzed the effects of the proposed action to the 

following resources: Aquatic Resources, Recreational Resources including Eligible Wild and 

Scenic River Classification, Cultural Resources, and Wildlife. The analysis area for most 

resources is the immediate river section of proposed work, upstream up to 1⁄4 mile, downstream 

approximately one mile, and the adjacent floodplain and associated riparian area.

Past Actions

The Yaak River has experienced sporadic placer mining activity since at least the early 1900s and 

hydraulic mining activity during the 1930s (Calvi, 1996). Most of the placer mining involved 

some excavation and sorting of gravels outside of the stream channel, but within the floodplain.

Other past activities within the Yaak drainage include road building and maintenance, logging, 

limited hard rock mining, and dispersed recreational use such as camping, hiking, hunting, 

fishing, and huckleberry picking. Most of the ownership within the Yaak drainage is National 

Forest. Some patented mining claims exist. 

Ongoing, and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions

Activities within the Yaak River drainage considered in the cumulative effects analysis for this 

project are described in Table 2.

Table 2. Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions within and adjacent to the project area.

Action Category Description 

Ongoing and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions within and Adjacent the Project Area

Activities on Private 

Lands

Continued development of private land is expected. Development is expected 

to include commercial timber harvest, land clearing, home construction, roads 

to homes, septic field installation, water well drilling, and minimal livestock 

grazing. 

Fire Suppression Fire suppression efforts will follow Forest Plan standards for management 

areas. Activities could include construction of firelines, safety zones, fuel 

breaks and helispots. Both ground and aerial operations are possible as well 

as the potential for emergency use of roads, including gated, barriered and 

roads overgrown with vegetation. 

Minerals One active placer mining claim with a permitted suction dredging operation 

(the “Why Not” claim) exists approximately three miles upstream from 

Snipetown Pat above the Yaak River Falls. Two inactive claims exist adjacent 

upstream of Snipetown Pat.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

10

Action Category Description 

Public Actions on 

National Forest 

System Lands

Recreation activities such as sightseeing, hiking, cross country skiing, 

camping, snowmobiling, hunting, and fishing, are ongoing and expected to be 

similar over the next 10 years. Firewood cutting is predicted to continue to 

occur along open roads. The Knotty Pine project proposes recreational 

improvements including a group site, trail improvements and improvements to 

an existing cross country ski area.

Recreation Activities Ongoing trail maintenance will occur on NFS lands. Dispersed and developed 

camping areas will be utilized and maintained. Seasonal and year-round 

activities include snowmobiling.

Road Activities Routine road maintenance is likely to occur as needed on those NFS roads 

that are open or gated within Yaak River watershed. The roads most likely to 

receive maintenance are those open to motorized use.

Weed Control Ground-based spraying and biocontrol agents to control weeds is ongoing 

within the project area and adheres to the Kootenai National Forest Invasive 

Plant Management EIS (April 2007 Record of Decision). The OLY and Knotty 

Pine project also include actions to control weeds and minimize spread.

Prescribed Burning Lower Yaak Obrien and Sheep (OLY) project harvest related underburn of 

1,936 acres, non-harvest related ecosystem burn of 1,652 acres. The Knotty 

Pine project also includes up to approximately 7,000 acres of prescribed 

burning.

Vegetation 

Management: 

National Forest 

System Lands

OLY and Knotty Pine project will have harvesting, planting, and precommercial 

thinning. 

Road and watershed 

work

Planned road storage, road decommissioning, and watershed improvement 

work in the OLY and Knotty Pine project area. 

Effects to Aquatic Resources

Methodology

In addition to direct effects, impacts to aquatic species and habitats were analyzed using the 

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) matrix for bull trout (U.S. Department of the 

Interior, 1998). This report and proceeding analysis are meant to fulfill the requirements for the 

biological evaluation (BE) under Forest Service Manual 2670 but only summarize the effects to 

bull trout, a federally listed species on the KNF. A biological assessment (BA) was prepared in 

conjunction with this analysis to meet the requirement of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and 

KNF Forest Plan. 

The resource indicators and measures in Table 3 assess the effects of the proposed action. This 

analysis includes temporary (one-month dredging season of any one year), short-term (one to ten 

years), and long-term (>10 years) periods. 
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

11

Resource Indicators and Measures 

Table 3. Resource condition indicators and measures for assessing effects.

Issue Indicator or Measure Source

Sediment delivery GOAL-WTR-01, FW-DC-WTR-01, FW-DCWTR-02, FW-DC-WTR-03, FW-DC-RIP01, FW-DC-RIP-02, FW-DC-RIP-03, FWSTD-RIP-03, FW-GDL-RIP-04, FW-DCAQH-01, FW-DC-AQH-02, FW-DC-AQH05, GOAL-AQS-01, FW-DC-AQS-01, FWDC-AQS-02, FW-GDL-AQS-01, and FWGDL-AQS-02

Clean Water Act 1977, KNF 

Forest Plan Standard

Special status 

species or habitat 

response to proposed 

activities

Special status species and effects 

determination

ESA Section 7, Forest Service 

Manual 2670

Environmental Consequences

Existing Condition

The Yaak River is a 5th order tributary of the Kootenai River, originating in Montana and British 

Columbia and flowing in a southwesterly direction, entering the Kootenai River about eight miles 

northwest of Troy, Montana. Elevations in the drainage range from 1,850 feet to 7,705 feet. 

Average annual precipitation ranges from 20 to 95 inches. The area is modestly influenced by 

rain-on-snow events generally at elevations below 4,500 feet. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

Hydrology – Water Quality

Suction dredging has the potential to reduce water quality by increasing sediment production and 

turbidity in streams. 

Water quality condition in the analysis area is rated as good per the 2012 Forest Service 

Watershed Condition Class Assessment (Potyondy & Geier, 2001). 

Suction dredging can have an impact of increasing suspended sediment downstream of the project 

area. A review of multiple studies indicates that the levels of turbidity created by dredging 

decrease to near baseline conditions within 49 meters and lethal conditions of suspended 

sediment are rarely produced (B. C. Harvey & Lisle, 1998). In these cases, the D84 particle size 

of the substrate is silt (0 to 2 mm). Stream surveys for the Yaak River dating back to 2003 show a 

D84 particle size in the coarse gravel (16-32 mm) to small cobble (64-128 mm) range. The Rocky 

Mountain Research Station Stream Metrics dataset (Wenger, Luce, Hamlet, Isaak, & Neville, 

2010) for the project area shows a modeled mean annual summer stream flow of 667 cubic feet 

per second (cfs) on the reach just north of the project area and a slight increase to 672 cfs at the 

confluence of the Kootenai River. Therefore, turbidity is not expected to be an issue due to site 

specific conditions including large D84 substrate size and the high mean annual summer flow.

Natural events, including high spring flows, shape the characteristics of the floodplain and 

channel geometry to such a degree that effects of the suction dredging would be indistinguishable 

from existing conditions. Minor amounts of river gravels and sediments would be moved within 
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

12

the stream channel by the suction dredging. Since the operation would move upstream, and 

continually fill previously dredged locations, no discernable change to floodplain or stream 

channel geometry other than the local movement of gravels and fines is anticipated. 

There is a possibility that petroleum products could be spilled into the river. The gas tank holds a 

maximum of 0.95 gallons. While the fuel system on the dredge is designed to be leak free and 

damage resistant, a maximum of approximately a gallon of gas and less than a quart of oil could 

be released into the water. If this were to occur, a petroleum sheen would be evident at the 

immediate accident site. However, dilution and vaporization to a low concentration would occur, 

and no impacts would be measurable downstream of the activity area. 

This analysis demonstrates that effects of proposed activities to hydrologic resources would be 

indiscernible from baseline conditions. Furthermore, effects would be temporary and limited to an 

area approximately 150 feet downstream from the project activity area.

Aquatic Species

Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive (TES) Species

The lower 11 miles of the Yaak River is accessible to bull trout, which are known to be present in 

the Kootenai River. Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MDFWP) have records 

indicating bull trout observations below Yaak Falls, but no documentation of redds or suitable 

spawning habitat. The May 5, 2021 letter from the FWS states that the best available information 

at this time suggests that bull trout are absent from the Yaak River. The nearest known bull trout 

subpopulations are in Callahan and O’Brien Creeks. Callahan creek flows into the Kootenai River 

from the south approximately 8 miles upstream from the Yaak confluence and O’Brien creek 

enters the Kootenai River from the north approximately 9 miles upstream from the Yaak 

confluence.

Sensitive aquatic species identified on the KNF that are known and suspected to occur in the 

project area include: Columbia River redband trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss gairdneri), westslope 

cutthroat trout (O.clarki lewisi), western pearlshell mussel (Margaritifera falcata), Coeur d’Alene 

salamander (Plethodon idahoensis) and Western toad (Bufo boreas). The northern leopard frog 

(Rana pipiens) is not suspected to occur within the project area, as the project area is outside the 

known range and there are no documented observations within the project area. The northern

leopard frog will not be analyzed further, as project activities are not expected to affect habitat, 

individuals, or the species. 

Standardized mussel distribution surveys were conducted by the Montana Natural Heritage 

Program in the Yaak River, which contains a large, viable population of western pearlshell 

mussels (Stagliano, 2015). Pearlshell mussels were observed in suitable habitat within the claim 

reaches during site visits in 2018.

The western toad and the Coeur d’Alene salamander are suspected to occur within the project 

area as suitable habitat exists and the area is within range of known species occurrence. 

An aquatic species snorkel survey was conducted by the U.S. Forest Service on August 8, 2018. 

The total survey length was approximately 1,500 feet located in the project area. Species 

observed included: Columbia River redband trout, redside shiner (Richardsonius balteatus), 

longnose dace (Rhinichthys cataractae), northern pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus oregonensis), 
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

13

mountain whitefish (Prosopium williamsoni) and western pearlshell mussel. No bull trout were 

observed during this survey.

Aquatic Species: Bull Trout

Indirect Effects

Possible indirect effects to potential bull trout habitat and bull trout include sediment disturbance 

and re-suspension in stream channels. Fine sediment has the potential to decrease bull trout 

feeding efficiency, decrease spawning and early rearing habitat quality, reduce macroinvertebrate 

production, fill in pools, and modify hydrologic processes. possible

While changes in channel morphology can occur if suction dredging is insufficiently regulated

(B. C. Harvey & Lisle, 1998), the proposed project design features are intended to eliminate or 

reduce these potential effects. Studies indicate that scour holes or tailings piles are generally 

removed by subsequent high-flow events (B. C. Harvey & Lisle, 1998). Observations of suction 

dredging sites on the Nez Perce – Clearwater National Forests show that high instream flows 

between the annual dredging operations tend to mobilize sediments, effectively “resetting” the 

channel morphology (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2016a, 2016b).

Short-term increase in suspended sediment is anticipated to have minimal effects on juvenile bull 

trout because suspended sediments and turbidity generated by the dredging operations would be 

evident only immediately downstream of activities. In addition, due to the mean bankfull width of 

the Yaak River relative to the spatial properties of the suction dredging activity, the highest 

turbidity would not affect the full width of the stream channel, allowing juvenile fish to avoid 

these plumes.

Effects to available food supply would be short term. Insects show high survival rate with several 

studies documenting less than one percent mortality for entrained organisms (B. C. Harvey & 

Lisle, 1998). Recovery of disturbed habitat is quick with recolonization by invertebrates and 

periphyton occurring within four to six weeks (B. C. Harvey & Lisle, 1998). Recovery is 

enhanced by the absence of silt on substrate surfaces. Mollusks are generally the last invertebrates 

to recolonize disturbed sites. Fish have also been observed feeding in turbid plumes created by 

suction dredging (Stern, 1988 - see project record, Thomas, 1985). Although turbidity and 

sedimentation may make it more difficult for fish to locate food, these effects may be offset by 

suction dredges exposing or mobilizing invertebrates, which fish readily consume.

Dredging may affect fish movement through the activity area by causing displacement and 

delays. However, no significant difference in the movement of rainbow trout between un-dredged 

areas and dredged areas were observed during dredging in the North Fork American River in 

California (A. E. Harvey, 1982). It is highly unlikely that mortality associated with forage fish 

entrainment would affect bull trout growth or survival due to the small extent of the activity area, 

the high natural mortality associated with most fish populations, and the likelihood that bull trout 

would be present in the Yaak River at any time of year.

Due to the annual low-flow period in the Yaak River, mobilized fine sediments in the stream 

channel would likely stay in place for a few weeks or months after which annual, natural highflow hydrologic events would mobilize deposited fines out of the project area accompanying 

fines from off-site already being carried by the creek. Therefore, increases in sediment due to 

activities would be indistinguishable from existing levels. 
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

14

With the exception of very fine sediments (<1 mm) that would float downstream of each suction 

dredge, the majority of the fine sediments (<6.4 mm) would be deposited as tailings (U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, 2016a, 2016b) immediately downstream of the suction dredge. The 

fine sediments and other larger substrate materials (<125 mm) processed by the suction dredge 

would be mixed in the tailing piles. In addition, project design features require the operators to 

return the dredging areas to near pre-project condition.

Direct Effects

There is low potential for bull trout to be present in the project area during the proposed suction 

dredging activity (See 5/5/21 FWS letter information below.). Little information exists regarding 

bull trout life history in the Yaak River, however it is possible that bull trout could be rearing in or 

migrating. Therefore, project activities may directly affect individuals, however, the probability of 

interactions is relatively low. Bull trout could periodically occupy the project stream reach but no 

documented spawning in the Yaak River exists. Daily peak water temperatures near the mouth of 

the Yaak River can exceed the desired rearing temperature of 15°C (U.S. Department of Interior, 

2010) by mid-July. Any potential rearing subadult and adult bull trout in the project area are 

likely to seek isolated areas of cool water in the mainstem Yaak River or colder tributaries. Bull 

trout spawn in Kootenai River tributaries such as Callahan and O’Brien Creeks in early to midOctober (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2005a), and activities would be completed prior to this 

timeframe. Design features further reduce potential direct impacts to individual fish.

Sensitive Fish Species - United States Forest Service Region 1 

Western Pearlshell Mussel

Indirect effects to western pearlshell mussels would be prevented or minimized by project design 

features and effects of peak streamflows. Direct effects would be minimal and limited in spatial 

and temporal scope. Some individual mussels may be displaced by dredging activities, but project 

design features would minimize the frequency of displacement. 

Any mussels entrained would typically be free floating until they are deposited in a location 

where they would be able to re-anchor themselves or move to such a location. During the interim, 

they may be more susceptible to predation by birds and mammals. There is also some risk that 

entrained individuals might be buried in dredge tailings to a depth where they may be unable to 

move and would eventually perish. Mussels are unlikely to be present in crevices targeted for 

dredging; use of a pump intake screen minimizes the likelihood of mussels entering the pump 

system; and daily redistribution of tailings piles decreases the risk that individual mussels would 

be buried.

Western Toad, and Coeur d’Alene Salamander 

Increased human foot traffic in the riparian area may directly affect mortality of Western toads 

and adult Coeur d’Alene salamanders. However, human foot traffic in the riparian area would be 

minor because dredging activities are limited to the water. The project is not likely to exceed 

existing foot traffic in the riparian area. Although toads are common in riparian areas, they are 

also relatively wary and mobile and likely could avoid trampling or other sources of mechanical 

injury. The likelihood of injury to toad eggs or tadpoles is low because the habitat favored by 

these life stages is not present in the project area and toad eggs would be hatched prior to the 

beginning of the dredging season. Although adult and juvenile salamander have the potential to 

be impacted, they are unlikely to occur in the proposed project area.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

15

Cumulative Effects of the Proposed Action

The cumulative effects analysis area for water and aquatic resources is the 6th HUC watershed. 

Table 1 lists on-going and reasonably foreseeable activities in this watershed. 

Activities on private land have potential for effects to water and aquatic resources from riparian 

development, road construction, and increased activity. The “Why Not” mining claim upstream is 

not expected to impact the proposed action. Per the Decision Memo (see project file), design 

features and enforcement activities would likely result in negligible sediment delivery 

downstream of the project area to streams and disturbance to riparian areas. Adverse effects from 

potential fuel or oil spills are minimized through design features. Required reclamation would

reduce potential for future impacts. No ground disturbing activities are currently authorized for 

the two closed mining claims adjacent (upstream) to Snipetown Pat and the Forest Service has not 

received any proposals to initiate an operation. Minimal, temporary and short-term negative 

effects and short and long-term beneficial effects are anticipated for routine road maintenance, 

decommissioning, and watershed improvements associated with the OLY and Knotty Pine 

projects. No effects to water and aquatic resources are expected in association with fire 

suppression, public actions on NFS lands, weed control under the KNF Invasive Plant 

Management EIS or the OLY and Knotty Pine projects, prescribed burning, vegetation 

management on NFS lands and recreational activities.

Summary

Determination of Effect

Endangered Species Act 

Section 7 of the ESA directs each federal agency to ensure that actions it authorizes, funds, or 

carries out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any threatened or endangered 

species. 

• The Yaak River has no designated bull trout critical habitat and the project would not 

impact any critical habitat. The project would have No Effect on critical habitat. 

• This project was determined to potentially impact bull trout; a determination of May Affect, 

Not Likely to Adversely Affect bull trout was made.

• The May 5, 2021 concurrence letter from the FWS states: 

At this time, the best available information suggests the bull trout are absent from the Yaak 

River (Cusack 2018). In addition, the identified reaches for dredging do not provide 

substrate ideal for bull trout spawning, and proposed activities would occur during late 

summer (July 15 to September 30) when water temperatures do not provide suitable 

conditions for bull trout spawning (USDI 2010). Mitigation measures will be implemented 

to reduce the risk associated with contamination by petroleum products used with the

dredge. As such, due to the unlikelihood of bull trout occurring in the reaches identified for 

dredging, the effects are expected to be discountable or insignificant to bull trout. Thus, we 

concur with the Forest’s determination that the proposed action is not likely to adversely 

affect threatened bull trout. The project was determined to have No Effect to white sturgeon

because the project would not impact sturgeon or their habitat downstream in the Kootenai 

River.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

16

• A BA was prepared to address the potential effects to threatened and endangered aquatic 

species and their critical habitat. This document is intended to meet the provisions of the 

ESA of 1973, P.L. 93-205 (87 Stat. 884), as amended. Concurrence from the FWS was 

received on May 5, 2021. 

R1 Sensitive Aquatic Amphibian Species 

Sensitive species are managed under the authority of the National Forest Management Act and are 

administratively designated by the Regional Forester (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2005b). 

Sensitive species are those that need special management to maintain and improve their status in

National Forests and Grasslands and prevent a need to list them under the ESA. Additionally, the 

Forest Service established direction in Forest Service Manual 2670 to guide habitat management 

for proposed, endangered, threatened, and sensitive species

• Project activities would not benefit aquatic species, but project design features and 

associated Plan of Operations conditions would minimize temporary and short-term effects 

and potential adverse effects would be minor and temporary. 

• For redband and cutthroat trout, the analysis concludes that implementation of proposed 

activities would result in a determination of “may impact individuals or habitat, but will not 

likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or loss of viability to the population or 

species”. 

• For the western pearlshell mussel, the analysis concludes that implementation of proposed 

activities would result in a determination of “may impact individuals or habitat, but would 

not likely lead to a trend toward federal listing or cause a loss of viability of the population 

or species”.

• For western toad and Coeur d’Alene salamander, the analysis concludes that 

implementation of the proposed activities would result in a determination of “may impact 

individuals or habitat, but would not likely lead to a trend toward federal listing or cause a 

loss of viability of the population or species”.

Consistency with Relevant laws, Regulations, and Policy

Land and Resource Management Plan

This project complies with the 2015 Forest Plan for hydrological resources, aquatic habitat and 

riparian plan components as follows:

Watershed

Goals

GOAL-WTR-01. Maintain or improve watershed conditions in order to provide water quality, 

water quantity, and stream channel conditions that support ecological functions and beneficial 

uses.

• Proposed activities would maintain watershed condition through implementation of 

applicable design features.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

17

Desired Conditions

FW-DC-WTR-01. Watersheds and associated aquatic ecosystems retain their inherent resilience 

to respond and adjust to disturbance without long-term, adverse changes to their physical or 

biological integrity.

• Implementation of the proposed activities would maintain the inherent resilience of the 

watershed to respond and adjust to disturbance in the project area.

FW-DC-WTR-02. Water quality meets applicable state water quality standards and fully 

supports beneficial uses. Flow conditions in watersheds, streams, lakes, springs, wetlands, and 

groundwater aquifers fully support beneficial uses, and meet the ecological needs of native and 

desirable non-native aquatic species and maintain the physical integrity of their habitats.

• The proposed action would maintain current water quality levels and support of beneficial 

uses. Activities would maintain conditions in these watersheds.

FW-DC-WTR-03. Stream flows provide for channel and floodplain dimensions that mimic 

reference conditions. Stream flows allow for water and sediment conveyance and overall channel 

maintenance. Sediment deposits from over-bank floods allow floodplain development and the 

propagation of flood-dependent riparian plant species. Surface and groundwater flows recharge 

riparian aquifers, provide late-season stream flows, cold water temperatures, and sustain the 

function of surface and subsurface aquatic ecosystems.

• No measurable changes in stream flows are expected, and channel and floodplain 

dimensions would continue to mimic reference conditions and maintain riparian and 

aquatic ecosystems. 

Riparian

Desired Conditions

FW-DC-RIP-01. Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) have healthy, functioning 

riparian systems and associated habitats that support well-distributed native and desired nonnative plant, vertebrate, and invertebrate communities.

• Design features are in place to protect stream banks and adjacent riparian areas.

FW-DC-RIP-02. Riparian and aquatic ecosystems, including stream channel integrity, channel 

processes, and sediment regimes function characteristically for a given landscape and climatic 

setting.

• Design features are in place to protect the aquatic ecosystem, stream channel integrity, 

channel processes, and sediment regimes.

FW-DC-RIP-03. Water quality provides stable and productive riparian and aquatic ecosystems. 

Streams and lakes are free of chemical contaminants and do not contain excess nutrients. 

Sediment levels are within reference conditions, supporting salmonid spawning and rearing, and 

cold water biota requirements.

• Chemical contaminants, nutrient amounts, and sediment levels would be protected through 

design features. 
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

18

Standards

FW-STD-RIP-03. The INFISH (Inland Native Fish Strategy) direction in the Decision Notice 

(U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1995; U.S. Department of Interior, 1998) and terms and 

conditions in the Biological Opinion (U.S. Department of Interior, 1998) shall be applied, with 

the following clarifications (see 2015 Forest Plan appendix B pp 133-146):

• Proposed activities would not negatively impact the RHCA’s or retard the attainment of 

Riparian Management Objectives (RMOs). 

Guidelines

FW-GDL-RIP-04. When drafting water from streams, pumps should be screened and located 

away from spawning areas to prevent entrainment of fish and aquatic organisms. During the 

spawning season for native fish, pumping sites should be located away from spawning gravels. 

Drafting equipment should be cleaned and inspected for aquatic invasive species prior to use in a 

water body.

• All applicable design features would be implemented with proposed activities.

Aquatic Habitat

Desired Conditions

FW-DC-AQH-01. Waterbodies, riparian vegetation, and adjacent uplands provide habitats that 

support self-sustaining native and desirable non-native aquatic communities, which include fish, 

amphibians, invertebrates, plants, and other aquatic-associated species. Aquatic habitats are 

diverse, with channel, lacustrine, and wetland characteristics and water quality reflective of the 

climate, geology, and natural vegetation of the area. Water quality supports native amphibians and 

diverse invertebrate communities. Streams, lakes, and rivers provide habitats that contribute 

toward recovery of threatened and endangered fish species and address the habitat needs of all 

native aquatic species.

• The proposed activities would maintain riparian vegetation through implementation of 

appropriate design features.

FW-DC-AQH-02. Connectivity between waterbodies provides for life history functions (e.g., 

fish migration to spawning areas, amphibian migration between seasonal breeding, foraging, and 

overwintering habitats) and for processes such as recolonization of historic habitats. Stream 

channels supply the required structure for desired stream habitat features.

• The proposed activities would maintain stream conditions through implementation of 

appropriate design features.

FW-DC-AQH-05. Stream channels supply the required structure for desired stream habitat 

features such as pools, pool tails, banks, large woody material, backwaters, and riffles that 

provide aquatic species the necessary niches for holding, overwintering, spawning, cover, rearing, 

and feeding.

• The proposed activities would maintain exiting stream habitat features through 

implementation of appropriate design features.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

19

Aquatic Species

Goals

GOAL-AQS-01. Maintain or improve the distribution of native aquatic and riparian dependent 

species and contribute to the recovery of threatened and endangered aquatic species.

• The proposed activities would maintain the current distribution of native species.

Desired Conditions

FW-DC-AQS-01. Over the long term, habitat contributes to the support of well-distributed selfsustaining populations of native and desired non-native aquatic species (fish, amphibians, 

invertebrates, plants, and other aquatic-associated species). In the short term, stronghold 

populations of native fish continue to thrive and expand into neighboring unoccupied habitats, 

and depressed populations increase in numbers. Available habitat supports genetic integrity and 

life history strategies of native fish, macroinvertebrates, and amphibian populations.

• The proposed activities would maintain the current populations of aquatic species. 

FW-DC-AQS-02. Non-native fish species are not expanding into waterbodies that support native 

fish on NFS lands. Impacts of non-native fish species on native salmonids, such as hybridization 

or displacement, are minimized to the extent possible. Aquatic ecosystems are free of invasive 

species such as zebra mussels, New Zealand mud snails, quagga mussels, bullfrogs, and Eurasian 

milfoil.

• The proposed activities would maintain current status of aquatic species and minimize 

introductions of invasive species through design features.

Guidelines

FW-GDL-AQS-01. Management activities that may disturb native salmonids, or have the 

potential to directly deliver sediment to their habitats, should be limited to times outside of 

spawning and incubation seasons for those species, as identified in Table 4.

• All salmonids spawn in the spring. The project activity would occur after this period, and 

would thus be consistent with this guideline. Lack of fall spawners in the project area allow 

activities to occur through September 30th. The proposed activities follow this guideline 

through design features.

Table 4. Spawning and incubation seasons for spring and fall spawners*.

Species Activity Inoperable Activity Period

Spring spawners Known occupied streams Prior to July 15

Fall spawners Known occupied streams September 1 to March 15

* (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2015); Dates can be modified when site-specific information on staging and spawning 

of native fishes supports changes.

FW-GDL-AQS-02. When conducting management activities and fire suppression, all equipment 

used in water should be treated to prevent the introduction of aquatic invasive species and aquatic 

borne diseases.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

20

• Design feature that require washing suction dredges prior to submersion in the Yaak River 

are in place to prevent the introduction of aquatic invasive species and aquatic borne 

diseases.

Clean Water Act

The Clean Water Act established Federal water quality policies, goals, and programs. 

Section 313 requires Federal agencies to comply with all Federal, State, interstate, and local 

requirements, administrative authority, processes, and sanctions with respect to control and 

abatement of non-point sources of water pollutants. 

Section 319 describes requirements for each state’s clean water management program, which is to 

include identification of Best Management Practices to reduce non-point source pollutant 

loadings. 

• The Yaak River is not listed as a Water Quality Limited Segment (303d) by the State of 

Montana, Department of Environmental Quality. All applicable design features would be 

implemented and all necessary permits for the proposed activity would be obtained. 

Executive Orders

Floodplain Management, EO 11988 of May 24, 1977

Executive Order 11988 requires federal agencies to avoid the long and short-term adverse impacts 

associated with the occupancy and modification of flood plains to the extent possible and to avoid 

support of floodplain development if there is a practicable alternative.

• No modifications to the floodplain are proposed.

Executive Order 12962 Recreational Fisheries.

This executive order directs federal agencies, “to the extent permitted by law and where 

practicable, and in cooperation with States and Tribes, improve the quantity, function, sustainable 

productivity, and distribution of U.S. aquatic resources for increased recreational fishing 

opportunities” through a variety of measures. It also mandates disclosure of effects to recreational 

fishing.

• No effects are anticipated to floodplains, wetlands, or recreation fisheries as a result of 

project activities. 

Montana Administrative Rule (ARM)

The Montana Administrative Rule (ARM) Chapter 36.11 requires that land management activities

not generate pollutants levels that exceed naturally occurring levels, regardless of the stream's 

classification. 

• Implementation of project activities are not anticipated to exceed naturally occurring levels.

Montana Streamside Management Zone Law and Rules

The Montana Streamside Management Zone Law and Rules established a system for classifying 

streams and determining widths of streamside management zones and allowable activities within 

them.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

21

• This project adheres to all requirements of the Streamside Management Zone Law and 

Rules.

Federal Permits, Licenses, or Other Entitlements

All required permits would be obtained prior to implementation of proposed activities. 

Conclusion

The proposed action incorporates project design features that would minimize effects to water 

and aquatic resources including effects to TES species. While short-term, localized changes in 

TES aquatic species habitat may occur, project design features would minimize or eliminate any 

potential long-term effects.

Effects to Cultural Resources

Cultural resources include archaeological sites, non-renewable resources composed of the 

physical remains of past human activity, and cultural sites, locations associated with religious or 

traditional subsistence practices of American Indians. Cultural sites are generally identified 

through consultation with American Indian Tribes. These sites are generally places associated 

with traditional religious or subsistence activities that are still practiced today.

Historic properties are historic or precontact cultural resources that have been determined eligible 

for inclusion, or are listed in, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). When there is a 

potential to affect historic properties, State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) consultation 

must occur before project implementation. If a project has no potential to affect historic 

properties, then an alternative consultation process is implemented as outlined in the 2015 

Programmatic Agreement between the Forest Service Northern Region and MT SHPO. This 

agreement allows for the implementation of projects with no potential to affect historic properties 

to proceed prior to completing SHPO consultation. Projects falling into this category (no potential 

to affect) are submitted to SHPO for review at the end of the calendar year.

The Forest Service and other Federal Agencies are required to manage historic properties in the 

United States under several statutes, most notably the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 

(NHPA). These requirements are regulated through 36 CFR 800 and are carried forward in the 

2015 Kootenai National Forest Land Management Plan standards (2015 Forest Plan, pg. 36-38).

Methodology

The purpose of the Forest Service’s Cultural Resource Management program is to identify and 

preserve historic properties and significant cultural sites located on Forest lands by conducting a 

cultural resource inventory. When conducting a cultural resource inventory, first, the area of 

potential effect (APE) for the project is defined. The APE is the geographic area where proposed 

activities could, potentially, impact cultural resources. Then, archaeological and cultural sites are 

identified through a combination of historical research, a review of information from previous 

cultural resource inventories, field survey, and consultation with American Indian Tribes whose 

ancestral territory and treaty rights may be impacted by the project, and the SHPO. Certain 

classes of cultural resources, such as sacred sites and traditional use areas, cannot be identified 

based on archaeological remains and, therefore, can only be identified through Tribal 

Consultation. For this undertaking, the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) and the 

Kootenai Tribe of Idaho (KTOI) are consulted. Once identified, archaeological sites are evaluated 

for significance and NRHP eligibility is determined. The consulting Tribes and the SHPO are 
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

22

provided the cultural resource inventory and are given an opportunity to comment on the 

adequacy of the research methodology, findings of the study, and the resource protection 

measures proposed by the Forest.

Resource Indicators and Measures

Impacts to cultural resources are measured in terms of beneficial or adverse effects to historic 

properties and significant cultural sites. Beneficial effects could include stabilizing an historic 

structure, installing erosion control features, or reducing public access to a sensitive site. Adverse 

effects are anything that reduces the integrity of a site as defined by Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation. Common adverse effects to historic properties include, but are not limited to, human 

activities that directly disturb artifacts and result in a loss of spatial context, and erosion due to 

human activities that causes damage to historic structures or where the spatial relationships 

between artifacts and features are affected. 

Environmental Consequences 

Existing Condition

The analysis area for this project includes the reaches of the Yaak River where the dredging 

would occur. All sediment disturbing activities would occur within the Yaak River channel. Due 

to annual high flow events and hydrologic properties of the Yaak River, it is unlikely that any 

intact cultural deposits are present within the river channel. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

As the dredging would only occur within the Yaak River channel, this activity has no potential to 

effect historic properties. 

Cumulative Effects

Surveys have been completed for this project, therefore, the confidence that all of the historic 

properties in this area have been identified is high. No ground disturbance within site boundaries 

is proposed. Based on the analysis, no cumulative impacts would result in an adverse effect to the 

historic properties in or adjacent to the Yaak River Suction Dredging project area.

Consistency with Relevant Laws, Regulation, and Policy

Land and Resource Management Plan

The project complies with the Forest Plan’s desired conditions, guidelines, goals, and objectives 

for cultural resources as follows: 

FW-DC-CR-01. Cultural Resources are inventoried, evaluated for inclusion on the National 

Register of Historic Places, and managed according to their allocation category, including 

preservation, enhancement-public use, or scientific investigation. National Register ineligible 

cultural resources may be released from active management. Until evaluated, cultural resources 

are treated as historic properties. Historically and archaeologically important cultural resources 

and traditional cultural properties are nominated to the National Register.

• A cultural resource inventory has been completed for this project; no cultural resources 

were identified. A site is immediately adjacent to the project area and has been determined 

eligible for inclusion on the National Register. No impacts to this site are anticipated. 
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

23

FW-DC-CR-02. Cultural Resources are safeguarded from vandalism, looting, and environmental 

damage through monitoring, condition assessment, protection, and law enforcement measures. 

Interpretation and adaptive use of cultural resources provide public benefits and enhance 

understanding and appreciation of Kootenai National Forest prehistory and history. Cultural 

resource studies provide relevant knowledge and perspectives to KNF land management. Artifacts 

and records are stored in appropriate curation facilities and are available for academic research, 

interpretation, and public education.

• The aforementioned site has been monitored as part of the KNF Heritage Program 

monitoring plan and for the preparation of the cultural resource inventory for this project. 

FW-GDL-CR-01. Cultural resource protection provisions should be included in applicable 

contracts, agreements, and special use permits for where activities could impact National 

Register-listed or eligible properties.

• The claimants are not proposing any ground disturbing activities within any historic 

properties; however, due to the proximity of the aforementioned site, cultural resource 

protection provisions are included in the design features and Plans of Operations. These 

include limiting motorized use to established system roads and prohibiting collecting or 

disturbing artifacts. The Plans of Operations would not authorize ground disturbance 

outside of the river channel.

GOAL-AI-01. It is the goal of the KNF to respect Indian tribal sovereignty, honor tribal Treaty 

and other legal rights, and to meet the requirements of the Forest’s trust responsibilities. The 

Forest will also be managed in a manner that is sensitive to traditional American Indian religious 

beliefs and practices.

FW-OBJ-AI-03. The KNF will maintain ongoing government-to-government consultation with 

all federally recognized tribes with historical or treaty interests in KNF lands.

FW-GDL-AI-01. The KNF will consult with American Indian Tribes when management 

activities may affect cultural sites, treaty rights, or traditional uses.

• The KNF has initiated government-to-government consultation with the Confederated 

Salish and Kootenai Tribes and the Kootenai Tribe of Idaho regarding this proposal. Tribal 

consultation will be completed prior to the decision and approving the Plans of Operations. 

This consultation process verifies that the KNF would meet its trust responsibilities, that 

cultural and religious sites are protected, and that treaty rights are ensured. 

Other Relevant Law, Regulation, or Policy

Federal Laws

36 CFR 800 describes the process for meeting compliance with the National Historic 

Preservation Act (NHPA), as amended (16USC 470-470t, 110).

• Consultation with American Indian Tribes and the SHPO ensures that the cultural resource 

analysis, determination of effect, and approved activities comply with the requirements of 

NHPA.

Antiquities Act of 1906 protects any object of antiquity on federal lands.

• Objects of antiquity are identified through the cultural resource inventory. The 

determination of effects is documented in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

24

report and the inventory report. Tribal and the SHPO consultation confirms the findings are 

accurate and any proposed mitigation would be adequate. 

American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 (AIRFA) (P.L. 95-442) preserves the 

inherent rights of American Indians for freedom to believe, express and exercise their traditional 

religions.

• The Tribal consultation process would address AIRFA issues. 

Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (ARPA) provides for criminal and civil 

penalties for anyone collecting artifacts or damaging archaeological sites on federal lands without 

a federally issued permit to excavate for research purposes, and provides for consultation with 

affected tribal governments.

• All operators would be made aware of this law and monitoring would verify ARPA 

compliance.

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), recognizes the rights 

of the Indian Tribes and American Indian organizations as caretakers of human remains, funerary 

objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony with which they can demonstrate a 

reasonable biological or cultural affiliation, and conveys to such groups the rights to decide upon 

the disposition of such items.

• Based on previous inventories, there are no known resources subject to NAGPRA in the 

project area. All proposed activities would occur within the Yaak River channel; therefore, 

it is very unlikely that any previously unknown cultural resources would be impacted.

Tribal consultation provides the Tribes with the opportunity to share any information 

regarding archaeological or cultural sites known only to them. 

Hellgate Treaty of 1855: The Salish (Flathead), Kootenai, and Upper Pend d’Oreille have rights 

reserved under the Hellgate Treaty. The rights reserved include the “right of taking fish at all 

usual and accustomed places, in common with the citizens of the Territory, and of erecting 

temporary buildings for curing; together with the privilege of hunting, gathering roots and berries, 

and pasturing their horses and cattle upon open and unclaimed land.”

• There are no anticipated effects to treaty rights that would result from authorizing the 

proposed activities. Tribal consultation would ensure that all treaty rights are protected.

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 as amended through 2000 requires 

federal agencies to take into consideration the effects of their activities or permitted activities on 

cultural properties, and provides for the participation of Indian tribes where there is the potential 

to affect sites identified as “Traditional Cultural Properties” or culturally significant to Americans 

Indians. It is the federal law governing the preservation of historic and archeological resources of 

national, regional, state, and local significance on all proposed ground disturbing activities. 

Section 106 of the NHPA requires that the head of a federal agency having any jurisdiction over 

an undertaking, or authority to license any undertaking, shall take into account the effect of the 

undertaking on any site, district, building, structure, or object that is included in, or eligible to, the 

National Register of Historic Places. 

• This project meets NHPA requirements through the cultural resource inventory and 

implementing design features aimed at site protection. Consultation with MTSHPO, CSKT,

and KTOI would confirm compliance. 
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

25

Executive Orders

Executive Order 11593 (1971) Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment: 

provides for the protection and enhancement of the cultural environment.

• This project meets Executive Order 11593 requirement through the cultural resource 

inventory, Tribal consultation, MTSHPO consultation, and applicable design features. 

Executive Order 13007 (1966) Indian Sacred Sites: directs federal land managers to “(1) 

accommodate access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites by Indian religious practitioners 

and (2) avoid adversely affecting the physical integrity of such sacred sites” and to “where 

appropriate, agencies shall maintain the confidentiality of sacred sites.”

• These issues are addressed through the cultural resource inventory and formal consultation 

with potentially affected, federally recognized Tribes. 

Interior Executive Order (EO) 3175 (1992) requires all federal agencies to carry out the trust 

responsibilities of the federal government, to assess the impacts of their actions on Indian trust 

resources and to consult with tribes when impacts are identified.

• Formal government-to-government consultation with the CSKT and KTOI would be 

complete prior to approving the Plans of Operations.

Other Agencies and Individuals Consulted

Montana State Historic Preservation Office (MTSHPO): the MTSHPO reviews the cultural 

resource inventory. This provides them the opportunity to review the inventory process, 

evaluations of cultural resources for NRHP eligibility identified in the inventory, and consider the 

proposed design features intended to protect historic properties within the project’s APE, and 

consider the effects determination as discussed in the cultural resource inventory and NEPA 

specialist report. 

Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes: The Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO) 

reviews the project and informs the Forest Service if any cultural or religious sites may be 

impacted by the proposed activity. The THPO also verifies that the cultural resource inventory is 

adequate and comments on the effects analysis. 

Kootenai Tribe of Idaho: A designated representative of the Tribe reviews the project proposal 

and cultural resource inventory for the same purposes as CSKT.

Conclusion

The Forest Plan, along with the applicable federal regulations and policies outlined above, were 

considered and provided guidance during the development of this project proposal. Additionally, 

consultation between the Forest and the SHPO, and the Forest and the affected American Indian 

Tribes, ensures that the analysis, findings, and design criteria presented in the NEPA document 

and the cultural resource inventory meet requirements of the applicable federal laws and policies. 

The proposal is consistent with the laws, policies, regulations, and treaties regarding cultural 

resource management and Tribal consultation.

While the intent of the cultural resource inventory is to identify all cultural resource sites and 

avoid or mitigate effects prior to proposed ground-disturbing activities, there is the potential for 

unidentified sites to become exposed during project implementation. In the event of an 
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

26

inadvertent discovery of cultural material during implementation, ground disturbing activities in 

the vicinity of the discovery may be required to cease so that Forest Archeologists can analyze the 

material in order to complete Section 106 consultation on the eligibility of the historic property, 

analyze for possible effects, and implement resource protection measures if determined necessary. 

During this process, the Forest Archaeologist or delegated staff will notify and consult with 

SHPO, as required by law, to determine the significance of the discovery and the potential effects 

to the historic property. The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes and the Kootenai Tribe of 

Idaho would be included in discussions where American Indian affiliated sites are involved.

Effects to Recreation and Eligible Wild and Scenic River 

Methodology

The Plans of Operations and verbal communication with the claimants provide details for this 

analysis. The KNF has performed site visits to the dredging location to assess effects to recreation

resources and eligible wild and scenic river classification.

The resource indicators and measures in Table 5 were chosen to assess the effects of the proposed 

action associated with recreation. This section of the Yaak River is classified as scenic.

Resource Indicators and Measures

Table 5. Resource condition indicators and measures for assessing recreational effects.

Issue Indicator or Measure Source

Wild and Scenic 

River- Scenic

MA2-DC-AR-01, MA2-DC-AR-02, MA2-

DC-AR-07, and MA2-DC-AR-08.

Compliance with KNF Land 

Management Plan

Environmental Consequences

Direct and Indirect Effects

Open FSRs 2378, 2370, and 2370A are unimproved roads that provide public access to the Yaak 

River. Dispersed camping and river access are the main uses in the area. Although primitive roads

may discourage some recreators from accessing the project site, the Yaak River remains a 

desirable camping, fishing, swimming, and day use area. Design features aim to minimize the 

effects operations may have on public recreational resources. Specifically, design features would 

require claimants to comply with KNF Order# Rl-2015-01camping restrictions at dispersed 

campsites. The design features would also require claimants to remove all personal equipment 

from the camping area when unoccupied (except for the suction dredge, which may remain 

onsite). 

Cumulative Effects

On-going and reasonably foreseeable activities adjacent to the suction dredging areas

(summarized in Table 1) and associated effects to recreational resources are described below. 

The “Why Not” mining claim is not expected to contribute to effects of the proposed action 

because the operation does not overlap with dredging site. Minimal, temporary, and short-term 

negative effects with short- and long-term beneficial effects could result from prescribed burning, 

vegetation management, and road maintenance. No cumulative effects are anticipated from 
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

27

activity from private lands, fire suppression actions, weed control under the KNF Invasive Plant 

Management EIS as well as the OLY and Knotty Pine projects, and existing recreational 

activities. 

Consistency with Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policy

Land and Resource Management Plan

This project complies with the 2015 Forest Plan for recreational resources and forest type

Management Area (MA) 2 – Eligible Wild and Scenic River components as follows:

MA 2 – Eligible Wild and Scenic Rivers (Access and Recreation)

Desired Conditions

MA2-DC-AR-01. Wild/Scenic/Recreational. Eligible wild, scenic, or recreational rivers and 

their adjacent areas retain their free-flowing status and preliminary classification, and conserve or 

enhance their outstandingly remarkable values. This section has been designated as scenic.

• The small-scale nature of the proposed activities would not disrupt the Yaak River freeflowing status.

MA2-DC-AR-02. Scenic. Eligible scenic river segments provide primarily non-motorized and 

limited motorized recreation opportunities. These areas provide opportunities for non-motorized

use, motor vehicle use on designated roads and trails, and over-snow vehicle use.

• Motor vehicle use would only occur on open roads accessing the mining claims. All other

access would be by foot traffic. 

MA2-DC-AR-07. Scenic. Summer and winter recreation opportunities and experiences are 

consistent with the ROS classification of semi-primitive non-motorized to roaded natural in 

eligible scenic river segments. 

• The proposed activities would not change or increase the opportunities for recreation.

MA2-DC-AR-08. Scenic/Recreational. Preservation of historic properties may occur in eligible 

scenic and recreational river segments. 

• The activities proposed occur in the river and have no potential to effect historic properties.

Conclusion

The proposed operations have potential to discourage other forest users from utilizing this area.

However, design features that specify compliance with KNF Order #R1-2015-01 and appropriate 

multi-use signage posted by the Forest Service minimize the potential for this to occur. 

Effects to Botany

Methodology

The KNF has conducted site visits to the project area to assess effects to Proposed, Threatened, 

Endangered and Sensitive (PTES) plant populations.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

28

Resource Indicators and Measures

Table 6 shows the documents that guide the analysis of Proposed, Threatened, Endangered and 

Sensitive species of plants.

Table 6. PTES Plants Guiding Documents

Guiding Document Direction

1973 Endangered Species Act Directs agencies to carry out specific actions for the

conservation of endangered and threatened species 

of plants and animals.

2015 Kootenai National Forest Land Management

Plan (2015 Forest Plan)

The 2015 Forest Plan details the direction for

managing Forest land and resources on the 

Kootenai National Forest.

Environmental Consequences 

Direct and Indirect Effects

Proposed threatened species

Whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis)

There are no specimens in the project site because it is well below the elevation range for suitable 

habitat. Therefore, this project would have No Effect on whitebark pine.

Sensitive species

Western Pearl-flower (Heterocodon rariflorum)

This project would not impact or contribute toward federal listing of western pearl-flower 

because the species is associated with disturbance and because the plant grows along a year-round 

open road to the public and not within the mining claim. Therefore, the mining activities would

have No Impact on western pearl-flower.

Cumulative Effects

The proposed project would have no direct and indirect effects, and therefore no cumulative 

effects to listed species on the KNF. 

Consistency with Relevant Laws, Regulation, and Policy

Land and Resource Management Plan

This project complies with the 2015 Forest Plan components for PTES as follows:

Forestwide Direction

Desired Conditions

FW-DC-VEG-09. The proposed project would maintain the geographic distributions of sensitive 

plant species as designated in the 2015 Forest Plan. 
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

29

Other Relevant Laws, Regulation, or Policy

Endangered Species Act 

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 declares that all Federal agencies “utilize their 

authorities in furtherance of the purposes of this Act by carrying out programs for the 

conservation of endangered species and threatened species listed pursuant to section 4 of this 

Act.” The ESA requires Federal agencies to ensure that any agency action (any action authorized, 

funded, or carried out by the agency) is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any 

threatened, endangered, or proposed species. Agencies are further required to develop and carry 

out conservation programs for these species.

National Forest Management Act

The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) directs the Forest Service 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.”

Sensitive species are administratively designated by the Regional Forester (FSM 2670.5) and 

managed under the authority of the NFMA. FSM 2670.5 Section 19 defines sensitive species as 

"those plant and animal species identified by a Regional Forester for which population viability is 

a concern, as evidenced by:

• Significant current or predicted downward trends in population numbers or density.

• Significant current or predicted downward trends in habitat capability that would reduce a 

species' existing distribution.”

The project would comply with NFMA direction to provide for diverse populations of plant and 

animal communities by applying Forest Plan desired conditions, standards, and guidelines.

Conclusion

Based upon this evaluation and the available information on these species needs, the proposed 

project would not impact individuals or habitat and will not likely contribute to a trend towards 

federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species for whitebark pine or 

western pearl-flower.

Effects to Wildlife

Methodology

State and Forest databases were queried for local wildlife observations. Potential habitat for any 

species was queried for vegetation databases or assessed based on potential species presence and 

use.

Resource Indicators and Measures

Implementing project design features would ensure operations are conducted in a manner that

complies with the Forest Plan. These measures are designed to limit interactions between 

operators and wildlife, consequently reducing potential conflict. 
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

30

Environmental Consequences 

Direct and Indirect Effects

Grizzly bear

The activities are not likely to adversely affect grizzly bears and their habitats, either individually 

or cumulatively. All activities would occur along frequently used, open roads and within the area 

of influence of open roads, and therefore would not affect secure habitats. Grizzly bears are not 

likely to be present in the vicinity during the activity period because they generally spend the late 

summer and early fall at high elevation foraging locales. Attractants management is required of 

all forest users and is specifically included in the operating plan; effects from attractants are not 

expected and will be monitored by the Forest Service. Therefore, this project May Affect, and is 

Not Likely to Adversely Affect the grizzly bear.

Canada lynx and Canada lynx Critical Habitat

The project area occurs outside a lynx analysis unit and critical habitat and does not include 

vegetation types and structure associated with lynx foraging. Vegetation would remain unaffected. 

Therefore, this project would have No Effect on both Canada lynx and Canada lynx Critical 

Habitat.

Sensitive species

Project impacts either would not impact or may impact, but would not contribute toward federal 

listing, sensitive species. 

Bald eagle, black-backed woodpecker, bighorn sheep, common loon, fisher, flammulated owl, 

harlequin duck, northern bog lemming, peregrine falcon, mountain goat, Townsend’s big-eared 

bat: because this area does not provide suitable habitat or because the project would not affect 

suitable habitat there would be - No Impact

Gray wolf and North American wolverine – the project May Impact Individuals or Habitat but 

is not likely to result in a trend towards federal listing or loss of viability in the planning area.

Other terrestrial wildlife

Because the project footprint is small, occurs on existing roads, activities are similar to those 

already occurring, and no physical habitat changes would occur, impacts to species unmentioned 

in the 2015 Forest Plan are negligible.

Cumulative Effects

Listed terrestrial species that occur on the KNF in and near the project area have been assessed. 

For nearly all of these, there would be no direct and indirect effects, and therefore no cumulative 

effects. Three listed species and some migratory birds may be impacted by project activities. For 

each of these, potential disturbance is the focus of cumulative impacts analysis because habitats 

would remain unchanged. Disturbances in the project vicinity are not likely to discernibly impact 

these species because motor vehicle access and human recreational use is expected to remain 

consistent with existing conditions. 

For the grizzly bear, future federal projects, by adhering to Forest Plan direction, would minimize 

potential disturbances and thus direct and indirect effects. For the North American wolverine, 
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

31

cumulative effects are discussed in the programmatic analyses; cumulative effects are not 

expected to have an impact on the wolverine. For wolves and migratory birds, unlikely or 

minimal direct and indirect impacts would not result in measurable cumulative impacts.

Consistency with Relevant Laws, Regulation, and Policy

Land and Resource Management Plan

This project complies with the 2015 Forest Plan components for wildlife as follows:

Forestwide Direction

Goals 

GOAL-WL-02. The KNF manages and schedules activities to avoid or minimize disturbance to 

sensitive species and manages habitat to promote their perpetuation into the future.

• Potential disturbances to Sensitive species are minimized. The duration of noise and human 

activity are short (two and a half months) and periodic throughout any day. Potential 

disturbances are low intensity only. Therefore, this project maintains this goal.

Desired Conditions

FW-DC-WL-01. Nests and den sites and other birthing and rearing areas for terrestrial 

threatened, endangered, proposed, or sensitive species are relatively free of human disturbance 

during the period they are active at these sites. Individual animals that establish nests and den

sites near areas of pre-existing human use are assumed to be accepting of that existing level of 

human use at the time the animals establish occupancy.

• Known, historic, or suspected nests or den sites are absent in the project vicinity. Such sites 

would not be impacted by project activities. Therefore, this project is neutral with regard to 

progress toward this desired condition.

FW-DC-WL-04. All grizzly BMUs [Bear Management Units] have low levels of disturbance to 

facilitate denning activities, spring use, limit displacement, and reduce human/bear conflicts and 

potential bear mortality. Spring, summer, and fall forage is available for the grizzly bear.

• This project is designed in accordance with the desired condition. The project would begin 

and end in late summer, avoiding potential impacts in spring habitat.

FW-DC-WL-05. Recovery of the grizzly bear is promoted by motorized access management 

within the KNF portion of the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) and CabinetYaak recovery zones.

• The project is designed in accordance with this desired condition. The project is outside 

area designated as grizzly bear core and in an area where disturbance impacts are already 

elevated. There would be no change to existing wheeled motorized access.

FW-DC-WL-06. Large-diameter trees are available within potential bald eagle nesting habitat 

adjacent to large lakes and major rivers. Forested stands are managed to promote large diameter 

trees within eagle nesting territories, especially in the area between the nest site and the adjacent 

water body.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

32

• This project is neutral with regard to this desired condition because it is not located near a 

large waterbody and is unlikely to provide nesting habitat for bald eagles.

FW-DC-WL-07. Peregrine falcon nests have a low level of disturbance during periods of use. 

Forest landbirds and small mammals are abundant and support the current and expanding 

population of peregrine falcons on the Forest.

• This project is neutral with regard to this desired condition. There may be potential nesting 

habitat nearby, but there is no record of use. Nesting habitat and potential prey would not be 

impacted.

FW-DC-WL-08. Habitat for native ungulates is available and well-distributed across the 

landscape to provide prey for carnivores.

• This project is neutral with regard to this desired condition because habitat would not be 

impacted. Authorized activities would occur near currently open roads; big game and 

carnivores are less likely to spend time or would be acclimated to existing traffic.

FW-DC-WL-18. Secure denning and rendezvous sites are available for wolf packs and avoided 

by management activities during critical biological periods (e.g., whelping, rearing).

• This project is neutral with regard to this desired condition. No known wolf dens or 

rendezvous sites occur within the project area.

Standards

FW-STD-WL-01. The Northern Rockies Lynx Management Direction (2007) and ROD is 

included in appendix B, and shall be applied.

• This project occurs outside of a LAU. It is designed in accordance with this standard.

FW-STD-WL-02. The Motorized Access Management within the Selkirk and Cabinet Yaak 

Grizzly Bear Recovery Zone Management Direction and ROD is included in appendix B, and 

shall be applied.

• This project is in a BMU. It is designed in accordance with this standard. Access would 

occur via an open road that is parallel and adjacent to another year round open road. The 

standards for Open Motorized Road Density (OMRD), Total Motorized Road Density 

(TMRD), and core would be unaffected.

FW-STD-WL-04. Permits and operating plans (e.g., special use, grazing, and mining) shall 

specify sanitation measures and adhere to the forestwide food/attractant storage order in order to 

reduce human/wildlife conflicts and mortality by making wildlife attractants (e.g., garbage, food, 

livestock carcasses) inaccessible through proper storage or disposal.

• This project is designed in accordance with this standard. All forest users are required to 

follow the Forest-wide food storage order.

Guidelines

FW-GDL-WL-01. Grizzly Bear. Management activities should avoid or minimize disturbance in 

areas of predicted denning habitat during spring emergence (April 1 through May 1).

• Grizzly bears are not expected to den within the project area. It is designed in accordance 

within this guideline.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

33

FW-GDL-WL-02. Bald Eagle. Management activities should avoid or minimize impacts to bald 

eagles on known occupied nest sites and roost sites, including known winter communal night 

roost areas, with timing and distance buffers based on the best available information.

• This project is designed in accordance with this guideline. Project activities occur outside 

of known bald eagle nest or roost sites. There are no large bodies of water within or 

adjacent to the project area.

FW-GDL-WL-08. Big Game. Management activities should avoid or minimize disturbance to 

native ungulates on winter range between December 1 and April 30, with the exception of routes 

identified on MVUM as open to motor vehicle use. Management activities that occur on winter 

range during the winter period should concentrate activities to reduce impacts to native ungulates.

• This project is designed in accordance with this guideline. The project would occur after 

the winter range use period.

FW-GDL-WL-13. Connectivity. Management activities within one-quarter mile of existing 

crossing features, and future crossing features developed through interagency coordination, 

should not prevent wildlife from using the crossing features. The vegetative and structural 

components of connectivity, including snags and downed wood, should be managed according to 

the desired conditions for vegetation.

• This project is designed in accordance with this guideline. Crossing features are not located 

near this project site.

FW-GDL-WL-15. Grizzly bear. Elements contained in the most recent “Interagency Grizzly 

Bear Guidelines,” or a conservation strategy once a grizzly bear population is delisted, would be 

applied to management activities.

• This project is designed in accordance with this guideline. The project area is in 

Management Situation 1. Research data has been used to assess use and habitat potential in 

the vicinity. The project effects are consistent with the programmatic BA and USFWS 

consultation. Cumulative effects have been considered. Implementation would occur when 

bear use is least likely and would occur in an area generally avoided by bears. Attractant 

storage minimizes potential bear-human encounters.

FW-GDL-WL-16. Raptors. Management activities on NFS lands should avoid/minimize 

disturbance at known active raptor nests, including owls. Timing restrictions and distance buffers 

should be based on the best available information, as well as site-specific factors (e.g., 

topography, available habitat, etc.). Birds that establish nests near pre-existing human activities 

are assumed to be tolerant of that level of activity.

• This project is designed in accordance with this guideline. There are no known raptor nests 

within the project area.

FW-GDL-WL-17. Townsend’s Big-eared Bat. Avoid or minimize disturbance at known active 

roosts and hibernacula in caves, abandoned mines, or rock outcrops using the best available 

information.

• This project is designed in accordance with this guideline. There are no caves or abandoned 

mines within the project area. Large outcrops along the Yaak River would not be impacted. 

There are no known roost sites in the vicinity.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

34

FW-GDL-WL-19. Harlequin Duck. Management activities should avoid or minimize disturbance 

near known active nesting and rearing areas based on the best available information.

• This project is designed in accordance with this guideline. Nesting and roosting habitat is 

not found in the project vicinity. There are no records or harlequin ducks in the vicinity.

FW-GDL-WL-20. Common Loon. Management activities should avoid or minimize disturbance 

near known active nests based on the best available information.

• This project is designed in accordance with this guideline. There are no lakes within the 

project area to provide habitat for common loons.

FW-GDL-WL-21. Management activities on NFS lands should avoid/minimize disturbance at 

known active nesting or denning sites for other sensitive, threatened, or endangered species not 

covered under other forestwide guidelines. Use the best available information to set a timeframe 

and a distance buffer around active nests or dens. Individual animals that establish nests and den 

sites near areas of pre-existing human use, inconsistent with the timeframes and distances in the 

other forestwide wildlife guidelines or in the best available information, are assumed to be 

accepting of that existing higher level of human use at the time the animals established 

occupancy. In those instances, as long as the individual animals continue to use the site, the 

higher intensity, duration, and extent of disturbance could continue but would not be increased 

beyond the level existing at the time the animals established occupancy.

• This project is designed in accordance with this guideline. Most sensitive, threatened, or 

endangered species are not expected to occur within the project area, and those species that 

are expected are covered above in other guidelines. No timber treatments would occur on 

NFS land under this project. 

Other Relevant Laws, Regulation, or Policy

Endangered Species Act 

The Endangered Species Act of 1973: As amended, provides requirements for federal agencies 

with regard to species listed under the Act. Section 2 states that ". . . all federal departments and 

agencies shall seek to conserve endangered species and threatened species and shall utilize their 

authorities in furtherance of the purposes of this Act." Section 5 directs the Secretary of 

Agriculture to "establish and implement a program to conserve fish, wildlife, and plants," 

including federally listed species. Section 7 directs federal departments and agencies to ensure 

that actions authorized, funded, or carried out by them are not likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any threatened or endangered species or result in the destruction or adverse 

modification of their critical habitats.

• A concurrence letter for this project was received on May 5, 2021. This letter states: The 

project was analyzed for effects to federally listed threatened, endangered, and proposed 

species, specifically: bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), designated bull trout critical 

habitat, Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis), designated Canada lynx critical habitat, and 

grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis). The Forest determined the project would have no 

effect on designated critical habitat for bull trout, Canada lynx and designated critical 

habitat for Canada lynx, white sturgeon, Spalding’s campion, or whitebark pine. Written

concurrence from the Service with no effect determinations is not required by the Act, but 

we acknowledge your determinations. The Forest determined the proposed project may 

affect but is not likely to adversely affect bull trout and grizzly bears.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

35

National Forest Management Act

The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) directs the Forest Service 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.” This project would comply with NFMA 

direction to provide for diverse population of plant and animal communities by applying Forest 

Plan standards and guidelines. 

• The project would comply with NFMA direction to provide for diverse populations of plant 

and animal communities by applying Forest Plan desired conditions, standards, and 

guidelines.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act was implemented to protect migratory birds and includes treaties 

between the U.S. and Great Britain (for Canada), Mexico, Japan, and the Soviet Union (now 

Russia). Without being permitted it is illegal to "pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, 

capture or kill, possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to purchase, purchase, deliver for shipment, ship, 

cause to be shipped, deliver for transportation, transport, cause to be transported, carry, or cause 

to be carried by any means whatever, receive for shipment, transportation or carriage, or export, 

at any time, or in any manner, any migratory bird, included in the terms of this Convention . . . for 

the protection of migratory birds . . . or any part, nest, or egg of any such bird." (16 U.S.C. 703).

• Proposed activities would not result in the possession of an individual, feathers or other 

parts, nest, or egg of a migratory bird. Potential effects are extremely unlikely and would be 

incidental to the implementation of the activities and may impact individuals but would and 

not affect a population.

Migratory Birds, Executive Order 13186 of January 10, 2001

Executive Order 13186 promotes the conservation of migratory birds. Furthermore, this 

Executive Order requires Federal agencies to evaluate the effects of Federal actions on migratory 

birds through environmental analyses.

• The project complies with Executive Order #13186 and associated Memorandum of 

Understanding by evaluating the effects of Federal actions on migratory birds as part of the 

NEPA process and promoting conservation of and minimizing adverse impacts to species.

State Law and Guidelines

Nongame and Endangered Species Act (MCA 87-5) of Montana

This Act has similar language to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act such that it is unlawful to collect, 

kill, possess, transport, trade, etc. any bird, part of a bird, egg, or destruction of nest of a wild bird 

unless under an issued certificate, license, or permit.

• As described for the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, there would be no impacts to 

nest and roost sites, or the possession of an eagle or their parts. Disturbance is not expected 

to occur.

• As described in the migratory bird section, potential impacts are benign or neutral, if they 

were to occur at all. It is unlikely that this project would adversely impact daily or 

reproductive efforts of any nongame or endangered species.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

36

Bald Eagle and their habitat Management Guidance or Recommendations in Montana

Guidance for the management of bald eagles and their habitat in Montana is provided by “Habitat 

Management Guide for Bald Eagles in Northwestern Montana” (Montana Bald Eagle Working 

Group, 1991), “Montana Bald Eagle Management Plan” (Montana Bald Eagle Working Group, 

1994), and “Montana Bald Eagle Management Guidelines: An Addendum to Montana Bald Eagle 

Management Plan” (MBEWG, 2010) which have been considered in this analysis. The KNF has 

been documenting bald eagle nests and reproductive success in cooperation with the State of 

Montana since at least 1978. Also, mid-winter eagle counts occur in early January to get an 

estimate of the number of individuals residing on the Forest during the winter period. These 

efforts have been occurring since 1980 for a similar timeframe as the regular nest monitoring.

• The proposed activity would not obstruct the ongoing documentation of bald eagle nests 

and their reproductive success.

Conclusion

The proposed actions are within the scope of the United States Department of Agriculture Forest 

Service Region 1 Programmatic Biological Assessment for Activities that are Not Likely to 

Adversely Affect Canada Lynx, Grizzly Bear and Designated Canada Lynx Critical Habitat. 

Design features incorporated into the claimants proposed Plans of Operation would reduce 

potential interactions between humans and wildlife. Site inspections would ensure Plan 

compliance and maintain adequate wildlife habitat. The BA, BE, and FWS letter of concurrence

are located in the project file.

Required Monitoring

The KNF would conduct site inspections throughout the operating season to monitor the dredging 

operations. This would verify design feature compliance including Occupancy and Use 

Restrictions, Food Storage and Sanitation Special Order F14-083-11, and Camping Restrictions 

Order #R1-2015-01. A Forest Service representative would also conduct an inspection at the end 

of each operating season to confirm the area is returned to pre-season conditions. 

Agencies or Persons Consulted 

This section summarizes public involvement and collaboration for the project. More detailed 

information including mailings, legal notices, notes from meetings, and comments are in the 

project record.

Public Involvement and Comments

A legal notice announcing scoping and 14-day opportunity to comment was published in the

Missoula, MT Missoulian (newspaper of record) and Libby, MT Western News on October 20, 

2018 and October 19, 2018, respectively. Project information and request for comment was sent 

to five interested parties. Notice of the proposed activity was also published in the Kootenai 

National Forest quarterly Schedule of Proposed Actions report. The Three Rivers Ranger District 

received two responses. One comment was in favor of the project. The other comment expressed 

concerns regarding the impact suction dredging may have on archaeological resources, fish 

habitat, water quality, riparian area vegetation and stream biota and requested that Forest Service 

implement design features and monitor the operations. Comment letters are available for review 

in the project record. 
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

37

The Forest Service consulted the following Federal and State agencies during the development of 

this EA:

• Fish and Wildlife Biologist, United States Fish and Wildlife Service

• Fish Biologist, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks

Tribes and Other Agencies

The Forest Service consulted with the Confederated Salish and Kootenai tribes and Kootenai 

Tribe of Idaho during the planning and analysis process. Consultation with the Tribes helped 

ensure that trust responsibilities were met.

References

Harvey, A. E. (1982, 15-17 February). The importance of residual organic debris in site 

preparation and amelioration for reforestation. Paper presented at the Site Preparation 

and Fuels Management on Steep Terrain, Spokane, WA.

Harvey, B. C., & Lisle, T. E. (1998). Effects of suction dredging on streams: A review and an 

evaluation strategy. Fisheries, 23(8), 8-17. 

MBEWG. (2010). Montana bald eagle management guidelines: An addendum to Montana Bald 

Eagle Management Plan, 1994. Retrieved from Helena, MT: 

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact

=8&ved=0CB4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Ffwp.mt.gov%2FfwpDoc.html%3Fid%3D

44181&ei=IiCGVP6xDMPvoATX3oDYAQ&usg=AFQjCNHwrFUlJtBGJYlhUdV9Yy8

mRF8A5g

Montana Bald Eagle Working Group. (1991). Habitat management guide for bald eagles in 

northwestern Montana. Missoula, MT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

Montana Bald Eagle Working Group. (1994). Mantana bald eagle management plan, 2nd edition. 

Retrieved from Billings, MT: 

Potyondy, J. P., & Geier, T. W. (2001). Watershed condition classification technical guide (FS978). Retrieved from 

https://www.fs.fed.us/biology/resources/pubs/watershed/maps/watershed_classification_g

uide2011FS978.pdf

Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy 

Act, 40 C.F.R. § 1500-01508 (1993).

Stagliano, D. M. (2015). Re-evaluation and trend analysis of western pearlshell mussel (SWG tier 

1) populations across watersheds of western Montana. Retrieved from 

Thomas, V. G. (1985). Experimentally determined impacts of a small, suction gold dredge on a 

Montana stream. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 5(3B), 480-488. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. (1995). Inland native fish strategy:

Environmental assessment--Decision notice and finding of no significant impact. 

Retrieved from 

https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fsbdev3_033158.pdf

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. (2005a). Region 1 aquatic ecological unit 

inventory technical guide: For wadeable streams. Missoula, MT: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Region

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. (2005b). Threatened, endangered and sensitive 

plants and animals. In Forest Service Manual: Wildlife, Fish, and Sensitive Plant Habitat 

Management (Vol. FSM 2600, pp. 22). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service.
Yaak River Suction Dredging Project Kootenai National Forest, Three Rivers Ranger District

38

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. (2015). Land management plan, 2015 revision, 

Kootenai National Forest. Retrieved from Libby, MT: 

https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprd3826663.pdf

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. (2016a). Environmental assessment: Small-scale 

suction dredging in Orogrande and French Creeks and south fork of the Clearwater 

River. Orofino, ID: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Nez PerceClearwater National Forest, North Fork Ranger District, Red River Ranger District, 

Salmon River Ranger District, and U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management, Cottonwood Field Office

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. (2016b). Small-scale suction dredging in 

Orogrande and French Creeks and south fork of the Clearwater River: Decision notice 

and finding of no significant impact. Grangeville, ID: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Nez Perce-Clearwater Natonal Forest

U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. (1998). Biological opinion for the effects 

to bull trout from continued implementation of land and resource management plans and 

resource management plans as amended by the interim strategy for managing fishproducing watersheds in eastern Oregon and Washington, Idaho, western Montana, and 

portions of Nevada (INFISH), and the interim strategy for managing anadromous fishproducing watersheds in eastern Oregon and Washington, Idaho, and portions of 

California (PACFISH). Retrieved from 

U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. (2010). 50 CFR Part 17, Federal Register 

/Vol. 75, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2010 / Proposed rules. Endangered and 

threatened wildlife and plants; Revised designation of critical habitat for bull trout in the 

coterminous United States, Page 63898-64070 [Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2009-0085]. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Retrieved from 

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-10-18/html/2010-25028.htm

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. (1998). A framework to assist in 

making endangered species act determinations of effect for individual or group actions at 

the bull trout subpopulation watershed scale. Retrieved from 

Wenger, S. J., Luce, C. H., Hamlet, A. F., Isaak, D. J., & Neville, H. M. (2010). Macroscale 

hydrologic modeling of ecologically relevant flow metrics. Water Resources Research, 

46, 1-10. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2009WR008839,
Appendix A

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

FOREST SERVICE 

NORTHERN REGION 

Order# Rl-2015-01 

REGIONAL CLOSURE ORDER 

CAMPING RESTRICTIONS 

Pursuant to Title 16 United States Code ("USC") 551, and Title 36 Code of Federal Regulations 

("CFR") 261.50(a) and (b), the following acts are prohibited on all National Forest System lands 

administered as National Forests or National Grasslands within the Northern Region (Region 1) of the 

United States Forest Service in the states of Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota. The closure 

order will be effective as of January 1, 2015. 

Restricted Areas: The Restricted Areas in Montana include the following National Forests: 1 !National Forests National Forests 

I Bitterroot Beaverhead-Deerlodge 

i Custer-Gallatin Flathead 

i Kootenai Helena 

: Lewis & Clark Lolo 

I 

Restricted Areas: The Restricted Areas in North Dakota and South Dakota include the following 

National Forests and National Grassland: I 

National Grassland 

Dakota Prairie 

National Forest 

Custer 

PROHIBITIONS: 

1. Camping or otherwise occupying a single location on all National Forest Service System 

lands within the state of Montana for a period longer than 16 consecutive days. The term 

"location" means the occupied undeveloped or developed campsite and the lands within a 

5 mile radius. After leaving the location, a minimum of 7 days is required before any 

group or persons from that group may reoccupy the original locations. 36CFR 261.58(a) 

2. Using or leaving camping equipment and or related supplies at any location on all 

National Forest System lands in the state of Montana for more than 16 consecutive 

days. The term "location" means the occupied undeveloped or developed campsite and 

the lands within a 5 mile radius. 36CFR 261.58(e) 

3. Camping or otherwise occupying a single location on all National Forest" System lands 

within the states of North Dakota and South Dakota for a period longer than 14 

consecutive days. The term "location" means the occupied undeveloped or developed 

campsite and the lands within a 5 mile radius. After leaving the location, a minimum of 5 

days is required before any group or persons from that group may reoccupy the original 

location. 36CFR 261.58(a) 

Page 1of6 

$SSHQGL[%
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

FOREST SERVICE 

NORTHERN REGION 

Order# Rl-2015-01 

4. Using or leaving camping equipment and or related supplies at any single location on all 

National Forest System lands in the states of North Dakota and South Dakota for more 

than 14 consecutive days. The term "location" means the occupied undeveloped or 

developed campsite and the lands within a 5 mile radius 36CFR 261.SS(e) 

(Additional forest or site specific camping restrictions may be in place on any one forest 

to address specific area issues.) 

EXEMPTIONS: 

Pursuant to 36 CFR 26 1.50(e), the following persons are exempt from this order: 

I. Persons with a Forest Service permit specifically authorizing the otherwise prohibited act or 

om1ss10n. 

2.Any Federal, State, or local officer, or member of an organized rescue or fire fighting force in the 

performance of an official duty. 

3. Forest Service employees in the performance of their official duties 

Done at Missoula, Montana this 

' 

9 day of a C!.P._.,... ~ 

~~r Regional Forester 

Northern Region 

, 20 14. 

Violation of Title 36 Code of Federal Regulation ("36 CFR'") regulations are punishable as a Class B 

misdemeanor, by a fine of not more than $5,000 for an individual or $ 10,000 for a legal entity other than an 

individual, or imprisonment for not more than six (6) months, or both ( 16 USC 55 1 and 18 USC 3559 and 3571 ). 

Page 2of6 
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

FOREST SERVICE 

NORTHERN REGION 

Order # Rl-2015-01 

Forest and Grasslands Supervisors 

Tim Garcia 

Forest Supervisor 

LnCJ::;oW L 

Chip Weber 

Forest Supervisor 6 

flathead ational ForeK _ 

Julie KiJ; #,

0 ilAl 0 

-I ~ Forest Supervisor 

Bitterroot National forest 

dgee:;:_t 

Mary Eric on 

Forest Su •rvisor 

Custer Galla · ational Forest 

f:)dd#id /)1f_,, 9t 

Dennis Neit k~ 

Grassland Supervisor 

rairi e Grasslands 

I 

Bil\

Forest 

lelena 

Avcy 

Supervisor 

Nation

~ 

al Forest 

Lewis and Clark National Forest 

Page 3of6 
$SSHQGL[C
4. The responsible party shall report the death and location of livestock to a Forest Service 

official within 24 hours of discovery. In remote areas, where it is not possible to meet the 24 

hour timeframe, the report should be made within 48 hours.

5. Burnable attractants (such as food leftovers or bacon grease) shall not be buried, discarded, 

or burned in an open campfire.

EXEMPTIONS

Pursuant to 36 CFR 261.50 (e) the following persons are exempt from this Order;

1.Persons with a permit issued by the Forest Supervisor specific lly exempting them 

from this Order.

2.Any Federal or Stateofficer pla<.,mg baits to capture animals for research or 

management purposes aspart of their official duties.

These restrictions are in addition to the general prohibitions in 36 CPR Part 261, Subpart

A. This Order supersedes any previous Order prohibiting or restricting the same, or 

similar, acts in the above-described areas.

Done this 3nl day of June, 2011.

Forest Supervisor 

Kootenai National Forest ·

Any violation of these probibitioru, is punishable by a fine of not more than $5,000.00 for an individual or

$10,000.00 for an organization, aod/or imprisonment for not more than six (6) months, or both (Title 16 USC 551, 

Title 18 use 3571 (b)(6), Title 18 use 3581 (b)(7)).

Exhibit A: Map of Kootenai NationalForest 

Exhibit B; Definitions

Page 2 of 5 6/2011
Food Storage and Sanitation Special Order 

Kootenai National Forest Map

B R I T I S H C O L U M B I A . C A N A D A

_,.,-,•·

c,,_..._,•••-•••--.

I

5 10

Kootenai 

National Forest

Maro/12011

_ r,. 111111 Cabinet Mountains Wilderness

ThompsonFa ls11CJ KNFBounda

MONTANA ry CJ state Boundaries

Page 3 of 5 &12011
Food Storage and Sanitation Special Order 

Definitions

I. "Food, refuse and other attractants" means any substance, solid, liquid or refuse 

(excluding water, baled hay, or hay cubes without additives), which is or may be eaten or 

otherwise taken into the body to sustain health or life, provide energy, or promote growth 

of any person or animal. Also includes items such as soft drinks, alcoholic beverages, 

canned foods, pet foods, processed livestock feed and grains, personal hygiene products, 

and empty food or beverage containers.

2. "Animal carcass" means the dead body or parts thereof, of any harvested mammal, bird, 

or fish, including the head or skull plate with antlers or horns and hide or cape of big 

game animals and any domestic livestock that may be found in the restricted area. 

Packaged or prepared animal carcass products transported into the restricted area for 

consumption, game birds, small mammals, or fish harvested for consumption in the 

restricted area are considered food under theprevious definition.

3. "Burnable attractants" include items such as food leftovers, waste products, food 

grease or residue, food saturated containers or other substances that will not be 

completely consumed by fire. To be completely consumed, there must be no residual 

attractant on the surface or in the soil. These items shall not be buried, discarded or 

burned in an open campfire, unless placed in a suitable container (i.e. tin can or fire pan) 

to prevent leaching into the ground, and burned over an open campfire. Attractants may 

be burned in a contained stove fire. Any remaining attractants unconsumed by burning 

shall be placed with other garbage, acceptably stored and packed out.

4. "Acceptably stored" means:

a. Stored in a closed vehicle (hard-sided camper, vehicle trunk, or cab or trailer cab) 

where the storage compartment is constructed of solid, non-pliable material that, when 

secured, will have no openings, hinges, lids, or coverings that would allow a bear to 

gain entry by breaking, bending, tearing, biting, or pulling with its claws (any 

windows in the vehicle must be closed); or

b. Stored within a hard-sided residence, building, or storage container subject to the 

terms and conditions of aspecial-use authorization or operating plan; or

c. Suspended at least 10 feet clear of the ground at all points and 4 feet horizontally from 

any supporting tree or pole (recommended to be 100 yards from camping or sleeping 

area); or

d. Stored in commercial bear-resistant container or electric fence certified through the 

lnterageney Grizzly Bear Committee Certified Bear-Resistant Equipment and 

Electric Fences for Public Lands (http://www.igbconline.org/html/container.html); or

Page 4 of 5 6/2011
e. Stored by other methods approved in writing issued by the Forest Supervisor 

responsible for the area where the method is proposed for use. Containers or fences 

developed for personal use may be inspected for approval by the local District Ranger 

or their designated representatives(s). See "Bear-Resistant Containers-Minimum 

design and structural standards inspection and testing methodology 1989" and 

"Electric Fence System: Requirements for Meeting the NCDE Food Storage Special 

Order, 1999", or most recent IGBC publication, for criteria for approving personal 

use containers or fences.

f. Animal carcasses more that 1⁄2 mile from a camping area and more than 200 yards 

from a National Forest System Trail may be left on the ground.

5. "Acceptably possessed"means:

a. Possessed or attended during daytime by a person(s) that is physically present within 

100 feet and direct sight of the accessible food, refuse or attractant or

b. Possessed or attended by such a person(s) for the purpose of field dressing lawfully 

taken animal carcasses, transporting any food or animal carcass, preparing any animal 

carcass or food for eating, or eating any food.

6. "Camping/sleeping area" means National Forest System Lands temporarily used for the 

purpose of overnight occupancy without a permanently fixed structure or lands 

temporarily occupied by unattended camping equipment.

7. "Contained Stove fire" means a metal stove that completely encloses the fue.

8. "Daytime" means 1⁄2 hour before sunrise to 1⁄2 hour after sunset, Mountain Time.

9. "National Forest System Trail" means a trail wholly or partly within, or adjacent to, 

and serving a part of the National Forest System and which has been included in a forest 

visitor map.

10. "Person(s)" means an adult (18 years or older) in control of attractants.

11. "Transporting" means the activity of carry from one place to another.

Page 5 of 5 6/2011
Yaak River Suction 

Dredging

Aquatics Identification Information

Appendix D
Threatened Species

Sources. https://covepalisades.wordpress.com/2018/10/16/bull-trout-are-biting 

http://fieldguide.mt.gov

Threatened: Listed as Threatened under the U.S. Endangered Species Act.

Bull Trout are a sensitive species that do not tolerate high sediment levels in their 

spawning streams. Sediment can suffocate the developing embryos before they hatch. 

They prefer cool water and temperature above 59 degrees Fahrenheit is believed to limit 

bull trout distribution. They typically spawn in water temperatures below 48 degrees.

Bull Trout 
http://the.owyhees.com/redband_trout.htm

Sensitive Species

Sensitive Species: Population viability is a concern as evidenced by a significant 

downward trend in population or a significant downward trend in habitat capacity. 

http://fieldguide.mt.gov

Columbia River Redband Trout

Coeur d'Alene Salamander

https://kaniksulandtrust.org http://www.californiaherps.com

https://oregonconservationstrategy.org https://www.nps.gov

Western Toad
https:www.fws.gov 

https://www.jaxshells.org/falco.htm https://www.jaxshells.org/falco.htm

Western Pearlshell Mussel

Design Feature

Move mussels away from the intake hose or avoid dredging in that area.

https://www.usgs.gov

Sensitive Species
Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS)

CLEAN. Inspect your dredge. Pay attention to crevices and hidden areas. Remove all vegetation (by 

hand or sprayer). Remove all mud (use a pressurized power sprayer, found at most do-it-yourself car 

washes). The hot water kills organisms and the pressure removes mud and vegetation. No need to use 

chemicals or soap. Dispose of debris in trash or on dry land away from water.

DRAIN. Drain all water from equipment.

DRY. Aquatic invaders can survive only in water and wet areas.

Zebra Mussels on a shopping cart (present in MT)

https://www.researchgate.net

New Zealand mudsnails (detected in MT)

https://nas.er.usgs.gov