United States 

Department of 

Agriculture 

Lewis and Clark 

Nationauorest 

P.O. Box 869 

Great Falls, MT. 

59403 

Fiscal Year 1990 

LEWIS AND CLARK 

NATIONAL FOREST PLAN 

Monitoring and Evaluation Report 

Belt Creek Canyon below Monarch in the Little Belt Mountains. 
Unlted States Forest Lewis & Clark NF 

Department of Servlce 

Agriculture 

REPLY TO: 1920 Date: 

9 

SUBJECT: FY 1990 Monitoring and Evaluation Report 

TO: Forest Plan Participant 

Enclosed for your review qnd use is the “FY 1990 Monitoring and Evaluation Report‘ for the Lewis and Clark 

National Forest Plan. This report was prepared later this year than we had anticipated as we have been 

busy with a backlog of environmental documents. I am happy to report that we have eliminated much of 

this backlog. 

First, we have had some changes in personnel from our last report. 

John Greer has replaced Jerry Reese as the Staff Officer for Forest Plan Implementation. John 

comes from the Klamath National Forest in California where he was the District Ranger at Oak Knoll. 

He is a wildlife biologist and has a wide background in resource management. 

Richard Newton has replaced Cynthia Manning as the Forest Archaeologist. Richard came to us 

from the Gila National Forest in New Mexico. 

Rich Saunders is the new Forest Soils Scientist. He is on loan to us from the Soil Conservation 

Service. Rich last worked for the SCS in Havre. 

Jerry Dombrovske has moved over to the Rocky Mountain District as District Ranger. 

Larry Timchak has replaced Jerry as the District Ranger on the Judith District. Larry comes from the 

Lolo National Forest where he was the Supervisory Forester for Resources on the Ninemile Ranger 

District. 

As shown by the report, I believe we are well on our way to implementing integrated resource management 

as described in the Forest Plan into on-the-ground projects. These projects, which consider all resources 

for a particular piece of land, help us move toward the desired future condition for the Forestas described 

in the Plan. 

After four years of monitoring, we are seeing some trends develop. Some of these trends, such as meeting 

or exceeding many of our Forest Plan outputs and activity levels, make us feel good. For example, our 1987 

wildlife habitat improvement level was at less than 50% of the projected Forest Plan level. Through the 

development and use of a habitat improvement program we have been able to substantially increase this 

program. Our 1990 level was double the projected Forest Plan level. 

Another example is that developed recreation is at a higher level than projected in the Forest Plan. If this 

trend continues, we will need to make an adjustment in our Forest Plan to provide for this increase. 

In some areas where we have not been completely successful in meeting Forest Plan outputs, we have 

rechanneled our energies. Over the last four years, the Forest has sold about 70% of its assigned timber 

sale program. The shortfall is the result of not getting Environmental Assessments through the appeal 

, 

rr 
process. We have shifted documenting our timber sale analysis into EISs. While they take more time to 

prepare, ElSs are more defensible and they give the public more opportunity to participate in the process. 

We are rapidly reaching our goal of having the NEPA document completed two years before project 

implemeritation. 

.. 

In a few cases, we feel frustrated because our program continues to lack the time and money to accomplish 

the level of activity that was envisioned in the Forest Plan. For example, our goal of not having more than 

10% of our range allotment management plans outdated is not being met. We have implemented a process 

that consolidates our efforts in key areas of the Forest. We feel very confident that this approach will enable 

us to bring our allotment planning closer to the Forest Plan level. 

While not specifically addressed in tpe-Forest Plan, we are also encouraged by the progress made in 

purchasing private lands in the Crazy Mountains. 

As part of the Forest Planning process, we will conduct a five year review of our Forest Plan next year. We 

will be analyzing and dealing with items such as these during this review. I encourage you to participate 

in this review. 

The Lewis and Clark National Forest continues to be a very busy place. I want to call to your attention some 

of the more important projects that are described on pages 57 through 61 of the Monitoring and Evaluation 

Report. Again, I want to thank you for your interest in the Lewis and Clark.Nationa1 Forest. Please contact 

us if you have any questions on the Forest Plan or the Monitoring and Evaluation Report. 

JOHN D. GORMAN 

Forest Supervisor 

c 
FOREST PIAN MONITORING AND EVALUATION REPORT -- < 

FISCAL YEAR 1990 

LEWIS AND CLARK NATIONAL FOREST 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

I. INTRODUCTION 

II. 

111. 

IV. 

V. 

VI. 

VII. 

VIII. 

IX. 

GOALS 

FOREST PLAN MONITORING-AND EVALUATION 

Elements: 

< 

Recreation (A) . 

Wilderness (B) 

Wildlife and Fish (C) 

Range (D) 

Timber (E) 

Soil, Water, and Air (F) 

Minerals (G) 

Lands (J) 

Facilities (L) 

Protection (P) 

Wild and Scenic Rivers (W) 

General (I) 

3 

10 

11 

26 

30 

39 

44 

47 

50 

52 

56 

56 

Comparison of Outputs and Activities with those Projected in the Forest Plan 

for the Planning Period - Fiscal Years 1987 through 1996 

€3 

Comparison of the Actual Budget Received in FY 1990 with the Forest Plan 

Projected Annual Budget 

PLANNED ACTIONS 65 

64 

RESEARCH NEEDS 65 

AMENDMENTS 65 

APPENDICES 65 

LIST OF PREPARERS 66 F 

APPROVAL 66- 
FOREST PLAN MONITORING AND EVALUATION REPORT 

LEWIS AND CLARK NATIONAL FOREST 

FISCAL YEAR 1990 L 

'. 

I. INTRODUCTION 

The Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) for the Lewis and Clark National Forest was 

approved by the Regional Forester on June 4,1986. Part of the process was a commitment to monitor and 

evaluate how well the Forest Plan was being implemented. A commitment was also made to consider 

modifications in the Forest Plan based on the monitoring and evaluation efforts. 

This report summarizes results of Forest Plan monitoring and evaluation conducted during Fiscal Year 1990 

(October 1, 1989 through September 30, 1990) the forth year of implementing the Forest Plan for the Lewis 

and Clark National Forest. 

The significance of the results of the Fiscal Year (FY) 1990 monitoring and evaluation program have been 

analyzed by the Forest Interdisciplinary Team and have been reviewed for action by the Forest Leadership 

Team. 

This report summarizes the results of the Forest's monitoring effort and provides the rationale for the 

modifications, if necessary, that will be made in the Forest Plan in the form of amendments. Any changes in 

the Forest Plan will follow the process outlined in Chapter V and will include appropriate public notification 

and completion of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) procedures. This report also provides a communication link with the public and other levels of Federal, State, private industry, and other interest groups to 

document the status on implementing the Forest Plan. 

The regulations in 36 CFR 21 9 describe the purpose for evaluation of the Forest Plan. These regulations are 

summarized below: 

--To determine if conditions or demands in the area covered by the Forest Plan have changed 

significantly enough to require any revision to the Forest Plan (36 CFR 219.10(9)); 

--To determine if budgets have significantly changed the long-term relationship between levels of 

multiple-use goods and service enough - to create a need for a 'significant amendment' (36 CFR 

21 9.1 O(e)); 

.. 

--To determine how well the, stated objectives of the Forest Plan are being met (36 CFR 219.12(k)); 

--To determine how closely Forest Wide Management Standards in Chapter II of the Forest Plan have 

been followed (36 CFR 219.12(k)); and .\ 

--To determine how the Forest is satisfying the requirements for Monitoring and Evaluation (36 CFR 

21 9.12(k)). IT 

1 
II. -GOALS 

The goals .for monitoring and evaluating the Forest Plan are to determine: 

--How well the Forest is meeting its planned goals and objectives; 

--If existing and emerging public issues and management concerns are being adequately addressed; 

--How closely the Forest Plan madagement standards are being followed; 

\ 

--If outputs and service are being provided as projected; 

--If the effects of implementing the Forest Plan are occurring as predicted, including significant 

changes in the productivity of the land; 

--If the cost of implementing the Forest Plan are as predicted: 

--If implementing the Forest Plan is affecting the land, resources, and communities adjacent to or near 

the Forest; 

--If activities on nearby lands managed by other Federal or other governmental agencies, or under the 

jurisdiction of local governments, is affecting management of the Forest; 

--If research is needed to support the management of the Forest, beyond that identified in Chapter II 

of the Forest Plan; and 

--If there is a need to amend or revise the Forest Plan. 

111. FOREST PLAN MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

Forest Plan management activities were monitored and evaluated as outlined in Table 5.1 Forest Plan 

Monitoring Requirements and Forest Service Handbook 1909.12, to determine how well objectives were met 

and how closely management standards were applied. The document resulting from the use of the Decision 

Flow Diagram constitutes the evaluation report. As applicable, the following will be included in the evaluation 

report: 

--A quantitative estimate of performance comparing outputs and service with those projected by the 

Forest Plan; 

--Documentation of measured effects, including any change in productivity of the land; 

c 

--Unit costs associated with carrying out the planned activities as compared with unit costs estimated 

during Forest Plan development; 

--Recommendations for changes; 

--A list of needs for continuing evaluation of management systems and for alternative methods y. of 

management; 

2 
-A list of additional research needed to support the management of the Forest; and 

--Identification of additional monitoring needs to facilitate achievement of the monitoring goals. 

The results of the evaluation report have been summarized and are discussed on the following pages. Each 

monitoring item lists: (1) what is being measured; (2) frequency of measurement; (3) reporting period; (4) 

variable which would initiate further evaluation; and (5) the results of the monitoring. They are grouped by 

resource area and follow the monitoring raquirements in the Lewis and Clark Forest Plan (Table 5.1). * 

RECREATION 

A-1 Recreatlon Opportunlty Spectrum settlng being Implemented. 

Frequency of MeFsurement: 100 percent per 10 years. 

Reporting Period: October 1 , 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlabillty Whlch Would initiate Further Evaluation: Plus or minus 10 percent of projected Recreation 

Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) setting. 

-- I .. 

1 *. 

RecreationOpportunity Spectrum (ROS) classes for the Forest were determined using a combination of three 

factors: (1) Physical Setting, (2) Social Setting, and (3) Managerial Setting. The four ROS classes utilized in 

the Forest Plan included Primitive, Semi-primitive, Roaded Natural, and Rural. Although monitoring of these 

setting is to occur every 10 years, some observations are possible to make for FY 1990. 

First, the physical setting component of ROS is primarily affected on this Forest by timber sale harvest units 

and associated road construction. These activities have the greatest potential to cause the activities of man 

to visually dominate, or be very obvious to the recreationist. Timber sale activities occurred in primarily 

Road@ Natural landscapes and did not result in any changes in ROS classes met. it was twice observed, 

however, that regeneration hakestihg from the past, combined with recent harvesting, resulted in some 

landscapes on the Musselshell and Kings Hill Ranger Districts that were completely dominated by logging. 

actiyity.and that were not natural appearing when viewed from improved roads. While this has not been 

observed from roads and trails identified as visually sensitive in the Forest Plan, it raises a concern within 

Forest Plan Management Area B (andother areas scheduled for timber harvest) that Roaded Natural can be 

a misleading term when used in National Fore& Management Act (NFMA) and National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA) documents to describe these laridscapes, which are not natural-appearing. A solution used by 

many forests is to subdivide Roaded Natural landscapes into Roaded Modified and Roaded Natural, more 

accurately reflecting future recreation settings. 

Secondly, the Bob Marshall and Scapegoat Wildernesses are regularly monitored to determine numbe 

encounters with other recreationists along trails. These wildernesses have an ROS Class of Primitive. Encounters noted were almost always within suggested levels defined in the 1986, ROS Book (less than 6 encounters 

per day) within the Bob Marshall, and were never exceeded in the Scapegoat Wilderness. 

.. 

rr 

.. 

' .. . .. . . ,,. : 

.. . .. :. . 

3 
A-2 Recrealon dlrectlon meets expectation of vlsitor. 

Frequency of Measurement: 10 percent sample annually. 

Reportlng Period: October 1,1989 - September 30,1990 (FY 1990) 

Varlablllty Which Would inltlate Further Evaluation: Adverse cqmments pr CQrrespondence. 

These monitoring Comments do not reflect a 10 percent Sample of visitors, but rather available information 

from studies done this past year, namely the Integrated Resource Mqnagemept Review for the Lewis and 

Clark, Tim Love’s Recreation Shortcourse Project on Effects of Gates Park Fire to Racreationists, the 

Demographic Survey of fasrern Montana for USDA-Forest Service, and University sf Montana’s Institute for 

Tourism and Recreation Research study entitled 7990 Montana National Forest Visifar Study4 Cewis end Clark 

National Forest. 

4 

, 

The Forest needs to develop a systematic approach to obtaining the public’s opiniw on the adequacy of 

Forest recreation direction. Options include routine documentation of public contacts with visitors tg note me 

positive and the negative. Suggestion boxes could tried at qeyeloped qnd dispersed site, iwluding 

trailheads. Presently, none of this is available and the following form@ qttydie6 will proyide this year‘s input 

to this monitoring item. 

The Integrated Resource Review (IRR) for the Forest included interviews with 27 citizens representing 8 

variety of interests in the Forest. 19 recognized wilderness as one of the top three issues for the Forest. While 

there was no concensus on whether or not the Forest should have more wilderness, the value of wil#emess 

to the public was obvious, and reflects the need to maintain ernphmis M WH&rn@sqi rn@xgewmt. 

Public lands access was identified as a key issue by 10 of the 27 intarviqwees. Concern9 ranged from feelings 

that private landowners were shutting out the public to their National Forest, to concerns that the Forest 

Service was trying to lock the public out of the Forest by closing roads. There is support among some to open 

more roads to provide more recreation access both within the Forest and across priyate lands into the Forest. 

There was no concensus on this issue. 

Recreation/Tourism was another key issue identified Qy 10 of ?he 27 intervipwees. They perceived that the 

number of Forest recreationists is growing rapidly, causing associated pressures on the resources. Off Road 

Vehicles (ORV) users sought an expanded trail system for their use. Others wanted more facilities like the 

Lewis and Clark Interpretive Center to bring more touricjm tb the area. Sop respondents hoped historical 

landmarks could be restored and more educational facilities be erected to provide a combineti recreational 

and educational experience on the Forest. Several felt the need for increased user fees to accommwlate mor? 

Forest users. Several felt that outfiiers were too concentrated in certain parts of the Forest, displaqing wildlife 

and causing land abuse. 

Results of this IRR survey of the public suggest a real desire for better Forest access across private lands, . 

and a mixed feeling about more motorized access within the Fore@. The [mportance of ouf existing wilderness 

can not be overemphasized, although there was no concensus on whether we should have more or less. 

There is a real perception that numbers Qf Forest recreationists are greatfy increasing. Providing more historic 

restoration and interpretive facilities did not appear eomtrouewial, with genqal support for both concern$ 

shown by interviewees. Outfiiers appear concerned about stricter rules on ‘caches’, Whether or not outfitters 

are overly concentrated in certain areas of the Forest needs tg be addressed by the Ranger DistrictsrThe 

tack of concensus in the area of more or less access on the Forest, as well as the need for more QF less 

wilderness, reinforces the need to provide a variety of recreational opportunities for a vqriety of e@bting wr 

groups. 

‘ 

4 
In an other study by Tim Love, former Resource Assistant on the Rocky Mountain Ranger District, a number 

of questions were asked of recreationists along the North and South Forks of the Sun Rier in the Bob Marshall 

Wilderness to determine effects of the 1988 Gates Park Fire to recreationists. Adequacy of existing trail 

condition was confirmed by most of the public visited with on site, while the majority of outfiiers in the area 

felt that trails were inadequate. Despite the fire, recreationists in the burned area rated their recreation 

experience at least an 8 on a scale of 1 to 10. Recreationists in unburned areas rated their experiences 9 or 

better. The majority felt the need for fire in the wilderness. The impacts of the fire were seen as one of the 

negative aspects to the trips of half of the interviewees. Impacts of the fire seemed to negatively impact only 

a small minority of the outfitters, so far as number of clients for the year of the interview. Generally, the results 

of this study suggest general public support for existing trail maintenance in the Sun River drainage while 

the outfiiers did not. Recreation was affected by the fire and resulted in displaced use causing heavier 

impacts in some unburned areas. 

In the Demographic Survey of Eastern Montana for USDA-Forest Service by A&A Research of Kalispell, 

Montana the following information, though not specific to recreation, is helpful, and represents 200 phone 

survey respondents. 

1. Two out of every five respondents when asked on a telephone survey felt the Forest Service was 

doing a good job of managing Forests in their area (42 percent); 36 percent felt they were doing a fair 

job; 9 percent felt they were doing a poor job; and 14 percent didn't know. 

2. When asked what the Forest Service should do differently, 46 percent did not know; 11 percent felt 

nothing should be done differently; 9 percent favored changing the 'let burn' policy; 6 percent said 

we should have less logging and clearcutting; 7 percent said we should have more access; and 5 

percent said we should have more concern for the environment, land, and wildlife. 

.3. When asked to rate the Forest Service, Post Office, County Sheri Department, Bureau of Land 

Management, National Park Service, and State Fish, Wildlife and Parks Department with regards to the 

job they are doing in serving the public, on a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 is very good and 1 is poor, the 

following scores resulted: National Park Service 4.0, Forest Service 3.9, State Fish, Wildlife and Park 

Department 3.9, County Sheri Department 3.8, Post Office 3.6, and Bureau of Land Management 3.4. 

Of those who rated the Forest Service good or very good (4-5),67 percent resided in Cascade County. 

There were no county trends in the remainder of the ratings. 

The 7990 Montana National Forest Visitor Study for the Lewis and Clark surveyed 134 campground users in 

6 campgrounds across the Forest. Results are as follows: .. 

1. The Forest appears to be doing a more than satisfactory job in providing opportunities for the 

developed site settings desired by the public, including naturalness, little evidence of land management activities, seeing or hearing few others, and low amounts of rules and regulations. (An average 

of just below 4 on a scale of 1 to 5). 

2. Those surveyed rated four components of the recreation facilities as being very low to moderate in 

importance to them: Recreational Vehicle (RV) hookups, flush toilets, access for disabled, and boating 

facilities. The study suggests possible overkill if the Forest tries too hard to accommodate these needs. 

Note: This study does not reflect needs of people not using these campgrounds. It is very possible 

some people are not using the campgrounds because they fail to provide flush toilets, handicap@ 

access, and boating facilities. 

, 

3. Recreation experiences rated as highly important include closeness to nature. Rated between 

moderately to very important are (1) high solitude, (2) high self reliance, and (3) using outdoor skills. 

5 
. High risk and challenge is rated as less than moderately important. The Forest is doing a good job in 

meeting these needs. (4 on a scale of 1 to 5). 

4. Overall satisfaction with use of the campgrounds was good (4 or better average on a scale of 1 to 

5) * 

5. In naming facilities in need of improvement at the site, the following were listed in order of percent 

of time mentioned as needing improvement: 

a. Restrooms (3137 percent) 

b. Recreational Vehicle (RV) sewerage dumps (1 9-22 percent) 

c. Drinking Water (17-20 percent) 

d. Nature Trails (1 4-1 5 percent) 

e. Campsites (14-1 5 percent) 

f. Information on Area (1231 percent) 

g. Hiking Trails (1 1-1 2 percent) 

h. Handicap access (6-9 percent) 

i. Recreational Vehicle (RV) Hookups (7-1 4 percent) 

< 

In addition to the above studies, our abiltty to meet the needs of the recreationist are affected by the following 

problem area, which require improvement, based on observation by the Recreation Specialist: 

1. Travel plan signing, especially for area restrictions, is still difficult to understand. Directional signing 

on roads is being improved yearly to make access easier on existing access roads to the Forest. We 

need to bring our travel plan signing up to Regional standards of understandability. 

2. Forest access studies for the Highwood and the Crazy Mountains need to be completed. 

3. Use information on trails needs to be improved in order to prioritize maintenance and reconstruction 

of trail system. This is in addition to our need to obtain more systematic information from the public 

on their perceptions of our recreation direction. 

A-3 Actual recreational use In the categories of wllderness, dlspersed, and developed recreation as 

compared to projected levels in the Forest Plan. 

Frequency of Measurement: Annually. 

Reporting Perld: October 1, 1989 - September - 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

hrerlablllty Which Would lnltlate Further Evaluation: Plus or minus 25 percent variance yearly or plus or 

minus 10 percent over a 5-year period. 

The Recreation Information System (RIM) reports for the Forest provide the base information to measure use 

in the categories described. The Forest Plan projects that total recreation use will average 869,000 vislor days 

in the first decade. This is broken down as follows: (1) Developed recreation - 169,000 visitor days, (2) 

non-wilderness dispersed recreation - 614,000 visitor days, and (3) wilderness use - 86,OOO visiior days. 

Recreation use in FY 1990 was as follows: (1) Developed recreation - 241,000 visitor days (142 percent of 

the Forest Plan level), (2) Dispersed recreation non-wilderness - 564,000 visitor days (92 percent of the Forest 

Plan level), and (3) wilderness use - 63,800 visitor days (74 percent of the Forest Plan level). Private developed 

site recreation activities on the Forest were not included in the developed public site recreation figures. This 

rc 

6 
was in order to reflect what our developed public sites operated by the Forest, including camp grounds and 

picnic areas, are producing in terms of recreation visitor days. Private developed sites, including downhill 

skiing, recreation cabin use, organization camping, and so forth were included in the 564,OOO figure for 

dispersed recreation non-wilderness. 

Forest 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 Plan Description 

Developed Recre- 169 145 175 205 241 

ation 

Non-Wilderness 61 4 581 503 450 564 

Dispersed Recreation 

Wilderness 86 54 42 60 64 

Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 recreation use is as follows: -. 

1993 1994 1995 1996 

RECREATION (Thousand Visitor Days) 

A4 CondRlon of developed shea 

Frequency of Measurement: Annually. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Warlablllty Whlch Would Initiate Further Evaluation: Less than acceptable standards, public safety hazards 

not corrected by 1990, poor conditions not corrected by 2005. 

Continued low recreation budgets, including recreation facility capital investment budgets, have caused the 

condition of developed sites to continue to deteriorate. Anticipated increases in capital investment funds, 

associated with the President's Recreation Initiative presently before Congress, will enable the Forest to 

rehabilitate many of its developed sites by 1994 if this initiative passes. F 

A-5 Recruetion Opportunity 

Frequency of Measurement: Annually. 

Reporting Perlod: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). \ 

Varlablltty Whlch Would Initiate Further Evaluation: Failure to complete by FY 1986. 

This standard is measured by the status of Recreation Opportunity Guides (ROG) completed by each Ranger 

District. Currently, guides have been completed for all Ranger Districts, except the Musselshell which has 

completed none, and the Judith Ranger District which needs to do ROGs for trailheads and trail systems. 

YL 

7 
A-6 Off-road vehicle damage and Travel Plan effectlveness. 

Frequency of Measurement: Annually. 

Reportlng Perlod: October 1,1989 - September 30,1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablllty Whlch Would Inltlate Further Evaluatlon: 

Off-road vehicle damage - Conflicts with Forest Management Area goals. 

Travel Plan effectiveness - Increase of 20 or more citations or variances yearly. 

\ 

This standard is monitored by two items. The first item is the status of the Forest Travel Plan as it relates to 

Forest Plan goals. The Forest presently utilizes the Forest Travel Plan that was revised in FY-1988 specifically 

to implement the recreation settings in the Forest Plan. 

me second monitoring item is the number of Forest Travel Plan citations issued and the number of Travel 

Plan variances granted. These are summarized below. 

Rocky Mountain Ranger District 

Thirty-eight incidents were reported, with one violation notice and no warning notices issued. Special 

emphasis was placed on monitoring compliance in the Badgerflwo Medicine area. No special compliance 

problems were noted. Additional patrols in that area are felt needed. Regular monitoring patrols are felt 

needed during the bear season. There is a need for week-end law enforcement patrols. Current law enforcement patrol emphasis is during April through December. 

Judith Ranger District 

Four incidents were reported, with four violation notices given, and four warning notices also issued. No travel 

plan variances were granted. There is a definite problem with Off Road Vehicle (ORV) signing at Hoover 

Mountain and around the Judith Guard Station. Violations of (ORV) restriction in the Middle Fork of the Judith 

River backcountry are still occurring, where additional law enforcement is needed. Funding was not available 

to do this needed law enforcement. 

Musselshell Ranger District 

Thirteen incidents were reported, four violation notices were given out, and two warning noticei issued. The 

Ranger District is getting good support and compliance - from the public, but some flagrant violations are still 

occurring. 

Kings Hill Ranger Districf 

Fourteen incidents were reported, with four violation notices issued, and no warning notices given. One 

variance was granted. Travel Plan compliance was good. In a February, 1991 meeting of resource assistants, 

it was felt that Travel Plan signing, especially for area restrictions, needed to be improved for understandability. Compliance with Regional Office standards of signing is also needed and funding is being sought to 

accomplish this. 

Cooperation was received from the Montana Department of Fish, Wildiie and Parks, County Officers, and the 

general public in reporting known violations. 

# 

8 
A-7 CondRlon of vkual resource meets objecthres In plan. 

Frequency of Measurement: 25 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablltty Whlch Would Inltlate Further Evaluatlon: Deviation from approved Visual Quality Objectives 

determined by Interdisciplinary Team review'of environmental assessments. 

Four project Environmental Analyses were reviewed for compliance with Visual Qualtty Objectives. All were 

found to meet these objectives. Projects included Hannan Gulch Habitat Improvement (Rocky Mountain 

Ranger District); Elephant Post and Pole and Near Cross Post and Pole Timber Sales (Musselshell Ranger 

District); and Moose Creek-Sheep Creek Powerline Amendment (Kings Hill Ranger District). 

A-8 Cultural Resource Protectlon. 

Frequency of Measurement: Selected sites - Once per 5 years. 

Reportlng Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablllty Whlch Would lnltlate Further Evaluation: Less than 10 percent accomplishment per year, 

The cultural resource program continued to show improvement through 1990. In all, forty reports, documenting cultural resource activities, were written during 1990, Twenty-seven of these projects describe field 

inventories, resulting in the survey of an estimated 2,050 acres. This acreage represents a decrease from 

1989 and is due, primarily, to the increased attention placed on the Badger-Two Medicine issue. The 

remaining thirteen reports document proposed undertakings that were surveyed during a previous project, 

did not require a cultural resources survey, were compiled as information for NEPA documentation, or 

pertained to other cultural resource management activities. 

Project complexity continues to be high, often involving use of more sophisticated archaeological techniques 

than basic survey. Many projects required intensive inventory within a small unit of land (such as range 

projects involving one acre), although we are trying to survey five acre minimums. The additional district 

archaeologist position created in 1990 was maintained for the FY 1990 field season to assist in cultural 

resources surveys at the district level. 

A total of thirteen cultural sites were located within the project areas. Eight prehistoric sites were newly 

recorded, as were five historic sites. Most of these inventoried sites were archaeologically tested and 

Determinations of Eligibilrty (DOE) were made. An eligibilrty determination is a helpful management tool, as 

it resolves the status of a site, so that a 'reassessment. does not need to be done in the future. If no eligibility 

determination is made, then project activities must avoid sites, regardless of their significance. 

During the 1990 field season a university field school was conducted in the Cooks Flat Archaeological District 

to acquire data for the compilation of a cultural resource management plan. The field school consisted of 

systematic survey, test excavations, and detailed mapping within a designated quarry area. The work was 

conducted by university students supervised by university professors and consulting Forest Service cultural 

resource specialists. A determination of eligibility was compiled for the quarry site and a written report 

describing the field work was completed. 

- 

\ 
In October, 1990, the Chevron/Fina Final EIS was completed. This involved considerable consultation with 

Blackfeet Indian traditionalists, and also considerable research for compiling background information regarding the Blackfeet. Revisions to the Draft EIS were necessary prior to completing the Final, and this required 

several person hours of research and writing. A nomination of eligible properties to the National Register of 

Historic Places was also prepared for sites within the RM 1 Management Unit. An Archeologist from the 

Flathead National Forest was temporarily employed by the Lewis and Clark National Forest to assist with the 

increased workload associated with the Chevron/Fina project. 

Involvement in the Forest Plan implemehation and the NFMA and NEPA processes increased. 

-- 

Cultural Sites Inventoried 

Newly Recorded Sites 

Some of the more important trends in the cultural resource program over the past few years include: (1) 

inventories are more thorough and intensive, (2) minimally land disturbing projects are routinely surveyed, 

(3) a greater number of cultural sites are being recorded and tested, (4) Determinations of Eligibilw are being 

sought, (5) context studies are being undertaken, (6) involvement in the Forest Plan implementation and the 

NFMA and NEPA processes has increased and cultural resources continue to become better incorporated 

into the overall Forest Service mission. 

40 34 34 13 

30 23 17 13 

Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 cultural resource accomplishment is as follows: 

CULTURAL RESOURCE 

WILDERNESS .. 

B-1 Maintenance of exlstlng quality of Wltderness ecosystems. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlabillty Which Would lnltlate Further Evaluetlon: Degradation of environment. 

No further monitoring will be accomplished on this item as established by Forest Plan Amendment Ndhber 

3. 

10 
6-2 Bob Marshall-Great Bear-Scapegoat Management Dlrectlon. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablllty Whlch Would Initlate Further Evaluation: Failure to meet the Bob Marshall, Great Bear and 

Scapegoat Wildernesses Recreation Management Direction (Appendix U). ." 

The monitoring which was completed in FY 1990 on the Lewis and Clark National Forest is detailed in 

Appendix A. 

6-3 Change In Roadleso Inventoty. 

Frequency of Reportlng: 100 percent per 10 year. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablllty Whlch Would Initlate Further Evaluation: Plus or minus 10 percent projected change in roadless 

inventory. 

This item is only measured at ten-year intervals. However, two timber sales were sold during FY 1990 that 

will have a reduction of acres on the roadless inventory on the Forest. These timber sales are the Mixes Baldy 

and PlacerSnow on the Judith Ranger District, In addition, a small amount of roadless inventory acres will 

be affected by the timber harvesting taking place over several years as part of the Beartree Challenge Project 

on the Rocky Mountain District. Total area reduction of roadless inventory is approximately 1,500 acres in FY 

1990 including those acres affected by the Beartree Challenge. 

No other management activities occurred which would alter the present roadless inventory. 

WILDLIFE AND FISH 

C-1 Threatened and Endangered Species: Grlnly Bear-Malntaln occupled habitat capacity. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Perlod: October 1,1989 - September 30,1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlabiilty Whlch Would Inltlate Further Evaluation: Any indication of downward trend in grizzly bear 

population. -.. 

In a monitoring effort tied to the Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan, efforts have been made since 1982 to reco$d 

sows with cubs and sows with young. A data table has been created this year in order to record the sightings 

and display trend data. The resuks of these surveys have revealed that all six Bear Management Units (BMU) 

on the Rocky Mountain Front have a sow with cubs. This year's survey resulted in 5 sows with 8 cubs sighted 

on the Forest or adjacent private lands, and 5 sows with 9 young. For FY 1990, four of six BMU's have had 

females with cubs sighted, and five of six BMU's have demonstrated occupancy by females with young. All 

six BMU's during a three year period (1988-1990) have had sightings of females with cubs. These data do 

11 
not allow assessment of population size, only the beginning of a trend toward occupancy of each BMU by 

sows that reproduce during a three year period. Summary at the end of this monitoring item displays the trend 

information that has been gathered during the monitoring period of FY 1987 through FY 1990. 

Two long-term monitoring transects were established in 1989 (coordinated with the Montana Department of 

Fish, Wildlife and Parks with files maintained at the Rocky Mountain District) to acquire trend data for bear 

activity, in respect to the Recovery Plan. These transects are located along the North Fork of the Sun River 

and in the Renshaw Mountain-Willow Creek areas, and were monitored in June. No grizzly tracks were found 

on either of these transects in FY 1990 

To evaluate the effectiveness of a buff aloberry release project for grizzlies (Bear Tree Challenge Project), 

transects were established to monitor berry production within and outside treated areas. The transects will 

provide data on the relative production of buffaloberry shrubs and will be monitored annually. 

-.iI 

Law enforcement efforts were continued in order to deter the illegal take of grizzly bears on the Rocky 

Mountain District. The District's Law Enforcement Officer logged 24 patrol days that had grizzly poaching 

deterrence as a major focus. These patrols were in the North Fork Sun and Badger-Two Medicine BMUs. 

Three biological evaluations were completed in response to Forest management activities within grizzly bear 

habitat (Management Situation 1) with a no effect or beneficial effect to the grizzly bear. 

During 1990, there were seven problem bear incidents that were handled under the Rocky Mountain District's 

'Problem Bear Policy'. None of the incidents involved grizzlies. Actions taken included posting bear warning 

signs and removal of attractants. 

The classification of vegetation types by the LANDSAT project continued and is expected to be completed 

for use by the end of fiscal year 1991. 

Summary of 1987 through 1990 trend monitoring information for sow grizzly bears with cubs or youngs: 

Fm=female grizzly 

Cb=cub grizzly 

f/y =female with young 

BADTW = Badger-Two Medicine BMU 

BIRTE = Birch-Teton BMU 

TETSU = TetonSun BMU 

NORFO = North Fork Sun River BMU 

SOUFO = South Fork Sun-Beaver-Willow BMU 

DEAEL = Dearborn-Elk Creek BMU *rr 

12 
C-2 Threatened and Endangered Species: Gray Wolf, Bald Eagle, Peregrine Falcon - Maintain suitable, 

unoccupled habitat. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Variability Which Would Initiate Further Evaluation: Deterioration or continuing disturbance on more than 

5 percent of suitable unoccupied habitat. -- 

* 

. No projects were approved which would cause a deterioration or continuing disturbance to suitable unoccupied habitat for the gray wolf, bald eagle, or peregrine falcon. 

There were forty seven confirmed sightings of wolves on or adjacent to the Rocky Mountain District, including 

ten multiple sightings (two or more wolves together). To determine the status of wolves on the Rocky Mountain 

Ranger District, an intensive survey/monitoring project began in December 1989. This survey revealed that 

a lone male wolf was regularly using the Sun River drainage and a pack of five wolves was regularly using 

the Dupuyer Creek drainage. Over 120 miles of wolf tracks were followed and mapped. Two dozen scats were 

collected and sent to Montana State University in Bozeman, Montana for analysis. 

There was four wolf sightings recorded on the Jefferson Division. These sightings were of individual wolves 

or a single track. These sightings were forwarded to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to incorporate 

into their data base in accordance with the Recovery Plan direction (USFWS, 1987). 

Biological evaluations were completed for the gray wolf in conjunction with the same projects discussed for 

the grizzly bear (C-1), with three 'no effect' determinations on the wolf and its habitat. 

There are currently no known active nest sites of bald eagle or peregrine falcons on the Lewis and Clark 

National Forest. There were sixteen observations of thirty bald eagles on the Rocky Mountain District. Most 

observations were made during the winter in the Teton and Sun River drainages. There were three summer 

observations in the West Fork Sun River drainage, indicating a possible nest site. Observations of bald eagles 

were recorded and added to the Lewis and Clark National Forest data base. Bald eagles continued to be seen 

foraging over broad areas of private rangeland and on the National Forest during the winter. Management 

practices that could potentialty affect wintering bald eagles were reviewed in accordance to Forest Plan 

direction. 

Forest Service biologists cooperatively assisted the USFWS and MDFWP biologists in completing surveys. 

The Forest again participated in the National Bald Eagle survey in January 1990. A total of twenty seven 

eagles were observed on January 12, 1990 during the midwinter bald eagle survey (18 bald and 9 golden), 

plus 3 bald or golden eagles were observed abng the Missouri River (National Transect Number 4). Anather 

Forest Transect was completed on January 1 1,1990 along the Musselshell River and Cottonwd Creek on 

the Musselshell Ranger District. This transect yielded a total of eight eagles (5 bald and 3 golden eagles). 

Two bald eagle nests are located on private lands between the Rocky Mountain and Jefferson Divisions. In 

1990 the 'Craig' bald eagle nest still remained unoccupied and the 'Cascade' nest was not active. 

A survey of historic Peregrine nest sites east of Great Falls was conducted in July 1990. No peregrines were 

sited, but three prairie falcon nest sites were located on the canyon faces and had young in all nest $es 

noted. The results of this survey were reported to the Peregrine Falcon Working Group and to the USFWS. 

All projects possibly affecting any known Federally listed Threatened or Endangered Species were reviewed. 

13 
C-3 EL: Wlnter range capacity (populatlon level), sex, age ratlos, and habitat effecthreness. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reportlng Perlod: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlabllity Whlch Would Inltlate Further Evaluatlon: 

Winter range capacity, sex, and age rati?s?Decrease of 5 percent or more in 3 year running means. 

Habitat effectiveness: Decrease of 10 percent or more in habitat effectiveness in any timber compartment. 

Elk Population Level and Sex Age Ratios 

Summary found at the end of this monitoring item displays the elk populations by mountain ranges for the 

Forest. The elk population on the Rocky Mountain Division appears to be in an increasing trend. This can be 

the direct response of two years of light harvest because of light snow years during the hunting season. This 

situation fails to push elk out of the Sun River Game Preserve and they are not available for hunter harvest. 

The population in the Highwood Mountains appears to be stable and the hunting regulations appears to be 

maintaining the desired number of elk in this mountain range. 

The information that is displayed in the summary for the Little Belt and Castle Mountains does not appear 

to show any trend as of yet and it is difficult to determine any such trend with this data. 

The data for the Little Snowy Mountains appears to show and increasing trend in the elk population. A high 

bull/cow ratio is being maintained with permit hunting only in contrast to the bullbow ratios that are present 

on the Rocky Mountain Division in which there are no permits on bulls. 

14 
Summary of elk population data by mountain ranges for FY 1987 through FY 1990 is as follows: 

ELK POPULATION Nu 

GFTGqd- ~~ ~ 

MOUNTAIN RANGE 

Rocky Mtn South of 

Teton low I 2690 I 2656 

BulVCow Ratio 

Cow/Catf Ratio 

Rocky Mtn North of 205 I 16Oa I475 

Teton' 

BulVCow Ratio 

Cow/Catf Ratio 

Total Rocky Mtn Division 1304 I 2850 I 3131 I 

Highwoods 521 521 403 

BulVCow Ratio 

Cow/Catf Ratio 

Little Belts 

and Castles 

1954 I 4155 I 3456 

BulVCow Ratio 

Cow/Catf Ratio 

Big Snowy Mtns 

Bull/Cow Ratio 

Cow/Calf Ratio 

Little Snowy Mtn 

BulVCow Ratio 

Cow/Catf Ratio 

'Used the high counts for all surveys periods by hunting district. 

*Summer survey. 

3Data Not Available. 

'Hunting Districts 415 and 441, 

Wnly hunting district 441. 

15 
.. Elk Habitat Effectiveness 

Forest Plan standards and guidelines were used to evaluate land management activities. 

On the Jefferson Division the emphasis continued to be placed on analyzing timber compartments in which 

road construction and timber harvest actions are proposed. Analysis for elk was finalized for two Final 

Environmental Impact Statements (FEIS) on the Jefferson Division-South Fork Complex of limber Sales and 

Mill-Lion limber Sale. Elk analysis was also completed for two Draft EIS’s-Spring Creek and Moose Creek 

Timber Sales. All preferred alternatives th& were selected in the EIS’s maintained effective cover at or above 

the Forest Plan Standard set for the management area. Road closures were recommended to reduce open 

road densities at or below the Forest Plan standard. 

Forest personnel developed a model to electronically compute elk effective cover based on data contained 

in the Timber Stand Management Record System (TSMRS). The TSMRS data base is the most current 

information on vegetation on National Forest Systems lands. Plans call for testing the elk effective cover model 

during FY 1991 on selected timber sale projects being evaluated. 

Forest personnel considered elk habitat needs in the coordination of road easements over National Forest 

lands in private/public checkerboard ownership in the north Crazy Mountains on the Musselshell District. The 

road easements were held by the ‘71 Ranch’ and coordinated with Brand ‘S‘ Corporation; the topics of road 

locations and post-harvest road access were addressed. 

Coordination with hard rock mining activities and elk habitat took place for one proposals by Kennecott 

Exploration in the Geiss Creek area on the Kings Hill Ranger District. Coordination was in the form of 

regulating the timing and location of exploratory drilling. 

C4 Blghorn Sheep and Mountain Goat: Winter range capacity (population level), sex, and age ratios. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reportlng Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablllty Whlch Would Inltlate Further Evaluatlon: Decrease of 5 percent or more in 3 year running means. 

Forest personnel classified and counted bighorn sheep on the Sun River winter ranges gn the Rocky 

Mountain District in cooperation with the MDFWP. 

Trapping efforts were successful in removing 72 sheep from the Sun River bighorn sheep herd during the 

winter of 1990. These sheep were moved to other areas of Montana. 

Summary at the end of this section displays the population trends of bighorn sheep on the Rocky Mountain 

Division for the areas south and north of the Teton River. The Sun River population south of the Teton River 

appears to be stable and are being maintained at the MDFWP’s objective of 800-1 OOO animals through their 

hunting seasons and transplanting efforts. The population north of the Teton River appears to be stable. The 

MDFWP are planning for additional animals to be transplanted from Wildhorse Island in Flathead Lake into 

this area. 

, 

rr 

16 
Summary of bighorn sheep population data for the Rocky Mountain Division for FY 1987 through FY 1990 

is as follows: 

MOUNTAIN RANGE 

Rocky Mtn South of 

Teton 

Lambs 

Rocky Mtn North of 

Teton 

Ewes 

Total Rocky Mtn Division 

BIGHORN SHEEP (Numbers) 

1990 1991 

392 260 400 

133 134 200 

127 73 79 90 

34 25 29 37 

23 5 7 12 

1035 655 1079 890 

By the figures displayed, the Rocky Mountain goat population appears to be stable for both hunting districts. 

Summary of mountain goat population data for the Rocky Mountain Division for FY 1987 through FY 1990 is 

as follows: 

Total Rocky Mtn Divi- I89 180' I119 I101 1 1 1 I I sion 

I 

I . '%'- 

c 

llncomplete survey resulted from equipment failure. Data incomplete to determine population trend. 

17 
C-5 ‘Other Blg Game Speclea: Mule Deer, Whltetail Deer, Black Bear, Mountain Lion, population trend, 

sex, and ‘age ratios. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reportlng Perlod: October 1,1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablllty Which Would lnltlate Furthe: ‘Evaluatlon: Decrease of 10 percent or more in 3 year running 

means for mule deer. 

In the past four years, 1987 through 1990, the MDFWP has had restricted hunting seasons for mule deer in 

hunting district No. 441 (North part of the Rocky Mountain Front). The first three weeks have been antlered 

buck only with the last two weeks permit hunting for antlered (75) and antlerless (1 50) deer. This change was 

initiated because of the decline of larger bucks and at the request of sportsmans and land owners. This 

decline was attributed to a larger harvest in 1984 and 1985 resulting from early snows forcing the deer out 

of the back country onto their winter ranges where they were readily accessible by hunters. This strategy has 

worked as evident by the presence of a high buck to doe (40:lOO) ratio that exist at this time. 

The MDFWP is recommending a change in the hunting seasons for 1991. The entire hunting district will be 

opened to antlered buck from October 27 to November 17, with National Forest lands only opened to antlered 

buck from November 18 to December 1. The private land within the hunting district will have 75 antlered 

permits and 150 anterless deer permits for the time period of November 18 to December 1. 

Hunting district no. 441 is a comparison to hunting district no. 442 that has had antlered hunting for the first 

three weeks and either sex the last two weeks of the season. This type of season will be continued for 1991. 

The buck:doe ratio in hunting district no. 442 is 23:lOO. 

These recommended changes in hunting season regulations have been supported by the Forest. 

Forest Plan Amendment Number 3 deleted the need to monitor whitetail deer, black bear, and mountain lion 

population trends as the data for these three species is not available for National Forest land. 

C-6 Small Game (Blue Grouse): Harvest level. No further monitoring will be accomplished on this item as 

established by Forest Plan Amendment Number 3. 

. 

C-7 Furbearer (Beaver & Bobcat) Speclal Jnterest (Lynx 81 Wolverine): Harvest level. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reportlng Period: 3-years (FY 1989, FY 1992, and FY 1995). 

Varlablllty Whlch Would Inltlate Further Evaluatlon: Decrease of 10 percent or more in average trapper take .. 

from previous reporting period. 

No further monitoring will be accomplished on this item as stated in Forest Plan Amendment Number 37Data 

on these species is available only at a State level and is lumped for both private and public lands. The harvest 

level is not a reliable measurement of a population as it is heavily influenced by the fur market. 

18 
FY 1988: 

6 wolverine sightings on the Jefferson Division. 

1 wolverine trapped on the Rocky Mountain Division. 

FY 1989: 

No wolverines sighted on the Jefferson Division. 

1 wolverine sighted and 1 track observed on the Rocky Mountain Division. --- 

FY 1990: \ 

JEFFERSON DIVISION 

On November 14, 1989 one wolverine was observed crossing a road in front of a pickup truck; 

animal was as big as a dog with a big bushy tail. 6 inches of snow was on the-ground. (T13N, 

R8g, Section 28, Southeast 1/4, Kings Hill District, by Craig Cowie, Forest Service). 

On July 24,1990 one wolverine was observed running down a rock slide in T14N, R8E, Section 

17 near Lucy Park, Kings Hill District, by Bob Gliko, Forest Service. 

ROCKY MOUNTAIN DIVISION 

During FY 1990 on the Rocky Mountain District, there were observations of eight wolverines, one 

fisher, one mink, one lynx, one river otter, sixteen mountain lions, and fwe pine martens. 

C-8 Old Growth Habltat (Goshawk): Actlve nesting terrltorles. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlabllity Whlch Would lnltlate Further Evaluatlon: Decrease of 10 percent or more in active nesting 

territories. 

The Forest funded a wildlife Cooperative Education position for the second year of a Master’s study on old 

growth. The main thrust of the study will be to define old growth in the Douglas-fir types and to tea the nesting 

portion of the R-1 Goshawk Habitat Suitability model. The student has identified over 40 suitable stands in 

addition to 10 stands, the later of which are known to have been used by goshawks for more than two years. 

Analysis of old growth stand data will be completed in FY 1991. 

Personnel continued to collected prey remains from active nests for analysis. Food habits data will be used 

to evaluate existing and future goshawk foraging habitat. 

Old growth habitat field validation continued for projects in the South Fork ComplexTimber Sales, the Mill-Lion 

Timber Sale, and a preliminary review was completed for the Little Snowy Mountains. It was found that all 

compartments met at least the 5 percent minimum standard that was established in the Forest Plan. 

\ 

19 
Sunimary of Fy 1987 through FY 1990 goshawk nesting territories is as follows: 

Territories Active 0 

Fledged Active Territory 0 

GOSHAWK (Nesting Territories - Jefferson Division) 

Territories Monit 

0 0 0 

0 0 0 

@ = attempted to monitor, but data inconclusive. 

C-9 Special interest Specles (Golden Eagle, Prairie Falcon): Nesting territories. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sampled of selected nesting territories annually. 

Reporting Perlod: 3-years (FY 1989, FY 1992, and FY 1995). 

Varlablilty Which Would Initiate Further Evaluation: Reduction in occupied nesting territories of 10 percent 

or more from previous reporting period. 

. 

The Forest Plan requirement is to monitor this activity at least once every three years. This item was formally 

monitored in FY 1989. 

An agreement was completed with the local Audubon Chapter for survey work for the spring-summer of 1990 

on the Rocky Mountain Division. The work entailed surveying the eagle and falcon nest sites that were 

identified during the Raptor Research that was done in conjunction with the Rocky Mountain Front Guidelines. 

Twenty-three of the 47 golden eagle and 25 of the 52 prairie falcon nests were monitored on the Rocky 

Mountain Division. Five fledglings were observed at 5 golden eagle nests and 7 fledglings recorded at 4 prairie 

falcon nests. Two previously unrecorded prairie falcon eyries were discovered. In addition, 17 prairie falcon 

.. 
nests and 8 golden eagle nests adults were observed without any observations of young. These nests were 

classified .as either possibly or probably active. 

Monitoring of nests on the Jefferson Division, was limited and was combined while performing other duties. 

Description 

Nesting Territories 1 

Territories Monitored 

Data are insufficient to show any trend for occupancy or production of nest sites. However, if one compares 

the 1990 data to data collected in 1983 during the Rocky Mountain Front studies, the total active golden 

eagles and prairie falcons territories are pearly equal, 5/21 and 4/22 respectively. The production data for 

golden eagles and prairie falcons are nearly equal, 6 young per 5 territories and 7 young per 4 territories. 

Based on this limited information one could conclude that the golden eagle and prairie falcon occupancy and 

production has remained relatively stable since 1983. 

Pre 1987 1989 1992 1995 

30 53 

6 

Summary of golden eagle nesting territories is as follows: 

GOLDEN EAGLE (Nesting Territories) 

Territories Monitored 

~~ ~~~ ~ ~ 

Summary of prairie falcon nesting territories is as follows: 

7/ Data is for only the Rocky Mountain Ranger District and is incomplete prior to 1989. 

C-10 Cavtty Nesting Habitat (Northern 3-Toed Woodpecker): Percent optimum habitat. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reportlng Period: 5-years (FY 1991). 

- 

Varlablltty Which Would Initiate Further Evaluation: Reduction in snags to below numbers needed to 

maintain minimum viable population level in any timber compartment. \ 

The Forest Plan Table 5.1 requirement is to monitor this activity at least once every five years; the item was 

formally monitored in FY 1990. A pre-harvest survey for snags was conducted in cutting units 6 and 9 of the 

Central Park Timber Sale (FY 1988) on the Kings Hill District. Post-harvest snag densities will be conducted 

after timber harvest and piling, and post-sale woodcutting to monitor changes in snag densities after each 

activity. 

21 
Design&& snags were marked with paint 'w' or wildlife tree signs on the proposed Moose Park and Little 

Moose Timber Sales (FY 1991) on the Kings Hill Ranger District. The pre-harvest marking of snags represents 

a change to a more effective snag management program. Other incidental monitoring was conducted in 

connection with wildlife input to timber sale planning. 

FY 1990 figures indicate a slightly declining demand for firewood. Section E-9 of this report displays the 

annual sale of firewood on the Lewis and Clark National Forest. 

The Pasture Gulch area on the Musselshell District was surveyed for pileated woodpeckers in conjunction 

with goshawk surveys. A pileated woodpecker was again observed in the area in FY 1990. The presences 

of a breeding pair of pileated woodpeckers is suspected, but remains unconfirmed at this time. 

--- 

< 

C-1 1 Aquatic Habltat Condition (Cutthroat Trout, Brook Trout, Rainbow Trout): Habltat- quallty (Coordinate with F-7 and F-8). 

Frequency of Measurement: lo0 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Period: 3-years (FY 1989, FY 1992, and FY 1995). 

Varleblilty Which Would lnltiate Further Evaluation: Predicted decrease of 5 percent or more (below 

planned level) in fish habitat capability based on predicted or actual changes in water quality or fish habitat 

parameters in any stream or lake. 

ROCKY MOUNTAIN DIVISION 

During the summer of 1990, the Rocky Mountain District monitored fish populations on 30 streams within the 

Canyon Creek and Gates Park Fires. Approximately 40 stream miles were monitored for changes in population composition, fish density, habitat quality, and water chemistry. There were no detectable differences 

between baseline data and 1990 data. To this date, the Canyon Creek and Gates Park Fires do not appear 

to have adversely affected fish populations and have negatively affected fish habitat on only two streams. 

Five streams on the Rocky Mountain District were surveyed to determine the presence of purestrain westslope 

cutthroat trout. Fish were collected and sent to Missoula for genetic analysis. Results are currently available 

for only two streams; Cow and North Waldron Creeks. Both streams were found to support genetically pure 

westslope cutthroat trout. Population estimates were made for the previously identified population of westslope cutthroat trout in North Badger Creek. Estimates were conducted on three reaches. Numbers of 

cutthroat were estimated at 232/mile with 12,7/mile greater than 6 inches in length. 

The condition of fish habitat and the condition of streamside shrub communities was evaluated on one stream 

on the Rocky Mountain District. 

JEFFERSON DIVISION 

, 

The condition of fish habitat and the condition of streamside shrub communities were evaluated on six 

streams of the Kings Hill District, four streams on the Musselshell District, and one stream on the Judith 

District. An additional four streams on the Kings Hill District were evaluated for the condition of spayping 

substrate. 

Substrate conditions were found to be in relatively poor condition on two of the streams evaluated with fine 

sediment levels in spawning gravels of 54 percent and 55 percent. These sediment levels are well over the 

32 to 42 percent levels found in relatively undeveloped drainages of similar geologies. It is likely that sediment 

22 
delivery from roads and livestock grazing combine together to cause the elevated sediment levels in the two 

streams. 

- 

Forest 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992. Plan Description 

Stream lntragravel - 4 4 6 4 

Sediment 

Stream COWFISH - 2 3 5 12 

Model 

Five of the streams evaluated for ripariadfish habitat conditions were found to have streambanks and/or fish 

habitat damaged due to livestock trampling. Over-browsing of the streamside shrub community was occurring on the same stream reaches. 

Four streams on the Jefferson Division we6 surveyed to determine the presence of purestrain westslope 

cutthroat trout. To date, results of the testing have not been completed. 

1993 1994 1995 1996 

Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 aquatic habitat condition is as follows: 

AQUATIC HABITAT CONDITION (Streams Sampled) 

C-12 Threatened and Endangered Habitat Improvement Outputs, Wildlife & Fish Habitat Improvement 

outputs. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Variability Which Would Initiate Further Evaluation: 

Threatened and Endangered Habitat Improvements: Accomplishment 10 percent below Forest Plan level 

over 5-year average. .. 

Wildlife and Fish Habitat Improvement Outputs: -Accomplished 20 percent below Forest Plan level over 5-year 

average. 

23 
The foilowing table summarizes FY 1987 through FY 1990 wildlife habitat improvement accomplishment in 

comparing what the Forest Plan states and what was actually completed: 

(WILDLIFE HABITAT IMPROVEMENT) 

C-13 Oil and Gas ActlvltyMllldltfe Monitoring Rocky Mountain Front. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlabiltty Which Would Initiate Further Evaluation: Any indication of downward population trend in 

species/management guidelines related to oil and gas activity. 

c 

There has been no major developmental projects approved on the Rocky Mountain District that have not been 

able to apply the guidelines totally or with very minor deviations. Based on the analysis none of the following 

permitted activities have had any influence on populations of wild ungulates or raptors. There were no new 

gas and oil permitted activities on National Forest lands during FY 1990. The following table summarizes the 

projects and how the guidelines have been applied since 1987. 

Y 

24 
Summary of guidelines and operating windows assigned to construction projects on the Rocky Mountain 

Ranger District for FY 1987 through 1990 is as follows: 

SPECIES I 1 AFFECTED YEAR I PROJECTNAME 

1987 Mobil Testing 1-1 3 raptor, grizzly 

Texaco Seismic raptor, grizzly 

u < 

1988 Mt Baldy pwrline grizzly, goat 

1989 EPS pipeline 1-13 grizzly, elk, raptors 

1990 Bear Tree Timber grizzly 

Harvest 

GUIDELINES APPLIED OPERATION 

WINDOW 

All guidelines followed I July l-Aug 1 

All guidelines followed 

All guidelines followed 

Aug l-Oct 15 

July 1- Oct 15 

All guidelines followed except 

for 5 day period on elk, deer 

winter range which had an effect on 160 acres along and 

existing open road. 

Ail guidelines followed 

Oc! l-Dec 1, Dec 

21Jan 4 extension. 

July l-Oct 15 

25 
D-1 Range Outputs. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - Sftpfember 30,1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablllty Whlch Would lnltlate Further Evaluatlon: Plus or minus 10 percent of target. 

Summary of Forest Plan 1 O-year average Range Management targets and actual accomplishment for FY 1987 

through FY 1990 is as follows: 

RANGE 

r 

M AUM = Thousand Animal Unit Month. 

Permitted grazing use, Thousand Animal Unit Month (M AUM), in FY 1990 is within 1 % of the Forest Plan 

projection and therefore requires no further evaluation. Permitted use is based on the grazing permits issued 

and estimates of recreation pack stock use before the grazing season begins. At the end of the grazing 

season the actual grazing use is gathered and reported. Actual grazing use in FY 1990 was 60.1 M AUM. The 

eleven year average actual use (1980 through 1990) was 64.8 M AUM. 

' 

NonstrucruralRange lmprovements - In FY 1990 only 42 % of the Forest Plan projected output for nonstrmural 

range improvements was accomplished. The reason was lower funding in FY 1990 and a shift in emphasis 

from non-structural to structural improvements in FY 1990. 

26 
Structural Range improvements - In FY 1990 only 88 % of the Forest Plan projected output for structural range 

improvements was accomplished. Again, funding below the projected Forest Plan budget reqbired in FY 1990 

dollars, did not allow the Forest to accomplish the projected outputs. Continued funding at this level will result 

in under accomplishment in structural range improvement. Without these investments in range improvement 

during the first decade of Forest Plan implementation, the increase in permitted grazing use, that is scheduled 

in the second decade of the Forest Plan, will not be possible. 

Allotment Management Plans - No allotment management plans (AMP's) were completed in FY 1990. The 

under accomplishment is a result of budget and targets for this activity that are below the Forest Plan level. 

The Region did not assign AMPs targets to the Forest in FY 1990. Funding for range management must 

increase to the Forest Plan level in order for allotment planning to reach the priority to accomplish the Forest 

Plan level of 10 AMPs per year. Even at the Forest Plan level, the Forest will continue to have a high percentage 

of AMPs that are outdated. See monitoring item 0-4 for further evaluation and discussion. 

0-2 Range Conditions and Trend. 

Frequency of Measurement: 25 allotments per year which will allow all Forest allotments to be sampled every 

10 years. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlabillty Which Would Initiate Further Evaluation: 

Condition - Acres of range in fair or less condition that have not shown any improvement in conditiin score 

during the monitoring interval (1 0 years). 

Trend - Any acres now in downward trend which were previously (at the last reading) stable or in an upward 

trend. 

Trend - Any acres in downward trend which still show a downward trend after another monitoring interval (10 

years). 

There are 276 condition and trend studies on 243 range allotments on the Forest. There were 49 condition 

and trend studies monitored on 7 allotments of the Forest in FY 1990. Some of these studies were Ecodata 

plots initiated inside and outside of riparian exclosures, to monitor changes in range and vegetation in riparian 

habitats resulting from livestock grazing. Several years of subsequent re-readings of Ecodata wiU be required 

to determine trend. 

Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 range'condition and trend studies are as follows: 

RANGE CONDITION AND TREND (Each) 

.. 

27 
The level of range condition and trend monitoring in FY 1990 is below the Forest Plan variability limit for this 

activii. At the FY 1990 rate of monitoring 7 allotments per year, it would take about 35 years to monitor all 

of the allotments. 

Description 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 

I 

Suitable Range 249.2 249.2 249.3 249.3 

Monitoring of range condition and trend is an important element in evaluating the effectiveness of the Forest 

Senrice range management activities. A much higher level of condition and trend monitoring is needed to 

meet the Forest Plan objectives and to eqable range managers to evaluate their programs. < 

Frequency of Measurement: Annualv. 

Reportlng Perlod: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablltty Which Would lnitlate Further Evaluation: More than 1 percent reduction in suitable range acres 

from previous year. Cumulatively, any reduction of 3 percent or more in suitable range acres over a 5-year 

period. 

Suitable range for FY 1990 is 249,350 acres. 

Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 suitable range acres is as follows: 

D-4 Allotment Management Plan status. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reportlng Perlod: 5-years (FY 1991). 

Varlablltty Which Would initiate Further Ev;iuatlon: If more than 10 percent of the AMPs are outdated. Plans 

approved more than 15 years ago (before 1976) are considered to be outdated. 

All allotments were considered in the FY 1990 report; cattle, sheep, and horse allotments, administrative 

pastures, special us8 pastures, and commercial packer grazing areas. 

28 
A summary of the number of allotments and allotment management plans follows: 

Category 1 Number of Allotments I Percent of Allotments I 

1, 

Total allotments itj#gRty-zppe.A) 239 100 - 

Total allotment management plans 157 66 

Allotments without plans 82 34 

Outdated plans (approved before 1976) 79 33 

15 a 

- 

Plans that will become outdated during this 36 

decade (approved 1976-1 981) 

Total allotments outdated by the end of the 197 82 

decade (1 996) 

There are 82 allotments without an AMP and another 79 allotments that have outdated AMPs. Within the 

balance.of the first decade of the Forest Plan (through 1996) another 36 allotments will become outdated. 

A total of 197 allotments (82 %) would have outdated plans by the end of the decade, if no further allotment 

planning were done. 

This data shows a major departure from the Forest Plan variabiltty of 'less than 10 % of AMPs outdated." To 

correct this situation within the first decade of Forest Plan implementation (through 1996) will require 35 AMPs 

per year. 

The projected outputs for AMPs in the Forest Plan is 10 AMPs per year. At this level the Forest will remain 

behind the Forest Plan requirement of less than 10 % of outdated AMPs. At 10 per year, 60 allotments would 

receive allotment planning by the end of the decade, but 149 allotments (62 %) would remain unplanned or 

have outdated AMPs. 

In FY 1990, the Forest did not complete any AMPs. 

It is apparent from this evaluation that to meet the Forest Plan monitoring requirement (no more than 10 % 

of AMPs outdated) will require a higher output of allotment planning than is now targeted in the Forest Plan, 

or currently being programmed. Funding for range management on the Forest must be increased above the 

current level in order to meet this objective. Allotments must be carefully selected by priority, whenprogramming allotment planning, to insure that the backlog is reduced. Only allotments that are unplanned, or 

currently have plans approved before 1982, will contribute to reducing the backlog of outdated AMPs. 

c 

29 
Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 range allotment management plan accomplishment is as follows: 

ALLOTMENT MANAGEMENT PLANS (Each) 

1/ Includes both new and revision of existing Allotment Management Plans. 

TIMBER 

E-1 Assure silvicultural management prescriptions are best suited to management area goals with all 

resources considered. 

Frequency of Measurement: One sale annually. 

Reporting Period: October 1 , 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlabillty Whlch Would lnltlate Further Evaluation: A departure from management prescription. 

A timber interdisciplinary sale review was conducted on the Quartzite Moose Timber Sale on the Kings Hill 

District. The review group felt that the prescriptions are appropriate to meet the Forest Plan Management Area 

B goals and that wildlife and water quality standards are being met. 

E-2 Assure prescription not primarily chosen on basis of greatest dollar return or greatest timber output. 

Frequency of Measurement: One sale annually. 

Reporting period: 5-years (FY 1991). . 

Variability Whlch Would Inltlate Further Evaluation: Test management area outputs against those predicted. 

An economic analysis was done for the Quartzite Moose Timber Sale in accordance with Forest-Wide 

requirements. 

The silvicultural prescription calling for clearcutting with dozer piling of the logging slash and mechanical 

scaridication for natural regeneration was chosen because of the decadent condition of the timber stands and 

the high risk of windthrow, offered few viable options. Economics and volume realized were not the prktciple 

reasons. 

Evaluation for the entire Forest will be done during the FY 1991 review. 

30 
E-3 Assure openings comply wtth size llmlts and are perlodically evaluated for appropriateness. 

Frequency of Meerurement: One sale annually. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30,1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablllty Which Would Inttlate Further +Evaluation: Unacceptable results of an Interdisciplinary Team 

review. * 

No individual cutting units in the Quartzite Moose Timber Sale area exceeded 40 acres. However, cutting units 

no. 1, 4, and 5 share a common boundary and harvest treatment. The combined size was 77 acres. 

Discussion by timber sale reviewers, including landscape ecology concepts versus dispersed settings 

concepts, came to the conclusion that the combined size of the unit was too large to meet the objectives for 

Management Area B. 

A review of timber sales sold during FY 1990 shows that no cutting units exceeded the 40 acres limitation. 

E4 Amure tlrnbew offered does not dlffer from allowable sale quantlty (ASQ) for 10-year period. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Period: October 1,1989 - September 30,1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablltty Which Would inttlate Further Evaluation: More than plus or minus 20 percent annually or more 

than plus or minus 10 percent over a 5-year period. 

c 

31 
The foilowing discusses the total timber program and the allowable sale quantity (ASQ) for the Forest: 

During FY 1990, the Forest sold 36 % of the Forest Plan total timber program volume. The Forest sold or 

offered 11.1 million board feet (MMBF). Of this amount, 5.0 MMBF was current year sell, 5.5 MMBF (Mixes 

Baldy 3.0 MMBF and PlacerSnow 2.5 MMBF) was volume sold that had been appealed during FY 1988, and 

0.6 MMBF (Near Cross 69 MBF and Lower Sage 492 MBF) was offered but not sold. No volume was prepared, 

appealed, and not offered. \s 

< 

Volume Sold: 

Regular Program 

Live Timber 

A. Chargeable 

B. Nonchargeable 

Mortality Timber 

A. Chargeable 

8. Nonchargeable 

TOTAL VOLUME 

Total Volume 

Percent of Total Volume Sold 

Volume Not Sold: 

Regular Program (Chargeable) 

Volume Offered But Not Sold 

Sold in Subsequent Years 

A. Chargeable 

6. Nonchargeable 

Volume Appealed 

Sold in Subsequent Years 

A. Chargeable 

B. Nonchargeable 

TOTAL NOT SOLD 

Total Subsequently Sold 

TOTAL VOLUME FY 1990 

7/ (MMBF) million board feet 

FOREST 

PlAN(MMBF) 

11.0 

1 .o 

1 .o 

1 .o 

14.0 

14.0 

1990 TARGET 

(MMBF) 

113 

0.2 

2.1 

0.6 

14.2 

1990 ACTUAL 

(MMBF) 

3.4 

0.2 

1 .o 

0.4 

5.0 

5.0 

35% 

0.6 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

5.4 

0.1 

0.6 

5.5 

11.1 

. . 

32 
Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 timber sold or offered is as follows: 

TIMBER SOLD OR OFFERED (Million Board Feet) 

* Reduced by 620 MBF (Last Chance Salvage Sale on the Kings Hill District) from FY 1987 Monitoring and 

Evaluation report per 2430 memorandum, dated 11/12/87 from Zone Timber, Helena National Forest and added 

to FY 1988 sell accomplishment. 

Differences in total volume figures are due to rounding. 

Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 annual timber sell program is as follows: 

TIMBER PROGRAM (Million Board Feet) 

c 

Timber sale appeals are a major reason that has kept the Forest from making its planned Timber Sale Targets. 

The Forest's goal is to have National Environmental Policy Act documents approved two years in advance 

of implementing the project. To accomplish this, the Forest has reorganized its workforce to place more 

emphasis on Forest Plan implementation. 

The key to this monitoring item is how well the Forest is doing in meeting the allowable sale quality over the 

1 O-year period. The annual summary shown consists of chargeable live and dead volume that has been sold. 

Appealed volume and volume of offered but not sold sales are not included until the sale is actually sold. 

' 

33 
Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 allowable sale quantty is as follows: 

ASQ (Million Board Feet) 

E-5 Assure restocking is In progress withln 5 years. 

Frequency of Measurement: 1,3, and 5 years (FY 1987, FY 1989, and FY 1991). 

Reportlng Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlabiilty Which Would Initiate Further Evaluation: Unacceptable results of an Interdisciplinary Team 

review. 

Stocking surveys indicate that all stands planted within the past five years and 85 % of stands where natural 

regeneration has been initiated within the past five years are either certified as being adequately stocked or 

are on a trajectory to meet adequate stocking within the desired time frame. Stocking surveys taken during 

the first year, and occasionally during the second year after site preparation, often do not have adequate 

numbers of seedlings to indicate whether or not the stand is proceeding toward the desired level of stocking. 

If the stand is still below desired levels at the time of the third year examination, then it will be evaluated to 

determine if treatment is needed to bring it to that level. 

E-6 Assure timber acres harvested are as projected. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Period: 5-years (FY 1991). c 

Varlablitty Which Would initiate Further Evluation: More than plus or minus 10 percent deviation over a 

5-year period. 

The Forest Plan projected that annual harvest would average about 1,800 acres. About 1051 acres were 

harvested in FY 1990. The average harvest is lower than projected due to the backlog of timber sales not 

being offered. Harvested timber volume in FY 1990 is 10.5 MMBF. FY 1990 volume under contract is 22.7 

MMBF. 

34 
Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 timber volume under contract, acres, and volume harvested is as 

follows: 

Description 

Volume Under Contract (MMBF) (1) 

Acres Harvested (2) 

Volume Harvested 

(MMBF) (3) 

TIMBER UNDER CONTRACT AND VOLUME & ACRES HARVESTED 

Forest 1987 i.988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Plan < 

- 29.1 26.4 21.9 22.7 

1,800 1,144 775 786 1051 

- 16.8 11.1 11.7 10.5 

acre material (PAM). - 

(2) Data for Acres Harvested for 1987 and 1988 have been adjusted based on updated Timber Stand 

Management Record System (TSMRS) output. 

(3) Does not include personal firewood volume. 

.\ 
E-7 Assure accompllshrnent of thlnnlng and other sllwlcultural treatments as projected In plan. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reportlng Perlod: 5-Years (FY 1991). 

Varlablllty Whlch Would lnltlate Further Evaluation: More than plus or minus 10 percent deviation over a 

5-year period. L 

* 

The following chart indicates accomplishment of timber stand improvement (TSl) and other silvicultural 

treatments: 

TIMBER STAND IMPROVEMENT 

Adjustments based on the Regional Annual Silvicultural Accomplishment Reports for each Fiscal Year. 

The Forest in FY 1988, in conjunction with Regional Objectives and Forest Plan Amendment Number 3, 

accelerated the stand examination program from 15.5 thousand acres to 28.0 thousand acres in order to 

complete the timber data base for use in Forest planning. 

IC 

36 
Most leforestation on the Forest is accomplished by natural regeneration. Most of the site preparation is now 

performed by the purchaser, and thus does not show up in either the appropriated or Knutson-Vandenberg 

(KV) categories. Thus KV treatments are expected to be at the average level over the five year period. 

Thinning accomplishment have exceeded Forest Plan outputs. The Cross Creek burn (1970) and many of 

the young stands created by harvest in the late 1960s and early 1970s are showing evidence of reduced 

growth and thus are being thinned. The variation of plus 10 percent for the decade will very likely be 

exceeded. .. 

Fuel treatments with brush disposal funds are tied closely to the acreage harvested in the past two years. 

Although there will be large fluctuations in individual years, average acreages should be achieved over the 

five year period (Refer to P-5 Fuel Treatment Outputs). 

This item will be completely evaluated in FY 1991. 

E-8 Insure harvest by even-age management Is compatible with resource values. 

Frequency of Measurement: One sale annually. 

Reporting Perlod: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Variability Whlch Would Inhiate Further Evaiuatlon: Unacceptable results of an Interdisciplinary Team 

review. 

The presale analysis of the Quartzite Moose Timber Sale indicated that the proposed treatments would meet 

the goals and standards of Forest Plan Management Area B. The Interdisciplinary Review Team on the 

post-sale review agrees that even-aged silvicultural systems are appropriate to meet Forest Plan Management Area B objectives and the needs of these particular sites. 

Even-aged silvicultural systems will provide greater forage production than uneven-aged systems and will 

provide more volume per acre and at less cost. The standards for wildlife cover and water quality are still being 

met in the area. The gentle terrain and past harvest patterns permit openings to still meet the visual 

management objectives of modification. 

E-9 Flrewood removal. 

- 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reportlng Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Variability Whlch Would Initlate Further Evaluation: Use increase exceeds 10 percent per year. , 

In FY 1990,2.2 million board feet of personal use firewood was removed from the Forest. The Environmental 

Assessment and Quartzite Moose Timber Sale package provided for decking of unmerchantable materjal at 

landing and for closing temporary roads at least one year after unit acceptance. 

37 
Sumniary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 commercial and personal use firewood removal is as follows: 

There has been a leveling-off in the demand for firewood from the Forest. It is expected that the use will 

probably continue at or near the current amount. 

E-1 0 Evaluate avallablllty of lands classtfled as suitable/unsuitable. 

Frequency of Measurement: 5-years (FY 1991). 

Reportlng Perlod: 5-years (FY 1991). 

Varlabllity Which Would Initiate Further Evaluation: More than plus or minus 5 percent change in acreage. 

The evaluation of land suitability is ongoing through area and project analyses. Data is beiiig entered into 

the Timber Stand Management Record System data base to provide information for the planned evaluation 

to be accomplished in FY 1991 and for future Forest Plan revisions. 

38 
E-11 Projected ylelds. (Growth Plots) 

Frequency of Measurements: 5-years (FY 1991). 

Description lg7' 985 1986 1987 1988 1989 

Growth Plots 27 2 0 1 2 

Established 

Growth Plots 7 2 2 0 4 

Remeasured 

Reporting Perlod: October 1,1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 

2 

6 

Varlablllty Whlch Would lnltlate Further Ewaluation: Standard error of 10 percent at 1 standard deviation. -% 

< 

The Forest established two new permanent growth plots and remeasured six existing plots during FY 1990. 

Efforts during the planning period (10-15 years) will be to continue the remeasurement so that each Growth 

Plot is remeasured on a 5-year interval to establish a base data file. The Forest is still on schedule to 

accomplish the remeasurement program. New plots will be installed to monitor growth and yield for treatments or conditions that are not being sampled as yet. 

Summary of growth plot establishment and remeasurement is as follows: 

GROWTH PLOTS (Number) 

At this time there is insufficient data available to run any type of comparison between the Growth Plot data 

and the projected yields of the Forest Plan. 

When these Growth Plots were established, they were to be installed in stands that were scheduled for a 

timber activity within the next five years, other than a regeneration harvest; example, precommercial or 

commercial thinning. Therefore, Growth Plots that have had their planned timber activity accomplished and 

remeasurement completed have data only from one remeasurement. c 

Evaluation will be done in FY 1991. 

SOIL, WATER, AND AIR 

F-1 Adequacy and Cumuiatlve Effects of Project Best Management Practices. 

. .\ 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. * 

Reportlng Perlod: October 1,1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablilty Which Would Initiate Further Evaluation: Projected deterioration of soil productivity or water 

useabilii. 

39 
Each proposed project with a potential for impact on soil or water quality is reviewed to determine the 

adequacy of the Project's Best Management Practices (BMPs) before it is approved to ensure soil productivty 

and water useability. Nine projects were evaluated in FY 1990 to provide detailed BMPs required to protect 

soil and water quallty. In addition, cumulative effects on water yield and sediment were evaluated as needed 

on these projects, as required by Forest-wide Management Standard F-3. 

All of these projects provided adequate BMPs to meet water quality goals and State water quality standards. 

These standards require that all reasonable land, soil, and water conservation practices are used. The 

cumulative effects analyses indicated, ih each case, that reasonable use of conservation practices would 

protect the beneficial uses and goals for the water resource and prevent deterioration of the soil or water. 

F-2 Revegetatlon of temporarily disturbed areas and roads within 5 years. 

Frequency of Measurement: 75 percent sample 2 years after termination. 

Reporting Perlod: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlabllity Which Would initlate Further Evaluation: Unacceptable resutts of an Interdisciplinary Team 

review. 

Projects completed under the Forest Plan with temporarily disturbed areas and roads are required to be 

revegetated within 5 years. A review two years after completion indicates the effectiveness of seeding 

required by the project and the need for any follow-up revegetation. Monitoring was accomplished on nine 

projects; all projects showed adequate erosion control and revegetation except two projects with 80 percent 

adequate revegetation. Follow-up seeding will be used to ensure adequate revegetation. There has been no 

Interdisciplinary Team reviews indicating unacceptable revegetation or inadequate erosion control of temporarily disturbed areas. 

F-3 Water quality effects of actlvttles in municipal watersheds. 

Frequency of Measurement: All projects. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Variability Which Would initiate Further Evaluation: Adverse water quality effects or violates water quality 

st and a r d s . 

c 

- 

The only activities conducted in either of the two municipal watersheds on the Forest in N 1990 were four 

small timber sales in the O'Brien Creek drainage, with no road or trail construction necessary. Project plans 

had been previously reviewed by &he State Water Quality Bureau. The operations on all four sales met the 

requirements of the timber sale contracts. However, comparison of on-the-ground operations with recently 

developed BMPs showed a minor departure from three BMPs on one of the four sales, only. Corrective action 

was taken that eliminated the potential for detrimental impacts on the soil or water resource. Prior to any 

additional activities (including any proposal for timber harvest) within the municipal watershed, past magagement practices will be evaluated by an intensive monitoring system with adequate data collection to assure 

that water delivered to the municipal system will be of the highest quality possible. 

40 
F-4 Aetlvltles In rlparlan areas, flood plalns, and wetlands. 

Frequency of Measurement: 50 percent of all projects. 

Reportlng Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlabllity Which Would lnltlate Further Evaluatlon: Unacceptable results of an Interdisciplinary Team 

review. -_ 

Riparian areas include flood plains and wetlands, and activities conducted in them pose an added risk to 

water-related resources and to water -qualtty. Ten projects (besides those included in element F3) were 

reviewed in the required manner in FY 1990, including one that was reviewed by the State audit team. Eight 

of the ten projects showed no departure from meeting the contract or Best Management Practices (BMPs), 

though the need for some follow-up was indicated. One project, a defauhed sale, showed four minor and three 

major departures with only minor or temporary detrimental impacts on the soil and water resources. These 

problems are being corrected. The last project, reviewed by the BMP audit team for the Montana Department 

of State Lands, indicated one major departure and two minor departures from meeting the contract or BMPs. 

This major departure was rated as providing adequate protection of soil and water resources and was based 

on the new Statewide Forestry BMPs not available at the time of the timber sale contract. 

F-5 Effects of other actlvlties on watershed condltlons. 

Frequency of Measurement: 20 percent of all projects. 

Reporting Perlod: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablllty Which Would lnltlate Further Evaluatlon: Unacceptable management practices or land productivity. 

Activities not in municipal watersheds nor in riparian areas may also have impacts on soil or water quality, 

A total of 12 such projects were reviewed in FY 1990. A minor departure from intent of BMPs was found in 

each of three projects because of inadequate water bars, skid trail locations, and filtering area. A major 

departure occurred on one project because of inadequate blading of the roadway and ditchwork. In spite of 

these departures, soil and water resources were either adequately protected, often with minor corrective 

measures immediately applied, or had only minor, temporary impacts. These projects will all need me 

follow-up in Fy 1991 to be certain seeding success and erosion control is adequate. F 

F-6 Ellmlnatlon of so11 and water restoration backlog. 

Frequency of Measurement: Annually. 

Reporting Period: 5-years (FY 1991). 

Varlablltty Which Would lnltlate Further Evaluatlon: Less than 50 percent by 1990; less than 100 pescent 

by 1995. 

Direction is that the backlog of soil and water restoration needs be eliminated by the year 1995. The Forest 

Plan identified a backlog of 373 acres of these restoration needs. A total of 57 acres of restoration were 

41 
accomplished in FY 1990. Thus, a total of 233 acres of restoration has taken place Over the last six years, 

a respeaable degree of accomplishment towards meeting the Forest Plan goal. 

Summary of pre 1987 through FY 1990 soil and water restoration backlog accomplishment is as follows: 

SOIL AND WATER RESTORATION (Acres Accomplished) 

The Forest Plan target for Soil Inventory is 2,000 acres. In FY 1990, no acres were inventoried. 

Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 soil inventory accomplishment is as follows: 

SOIL INVENTORY (Acres Accomplished) 

F-7 Water and Stream Qualtty as affecting fish habitat and other uses: validation of estimations of 

sediment. 

Frequency of Measurement: Seasonal-continuous and annual. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Variability Which Would initiate Further Evaluation: Not meeting State or Federal water quali standards 

or significant (90 percent confidence) deterioration, by best available indexes. 

.. 

Water quality monitoring did not identify any significant deterioration which would require immediate action. 

State or Federal water quality standards are met when all reasonable land, soil and water management, or 

conservation practices (BMPs) have been applied. The adequacy of these BMPs is determined through 

monitoring item numbered F-1, and the application and effectiveness of these BMPs is monitored in items ' 

numbered F3, F-4, and F-5. 

Data is required to validate estimates of sediment and to determine if water quality or fish habitatmight 

deteriorate where estimates of effects are incorrect. Methods and intensity of validation and evaluation of 

sediment are still in a state of development. Considering this, sampling of representative streams by available 

techniques has been conducted over the last five years. The sampling in FY 1990 included three stations with 

regular (automated) sampling of suspended sediment along with a continuous record of streamfiow and four 

42 
streams sampled for intragravel sediment. Sampling in FY 1990 has provided data with somewhat less value 

because the amount and variation of streamflow has been less than the 'average' year similar to the first three 

years of drought in 1986 through 1988. An 'above average' year for streamflow is still needed to provide a 

more reasonable balance to the analyses. lntragravel sediment on two streams was relatively high in fines, 

indicating impacts on the fish spawning substrates. 

One of the stations sampled was reestablished to monitor the effects of the Gates Park Fire on the North Fork 

Sun River. The station was discussed ip'fhe 1989 Monitoring and Evaluation Report. This station was an 

abandoned USGS stream gauging station, located below the Gates Park Fire and just above Gibson 

Reservoir. This station has 20 years of records available that are correlated with four snow courses in the 

North Fork Sun River drainage. The Bureau of Reclamation and the Greenfields lrrjgatiqn District are cooperating with the Forest Service to have the USGS maintain this station and to measure stream sediment there 

and compare it to baseline information. In addition, photopoints (some in FY 1989), channel condition 

surveys, grab samples, and erosion transects were established for the fires, and a sediment survey will be 

done for Gibson Reservoir to determine the amount of deposition between 1973 and 1989, as compared to 

the period between 1989 and 1993. Preliminary results indicate that a large amount of sediment is still coming 

out of the fire area with the spring snowmelt in early May and with late July and August thunderstorms. 

F-8 Riparian areas and streams: stream cover and pools. 

Frequency of Measurement: High-impact annually. 

Reportlng Perlod: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Variability Which Would Initlate Further Evaluatlon: Significant (90 percent confidence) decline in condition. 

Inventory of the condition of riparian areas and streams is presently conducted using the COWFISH model 

and shrub condition. Twelve streams were evaluated in FY 1990 by these methods. Riparian evaluations 

indicated that excessive levels of bank damage have occurred on five streams. Streamside shrubs are also 

heavily browsed by livestock on these same streams. Other streams evaluated were found to have fair to good 

fish habitat conditions. The streamside shrub community condition is increasing on one reach but is declinipg 

in vigor on two streams with a slight decline in a third stream. Additional analysis and additional years of data 

are necessary to indicate relative change in condition. 

Further analysis of riparian condition requires classification. A Forest-level riparian classification prpject was 

initiated in FY 1990 with the sampling of 33 stream reaches. These samples, and additional sampling in 1991, 

will be used to characterize and classify the cprrent and potential condition of riparian areas. The classification 

will provide a means to compare existing and desired condition in riparian areas, including any areas that 

are significantly declining. This classification will be used as a basis for designing riparian monitoring and in 

development of range allotment management plans. The riparian reach sampling also sews to document 

baseline conditions of riparian sites. 

43 
F-9 Public Health. 

Frequency of Measurement: Monthly when in use. 

Reportlng Perlod: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablllty Whlch Would Inltlate Further Evaluatlon: Violates State or Federal drinking water standards per 

year. < % 

During FY 1990,41 Forest water systems and 7 special use water systems were opened for use. Thirty-seven 

of the Forest Service systems and two of the special us8 systems were tested and operated in accordance 

with State and Federal Safe Drinking Water Acts. The remaining systems did not receive sufficient bacteriological testing. 

An evaluation of this situation revealed that the problem was confined to one Ranger District for the Forest 

Service systems. Further analysis indicated that the individual who had been trained and assigned the 

responsibility for sampling the systems had been called out on fire duty. During the time that the individual 

was absent, the responsibility was apparently lost. The matter has been reviewed with the District Ranger in 

an effort to redeem this management responsibility. 

MINERALS 

0-1 Effect of Mlnlng Acthritlm. 

Frequency d Measurement: 100 percent annually of active operations on a monthly basis. 

Reportlng Perlod: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablltty Which Would lnltlate Further Evaluatlon: Adverse effect of Forest Service project on mineral 

activities or revision or departure from approved operation plans. 

Review of minerals exploration activities during FY 1990 indicates that there were not any adverse impacts 

resulting from permitted activities. 

All proponents of exploration activities were required to submit a Notice of Intent or Pian of Operations prior 

to initiating any surface disturbing activities on mining claims. Seventeen Plans of Operation were received 

and approved during the fiscal year. For each Plan, an environmental analysis was conducted and proposed 

operations were approved or modified to reduce environmental impacts through application of mitigating 

measures to meet Forest Plan standards and guidelines. 

Exploration activity conducted in FY 1990 consisted of core drilling to determine the existence and/or extent 

mineralized areas. Forest-wide, nineteen core sites were drilled. Except for 0.5 miles of road construction, all 

drill sites were located on existing roads and did not require any reconstruction to accommodate dalling 

equipment. Although the 0.5 miles was classified as new road construction, actual surface disturbance 

consisted of clearing to allow vehicle passage. 

44 
One request for use of a Forest System road to haul a bulk sample from private land was received. This 

proposal would require upgrading of the proposed haul route to accommodate equipment and haul vehicles. 

Thus far, no work on this proposed project has been conducted. 

G-2 Effect of Geophysical Seismic Prospecting. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percgnf of active operations on a biweekly basis. 

Reportlng Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Variability Whlch Would Initiate Further Evaluation: Adverse effect upon surface resources or departure 

from conditions of the approved permit. 

There were no requests for geophysical prospecting permits in FY 1990. 

G-3 Effect of Drilling. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent of active operations on a weekly basis. 

Reporting Perlod: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Variability Which Would Initiate Further Evaluatlon: Adverse effect upon surface resources or departure 

from conditions of the approved permit. 

The Final EIS on two pending Applications for Permit to Drill by Chevron, USA and Fipa Oil and Chemical 

Company, on the Rocky Mountain District, was nearing completion at the end of FY 1990. Pyring FY 1990, 

public comqents were analyzed and revisions or aqiditions were made to the final document reflecting 

comments received on the Draft EIS. 

Working with the Bureau of Land Management, the Forest continued to provide input to the Blackleaf Canyon 

Field Development EIS. 

The Rocky Mountain District, working with the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Bureau of Land 

Management, and Teton County Commissioners, prepared an environmental assessment and allowed 

connection of a shutin gas well to productiop facilities. Approximately one-quarter mile of the pipeline is on 

National Forest land. The project was monitored continuously and rehabilitation of disturbed areas has 

occurred. 

c 

45 
G4 Rehabllltatlon of Dbturbed Areas. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent of activity on a weekly basis during rehabilitation. A final inspection 

will be made within 5-yeaE after rehabilitation has been completed. 

Reporting Period: October 1,1989 - September 30,1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablllty Whlch Would lnltlate Furthgr 'Evaluatlon: Rehabilitate less than 90 percent of disturbed areas. 

Approval of all Plans of Operation requires posting of a bond to cover reclamation costs in case of noncompliance with the conditions of approval by operators. Bonds are retained until reclamation standards are met. 

G-6 Mlnerals Avallablllty. 

Frequency of Measurement: lo0 percent sample annually. 

Reportlng Perlod: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablllty Whlch Would lnltlate Further Evaluation: Denial of more than 10 percent of proposed projects. 

During FY 1990, the Forest did not deny any exploration proposals. Some proposals were modified to provide 

better protection to surface resources but none of the proposals were denied for noncompliance with 

established Forest Plan standards and guidelines. 

The Forest Plan target for Mineral Management in FY 1987 and FY 1988 was 90 cases. In FY 1989 and 1990, 

the Forest Plan target was increased to 160 cases. 

Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 mineral cases reviewed and approval is as follows: 

MINERAL CASES (Each) 

46 
LANDS 

J-1 Compliance with use permits. 

Frequency of Measurement: As needed. 

Reportlng Perlod: October 1, 1989 - Sqpiember 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Vgrlabllm WhlcQ Would lnltlate Further Evaluation: Unacoeptable results or deviation from permits. 

Special use permits on the Forest are generally up to date and are in conformance with current policy. The 

computerized Forest Land Use Report (FLUR) program is working well and has reduced time required for 

preparing bills and in gathering information for Regional Off ice requests. 

New recreation residence permits were accepted by most permittees. FY 1988 recreation residence policy 

was appealed; permittees have been notified that some provisions of their new permit are void and may have 

to be revised upon finalization of the revised policy. This change has caused confusion and uncertainty for 

the permittees and additional work for employees to stay current with and explain the changes. 

Proposed changes in fee determinations for communication authorizations and for minimum fee authorizations has also caused additional work in preparing mailings and answering questions for current and potential 

permittees. 

On-the-ground administration of special use permits is primarily for health and safety problems as well as 

permittees who are not meeting their financial obligations to the Forest Service. The condition of special use 

facilities on the ground is generally acceptable. 

J-2 Right-of-way Easements Accomplishment. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Perlod: October 1, 1989 - September 30,1990 (PY 1990). 

Varlablllty Whlch Would lnltlate Further Evaluation: Less than 75 percent accomplishment of 5-year 

program. 

L 

The Forest Plan does not specify a level of accomplishment for the acquisition of rights-of-way easements. 

However, the Monitoring Section does refer to the Forest’s 5-year program. The program for N 1989-1 993 

was transmitted to the Forest Leadership Team on March 27,1990 by the Forest Svpetvisop in a 5460 memo. 

The program for FY 1990 contains four road easements. 

Two road easements, one on the existing Dry Wolf Road no. 251, and one on the Lone Tree Road no. 262 

relocation were acquired. Two others, also one on the Dry Wolf Road no. 251 and one on the Lone Tree Road 

no. 262 were programmed but not acquired due to difficulties in negotiation. These will be: programmed again 

in FY 1991. 

47 
Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 road and trail right-of-way easement program and acquisition is as 

follows: ' 

Description 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 4. r 

Road R-O-W Program 4 ; 4 4 

Road R-O-W Acquisition 3 1 2 2 

Trail R-O-W Program 1 1 0 0 

Trail R-O-W Acquisition 1 0 1 0 

EASEMENT ACQUIRED (Each) 

J-3 Land Ownershlp Adjustment Accompllshrnent. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablllty Whlch Would lnitlate Further Evaluation: Less than 75 percent accomplishment of 5-year 

program. 

The Forest Plan does not specify a rate of accomplishment for this item except in the Monitoring Section 

where a reference is made to the Forest's 5-year Program. However, the Forest does not have an established 

Land Exchange Program but rather relies on opportunities that are forwarded by proponents. Other opportunities to acquire tracts which are desirable for National Forest System ownership are pursued as they develop. 

The Forest Plan specifically says that '----it is not the intent of the Forest Service to pursue this direction (land 

exchange) except on a willing grantor basis.' For this reason, it would be very difficult to 'lock-in' on targets 

for accomplishments. 

The Forest's annual target with the Region beginning in FY 1989 is 60 acres. In FY 1990 'no lands were 

exchanged. Although no land exchange was accomplished in FY 1990 a decade's target could easily be 

accomplished with one exchange case. r 

48 
Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 land exchange program accomplishment is as follows: 

- 

Description Annual 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Target 

Land Exchange 0 0 '0 0 0 

Land Exchange 60 0 0 , 

LAND EXCHANGE ACCOMPLISHMENT (Acres) 

Forest 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Plan Description 

L 

Landline Location 26 14 21 25 21.5 

?* 

-.~ 

In FY 1990, the Forest did not complete any cases as a part of the Small Tract Act. 

J-4 Landline Location Accompllshment. 

Frequency of Mearurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reportlng Perlod: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Warlablltty Whlch Would inttlate Further Evaluatlon: Less than 75 percent of the Forest Plan Target. 

The Forest Plan target for landline location is 26 miledyear decadal average. In FY 1990 the Forest was 

funded for a target of 18 miles and actually accomplished 21.5 miles, about 83 percent of the Forest Plan 

target. For the first half of the Forest Plan decade the Forest accomplished an average of 82 percent of its 

annual target. 

The Forest has a total of 1,636 miles of property boundary. Of this, 241 miles has been posted to standard, 

leaving 1,395 miles not posted. If 26 miles per year were to be achieved until the entire boundary was posted, 

it would take 54 years to complete the job. In the interim, many miles would need maintenance. 

The Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resource Planning Act of 1974 (RPA) set the year 201 0 as a goal for 

completing the posting of all National Forest boundaries. For this to be achieved on the Lewis and Clark 

National Forest, an annual average of about 70 miles of accomplishment would be needed in the period 1991 

-201 0. c 

Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 landtine location accomplishment is as follows: 

LANDLINE LOCATION (Miles) 

49 
FACILITIES 

L-1 Road and Trail Construction and Reconstruction; Trails; Arterlal and Collector Roads; Local Roads. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30,1990 (FY 1990). 

Variability Whlch Would lnltlate Further Evaluatlon: Plus or minus 20 percent of programmed construction 

and reconstruction accomplishment. 

<- 

ROADS - Construction and Reconstruction. The Forest Plan Road Program, as amended, provides for 9.0 

miles of road construction, and 24.0 miles of reconstruction yearly which are further broken down to 20.0 miles 

for Capital Investment Program and 13.0 miles for the Timber Management Program. In FY 1990 the Forest 

constructed no miles and reconstructed 9.8 miles for a total of 9.8 miles-under the Capital Investment 

Program. Under the Purchaser Credit Program 3.1 miles were constructed and no miles were reconstructed 

for a total of 12.9 miles of construction and reconstruction under all programs. 

When considering the total miles constructed and reconstructed in both programs, the output was 39 percent 

of that projected by the updated Plan. This is not within the variability tolerance. Therefore, additional 

evaluation is required. An analysis revealed the following: 

The reasons for the accomplishment shortfall in the Timber Purchaser Program were all NEPA related. Only 

the Mixes Baldy timber sale with 3.1 miles of road construction was sold. All other scheduled timber sales 

were not offered because of incompleted NEPA work. 

Two Capital Investment Projects involving 9.8 miles of reconstruction and about $597,000 were let. Two other 

projects involving 12.4 miles of reconstruction and $600,000 were not accomplished because of funding 

constraints. 
Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 road construction and reconstruction as part of the Capital Investment 

and Timber Program is as follows: 

ROADS (Miles) 

TRAlLS - Construction and Reconstruction. The Forest Plan, as amended, programs an average of 14.0 miles 

of trail construction and reconstruction annually. In FY 1990, 11.1 miles of trails were reconstructed, and an 

additional 3.0 miles of trails were reconstructed with contributed labor. This represents 100 % accomplishment of the Forest Plan program. Trail maintenance and trail construction/reconstruction funds have continued to increase over the last 2-3 years. This trend in anticipated to continue over the next several years, 

enabling the Forest to maintain its program of trail construction/reconstruction. 

Rocky Mountain Ranger District: 

Seven miles of the Eastside Sun River Trail no. 109 was reconstructed with 3.0 miles of the reconstruction 

being accomplished with contributed labor. In addition, 2.0 miles of the Beartop Trail no. 129 and 1.0 mile 

of the Biggs Creek Trail no. 128 were reconstructed. - 

Judith Ranger District: c 

3.3 miles of the West Fork Lost Fork Trail no. 422 was constructed or reconstructed. 

Musselshell Ranger District: 

No trails were constructed or reconstructed. 

Kings Hill Ranger District: 

0.8 miles of Monument Ridge Trail no. 339 was reconstructed. 

51 
Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 trail construction and reconstruction is as follows: 

TRAILS (Miles) 

L-2 Mlles of roads open to publlc use. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reportlng period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Variability Whlch Would Initiate Further Evaluation: Plus or minus 20 percent of target miles to be left open 

to public. 

The Forest Travel Plan resulted in the following summation of road restrictions and closures. On the Jefferson 

Division, approximately 230 miles of roads are restricted either yearlong or seasonally to some forms of 

motorized public use. On the Rocky Mountain Division, approximately 23 miles of roads are restricted either 

yearlong or seasonally to some forms of motorized public use. 

It is estimated that there are approximately 1,480 miles of roads left open to the public. The Forest Plan does 

not establish any target miles to be left open to the public. 

In FY 1990, no significant changes were made in the Forest Travel Plan. 

PROTECTION c 

P-1 Assure harvest empheslzes the removal of high rlsk stands for mountain plne beetle attack and that 

timber sales are located to break-up continuous natural fuel accumulations. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. , 

Reporting Period: 5-years (FY 1991). 

Variability Whlch Would Inltlate Further Evaluation: Unacceptable results of an lnterdisciplinary?eam 

review, or if less that 70 percent of timber volume is programmed from high risk mountain pine beetle stands. 

52 
In FY 1990,67 56 of the sawtimber sold on the Lewis and Clark National Forest was high risk lodgepole pine. 

Reviews of timber sale locations shawed the Forest is continuing to breakup large concentr&ions of natural 

fuels. Future planning is also emphasizing removal of high risk lodgepole pine. 

Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 removal of high risk lodgepole pine stands is as follows: 

REMOVAL OF AGH RISK LODGEPOLE PINE (Percent) 

P-2 Acres and volume of Insect and dlsease Infestations. 

Frequency of Measurement: Once annually. 

Reportlng Period: 5-years (FY 1991). 

Varlablllty Whlch Would lnltlate Further Evaluatlon: Introduction of new insect or disease or spread of an 

existing insect or disease. 

r' insect and disease surveys conducted during the summer of 1990 showed. no significant change in insect 

and disease infestation on the Forest. 

P-3 Management practlces to ensure actlvltles do not promote an Increase In Insect and dlsease 

organlsms. 

Frequency of Measurement: Continuous. 

Reporting Perlod: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Varlablllty Which Would lnltlate Further Evaiuatlon: Significant increase in insect and disease organisms. 

No significant increase in insect and disease organisms has been observed. Post timber sale reviews showed 

that the Forest is meeting regional standards for slash disposal. \ 

.. 

53 
P4 Assure prescribe fire meets alr quality standards. 

Forest 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Plan Description 

Activii Fuels 1,470 1,813 1,201 1,053 737 

Natural Fuels 700 665 863 1,020 675 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Period: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Variability Which Would Initiate Further Evaluation: Plus or minus 10 percent beyond standard guidelines. \ 

, 

The Forest burned over 3,236 acres for slash disposal, natural fuel treatment, wildlife habitat improvement, 

and range land improvement. There were no known complaints about any prescribed burning project 

affecting air qualny. 

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 

P-5 Fuel treatment outputs. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Perlod: October 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990 (FY 1990). 

Variablllty Which Would Initiate Further Evaluation: Plus or minus 25 percent of programmed targets. 

In FY 1990, the Forest treated 737 acres of activity fuels and 675 acres of natural fuels. The Forest Plan shows 

a target of 1,470 acres of activity fuels and 700 acres of natural fuels per year. The under accomplishment 

in treating activity fuels is related to the backlog of timber sales not being offered (see item E-6). 

Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 natural and activity fuels reduction is as follows: 

ACTlVIlY AND NATURAL FUELS (Acres) 

P-6 Wlldfire acres burned. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reportlng Period: January 1, 1990 - December 31,1990. 

Varlablltty Which Would Initiate Further Evaluation: Plus or minus 25 percent above projected average 

annual wildfire burned acres. 

The 1990 Fire Season can best be described as late, dry, and windy. A very dry spring was followed by near 

record moisture in August, bringing the total growing season precipitation to near normal. This was followed 
by an extremely dry fall. In 1990, the forest had a total of 32 fires, half of which occurred in October and 

November. Most of the fires were small. The exception was the Turkey Fire which started 'the day after 

Thanksgiving. This fire burned 4,546 acres of National Forest land and 27,454 acres of State, BLM, and private 

land. Most of the acres were burned in one night. 

Description 

Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 total wildfire acres burned is as follows: 

1 O-year 

aver- 1987 1988 1989 

age 

\ 

WlLDFiRE AREA BURNED (Acres) 

P-7 Coat of Suppresslon and Protectlon Organlzatlon. 

Frequency of Measurement: Once annually. 

Reporting Period: 5-years (FY 1991). 

Variablitty Which Would initiate Further Evaluatlon: Plus 5 percent increase in total costs. 

Description 

The total cost of fire suppression and protection in FY 1990 was $1,684,000. This is well above the 1 O-year 

average of $590,000. Seventy-five percent of the suppression cost are attributed to the Turkey Fire. 

1 O-year 

aver- 1987 1988 1989 

age 

Summary of FY 1987 through FY 1990 suppression and protection costs is as follows: 

FIRE SUPPRESSION AND PROTECTION COSTS (Thousand Dollars) 

I Fire Costs I 590 I 379 I 6,361 I273 rn 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1992 1993 1994 ,1995 1996 

c 

55 
WILD 'AND SCENIC RIVERS 

W-1 Project-level effects on ellglble rivers quallficatlons (free-flowlng and "outstandingly remarkable' 

resource values) and rsslgned potentlal classification. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100% sample annually. 

Reporting perlod: Yearly but this repoh covers period from March 13, 1989 to September 30, 1990. 

-r 

Varlablltty Whlch Would lnltlate Further Evaluation: Any action that would adversely impact or degrade an 

eligible rivers qualifications and/or potential classification. 

No project-level activities occurred along any of the nine eligible rivers or river segments which adversely 

impacted or degraded a river's qualifications and/or potential classification. The rivers monitored for projectlevel activities were: North Badger Creek, North and South Forks Sun River, Dearborn River, North Fork Birch 

Creek, and Green Fork of Straight Creek on the Rocky Mountain Ranger District; Smith River and Tenderfoot 

Creek on the Kings Hill Ranger District; and Middle Fork Judith River on the Judith Ranger District. However, 

a few activities changed the condition of a couple rivers since the Wild and Scenic River Study was completed 

in March 1989. Two range packer allotments along the Dearborn River on the Rocky Mountain Ranger District 

have changed status. The Whitetail Packer Allotment Number 21 7 is closed and the Blacktail-Dearborn 

Packer Allotment Number 202 is used but outside the 0.50 mile river corridor. One recreation residence under 

permit along the North Fork Sun River on the Rocky Mountain Ranger District is scheduled to be permanently 

removed in December 1990. This residence (#295) is visible from the river. Trails #log, 1 10, and 164 along 

the North Fork Sun River were reconstructed as a result of the Gates Park Fire. This activity consisted of 

replacing bridges using native materials and reconstructing the tread on trails. A decision was made July 2, 

1990 to restore the historic Judith Station located within the Middle Fork Judith River corridor. This decision 

further enhances and protects this historic structure which was identified as an 'outstandingly remarkable' 

cultural resource value. 

GENERAL 

1-1 Valldatlon of cost and values used In the Forest Plan. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reportlng Perlod: 5-years (FY 1991). 

Variablllty Whlch Would Inltlate Further Ewaluatlon: In general, plus or minus 25 percent; however very large 

cost items such as stump-truck costs would have a smaller degree of acceptable variability. 

\ 

The Forest has completed the first step, updating Forest Service costs and validation of costs and values used 

in the Forest Plan. This work will be completed for the 5-year review. rc 

56 
1-2 Effect of emerging Issues or changlng soclal values. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reportlng Perlod: Continuous. 

Varlablihy Which Would initiate Further Evaiuetion: If issue cannot be deatt with under the Forest Information and Involvement Plan. \ 

.- 

Public interest in the management of the Lewis and Clark National Forest continues to play a major role in 

the implementation of the Forest Plan. In addition to new projects and issues, several ongoing projects carried 

into fiscal year 1990. While each Ranger District was involved with several smaller scale projects requiring 

public involvement, the key projects necessitating more extensive efforts because of the sensitivrty of the 

issues involved were: Chevron/Fina Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on Exploratory Oil and Gas Wells; 

Gatt Land Exchange, Eligibiltty Determination for Wild and Scenic Rivers, Prescribed Fire Program in the Bob 

Marshall Wilderness Complex, and as always, Timber Sale Program (Timber sale EA appeals and Timber Sale 

Program Information Report System - TSPIRS). 

CHEVRON/FINA EIS: 

A decision was made to combine the analysis for the exploratory oil and gas drilling proposals from 

both Fina (Hall Creek) and Chevron (Badger Creek) in order to provide a more thorough examination 

of the cumulative and interrelated effects of both projects in the RM-1 Geographic Unit on the Forest. 

Because scoping efforts had been conducted for each of the projects individually (Fina in 1983-84 and 

Chevron in 1986), it was decided that public scoping meetings were not necessary for the combined 

€IS effort. Instead, the Study Team mailed summary packages to the individuals and organizations on 

their mailing list. The summary packages included the scoping comments and the issues identified 

during initial scoping periods for both the projects. The team also included a summary of the issues 

identified in the appeals on the original Hall Creek decision. Those receiving the packages (approximately 350) were asked to review the issues that had been identified and submit any additional issues 

to the Study Team. The Forest received seven wriien letters and one telephone comment ‘during this 

third round of scoping. 

In April 1988, a second letter was sent to the mailing list (350) identifying the alternatives to be analyzed 

and a colored map of the afternative locations. 

A social assessment was prepared during 1987 as part of the background materials for the EIS. The 

information in this report provided insight into the social values, perceptions, and attitudes of those 

residents most likely to be influenced by oil and gas exploration and/or development. me need for a 

sociaVeconomic issue was identified by the Study Team and included in the analysis. me social 

conditions and analysis were based on the comments received during the scoping process, comments 

on the Forest Plan (1985), newspaper articles, and the resutts from the unstructured interviews 

conducted in the preparation of the Social Assessment background document. During 1988 and 1989, 

the Study Team continued work on the preparation of the draft EIS using all of this information. 

c 

Feelings and perceptions about the social implications of exploratory drilling in the RM-1 Geographic 

Unit vary. Some feel oil and gas development would bolster the economic condition on the reservat’m 

and the local communities. They believe the National Forest should be managed for multiple use 

purposes, oil and gas being an acceptable use. Others support protection of the area The amount 

of protection ranges from those who support a recreation-based management concept to those who 

advotxte Wilderness classification. Blackfeet traditionalists feel that the area deserves protection fw 

the continued practice of the traditional Blackfeet religion. 

57 
I . The draft EIS was released for public comment in early October, 1989. More than 300 people were 

mailed summaries or complete Draft Environmental Impact Statements. Included in the DElS was a 

cover letter listing the comment period closing date and dates of five open houses where Forest 

Service officials would be available to answer questions on the document. The open houses were 

scheduled and held in Missoula, Montana, November 2,1989; Cut Bank, Montana, November 6,1989; 

Browning, Montana, November 7, 1989; East Glacier, Montana, November 8, 1989; and Great Falls, 

Montana, November 14, 1989. 

At the same time, news releases'on the availability of the Draft EIS were sent to 32 newspapers, 18 

radio stations, and 9 television stations. On October 23, 1989, a Notice of Availability and Notice of 

Meeting for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Exploratory Oil and Gas Wells; Lewis and 

Clark National Forest, Glacier and Pondera Counties, Montana, appeared in the Federal Register. 

Interested individuals were requested to submit written comments to the Forest Supervisor by December 15, 1989. 

.- 

More than 1 ,OOO comments were received from individuals, groups, and State and federal agencies. 

Comments were analyzed by the DElS ID team in January. Following the analysis of all submitted 

comments on the Draft EIS, all documents were microfilmed and microfiche copies were placed in six 

public libraries for public review (Great Falls, Missoula, University of Montana - Missoula, Helena, 

Browning, and Cut Bank). Comments also were available at Forest Service offices in Missoula, Great 

Falls, and Choteau. 

There were 141 coded comments which fell into 18 categories developed from the responses received 

on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Resource specialists responded to the comments and 

included expanded information in the Final Environmental Impact Statement which was released in 

October, 1990. 

GALT LAND EXCHANGE: 

An ongoing process to evaluate and finalize a land exchange proposal in the Crazy Mountain range 

has been the focus of public concern for those having an interest in both the Lewis and Clark and the 

the Gallatin National Forests. Many people were involved in public scoping meetings during 1986 to 

assist the Forest in identdying issues. Access to National Forest lands was identified as the key issue 

during the scoping process. Also expressed was the concern that Forest lands involved in the 

exchange may be more valuable for wildlife than those lands to be acquired. 

In response to the access issue, the exchange proponent has agreed to include five trail easements 

and one road easement in the exchange package. Perfection of these easements would ensure public 

access to the National Forest. The total acreage of the original exchange proposal was reduced. 

Letters were sent in late January 1988 to those who had been involved in the scoping process 

explaining the modifications to the original land exchange proposal. 

At the end of FY 1989, the landowners made an offer to sell the land in the Crazy Mountains to the 

Forest Service. Because of this offer, the decision on the land exchange proposal was dropped and 

arrangements to purchase the property proceeded expeditiously. 

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS: 

To fulfill the requirements specified in the 1968 Wild and Scenic River Act (WSR Act), an ana@% was 

initiated on the Forest to determine the eligibility of every river on or crossing the National Forest and 

to assign a potential classification (wild, scenic, recreational) to those river segments determined 

eligible. The analysis will be documented in an Environmental Assessment and a Decision Notice will 

be prepared. 

58 
. A March 13, 1989 Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact documented nine rivers eligible 

for further study under the 1968 Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. Eligibillty was based on each river being 

free-flowing and containing at least one 'outstandingly remarkable' resource value (i.e. scenic, recreation, geologic, fisheries, wildlife, cultural, natural). Eligible rivers include North Badger Creek, North 

Fork Sun River, South Fork Sun River, North Fork Birch Creek, Green Fork of Straight Creek and 

segments on National Forest System land along the Smith River, Tenderfoot Creek, Dearborn River, 

and the Middle Fork Judith River. These nine rivers were assigned a potential classification of 'wild, 

scenic, and/or recreationar based on'the condition of the river and adjacent lands. The March 13,1989 

Decision Notice also incorporated korest Plan Amendment 2 which provided management direction 

to protect and enhance each eligible river consistent with their potential classification. This direction 

remains in effect until the river suitability study is completed and/or a future decision is made on their 

designation into the National Wild and Scenic River System. 

Copies of the decision were mailed to over 380 individuals/groups. The decision was appealed by: (1) 

Pikuni Traditionalists Association, (2) Badger Chapter, Glacier-Two Medicine Alliance, and (3) John R. 

Swanson. The decision was upheld by the Regional Forester. 

The Study Team is presently reviewing resource information collected on Forest rivers during past field 

seasons. This review could result in the Study Team recommending additional rivers as eligible. No 

action was taken during FY 90. 

LEWIS AND CLARK NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL INTERPRETIVE CENTER: 

The Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail Interpretive Center was established by Public Law 100-552 

on October 28, 1988. Congress specifically determined that the 'historic significance of the travels of 

Lewis and Clark on the high Plains and their portage around the Great Falls of the Missouri 

requires .... recognition and interpretation.' 

In January 1990, an interpretive planning session was held to develop the interpretive themes for the 

Center. Representatives from the Citizens Steering Committee, the Forest Service, the Portage Route 

Chapter of the Lewis and Clark Trail Heritage Foundation, and four specialists developed the overall 

theme of 'Lewis and Clark and their encounters in Indian Country.' The four specialists invited in the 

interpretive planning session were: Beth Merrick, exhibit designer from the Museum of the Rockies, 

Bozeman, Montana; George Horse Capture, at that time curator of the Plains Indian Museum at the 

Buffalo Bill Historical Center, Cody, Wyoming; Dr. Herman Viola, Coordinator of the Quincentenniary 

Celebration of Columbus Discovery of America at the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC; and 

Dr. James Ronda, at that time History Professor, Author and Researcher at Youngstown University, 

Youngstown, Ohio. 

.. 

.. 

In April 1990, an informational packet aescribing the Interpretive Center, outlining the themes, the 

projected costs, and the proposed developments was distributed throughout the Forest Service, to 

citizens invoked in the project, 'and to the Congressional Delegation. 

A contract for the conceptual design, first of three design phases, was awarded to the Portico Group 

(architectural and landscape architectural design) of Seattle, Washington in May 1990. Subcdntractors 

from the Great Falls area included: Davidson Kuhr Architects, Chen Northern, Drapes Engineering, and 

Neil Consultants. Other subcontractors included: Gerard Hilferty and Associates (exhibit designers) 

and Stephen Beckman and Gary Moutton (research historians). In June 1990, the contractor met with 

the Citizens Steering Committee, the Forest Service and the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and 

Parks to begin the design. Completion of the Conceptual Design was expected by November 1990. 

Throughout FY 1990, environmental analyses and public involvement on the proposed building, road 

relocation, and associated site developments (parking) was continuing. In July of 1990, a Decision 

.. 

59 I.. 

... . 
’. 

Notice and Environmental Assessment was released. One appeal was received and dismissed. 

Throughout the summer of 1990, the interdisciplinary team worked closely with the design contractor 

to analyze the potential environmental impacts of proposals for additional developments associated 

with the Interpretive Center (ie. interpretive trails and living history site locations). These additional 

developments and decisions would be made under a supplemental Environmental Assessment, 

expected for release by January 1991. 

\ 

TIMBER SALE PROGRAM: , 

South Fork Complex Timber Sales - Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

The public was first notified of the South Fork projects during Forest Planning in July, 1982. Scoping 

for the South Fork project proposal began in May 1986. Letters were sent to interested parties including 

local landowners, timber purchasers, and Montana Department Fish, Wildlife and Parks. Articles to 

inform the public were published in the Stanford, Lewistown, and Great Falls newspapers. Ten (10) 

individuals and/or agencies commented. From scoping, six (6) significant environmental issues were 

identified. Based on these issues, an environmental analysis was conducted and documented in an 

Environmental Assessment for the South Fork Complex Timber Sales. On July 12, 1988, the Forest 

Supervisor issued a Decision Notice for the South Fork Complex Timber Sales. This decision was 

appealed and later withdrawn on January 24, 1989, to complete addaional environmental analysis. 

Following this analysis a decision was made to prepare an EIS. A Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS 

was published in the Federal Register - February, 1990. Letters were mailed to more than 500 people 

and articles were published in the local newspapers. No additional comments were received. 

The Draft Environmental Impact Statement for South Fork Complex Timber Sales was released for 

public review and comment on June 6, 1990. Public Open Houses were held in Stanford, Montana, 

on June 26 and Great Falls, Montana, on June 27. Written comments on the DEE were due by Juty 

21,1990. 

Mill-Lion Timber Sale - Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

The public was first notified of the Mill-Lion project during the Forest planning process in July, 1982. 

In May, 1986, the public was informed of this specific project through several articles in the newspapers 

in Harlowton, Great Falls, and Billings, Montana. Also, letters were sent to interested parties with written 

responses being received from 10 individuals or groups. A Decision Notice was issued on May 13, 

1988, for the Mill-Lion Environmental Assessment, and on June 28, 1988, the decision was appealed. 

The Regional Forester remanded the Mill-Lion Timber Sale EA decision back to the FoM Supervisor 

on November 23, 1988, to adequately disclose how clearcutting was found to be the optimum harvest 

method to meet the area objectives. After the remand, additional scoping and analysis were completed. 

Through letters to interested parties, news releases in area newspapers, meetings with participating 

groups and an Open House, March 15, 1989, the public was notified of the remand and additional 

analysis underway. 

A revised Environmental Assessment and Decision Notice was issued on September 15, 1989, and 

again the decision was appealed. On February 13, 1990, the Forest Supervisor withdrew his decision 

because of possible significant environmental effects and directed that the analysis for the proposed 

action be documented in an EIS. A Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS was published in the Federal 

Register on February 27, 1990. Letters were mailed to more than 500 people and articles were 

published in local newspapers. No additional responses were received. 

60 
. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement was released in July, 1990 with comments due by Septembei 24, 1990. 

NATURAL PRESCRIBED FIRE PROGRAM: 

As a result of the 1988 fire season, the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture appointed a national 

review team to address fire management policies on federal lands. They authored a report that 

concluded, The objectives of prescribed natural fire programs in national parks and wildernesses are 

sound, but the policies need to be refined, strengthened, and reaffirmed.' While the national review 

team and two Secretaries supported the overall program, they made recommendations for improving 

the management of prescribed natural fires. They directed agencies to review fire management plans 

for compliance with these recommendations. 

At the end of FY 1989, a regional team was established to review the fire management action plans 

for the four National Forests which are part of the Bob Marshall Wilderness Complex. A letter notifying 

people of the fire review was mailed to approximately 500 individuals, organizations, and media 

contacts on January 11 , 1990. Presentations were made to interested groups and Wilderness users 

were interviewed about their perceptions of prescribed natural fire. The interview results were considered in the review and were available in the fall of 1990. 

On July 10, 1990, a report outlining revisions necessary to meet the Forest Service Chief's current 

direction on prescribed natural fires was signed by the Forest Supervisors of the Flathead, Helena, 

Lolo, and Lewis and Clark National Forests. The Supervisors also accepted a guidebook (to insure 

consistency and coordination in the development of individual Fire Management Action Plans for each 

forest) developed by the review team. With this acceptance, the four Supervisors recommended to the 

Regional Forester that the prescribed natural fire program in the Bob Marshall Wilderness Complex 

be reinstated 

* 

On August 13, 1990, Regional Forester John Mumma authorized implementation of the prescribed 

natural fire program, with the comment, The guidebook will be used to incorporate prescribed natural 

fire management direction into your individual Fire Management Action Plans and to implement that 

direction when the plans are completed and approved.' 

OTHER ISSUES: 

Reissuance of oil and gas leases on the Forest is an upcoming issue for managers within the next year. 

Many of the previously issued leases expire beginning in 1991, Currently, no requests for reissuance 

of expired leases have been received by the Forest. Requests are anticipated within the next several 

years. A decision on the future status of leasing will be made after further NEPA analysis. 

The Forest is in the center of a regional (eastern Montana) issue which revokes around increased 

public awareness and demand for access to public lands. In 1987, a Goal Statement was developed 

by the staff of the Lewis and Clark National Forest to promote public access to public lands. 'It is the 

goal of the Lewis and Clark Nationai Forest to provide equal access opportunities to all National Forest 

System lands except where the impact of public access to the unique resources of the area would be 

unacceptable. Where the cost of providing public access is greater than the anticipated public benefit, 

the lands will be scheduled for disposal by exchange or other land ownership adjustment process. The 

number and location of access points and type of access facility will be determined through anatysis 

of the expressed public demand, environmental impacts, and cost of access for each individual 

situation. In the summer of 1989, an analysis of Area Access Needs for the Highwoods Mountains was 

initiated. Individual contact was made with all landowners adjacent to National Forest System lands 

and public meetings were held in FY 1990 to determine the type and location of access needed as 

documented in the Forest Plan. Further analysis is underway. 

61 
1-3 Evaluate lands identtned as not meeting physlcal or biological characteristics used in Inltiai aiiocation. 

Frequency of Measurement: 100 percent sample annually. 

Reporting Period: Continuous. 

Variability Which Would Initiate Furth9r.Evaluation: All changes will be evaluated annually. 

The Forest is updating its timber stand inventory data base. As of the end of FY 1990, 785,493 acres of the 

Forest total of 1,843,397, or 43 percent has been updated. 

Following is a summary by Ranger Districts: 

Ranger District Total National Forest - Inventoried 

Acres Acres 

Rocky Mountain 776,259 

Judith 362,84 1 

Musselshell 267,415 

Kings Hill 436,882 

Total 1,843,397 

67,862 

261,366 

103,105 

353,160 

785,493 

1-4 Valldatlon of employment and Income proJections. 

Frequency of Measurement: 5-years (FY 1991). 

Reporting Period: 5-years (FY 1991). 

Variablllty Which Would initiate Further Evaluation: More than plus or minus 20 percent of projected 

changes. 

This is a 5-year frequency measurement and will be validated in FY 1991. 

c 

The following tables compare the outputs, activltles, and budgets wlth those projected In the Forest 

Pian. 

62 
TABLE I 

COMPARISON OF OUTPUTS AND ACTIVITIES WITH THOSE PROJECTED IN THE FOREST PLAN FOR THE 

PLANNING PERIOD (1 987-1 996) 

Projected Outputs and Activities by Time Period (Average Annual Units) 

Output or Activity 1995 

- 

Unit of 

Measure 

Firat 

Decade 

169 

86 

61 4 

600 

5 

100 

10 

25 

- 

71.1 

1329 

40 

10 

300 

600 

1987 1996 

Y 

145 

54 

51 8 

300 

2 

0 

2 

16 

71 .O 

1999 

20 

5 

772 

1988 

- 

175 

42 \ 

503* . 

1400 

0 

0. 

0 

19 

72.3 

2433 

18 

4 

616 

1989 

- 

205 

60 

450 

1392 

10 

0 

3 

11 

72.4 

1607 

26 

4 

636 

1990 

- 

24 1 

64 

564 

1262 

16 

500 

2 

34 

1991 

I 

1992 

- 

1993 

- 

M RVD 

M RVD 

M RVD 

Developed Use 

Dispersed Use 

Wilderness 

Non-wilderness 

Wildlife Habitat Imp 

Fish Habitat Imp 

TBE Habitat Imp 

Wildllfe Habitat 

Structures 

Fish Habitat Structures 

Permitted Graze 

Use 

Range Improvement 

Nonstructural 

Structural 

Acres 

Acres 

Acres 

Structures 

Structures 

.. 

.- I. 

: .#. 

... 

M AUM 

Acres 

Structures 

Plans 

Acres 

Acres 

71.9 

562 

35 

0 

472 

Range Reeource 

Plans 

(Allotment Mgt 

Plans) 

Noxious Weed Control 

Noxious Weed Control 

Soil Inventory Acres 2Ooo 

90 

160 

14 

15.5 

28.0 

54 

270 

200 

0 

26 

1470 

- 

0 

160 

11.7 

30.6 

0 

1064 

688 

125 

14 

1813 

0 

134 

16.0 

33.9 

225 

490 

568 

12 

21 

1201 

0 

250 

9.7 

25.9 

67 

0 

502 

0 

25 

1053 

0 

108 

5.6 

37.3 

25 

0 

340 

0 

21.5 

737 

Minerals Mgmt 

Minerals Mgmt 

Cases 

Cases 

Total Volume Offered 

Silvicultural Exams 

Silvicultural Exams 

Reforest-Approp 

Reforest-KV 

Tlmber Stand Imp 

Approprlation 

Timber Stand 

1rr:pKV 

Landllne Location 1 Fuel8 Mgmt-BD 

MM BF 

M Acres 

M Acres 

Acres 

Acres 

Acres 

Acres 

Miles 

Acres 

Fuels Mgmt-FFP Acres 

Road Construction 

Road Reconstruct 

Trall Constructlonl 

Reconstruction 

675 

3.1 

9.8 

12.9 

14.1 

700 

9.0 

24.0 

33.0 

14.0 

665 

3.7 

29.7 

33.4 

8.5 

863 

2.9 

20.3 

23.2 

13.3 

1020 

0 

17.9 

17.9 

12.8 

Miles 

Miles 

Miles 

Miles 

63 
TABLE II 

COMPARISON OF THE ACTUAL BUDGET RECEIVED IN FY 1990 WITH THE FOREST PLAN 

PROJECTED ANNUAL BUDGET: 

Fundlng Item 

00 

01 

02 

03 

04 

05 

06,07 

08 

09 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

23 

26,28 

29 

30 

31 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

42 

43 

24,38 

Budget Actlvlty 

General Administration 

Fire \ 

Fuels 

Sales PreplAdmin 

Timber Planning 

Silvicultural Exams 

Range 

Minerals 

Recreation 

Wildlife arid Fish 

Soil, Air, Water 

Facility Maintenance 

Special Uses 

Geometronics 

Land Exchange 

Landline Location 

Road Maintenance 

Trail Maintenance 

Co-op Law Enforcement 

Reforestation - Appropriated 

TSI - Appropriated 

Tree Improvement 

KV (Trust Fund) 

CWFS - Other (Trust Fund) 

Timber Salv. Sales (Perm-Fund) 

Brush Disposal (Perm. Fund) 

Range Improvement 

Recreation Construction 

Facility Construction - FA&O 

Engineering Construction Support 

Const. - Capital Investment Roads 

Trail ConstructiodReconstruction 

Land Status - 

Land Acquisition 

.& 

Total Budget 

Timber Purchaser Credits 

Total Cost 

Forest Plan 

Projected 

Budget FY90 

Do I I a r s 

Thousand S 

$1 121 

$349 

$35 

$285 

$1 71 

$224 

$469 

$51 5 

$596 

$539 

$1 86 

$1 30 

$59 

$1 3 

$55 

$1 05 

$445 

$325 

$48 

$66 

$33 

$9 

$118 

$28 

$37 

$28 

$60 

$53 

$0 

$524 

$603 

$1 53 

$44 

$1 80 

$7,606 

$248 

$7,854 

, 1990 Actual 

Budget 

FY90 Dollars 

Thousand $ 

$909 

$327 

$40 

$447 

$258 

$316 

$347 

$1 92 

$421 

$305 

$21 9 

$47 

$24 

$0 

$35 

$1 14 

$353 

$31 4 

$44 

$75 

$61 

$1 9 

$43 

$26 

$1 06 

$24 

$40 

$208 

$0 

$492 .. $61 0 

$98 

$0 

$39 

$6,553 

$59 

$6,612 

64 
IV. PLANNED ACTIONS 

These planned action items have been identified in this rep&. They are in addition to the routine actions listed 

in Chapter V Implementation section of the Forest Plan. 

Planned Action 

A. There is a need to increase awareness and commitment to monitoring range condition and trend (D-2). 

6. There is a need to place greater emphasis on range management planning (Allotment Management 

Plans) (D4). 

There is a need to continue to vali'date costs and values used in the Forest Plan (1-1). 

\ 

C. 

V. RESEARCH NEEDS 

The following additional research needs have been identified: 

No additional research needs have been identified. 

VI. AMENDMENTS 

The following amendments have been made to the Lewis and Clark National Forest Plan: 

A. Bob Marshall, Great Bear and Scapegoat Wildernesses Recreation Management Direction (Replaces 

Appendix U, Wilderness Recreation Opportunity Class Descriptions and Guidelines, April 1987) 

(Amendment Number 1). 

6. Wild and Scenic Rivers Study, March 13, 1989. (Amendment Number 2). 

C. Amendment Number 3, April 17, 1989. 

VII. APPENDICES 

APPENDIX A - Lewis and Clark National Forest Wilderness Monitoring Report (6-2) .. 

c 

i .. 
VIII. LIST OF PREPARERS 

The following individuals contributed to the development of the Monitoring and Evaluation Report for the 

Lewis and Clark National 'Forest for Fiscal Year 1989. *. 

Name Functional Resource Area 

Bonnie Dearing 

William Ouryee 

James Eakland 

Sam Gilbert 

Donald Godtel 

Valdon Hancoch 

Richard Newton 

Wayne Phillips 

Keith Sandifer 

Donald Sasse 

Dick Smith 

Len Walch 

Ronald Yates 

Public Information Officer 

Staff Officer EngineerlLands 

Forester - Planning 

-. Zone Timber (Silviculturist) 

Wildlife Biologist 

H ydroiogist 

Archaeologist 

Ecologist 

Supervisory Geologist 

Wildlife Biologist 

Staff Officer Land Management Planning/Fire 

Zone Fisheries Biologist 

Landscape Architect . 

% 

in addition, the report was reviewed by the following individuals: 

John Gorman 

David Fischer 

John Greer 

Paul Threlkeld 

Jerry Dombrovske 

Larry Timchak 

William Fortune 

Victor Standa 

Forest Supervisor 

Zone Staff Officer (Timber) 

Forest Plan Implementation Group Leader 

Staff Officer Administration 

District Ranger, Rocky Mountain Ranger District 

District Ranger, Judith Ranger District 

District Ranger, Musselshell Ranger District 

District Ranger, Kings Hill Ranger District 

IX. APPROVAL 

I have reviewed the annual Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report for Fiscal Year 1990 for the Lewis 

and Clark National Forest that was prepared by the Forest Interdisciplinary Team. I am satisfied that the 

Monitoring and Evaluation effort meets the intent of the Forest Plan (Chapter V), Forest Service Handbook 

1909.12, and 36 CFR 219. 

- 

This report is approved: L 

<-- Date: October 11, 1991 

JOHN D. GORMAN 

Forest Supervisor 

66 
APPENDIX A 

1990 ANNUAL REPORT 

COMPILED BY ROCKY MOUNTAIN RANGER DISTRICT 

LEWIS & CLARK NATIONAL FOREST 

,. BOB MARSHALL WILDERNESS 

1. Changes in Acreage: None 

2. Significant Management Activities: % 

A. Resource Managemeht 

1. Range - Paced transects taken on outfitters grazing 

areas. All were under 30% utilization on key species. 

2. Wildlife and Fisheries - 

a. Wolf Monitoring within wilderness and on 

b. Fish shocking to determine population, species 

Forest-administered land adjacent to the Wilderness. 

composition, and possible effect of 1988 fires on 

fisheries. 

c. Grizzly bear transect monitoring for population 

determination. 

d. Harlequin Duck surveys conducted to determine 

population density and geographic habitat extent. 

3. Minerals - None 

4. . Water - 

a. Water quality and sedimentation study taken on North 

Fork Sun River on water draining area of 1988 Gates 

Creek Fire. 

b. Three snow surveys taken to determine amount of run-off 

and to predict when to fill down-stream reservoirs. 

5. Cultural Resources - 

a. Surveys completed on three trail projects within the 

b. A known cultural area adjacent to the wi1dernes-s was 

wilderness. 

mapped and recorded. 

6. Boundary Survhying - None 

7. Signing - New white oak "Wilderness Boundary" sign 

installed at boundary on primary access trail. 

B. Ongoing resource inventory and monitoring efforts (all -, 

functions). 

1. 1150 persons were contacted by Wilderness Rangers. The ~ 

results of monitoring are as follows: 

67 
Trail Encounters 

Frequency: 

e. Monitoring of trail and campsite density was accomplished once per 

week in Opportunity Class (OC) IV, and once per month in’opportunity 

Class 111. Some .of the OC I11 trails were impassable until 

mid-August because of excessive down-fall in and around fire area. 

It should be noted that in much of the Rocky Mountain Ranger District 

(RMRD), OC I11 lies within the Sun River Game Preserve, and these 

trails receive little to no use in October and November (hunting 

season). < 

Monitoring within the Gates Creek fire area reflected outfitter use 

at 80% of level before the fire, while private use of the burned area 

was less than 20,%-of the level before the fire. The exception to 

this was Headquarters Pass Trail #165, a primary access route to the 

Sun River. This trail in OC I11 was monitored 5 times and exceeded 

the train encounter standard 3 times. 

.- 

Encounter Standards: 

OC 1 - 80% probability of encountering no other parties. 

OC 2 - 80% probability of encountering no more than 1 other party. 

OC 3 - 80% probability of encountering no more than 3 other parties. 

OC 4 - 80% probability of encountering no more than 5 other parties. 

Standards exceeded: 

oc 4: 

- West Fork Sun Trail #2O3 (lower section), monitored 12 times, 

- South Fork Sun Trail #202, monitored 10 times, exceeded standard 3 

- North Fork Sun Trail #201, monitored 8 times, exceeded standard 2 

- Several other OC IV trails when monitored tied the standard, but none 

exceeded standard 6 times. 

times. 

times, both in the fall season. 

exceeded it. 

oc 3: 

- 

- 

- 

- Wall Trail #175, monitored 5 times, exceeded standard 2 times. 

Upper West Fork Sun Trail #2O3, monitored 8 times, exceeded standard 

3 times. 

Headquarters Pass Tra;l #165, monitored 5 times, exceeded standard 3 

times. 

Moose Creek Trail #l3l, monitored 5 times, exceeded standard 2 times. 

oc 2: 

85% of the OC trails were monitored at least once during the summer. , 

season 25% were monitored at least once during the fall season. The 

only trail that exceeded the encounter standard was: 

standards 2 times. 

- Bear Creek Trail #222, monitored 4 times, exceeded encounter ~ 

68 
oc 1: 

30% of the OC I trails were monitored once during the summer season. 

Of the trails monitored, only: 

Goat Creek Trail #249, monitored 2 times and exceeded the encounter 

standard 1 time. 

- 

Campsite Encounters and Density 

Frequency: Same as accomplished under trail encounters. 

Encounter Standards: < 

4 

OC 1 - 80% probability of encountering no other camps. 

OC 2 - 80% probability of encountering no other camps. 

OC 3 - 80% probability of encountering no more than 1 other camp. 

OC 4 - 80% probability of encountering no more than 3 other camps. 

Exceeded Standards: 

East of Reef Creek throughout section 21, T21N, RllW, between Indian 

Point Meadows and Prairie Reef Trail Sections 17 & 20, T21N, RllW and 

the unnamed meadow in Section 22, T21N, R11W. These sites exceeded 

standards 3 times during July and August. 

The South Fork of Sun River area around Pretty Prairie exceeded 

standards once in August in Section 17. T21N, RlOW. 

Although Glenn Creek received very heavy continuous use during July 

and August, It did not exceed standards at least on the days that it 

was monitored. 

During the fall only, Circle Creek, Sec 3, T22N. RlOW, and Bridge 

Creek, Sec 28, T23N, RlOW exceeded standards for four days each. 

Upper West Fork Sun River Sec 24, T22N, R12W and 

Chinese Wall Sec 14, T22N, R12W and Sec 33. T23N, R12W exceeded 

standards . 

oc I 84 I1 

- No area in these Opportunity Classes were found to exceed standards. .. 

Severely Impacted Sites: 

Frequency: 

- 

Severely impacted sites should be reinventoried annually. 

campsites have been inventoried to date. 

were classified as severely impacted. 

286 

Of these, less than 10% 

-, Problem Areas : 

- West Fork of Sun River from Reef Creek to Indian Point 

- Glenn Creek from 1/2 mile upstream of North Fork Sun River to 3/4 

mile down-stream. +r 

- One campsite in the Pretty Prairie area. 

69 
Camp closures around all lakes and under the Chinese Wall are in effect and 

these sites are showing slow improvement. Rest rotation and closure to 

horses in some other campsites have dramatically improved conditions at 

I . . these sites. 

Improved Sites: 

- The junction of Headquarters Creek and Gates Creek and North Fork of 

Sun River. 

Barren Core 

Problem Areas: 

-% 

* 

- Moose Creek closure under the Chinese Wall. 

- 

- Areas along the West Fork of Sun River have barren core areas that 

Pretty Prairie area where very early season camping (May & early 

June) has occurred in the past. 

average 100 to 200 square feet, but upon reinventorying, do not 

appear to be increasing in size. 

Number of Human impacted sites per 640 acres 

Standard: 

OC 1 - 1 Human impacted site per 640 acres. 

OC 2 - 2 Human impacted sites per 640 acres. 

OC 3 - 3 Human impacted sites per 640 acres. 

OC 4 - 6 Human impacted sites per 640 acres. ' 

oc 4: 

- Only the West Fork of Sun River and Glenn Creek area on North Fork 

Sun River approach this standard. 

oc 3, 2, & 1: 

- Isolated instances occur in all OC's, particularly in areas receiving 

additional use since the 1988 fires. 

Creek in OC 3, Ahorn and Pearl Basin in OC 2, and Grizzly Basin in OC 

1 are areas that will require close monitoring in the future. 

Upper West Fork Sun and Moose 

Range 

Standard: .. Degree of forage utilization 

OC 1 - No more than 20% of key species forage utilized. 

OC 2 - No more than 20% of key species forage utilized. 

OC 3 - No more than 40% of key species forage utilized except on big 

game winter range and grizzly bear habitat. 

OC 4 - Same as OC 3 

OC 4: Areas that are approaching the standard are: 

- West Fork of Sun River from Reef Creek to Burnt Creek 

- Bear Creek on South Fork Sun River 

- Glenn Creek on North Fork of Sun River 

- Heavy fall use area on Circle Creek and Bridge Creek. 

. ., 

70 
oc 3: 

- Red Shale received light use in 1990 because private parties still 

will not use fire area. 

oc 1 & 2: 

- No known areas have exceeded standard. 

C. Recreation Management 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

Trail and Campsite work - 

a. Trail Reconstruktion - Completed 7.5 miles of reconstruction 

due to fire damage on three trails - #log, #128, and #l29. 

456 feet of new bridge decking was replaced on burned 

bridges. 

b. Trail Maintenance - 290 miles of trail maintained. 

Signs - 24 trail directional signs were replaced that were 

destroyed in 1988 fires. 

Trailhead development - None 

Administration of Special Use Permits - 

a. Nine Special Use Permits were issued to outfitters. 

b. On-ground inspections were completed on outfitter base 

camps. 

Wilderness Education - 

a. Hunter Safety class of 24 twelve-year-olds were given 

classroom minimum-impact training. 

b. Grade school classes, 3rd and 4th grades, from Valier School 

attended outdoor field day with wilderness instruction. 

D. Administration: 

1. 

2. 

3. 

Use of mechanical and motorized equipment. 

a. Trails - Permission had been granted for a rock drill on 

trail #l29, however, blasting was accomplished by other 

means and drill was not used. 

Search and Rescue 

a. 

b. 

.. 

Two seriously injured individuals were evacuated by 

helicopter. c 

One heart-attack 'victim's body was retrieved by helicopter 

for a total of three search and rescue operations. 

Violations and Law Enforcement actions 

a. Law enforcement responsibilities instruction - Wilderness 

b. 

c. Incident reports on unattended and/or escaped campfires - 2 

seasonal employees including reporting procedures. '\ 

Incident reports of leaving food exposed on the ground - 2 

d. Active illegal outfitter cases - 6 (One includes large Ir 

group violation) 

71 
e. Incident report buried garbage - 1 

f. Incident report mechanized equipment in the Wilderness - 1 

g. Incident report of Outfitter violating wildlife guidelines 

(salting for game) - 1. 

h. Report of low-flying aircraft - 1. 

i. Incident report of the large group violation - 1. 

j. Wilderness Hunter Patrol with U.S. Fish & Wildlife Officers 

(October). 

E. Administrative Structures and related actions -. 

* 

1. Cabin Creek Guard Station, pasture, and saddle/hayshed - used: 

a. July, August, September by seasonal Wilderness Rangers for 

monitoring and patrolling wilderness activities. 

b. October and November for hunter patrol in area of high 

concentration of hunters. 

c. February, March, and April by snow survey crew. 

2. Gates Park Wilderness Work Center - Administrative cabin, bunk 

house, saddle shed, cellar, corrals, pasture and original early 

1900's Ranger Station - used: 

a. June, July, August, and September continuously by seasonal 

b. 

c. February, March and April for snow survey crew. 

Wilderness Rangers, Wilderness Trail Crews, and fire crews. 

October and November by Wilderness Ranger patrolling and 

monitoring hunting activities and outfitter base camps. 

3. Pretty Prairie Cabin, corral, and hay/saddle shed. (used the same 

as Tndian Point Cabin - see below) 

4. Indian Point Cabin, corral, and hay shed. 

a. 100% supplemental feed used. 

b. Seasonal wilderness Ranger roves between these two cabins, 

monitoring trail and campsite conditions in extreme high-use 

area. 

Maintenance Crews also use these cabins extensively rather 

than compete with recreationist for campsites. 

Use during all winter months by endangered species study 

crew. 

c. May, June, July, August, and September - Wilderness Trail 

d. 

- 

5. Rock Creek Cabin qnd Corral 

a. 100% supplemental feed used. 

b. July, August and September - Used by seasonal Wilderness 

Rangers and Trail Crews monitoring wilderness activities in 

heavy use Alpine cirques ina and around the Chinese Wall 

area. .. 

6. Beartop and Prairie Reef Look Outs 

a. July, August, and early September for fire detection, 

monitoring, communications, safety and visitor centers. 

72 
F. Ongoing research projects - 

1. Wolf Monitoring 

.2. Fish Monitoring 

3. Harlequin Duck Survey 

4. Snow Surveys and water quality monitoring 

5. Grizzly Monitoring 'r 

3. Administration 

A. Status of Wilderness Implementation Schedules (include target 

completion date) and status of fire management plan addressing 

wilderness. 

1. A draft Implementation Schedule for the Bob Marshall Wilderness 

Complex was presented to the Regional Wilderness Council, as well 

as a Fire Management Plan on August 15, 1990. 

B. Regulations in effect - 

1. All wilderness regulations are enforced - plus a 14 day camping 

restriction (critical during hunting season). 

2. Camp closures around Lake Levalle, Bear Lake, Upper Moose Creek 

under the Chinese Wall. 

3. Indian Point meadows (restricted for stock) 

4. Elk Hill hunting season camping closure. 

C. Staffing - 

1. Seasonal Employees 

(6/15 - 9/15 5 employees 

9/15 - 10/15 2 employees 

lO/l5 - 12/1 3 employees) 

- a. Assistant Ranger'- 6 months 

b. Wilderness Ranger - full time 

c. 

d. Trail Head Monitor - 2 for 6 months 

e. 

f. 

g. 

Trails Supervisor - 6 months 

Seasonal trail persons - 6 for 4 months 

Seasonal trail construction persons - 4 for 3 months 

Volunteer Fire Lookouts - 2 for 3 months 

73 
D. Ongoing partnerships that assist with wilderness management. 

1. Volunteers 

a. 2 individuals - 112 hours contributed for Wilderness Snow 

Survey. 

b. 1 organizations, East Slope Back Country Horsemen, completed 

projects. 

c. 1 Summer Guards 

d. 2 lookouts 

e. Several Volunteered for a week or two totaling 100 days. 

f . Wildlife Monitoring Volunteers 

For a total of 790 hours of volunteer time spent on resource projects, and a 

total of 708 hours of volunteer time spent on fire lookouts in the Bob Marshall 

Wilderness. 

Volunteer Projects: 

a. Back Country Horsemen - Area cleanup and packing lumber 

b. Outfitter responsible for assisting in the opening of trails 

c. Wildlife Monitoring and mapping - harlequin ducks - wolf - 

grizzly - fisheries 

2. Law Enforcement partnership - Montana Fish Wildlife & Parks 

Wardens and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service personnel. 

3. Wildlife Survey partnerships with Montana Fish Wildlife & Parks 

biologists. 

4. Recreation Challenge Cost-Share Partnership for Trail 

Construction (Reconstruction) with Gene Persha, Patigonia Inc., 

and Target Store for a total of $1375 combined donation from 

these sources. 

4. Problems that limit effective management of this wilderness, excluding 

funding constraints. 

A. Failure of management to comprehend the impact past large fires would 

have on wilderness camping areas, trails, watershed, and use patterns 

and impacts of wilderness users shifting from burned areas to unburned 

areas following a fire. .. 

B. Heavy concentrated use ,in popular areas. 

C. Illegal outfitting and the difficulty of solving this because of high 

costs to accomplish this and other forest priorities. 

D. Deteriorating trails system, primarily in the fire area. I, 

74 
1990 ANNUAL REPORT 

SCAPEGOAT WILDERNESS 

COMPILED BY ROCKY MOUNTAIN RANGER DISTRICT 

LEWIS & CLARK NATIONAL FOREST 

1. Changes in Acreage: None 

2. Significant Management Activities: 

A. Resource Management -. 

1. Range - Monitoring ‘of recovery from 1988 fires in the Dearborn 

and Straight Creek drainages. 

2. Wildlife and fisheries - 

a. Wolf monitoring within the wilderness and on lands adjacent 

to the wilderness boundary. 

b. Fish shocking and study in the Dearborn River area to 

determine population and extent of fisheries in small 

contributaries of the Dearborn River, and the pos-sible 

effects of the 1988 fire on those fisheries. 

3. Minerals - None 

4. Water - None 

5. Cultural Resources - None 

6. Boundary Survey - None 

7. Signing - 

Replacement of signs destroyed by 1988 fires. 

made of white oak. 

a. 

b. Lincoln Ranger District - 

c. Seeley Lake Ranger District - 77 signs by contract. 

Replacements are 

Rocky Mountain Ranger District - one boundary sign and 18 

trail directional signs 

B. Ongoing resource inventory and monitoring efforts. 

- 

1. Rocky Mountain Ranger District 

a. 60 man-days in th_e field resulted in the following LAC 

report for the Scapegoat Wilderness: 

Trail Encounters: 

Frequency : 

There are no Opportunity Class (OC) IV areas in this portion of the 

Scapegoat Wilderness. 

and August, and once a month in September and October. 

OC 1 and 2 - All trails were monitored once per season and problem areas 

were monitored once a month July through September. 

OC I11 areas were monitored twice monthly in July 

r.. 

75 
Encounter Standards: 

OC 1 - 80% probability of encountering no other parties. 

OC 3 - 80% probability of encountering no more than 3 other parties. 

OC 4 - 80% probability of encountering no more than 5 other parties. 

' -0C 2 - 80% probability of encountering no more than 1 other party. 

Standards exceeded: 

oc 3: 

No trails exceeded s,thdard in this OC. 

oc 2: 

- Only Elbow Pass Trail #248 exceeded standard. 

and exceeded the standard once. 

It was monitored twice 

oc 1: 

The popular high alpine trails: 

#234 exceeded standard. 

once. 

Cave Creek #2l7 and Scapegoat Mountain 

Both trails were monitored twice and exceeded 

CamDsite Encounters and Densitv 

Frequency: Same as accomplished under trail encounters. 

Encounter Standards: 

OC 1 - 80% probability of encountering no other camps. 

OC 2 - 80% probability of encountering no other camps. 

OC 3 - 80% probability of encountering no more than 1 other camp. 

OC 4 - 80% probability of encountering no more than 3 other camps. 

Exceeded Standards: 

No areas exceeded this standard. 

Severely Impacted Sites: 

No areas have shown an increase in impacted sites. c 

Improved Sites : - 

- Pass Creek and Halfmoon Park continue to show improvement. - 

Barren Core 

Problem Areas: 

- Barren core has not been a problem in the Scapegoat Wilderness area. . 

76 
Number of Human impacted sites per 640 acres 

Standard: 

OC 1 - 1 Human impacted site per 640 acres. 

OC 2 - 2 Human impacted sites per 640 acres. 

OC 3 - 3 Human impacted sites per 640 acres. 

OC 4 - 6 Human impacted sites per 640 acres. 

No heavily impacted sites have been monitored in this area. 

little use has occurred since Canyon Creek Fire. 

However, very 

-_ * 

Range : 

Standard : 

Degree of forage utilization 

OC 1 - No more than 20% of key species forage utilized. 

OC 2 - No more than 20% of key species forage utilized. 

OC 3 - No more than 40% of key species forage utilized except on big game 

winter range and grizzly bear habitat. 

OC 4 - Same as OC 3 

Overall range condition is excellent, with normal to just above normal 

precipitation occurring in 1990 and light use of the area, the forage condition 

is excellent. 

There were isolated instances of range deterioration, but these areas burned 

intensively and have not been grazed the past two seasons. 

these are: 

Most notable of 

- Pass Creek - which is well recovered 

- Cave Creek - which shows steady improvement 

- Halfmoon Park - which shows steady improvement 

2. Seeley Lake Ranger District - 

a. 

b. 

d. 

e. 

f. 

C. 

g. 

h. 

7 sites identified as highly impacted by LAC standards. 

142 trail encounters of which 69% were with stock. 

12 occupied camp encounters. 

Low flying aircraft observed on 35 days, or an average of 

two per day. 

High level flights were observed 57 days. or an average of 5 

per day. 

Nine species of npxious weeds were found between outfitter 

camps, trailheads, administrative sites and along trails and 

stream. 

Range monitoring was conducted to determine degree of impact 

resulting from horse use. 

Introduction of noxious weeds, grazing areas at 

administrative sites and outfitter camps were studied. 

Alternatives for management of weed problems were developed 

and recommended. 

. 

c 

3. Lincoln Ranger District - 

direction. 

a. 180 man-days monitoring use and impacts according to LAC 

77 
C. Recreation Management 

Rocky Mtn RD .. 

1. Trail Maintenance 120 Miles 

and campsite work 

Lincoln RD Seeley RD 

180 Miles 43 Miles 

2. signs 0 0 0 

3. Trailhead development 0 

4. Administration of 

.- 

< 

outfitter permits & 

5 year plans issued: 3 

0 0 

6 5 

5. Wilderness Education 0 0 0 

D. Administration: 

Rocky Mtn RD Lincoln RD . Seeley RD 

1. Mechanized equipment 0 

(for fire management) 

2 0 

2. Search and Rescue: 0 0 0 

3. Law Enforcement: 

a. Two incidents of mountain bikes were reported and regulatory signs 

posted. No citations issued. 

b. One incident report of resource damage. 

c. One incident report of littering. 

d. One report of illegal outfitter operation. 

E. Administrative structures - actions related to them. Status Report 

1. Rocky Mountain Ranger District: 

a. Welcome Creek Work Center - Consisting of cabin, tack/hay 

b. Green Fork Cabin - including tack/hayshed and corral 

c. 

shed, corral and pasture fence. 

Patrol Mountain Fire Lookout - on Wilderness boundary Serves 

the Scapegoap as a fire lookout and communication relay. 

2. Lincoln Ranger District: 

a. Webb Lake Cabin and tack shed 

3. Seeley Lake Ranger District: 

a. None 

78 
F. Ongoing research projects (include non-Forest Service). 

1. Rocky Mountain Ranger District 

a. Monitoring of grizzly bear and wolf endangered species 

2. Lincoln Ranger District 

a. LAC monitoring etc. 

3. Seeley Lake Ranger District 

a. Wilderness over flight study to determine adverse impacts, 

if any, to wilderness users. 

3. Administration 

A. Status of Wilderness Implementation Schedules (include target 

completion date) and status of fire management plan addressing 

wilderness: 

1. Wilderness implementation schedule is near completion. A draft 

Implementation Schedule for the Bob Marshall Wilderness Complex 

(this includes Scapegoat Wilderness) was presented to the 

Regional Wilderness Council on August 15, 1990. 

2. Fire management plan completed in July 1990. 

B. Regulations in effect 

1. No new regulations were imposed this year. However, all existing 

wilderness regulations were enforced. 

C. Staffing 

Rocky Mtn RD Lincoln RD Seeley RD 

GS-11 Resource Asst. 

GS-9 PFT Wilderness Tech 

GS-6 Packer/COR 

GS-4 Seasonal Wldns Guard 

GS-3 Trail Head Monitor 

GS-3 Trail Maint. Persons 

GS-4 Trail Const. Crew 

GS-3 Trail Const. Crew 

Volunteer Wldns Guards 

Volunteer Trailhead Host 

Volunteer Fire Lookout 

1 - 3 Mo. 

1 - 3 Mo. 

0 

1 - 6 Mo. 

1 - 3 Mo. 

2 - 3 Mo. Ea. 

1 - 3 Mo. 

2 - 3 Mo. Ea. 

0 

0 

1 - 3 Mo. 

1 - 3 Mo. 

1 - 3 Mo. 

0 

1 - 6 Mo. 

0 

2 - 6 Mo. Ea. 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 - 6 Mo. 

1 - 6 Mo. 

1 - 3 Mo. 

0 

0- 

0 

0 

0 

1 - 3 Mo. 

D. Ongoing Partnerships that assist with wilderness management 

1. Volunteers 

a. Summer guard assistance 

b. Wildlife monitoring 

c. Fire Lookout 

d. Outfitter assistance 

79 
Volunteer Projects: 

a. Outfitter assistance in opening of trails 

b. Wildlife Monitoring and mapping - harlequin ducks - wolf - .. grizzly - fisheries 

For a total of 120 hours of volunteer time spent on resource projects, and a 

total of 320 hours of volunteer time spent on fire lookout in the Scapegoat 

Wilderness. 

2. Law Enforcement partnership - Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks Wardens 

and U.S. Fish and Wild3ife Service personnel. 

Wildlife Survey partnerships with Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks 

biologists. 

\ 

3. 

4. Problems that limit effective management of this wilderness, excluding 

funding constraints. 

a. Location of FTEs limits effective management by making it difficult 

for Districts to hire skilled seasonal employees capable-of doing 

creditable work the entire field season because we are presently 

unable to guarantee these individuals annual employment. 

FTEs would be volunteers which sometimes lack skills and dedication to 

do the job. 

In place of 

b. Failure of management to understand the impact past large fires would 

have on wilderness trails, watershed, and use patterns of users 

shifting from burned to unburned areas and campsites. 

80