United States 

Department of 

__ 

2001 

~ 1999 

i 1996 

- 

Agriculture @ Service Forest 

Lewis and Clark 

National Forest 

Fiscal Years 2000 - 2001 

Lewis and Clark 

National Forest Plan 

Monitoring and 

Evaluation Report 

10 

8 

- 

r 

26 

9 

t 

24 

w 

2 

0 

CHANNEL CROSS-SECTION PLOT I 

Lower Bonanza Creek 

X-SECTION 15 

0 

- 

10 
United States Forest Lewis and Clark 1101 lSth Street North 

Department of Service National Forest P.O. Box 869 

Agriculture Great Falls, MT 59403-0869 

406 791-7700 

FAX 406 761-1972 

File Code: 1920 

Date: June 2002 

Dear Forest User: 

Enclosed for your review is the Fiscal Years (FY) 2000-2001 Lewis and Clark National 

Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report. This report records our progress and 

accomplishments for our 1 4‘h and 1 gfh year of Forest Plan implementation. 

Our last published report updated information from FY 1994 through 1999. This report 

contains an update of information since that time. It also contains resource specialists’ 

observations and recommendations based on 15 years of findings through site-specific 

analyses and other evaluations. Currently, the Lewis and Clark National Forest is 

scheduled to begin Forest Plan revision in 2005. The results of our monitoring will be 

incorporated into that effort. 

Some changes have occurred on the Forest since our last monitoring report. In order to 

be more responsive to public desire for a Forest Service presence close to forest 

communities, we have re-established the Belt Creek Ranger District. The old Kings Hill 

Ranger District was divided roughly along the Belt CreeWSmith River watershed divide. 

The Belt Creek Ranger District encompasses roughly 225,000 acres and the re-named 

White Sulphur Springs District covers about 306,000 acres. Mike Herrin is the District 

Ranger for the Belt Creek district, while Tim Benedict is District Ranger for the White 

Sulphur Springs district. The districts share staff and work closely to accomplish a joint 

program of work. We’re pleased to provide more opportunity for public interaction! 

Thank you for your continued interest in the Lewis and Clark National Forest. We hope 

to enjoin you in the management of your National Forest System lands. 

Sincerely, 

RICK PRAUSA 

Forest Supervisor 

Caring for the Land and Serving People Printed on Recycled Paper a 
SUMMARY 

Lewis and Clark National Forest 

Forest Plan Monitoring Report 

Fiscal Years 2000-2001 

SUMMARY 

This summary capsulate the full report of 

the Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation 

for the Lewis and Clark National Forest 

during Fiscal Years 2000-2001 (October 

1999 through September 2001). Our 

monitoring items are listed in Chapter V of 

the 1986 Lewis and Clark National Forest 

Land and Resource Management Plan 

(Forest Plan). Forest specialists monitor 

and report on 76 individual monitoring 

items. They evaluate their findings and 

make recommendations to the Forest 

Leadership Team. 

Detailed information for each of the 

monitoring items is disclosed in the full 

report. In the full report you will find three 

main sections. The Introduction includes 

general discussion of the purpose of 

monitoring and outlines the amendments 

that have been made to the 1986 Forest 

Plan. The second section outlines, in 

general terms, the decisions made in the 

a 

Forest Plan. And the third section details 

each monitoring item, including the 

methods used in our monitoring, the 

findings from our monitoring efforts, and 

any recommendations for improving 

implementation of the Forest Plan direction. 

MONITORING RESULTS 

Recreation: Overall use levels for both 

developed and dispersed recreation have 

been lower than annual Forest averages for 

the FY 00-01 (Fiscal Year 2000-2001) 

monitoring per,iod. This may be due, in 

part, to severe fire activities during the past 

two fire seasons. Area and Forest 

restrictions have lessened the opportunity 

for public access onto the Forest for 

recreational opportunities. The general 

feeling from District personnel is that overall 

recreational use is generally consistent, but 

some specific areas are seeing increased 

use while others are declining. 

Campgrounds and dispersed areas close to 

water are likely to receive more use; sites 

closer to population centers also appear to 

have increased use, as do those sites in 

which recent improvements have been 

made. Some of the Districts are seeing 

more general forest use throughout the 

summer seasons, as opposed to mostly 

peak uses during holiday weekends. The 

diversity of uses also appears to be 

increasing; activities such as rock 

collecting, mountain biking, 'and mushroom 

picking are rising. In addition, uses at 

developed sites have experienced a slight 

shift from family groups to groups of 

younger users, i.e., high school-aged 

groups. Some districts have experienced 

an increase in reservations by various usergroups for group sites at developed 

recreation sites. 

Actual visitor numbers recorded at the 

Lewis and Clark Interpretive Center during 

the FY 00-01 monitoring period was 88,312 

in 2000 and 77,164 in 2001. 

A National Recreation Survey was 

conducted on the Lewis and Clark National 

Forest in FY 2001. The survey identified 

exit locations around the Forest to be 

1 
SUMMARY 

monitored at certain times and a list of 

interview questions for forest users to 

gather demographic and use data. The 

figures for total recreation use of the Forest 

will become available after September 

2002. The figures are intended to more 

accurately portray use on the National 

Forests at both the Regional and National 

scales. Campgrounds appear to be 

adequate in capacity, but many need 

reconditioning. Trail and road maintenance 

has lagged due to inadequate funding. 

Heritage Resources: The Forest continues 

to focus on inventorying and assessing 

potential impacts to heritage (cultural) 

resources on site-specific projects and 

gathering ethnographic information to 

understand traditional uses across the 

Forest. During the 2000-2001 period, a 

total of 127 surveys for cultural resources 

were conducted, resulting in identification of 

three areas where evidence indicates 

further inspection is warranted. The Forest 

continued its efforts to seek an eligibility 

determination from the Keeper of the 

Historic Register on properties in the 

Badger-Two Medicine area of the Rocky 

Mountain District identified as having 

traditional cultural significance to the 

Blackfeet Nation. Three projects were 

initiated without completion of consideration 

for heritage resources, but all undertakings 

eventually received full consideration. 

Wilderness: Most prominent threats to 

preservation of Wilderness resources 

continue to be the spread of noxious 

weeds, degradation and overuse of popular 

trails and lakeside campsites, low numbers 

of natural I y-occu rri ng fires , enforce me nt of 

grizzly bear sanitation regulations, use 

allocation, and increasing need for 

Wilderness education. 

The Continental Divide Trail leading to the 

Chinese Wall in the South Fork and West 

Fork of the Sun River drainage continues to 

have a number of days with more than five 

human encounters per day during the 

heavy use period of July and August. On 

average, areas with a higher probability of 

human encounters were within the 80 

percent probability standard. 

Those areas (Opportunity Class I and II) 

with a lesser likelihood of human 

encounters had such low sample sizes in 

2001 that it would not be prudent to draw 

any conclusions from the data. With that 

said, on average in Opportunity Class I 

there was only a 75 percent probability of 

encountering zero other parties per day and 

this is a violation of the standard for this 

opportunity class (which is 80 percent 

probability of encountering zero 

partiedday). Wilderness Rangers and 

Managers do still feel there are potential 

problems with trail encounters between 

parties on the Prairie Reef Lookout Trail 

249 in Opportunity Class I. The Lookout, 

staffed for a 70-day season, recorded over 

250 people visiting the site in 2001. This 

situation will require more intensive review 

and monitoring during the 2002 field 

season. 

Wildlife: In both FY 2000 and FY 2001, a 

total of 25 grizzly sows with cubs or 

youngsters (two to three years) were 

observed. Nineteen grizzlies were lost from 

the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem 

(NCDE) in each year. In 2000 and 2001, 

seven of the deceased bears were on the 

east side of the Continental Divide, 

although only one was on Lewis and Clark 

National Forest System lands. That bear 

was an adult male, captured and killed after 

breaking into the Forest Service 

Administrative Cabin at Green Fork in the 

fall of 2000. The remaining six mortalities 

occurred on private land or on the Blackfeet 

2 
SUMMARY 

Indian Reservation. Five of those deaths 

were due to management actions and one 

was an illegal kill. 

During the summer and fall of 2000, wolf 

sign was reported along the Sun River 

drainage on the Rocky Mountain Ranger 

District, and several observations of wolves 

were reported at various locations along the 

Rocky Mountain Front both on and off 

National Forest System land. In winter of 

2000-2001, two wolves were observed 

traveling together in the Gates Park area by 

a MFWP (Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks) 

biologist conducting aerial ungulate 

surveys. In June 2001, several 

observations of two adult wolves and six 

pups were reported from the Gates Park 

area. Observations of this pack in the 

North Fork Sun River drainage and along 

Gibson Reservoir in early 2002 indicated 

that at least seven wolves remain in this 

pack. 

No bald eagle nests have been 

documented on the Forest to date. In 2000, 

the Sunset Cliff peregrine nest (found in 

1999) produced two young and in 2001 it 

again produced two young. A new nest 

was found on the Rocky Mountain Ranger 

District in the South Fork of the Teton River. 

This nest produced two young. A total of 

five wild, young peregrine falcons were 

produced on or near the Forest in 2001. 

In the 2000-2001 hunting season the 

quotas on cow elk along the Rocky 

Mountain Front were reduced in order to 

build the population back to within the 

numbers required by the MFWP Elk 

Management Plan. Quotas were raised in 

the 2001 -2002 hunting season, reflecting 

increased numbers in annual herd counts. 

Populations of Rocky Mountain bighorn 

sheep in FY 00-01 showed the biggest 

increase since 1991. Mountain goat 

populations appear to be growing in 

Highwood and Crazy Mountains; 

populations along the Rocky Mountain 

Front appear to be maintaining current 

population levels. There has been no 

management implemented on National 

Forest System lands since 1987 that would 

result in any decline or increase in 

populations; fluctuations appear to be 

related to natural events or hunting 

regulations. 

Monitoring for furbearers was conducted 

during 2000 and 2001 on established 

transects; an additional 110 miles of snow 

track surveys were completed on the 

Jefferson Division during that timeframe. 

Numerous lynx tracks were recorded on a 

transect along the Teton road on the Rocky 

Mountain Ranger District (RMRD). 

Wolverine tracks were recorded during 

snow track surveys in the Jefferson 

Division, but fewer than in previous years. 

A possible lynx track was identified in late 

winter 2001. Results of DNA analysis from 

hair snare samples collected during 2000 

revealed “hits” from ungulates, black bear, 

domestic cat, and one wolverine. Samples 

from 2001 have not yet been processed. 

The Forest continues to inventory for old 

growth forest; approximately 29 percent of 

the Forest has been inventoried, mostly in 

the Little Belt and Little Snowy mountains. 

More than 31,300 acres of old growth have 

been allocated for retention to meet Forest 

Plan standards. Five additional goshawk 

territories were recorded on the Jefferson 

Division, and two new territories on the 

RMRD between 2000-2001. Although 100 

percent monitoring of all known goshawk 

territories has not been accomplished 

during all years, additional nesting 

territories continue to be discovered. 

3 
SUMMARY 

The Forest has marked snags on 750 acres 

of cutting units since 1995. In 2000-2001, a 

resurvey of all burned areas on the 

Jefferson Division revealed that blackbacked woodpeckers are continuing to use 

areas burned in the Spring Creek fire 

(1 999). No black-backs were found in the 

area burned by the Lost Fork fire in 2000. 

During 2000-2001, fisheries surveys were 

conducted to further delineate the 

distribution of native westslope cutthroat 

trout (WCT) on the Forest, and to determine 

the genetic integrity of these populations. 

Forty streams were surveyed during this 

timeframe. No new genetically pure 

populations were discovered and some 

streams originally thought to contain pure 

strains have now been shown to contain 

fish that are slightly hybridized. Monitoring 

of the effectiveness of a fish barrier at 

Chamberlain Creek has shown that the 

WCT population has expanded in the 

absence of brook trout competition. New 

grazing plans are being phased in which 

incorporate measures such as reduced 

stocking or fencing to improve riparian 

conditions in riparian reaches. Continued 

monitoring of grazing management 

practices will help determine if changes are 

effective in moving riparian areas toward 

healthy conditions. 

Fluvial grayling were introduced into the 

South and North Forks of the Sun River in 

1999. Only limited numbers of grayling 

have retained a fluvial lifestyle by taking up 

residence in the rivers; more have dropped 

downstream into Gibson Reservoir. 

From 2000-2001,39 amphibian surveys 

were conducted across the Forest. 

Populations of Columbia spotted frogs 

appear stable and boreal toads reproduced 

at 10 sites. Northern leopard frogs were 

seen in the Highwood Creek drainage, but 

have not been found elsewhere on the 

Forest. Recent drought appears to have 

reduced potential breeding habitat for this 

species.. 

Range: Grazing levels and structural 

improvements have continued within Forest 

Plan projection. The completion of range 

plans has increased and is expected to 

continue at levels higher than Forest Plan 

projections for the next five years. 

Nonstructural improvement outputs are at 

23 percent of those projected for the 

second decade of the Forest Plan; this 

should increase with implementation of new 

range plans. Noxious weed control 

continues at levels above Forest Plan 

projections because of the identification of 

more acres of infestation and increased 

noxious weed control budgets. No 

condition and trend studies have been 

monitored for several years, and reporting 

is currently provided as the status of range 

vegetation. Thirty-one permanent 

ecosystem monitoring plots were 

established in 2001 to monitor range 

condition. Acres of suitable range within 

allotments has been declining as a result of 

more precise. range analysis, natural 

succession from grassland or open trees to 

closed tree cover vegetation, and closure of 

some allotments or portions of allotments. 

This is reflected by a reduction of 4.4 

percent in suitable range in 2001 and 0.6 

percent in 2002. The Forest exceeded 

Forest Plan variability of 10 percent of 

allotment management plans being 

outdated (i.e., more than 15 years old). 

The current allotment management 

planning schedule has increased the 

number of plans completed and the percent 

of outdated plans has been decreasing. 

Timber: During FY 2000, an 

interdisciplinary review of the 

DanieldKinney timber sales was 

4 
SUMMARY 

conducted. The review groups felt that 

prescriptions were appropriate to meet 

management area goals, but some 

changes were made to address fuels 

concerns. One unit was dropped prior to 

advertisement due to changed conditions 

(drought related) since the previous review 

was made. Several boundary changes 

were made to meet riparian guidelines on 

westslope cutthroat trout streams. The 

Anderson Select commercial thinning 

project was reviewed twice during 2001, 

prior to a decision being made. Changes 

were made in the prescription to improve 

regeneration response in an aspen stand 

and to ensure that growth response would 

meet objectives in one of the thinning units. 

Another review of the Miller Gulch and 

Smokey B timber sales took place in June 

2001. The need fodfeasibility of prescribed 

burning following harvest was reviewed on 

those sales. A monitoring trip to the 

Corridor and South Deadman/Sawmill sales 

occurred in July 2001. Concerns identified 

during the review focused on excessive 

downed fuels that conflicted with 

reforestation objectives. Silvicultural 

prescriptions have been or will be changed 

to reflect these findings. 

Several harvest units identified in the Dry 

Fork Belt Creek Vegetation Restoration 

analysis exceeded the 40-acre clear-cut 

standard. Eleven treatment areas were 

proposed to exceed the 40-acre limitation 

because of historical path size, the need to 

shift age-class distribution towards younger, 

regenerating forests, and the need to break 

up continuous fuels. The environmental 

analysis for these sales considered the 

effects of larger openings and Regional 

Forester approval was granted. 

Harvest over the past five years has 

averaged about 66 percent of the Forest’s 

Allowable Sale Quantity (ASQ) of 12.1 

million board feet. Some of the harvests 

have taken place outside the timber base in 

order to accomplish resource management 

objectives. 2001 Reforestation Indices 

indicate that 96 percent of all stands with 

final harvest since 1986 are progressing 

toward adequate stocking or were certified 

as adequately stocked within five years of 

final harvest. No failures have occurred five 

or more years following final harvest. 

About 806 acres were harvested in 2001 for 

a volume of 8.9 mmbf. Acres harvested are 

expected to remain below Forest Plan 

expectations. Most reforestation on the 

Forest is accomplished through natural 

regeneration, but artificial restoration rates 

over the past five years have been about 29 

percent, which is above Forest Plan 

projections. The total amount of 

regeneration needs is much lower than 

Forest Plan projections, however. 

Through project analysis, land suitability 

classes, which identify stands suitable for 

timber production, have been refined. This 

has resulted in about a 6 percent reduction 

in lands deemed suitable for timber 

production, slightly above the Forest Plan 

variability threshold of 5 percent. 

Water and Soil: The addition of a soils 

scientist shared between the Helena and 

Lewis and Clark National Forests has 

provided the ability to conduct some soil 

monitoring to help determine the effects of 

management actions on soil quality. 

Monitoring shows that some past harvest 

units where site preparation was 

accomplished with tractor pile and burn, or 

tractor scarification, may show soil 

compaction in excess of the 15 percent 

regional soil standards, while units using 

lop and scatter, or broadcast burn methods 

for site preparation had less than 15 

percent compaction. Soil quality monitoring 

5 
SUMMARY 

in prescribed burn areas will continue to 

determine how best to accomplish 

prescribed burning objectives while 

maintaining soil productivity. 

Best Management Practice (BMP) reviews 

have shown that, for the most part, BMPs 

are being implemented as planned and 

effective in limiting soil and water impacts. 

Improvements can be made with regard to 

providing adequate road drainage and 

filtration zones, and ensuring that road 

drainage is routed away from live water. 

Departures have been recorded with regard 

to road drainage at stream crossing sites, 

maintaining appropriate Streamside 

Management Zone (SMZ) widths and 

retention trees within an SMZ, inadequate 

protection or stabilization of a crossdrain 

culvert in a steep catchment basin, and 

equipment in an SMZ. Two timber sales 

harvested under the 1995 salvage sale 

rider were also reviewed. The application 

of BMPs at these units appeared to be 

effective in protecting surface water. 

An administrative review of range 

management across the Forest was held in 

October 2001. Utilization standards were 

exceeded in 9 of the 19 pastures reviewed. 

Current-year grazing resulted in moderate 

to high bank alteration in eight of the 

pastures. The amount of streambank 

length affected ranged from 45 to 100 

percent of the reach length reviewed. 

Additional fencing was recommended to 

address some of these concerns. 

Development of streambank standards has 

been initiated to address issues related to 

riparian grazing. 

The Forest has accomplished its backlog of 

soil and water improvement acres; a total of 

558 acres were accomplished in the past 

five years. 

Minerals: During FY 00-01, one mining 

plan of operation and three mineral material 

proposals were reviewed. Environmental 

analyses were conducted for each. Mineral 

activity has slowed somewhat and is 

probably reflective of low metals prices, 

recent legislation, and closure of many 

mining operations throughout the state. 

Most of the recent activity has centered 

around expansions at the Yogo Sapphire 

Mine (previously known as the Vortex 

Mine). Other smaller operations have 

continued on an annual basis in 

accordance with approved plans. 

Reclamation needs to occur at one site. 

No geophysical operations have been 

proposed since 1987. Interest continues in 

oil and gas exploration on existing leases 

on the Rocky Mountain Ranger District. In 

October 2000, Grizzly Resources (also 

known as Resource Management 

Associates) submitted a notice of staking 

on their lease in the Muddy Creek drainage. 

An onsite inspection was held. Neither the 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) nor 

Forest Service received an Application for 

Permit to Drill (APD) from Grizzly during the 

2000-2001 timeframe. The current holder 

of the lease on which Fina Oil and 

Chemical Company proposed an 

exploratory well in 1983, has expressed an 

interest in pursuing drilling at that location. 

The Forest continues to work cooperatively 

with the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) to rehabilitate the Block P Mill 

Tailings site in the Little Belt Mountains. In 

2000-2001, the Doe Run Resource 

Company, who has been identified as the 

party responsible for cleanup actions, 

completed a final Engineering 

Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA) 

identifying long-term clean up alternatives 

at the site. In September 2001, the BarkerHughesville Mining District, which includes 

6 
SUMMARY 

the Block P Mill site, was listed on the 

National Priority List (NPL). The Forest 

Service and EPA, in conjunction with the 

Montana Department of Environmental 

Quality (DEQ), are completing an Action 

Memorandum that will document the 

selection of the clean-up actions to be 

implemented at the site. Final clean-up 

actions are anticipated to begin in the 

summer of the year 2002. 

Lands: The Forest surveyed 10 and 19 

miles of landline during FYs 2000 and 

2001, respectively. This is 38 percent to 73 

percent of the Forest Plan target of 26 miles 

per year. The Forest addresses land 

adjustment opportunities as they arise. An 

exchange of lands in the Tenderfoot area of 

the Little Belt Mountains is currently in 

progress. 

Facilities: During 2000, 10.1 miles of road 

were reconstructed; 22.9 miles were 

reconstructed in 2001. A total of 0.7 miles 

of new road was constructed in 2001. 

Programmed timber sales have fallen 

behind anticipated schedules and amount 

of new road construction has been 

significantly below Forest Plan projections 

for the past decade. A total of 24.5 miles of 

road were decommissioned during the 

2000-2001 period and a total of 24 miles of 

trail construction/reconstruction took place. 

Protection: The Forest Plan emphasized 

removal of timber at high risk to insects and 

disease, usually lodgepole pine. 

Approximately 91 percent of the harvest 

volume in 2001 was high-risk lodgepole 

pine. Recent information suggests that dry 

forest, mixed conifer stands may be higher 

priority as the Forest has never 

experienced epidemic populations of 

mountain pine beetle in lodgepole stands. 

Mountain pine beetle mortality is becoming 

more numerous in the Little Belt, and Big 

and Little Snowy Mountain Ranges. Limber 

pine decline continues on the forest, as 

does a decline in whitebark pine due to 

white pine blister rust. The reintroduction of 

fire on the landscape in conjunction with 

selecting trees resistant to blister rust for 

seed collection is necessary to ensure that 

whitebark pine maintains its essential 

ecological role in upper subalpine systems. 

The total acres of fuels acres treated by 

prescribed burning was nearly 2,700 in 

2000 and 933 in 2001. The main increase 

is associated with prescribed burning of 

natural fuels to reduce potential intensity of 

wildfires and to improve forest health 

conditions. 

Record drought patterns across much of 

central Montana during the past four years 

has resulted in longer fire seasons. In 

2000, a total of 9,038 acres were burned 

from wildfire. In 2001, 4,067 acres were 

burned in wildfires, another 7,600 acres 

were burned in the Bob Marshall 

Wilderness as fire use, meaning the wildfire 

was managed for resource objectives under 

a burn plan. Suppression costs totaled 

$4.1 million in 2000 and $2.2 million in 

2001. 

Wild and Scenic Rivers: No project level 

activities occurred along any of the nine 

eligible rivers or river segments which 

adversely impacted of degraded a river's 

qualifications and/or potential classification. 

A land exchange in progress in the 

Tenderfoot area would consolidate lands 

identified for potential classification as 

scenic under the Wild and Scenic Rivers 

Act. 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

7 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

I . INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 12 

II . FOREST PLAN DECISIONS ..................................................................... 13 

Ill . INDIVIDUAL MONITORING ITEMS 

A . RECREATION 

A-1 Recreation Opportunity Spectrum Setting .............................. 14 

A-2 Recreation Direction Meets Visitor Expectation ...................... 15 

A-3 Recreation Use ....................................................................... 16 

A-4 Condition of Developed Sites ................................................. 18 

A-5 

A-6 Off-road Vehicle Damage and Travel Plan ............................. 19 

A-7 Condition of Visual Resources ................................................ 22 

A-8 Cultural Resource Management (Identification & Protection) . 23 

A-9 

A-1 0 

A-1 1 Cultural Resource Management (Inspection) ......................... 25 

A-1 2 

Recreation Opportunity Guide ...................................................... 18 

Cultural Recourse Management (Effectiveness) .................... 24 

Cultural Resource Management (Interpretation) ..................... 24 

Cultural Resource Management (Program Effectiveness) ...... 25 

B . WILDERNESS 

B-1 

8-2 

8-3 

Quality of the Ecosystem ........................................................ 27 

Bob Marshall-Great Bear-Scapegoat Management ................ 27 

Change in Roadless Inventory ................................................ 27 

C . WILDLIFE 

C-1 

C-1 a 

C-1 b 

C-1 c Nuisance Bear Incidents by Year and Month .......................... 32 

C-2 Gray Wolf. Bald Eagle. Peregrine Falcon Habitat ................... 33 

C-2a National Bald Eagle Survey .................................................... 34 

C-3 Elk Winter Range Capacity ..................................................... 35 

C-4 Bighorn Sheep and Mountain Goat ......................................... 36 

C-4a Bighorn Sheep Population - Rocky Mountain Division ........... 36 

C-4b Mountain Goat Population - Rocky Mountain Division ........... 37 

C-5 Other Big Game Species ........................................................ 38 

C-6 Small Game ............................................................................ 38 

C-7 Furbearer ................................................................................ 39 

C-8 Old Growth Habitat for Goshawk ............................................ 40 

C-8b Goshawk (Nesting Territories - Rocky Mountain Division) ...... 43 

C-8c Goshawk (Nesting Territories - Jefferson Division) ................. 43 

C-9 Special Interest Species ......................................................... 44 

C-9a Golden Eagle (Nesting Territories - Rocky Mountain) ............. 45 

C-9b Golden Eagle (Nesting Territories - Rocky Mountain) ............. 45 

Threatened & Endangered Species: Grizzly Bear Habitat ..... 29 

Trend Information for Grizzly Bear Management Units ........... 30 

Rocky Mountain Ranger District Nuisance Bear Incidents ...... 32 

C-8a Acres Designated as Old Growth 1988-2001 ......................... 42 . 

8 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

D . 

C-9c Prairie Falcon (Nesting Territories . Rocky Mountain) ............ 45 

C-9d Prairie Falcon (Nesting Territories . Jefferson) ....................... 45 

C-10 Cavity Nesting Habitat ............................................................ 46 

C-loa Monitoring Results for Snag Management on Kings Hill ......... 47 

C-1 1 Aquatic Habitat ....................................................................... 47 

C-12 Habitat Improvement Outputs ................................................. 50 

C-12a FY 01 Targets & Accomplishments Compared to Forest Plan 50 

C-12b Wildlife Habitat Improvement .................................................. 51 

C-l2c Wildlife Habitat Improvement .................................................. 52 

C-13 Oil and Gas Activity ................................................................ 52 

C-14 Sensitive Wildlife and Fish ...................................................... 53 

C-14a Electrophloretic Testing Results for Cutthroat Trout .............. -54 

C-14b Harlequin Duck (Minimum Brood Numbers on Rocky 

Mountain) ................................................................................ 55 

C-15 Sensitive Plant Program ......................................................... 56 

RANGE 

D-1 Rangeoutputs ................................................................................... 58 

D-1 a RangeAccomplishments ...................................... ... ............................ 58 

D-2 Rangeconditions and Trend ............................................................. 59 

D-2aRangeCondition and Trend ............................................................... 59 

D-3aSuitable Range .................................................................................. 61 

D-4 Allotment Management Plan Status .............. 1................................... 62 

D-4aStatus of Allotment Management Plans ............................................ 62 

D-3 Supply ............................................................................................... 60 

E . TIMBER 

E-1 Silvicultural Prescriptions Meet Management Area Goals ................. 64 

E-2 Prescription Selections ...................................................................... 65 

E-3 Timber Openings ............................................................................... 66 

E-4aAllowable Sale Quantity (Million Board Feet) .................................... 67 

E-4bTimber Program (Million Board Feet) ................................................ 68 

E-5 Restocking ......................................................................................... 69 

E-6 Acres Harvested ................................................................................ 70 

E-6aTimber Under Contract and Volume and Acres Harvested ............... 70 

E-7 Thinning and Silvicultural Accomplishments ...................................... 71 

E-7aTimber Stand Improvement and Other Treatments ........................... 71 

E-8 Even-Age Harvest ............................................................................. 72 

E-4 Timber Offered/Allowable Sale Quantity for a Decade ...................... 67 

E-9 Firewood Removal ............................................................................ 73 

E-9a Commercial and Personal Use Firewood Removal ........................... 73 

E-1 0 Suitable/Nonsuitable Lands ............................................................... 74 

E-1 1 Projected Yields ................................................................................ 74 

E-1 1 a Growth Plots (Number of Plots) ...................................................... 75 

F . WATER AND SOIL 

9 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

F-1 Adequacy and Cumulative Effects of Best Management Practices ... 76 

F-2- Revegetation ..................................................................................... 78 

F-2a Project List for Revegetation ............................................................. 78 

F-3 Water Quality in Municipal Watersheds ............................................. 81 

F-4 Riparian Areas. Flood Plains. and Wetlands ..................................... 82 

F-5 Other Effects ..................................................................................... 101 

F-6 Water and Soil Backlog ..................................................................... 101 

F-6a Restoration Projects List .................................................................... 101 

F-7 Water and Stream Quality ................................................................. 103 

F-8 Stream Cover and Pools ................................................................... 104 

F-9 Public Health ..................................................................................... 104 

F-6b Soil and Water Restoration Accomplishments (Acres) ...................... 102 

F-9a Total Number. Frequency. and Results of Sites Tested .................... 105 

G MINERALS 

G-1 Effect of Mining Activities ................................................................... 106 

G-1 aProject List for Mining Activities, FY 00-01 ........................................ 107 

G-2 Geophysical Prospecting ................................................................... 108 

G-3 Drilling Effects ................................................................................... 109 

G-4 Rehabilitation ..................................................................................... 110 

G-4aFY 00-01 Project List for Rehabilitation of Disturbed Areas ............... 111 

G-5 Mineral Availability ............................................................................. 111 

J . LANDS 

J-1 Compliance With Use Permits ........................................................... 113 

J-1 A Special Use Permits .......................................................................... 114 

J-2 Right-of-way Easements .................................................................. 115 

J-2a Easement Acquisitions (Cases) ......................................................... 115 

J-3 Land Ownership Adjustment ............................................................. 115 

J-3a Land Adjustment Accomplishments (Acres) ...................................... 116 

J-4 Landline Location .............................................................................. 116 

J-4a Landline Location Accomplishment (Miles) ....................................... 117 

L . FACILITIES 

L-1 Road and Trail Construction/Reconstruction ..................................... 118 

L-1 a Miles Of Road Construction/Reconstruction ...................................... 119 

L-1 b Total Trail Reconstruction/Construction (Miles) ................................. 119 

L-2 Miles of Road Open ........................................................................... 120 

L-2a Miles of Open Road and Total Road by Management Area .............. 120 

L-2b Road Decommissioning (Miles) ......................................................... 121 

P . PROTECTION 

P-1 High Risk Stands ............................................................................... 122 

P-1 a Removal of High Risk Lodgepole Pine (Percent) .............................. 122 

P-2 AcresNolume of Insect and Disease ................................................. 122 

P-3 Management Practices ...................................................................... 123 

10 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

P-4 Prescribed Fire and Air Quality .......................................................... 124 

P-5 

P-5aActivity and Natural Fuel Accomplishment (Acres) ............................ 125 

P-6 Wildfire .............................................................................................. 125 

P-6a Wildfire Area Burned (Acres) ............................................................. 126 

P-7 Suppression and Protection Costs .................................................... 126 

P-7a Suppression and Protection Costs (Thousand Dollars) ..................... 127 

Fuel Treatment Outputs ..................................................................... 124 

W . WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS 

W-1 Effects on Eligible Rivers ................................................................... 128 

I . GENERAL 

1-1 Costs and Values .............................................................................. 129 

1-2 Emerging Issues ................................................................................ 129 

1-3 Land Allocations ................................................................................ 137 

I-3a Allocation of Management Areas and Acres ...................................... 137 

1-4 EmploymentAncome Projections ....................................................... 138 

I-4a Annual Forest Collection Summary by Resource Class for FY 2000 138 

IV . COMPARISON OF OUTPUTS. ACTIVITIES. AND BUDGETS 

TABLE I . Comparison of Projected Outputs/Activities for Second 

TABLE II . Comparison of FY 2001 Budget Allocation vs . Decade of Forest Plan ............................................................... 140 

Forest Plan Projections ............................................................ 141 

V . LIST OF PREPARERS .............................................................................. 143 

VI . APPROVAL ............................................................................................... 144 

APPENDIX A ................................................................................................ 145 

11 
INTRODUCTION 

1. INTRODUCTION 

The Lewis and Clark National Forest Land 

and Resource Management Plan (Forest 

Plan) was approved in June 1986. Each 

year we monitor management decisions 

that have been implemented on the ground. 

This report summarizes the monitoring and 

evaluation findings for Fiscal Years 2000- 

2001 (FY 00-01). 

The purpose of Forest Plan monitoring and 

evaluation is to determine how well we 

have met our Forest Plan objectives and 

how we have applied the management 

standards and guidelines in the Plan. Our 

monitoring and evaluation process is 

outlined in Chapter V of the Forest Plan. 

Using this process, resource specialists are 

currently reporting on 76 individual 

monitoring items. Monitoring items have 

been added, revised, or deleted as new 

information has become available. 

Within the last 15 years, twenty-two 

amendments have been made to the 1986 

Forest Plan. These changes have resulted 

from findings from our previous 

monitoringlevaluation reports and from 

several environmental analyses of sitespecific projects. Since our last monitoring 

report in 1999, Forest Plan Amendment 22 

has been signed. This amendment 

changed projected outputs for nonenergy 

minerals as a result of the withdrawal of the 

Rocky Mountain Division from entry under 

the mining laws. 

The Forest conducted a thorough review of 

our progress in 1992, five years after the 

Forest Plan was implemented. This review 

identified findings, some of which resulted 

in a need to change the Forest Plan, 

including Forest Plan monitoring items. 

This report contains recommendations by 

Forest specialists as a result of 15 years of 

monitoring and implementation. 

Recommendations were made as to 

whether the Forest Plan monitoring items 

provided an accurate measure of 

management prescriptions, outputs or 

effects, and if not, what would be a more 

accurate measure. Recommendations were 

made when monitoring resulted in 

identification of a need to change Forest 

Plan direction. The Forest is preparing to 

revise the Forest Plan. Currently, 

“eastside” National Forests, including the 

Lewis and Clark, Helena, Gallatin, Custer 

and Beaverhead-Deerlodge, are concluding 

an assessment of conditions and trends 

across a broad-scale to determine a need 

to change management strategies in light of 

changed conditions or new information. 

Monitoring results are being incorporated 

into this effort. 

12 
FOREST PLAN DECISIONS 

II. FOREST PLAN DECISIONS 

The Forest Plan is a compilation of 

decisions that guide our management of the 

Forest. In general terms, it contains three 

types of decisions: 

Goals, Objectives and Desired 

Future Conditions (pages 2-2 

through 2-22 of the Forest Plan) 

provide general direction for 

managing Forest resources. 

0 Standards (pages 2-23 through 2- 

73) and Management Direction 

(Chapter Ill of the Forest Plan) tell us 

how to put the plan into practice or 

what conditions we must meet while 

we implement the Forest Plan. 

Management Areas (described in 

Chapter Ill of the Forest Plan) 

delineate the Forest into areas that 

are suitable and available for 

different types of management and 

resource production. 

The Forest Plan also includes a prediction 

of the average annual "outputs" produced 

by the Forest. These predictions are 

outlined in Table 2.1 (Plan pages 2-10 and 

2-1 1) and discussed in the Record of 

Decision for the Forest Plan. 

The following pages contain reports for 

each monitoring item listed in the Lewis and 

Clark Forest Plan, as amended by 

subsequent monitoring and analysis. The 

items are reported sequentially, as they 

appear in Chapter V of the Forest Plan. 

13 
RECREATION 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Recreation Opportunity Annually +/- 10% of projected ROS 

Spectrum setting being setting 

VAR I AB I Ll TY (+/-) W H I CH 

111. MONITORING RESULTS 

RECR EATlON 

A-1 Recreation Opportunity Spectrum Setting 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

No No 

FINDINGS 

Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) 

settings are being implemented in line with 

Forest Plan management area direction. 

The Forest Plan projected an increase of 

73,000 acres of “Roaded Natural” lands, 

with a decrease in the same amount of 

“Semi-Primitive” lands over the next 50 

years. Changes in ROS settings from one 

setting to a more developed setting are 

typically the result of either new road 

construction in a semi-primitive ROS setting 

or a change in travel plan restrictions from 

exclusively non-motorized trail use to 

motorized use. Additionally, in developed 

recreation sites, e.g., campgrounds, the 

introduction of artificial materials may 

“push” a site towards a more developed 

ROS setting if done on a large scale. 

In the FY 00-01 time period, new road 

construction averaged less than 0.3 miles 

per year, according to Management 

Attainment Reporting. Most construction 

was associated with timber sale activity and 

occurred in areas already considered 

Roaded Natural, and, therefore, did not 

change existing ROS settings. Where 

construction occurred in Semi-Primitive 

ROS settings, it changed the setting to 

Roaded Natural. This was fully anticipated 

in the Forest Plan, and is in line with the 

Forest Plan Management Area 

prescriptions for the areas of involved road 

construction. 

There have been little or no changes in 

travel management wherein nonmotorized 

trails became designated motorized routes. 

Thus, existing ROS settings were 

maintained. 

Concrete picnic tables were installed in 

Aspen and Jumping Creek Campgrounds in 

the FY 00-01 time period. While the use of 

these “non-native” materials may be 

inconsistent with guidelines for Roaded 

Natural ROS settings, they were opted for 

because their low maintenance 

requirements met over-riding management 

needs. ROS settings were not changed by 

the use of these concrete facilities, but 

caution needs to be used when selecting 

materials that meet desired ROS settings. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

Successful implementation of an ROS 

setting requires recognition of the effects 

site improvements can have on a setting. 

Roads, trails, site furnishing in the 

14 
RECREATION 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED. EVALUATION 

Direction meets expectation Annually Adverse comments or 

of visitor correspondence 

constructed environment, gates, fences, 

and other range improvements should vary 

in finish, color, kind of material, and 

refinement of design to reflect the desired 

ROS settings. The Forest can improve in 

this area by identifying the existing/desired 

ROS settings whenever any changes in site 

improvements are planned. Upcoming 

national direction on how the constructed 

Forest Service environment should appear 

is forthcoming. Training on this direction is 

recommended for all Forest Service 

employees. 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

No No 

A-2 Recreation Direction Meets Visitor Expectation 

FINDINGS 

Developed Sites: There has been no new 

rehabilitation during the FY 00-01 time 

period. Public using the Forest's existing, 

minimal development level campgrounds 

seem to generally be satisfied with the 

facilities and movement toward the lower 

end of the development scale, although 

maintenance levels of older campgrounds 

are not always adequate to keep facilities in 

good condition and reflect funding 

shortages in maintenance and operations. 

There are occasional requests for more 

developed facilities. Campgrounds are 

adequate in capacity to support existing 

and future use levels for some time. There 

is good support for campground 

rehabilitation efforts, including the 

replacement of old smelly toilets. Most 

campground users accept Pack It In-Pack It 

Out policies. There is a desire by some 

campground users that the Forest provide 

firewood at those facilities. In addition, the 

cabin rental program is popular. 

In June 2000, the Forest issued a decision 

on the Dry Fork Vegetation and Recreation 

Restoration project. The selected 

alternative included actions to be taken to 

respond to human waste sanitation 

problems and to improve riparian areas in 

the Dry Fork drainage while providing for 

dispersed camping opportunities desired by 

users. Metal fire rings will be installed at 51 

dispersed sites along the Dry Fork corridor; 

some sites will be closed to improve and 

resort vegetation and to stabilize 

streambanks; and new signs will be 

installed to more clearly show where 

camping would be authorized on National 

Forest System lands to avoid conflicts with 

trespass use on adjacent private lands. 

Funding to accomplish the improvements 

will be through a stewardship project in FY 

2003, where proceeds from the sale of 

timber in the area will be used to 

accomplish the recreation work. 

Road Maintenance: Complaints have 

been received about poor road 

maintenance and resultant chuckholes 

impacting recreationist's vehicles. Lack of 

adequate road maintenance funding has 

been the problem, and is especially felt by 

recreationists using roads to access 

campgrounds. Some believe that 

chuckholes and ruts should not be fixed on 

15 
RECREATION 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Actual use of developed and +/- 25% variance yearly or +Idispersed recreation 10% over 1 5-year period. 

compared with projected 

Annually 

primitive roads to keep user numbers in 

those areas low. 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

Yes No 

Trail Maintenance: Lack of adequate trail 

maintenance funding has resulted in more 

trails needing reconstruction or heavy 

maintenance. Complaints are received 

from the public on washouts and ruts on 

trails, and about damage to trails caused 

when stock and motorized vehicles use 

trails when the ground is wet and easily 

impacted. Blowdown in the Canyon Creek 

(1988), Bates Park (1988), and McDonald II 

(2000) fire areas requires crews to clear the 

trails repeatedly throughout the field 

season. 

Other: Outfitter-guide services appear to 

be adequate to meet public demand. 

There is a desire among some to create 

more activity-specific brochures directing 

them to where they can pursue specific 

activities. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

The Forest will continue to determine public 

expectations for our developed sites by 

learning both the desires and needs of the 

public that use and don't use our recreation 

sites or Forest. This could be 

accomplished with public meetings or by 

occasionally meeting with an "ad hoc" 

group of users. A revision of the Travel 

Plan is in process to identify any needs to 

change travel management to resolve 

resource concerns and conflicts between 

motorized and non-motorized 

recreationists. A review of the Forest 

access program is warranted, to determine 

how it might be strengthened. Additional 

emphasis should be placed on trail and 

campground maintenance funding. 

Continue with the existing campground 

rehabilitation program. 

A-3 Recreation Use 

FINDINGS 

Overall use levels for both developed and 

dispersed recreation have been down 

approximately 20 percent from annual 

Forest averages for each year during the 

FY 2000 and 2001 monitoring period. This 

may be due, in part, to severe fire activities 

during the past two fire seasons. Area and 

Forest restrictions have lessened the 

opportunity for public access onto the 

Forest for recreational opportunities. 

Actual visitor numbers recorded at the 

Lewis and Clark Interpretive Center during 

the FY 00-01 monitoring period was 88,312 

in 2000 and 77,164 in 2001. 

It should be recognized that use figures are 

best estimates only, and are not the result 

16 
R ECR EAT ION 

of statistically valid sampling techniques. At 

best, the figures above suggest a 

consistent increase in developed 

recreation, which includes campgrounds, 

picnic grounds, recreation residences, 

downhill skiing, resorts, and organization 

camps. Similarly, dispersed recreation is 

increasing, but has not exceeded projected 

levels contained in the Forest Plan. 

Wilderness use has been relatively flat. 

A National Recreation Use Study is being 

conducted for all National Forests between 

FY 1999 and FY 2002. The Lewis and 

Clark National Forest was surveyed in FY 

2001. The survey identified exit locations 

around the Forest to be monitored at 

certain times and a list of interview 

questions for forest users to gather 

demographic and use data. The figures for 

total recreation use of the Forest will 

become available after September 2002. 

The figures are intended to accurately 

portray use on the National Forests at both 

the Regional and National scales. In the 

past, with some exceptions, little time has 

been dedicated to taking use estimates on 

this or other Forests. This is common 

across most National Forests. The agency 

recognizes the difficulty in collecting 

accurate use figures and is making an effort 

to provide better use figures to Congress 

through a consistent sampling technique. 

Use figures obtained so far on other forests 

show that use is roughly half of previous 

agency estimates. If this is also the case 

on the Lewis and Clark National Forest, it 

may be that use is increasing at a rate 

substantially less than shown by the above 

figures, and probably at a rate more in line 

with the state's annual increase in 

population. 

The general feeling from District personnel 

is that overall recreational use is generally 

consistent, but some areas are seeing 

increased use while others are declining. 

Campgrounds and dispersed areas close to 

water are likely to receive more use; sites 

closer to population centers also appear to 

have increased use, as do those sites in 

which recent improvements have been 

made. Overnight hunting use, in general, 

has declined since the early 1990s. Some 

of the Districts are seeing more general 

forest use throughout the summer seasons, 

as opposed to mostly peak uses during 

holiday weekends. The diversity of uses 

also appears to be increasing; activities 

such as rock collecting, mountain biking, 

and mushroom picking are rising. In 

addition, uses at developed sites have 

experienced a slight shift from family 

groups to groups of younger users, i.e., 

high school-aged groups. Some districts 

have experienced an increase in 

reservations by various user-groups for 

group sites at developed recreation sites. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

The variability that would initiate further 

evaluation is presently not possible to 

determine accurately for the Forest using 

past estimates of use. 

A-4 Condition of Developed Sites 

I OUTPUT. MANAGEMENT I REPORTING I VARIABILITY (+/-)WHICH I Chanae I Chanae I 

17 
RECREATION 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Recreation condition of 

developed sites. 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Annually Less than acceptable No No 

standards, public safety 

hazards not corrected by 1990, 

poor conditions not corrected 

by 2005. 

FINDINGS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Recreation Opportunity 

New campground reconstruction during the 

FY 00-01 time periods included the Many 

Pines, Kings Hill, Aspen, and Jumping 

Creek Campgrounds on the White Sulphur 

Springs and Belt Creek Ranger Districts. 

These four fee campgrounds are found 

along Highway 89 between Armington 

Junction and White Sulphur Springs. The 

Forest installed 10 new concrete sweetsmelling toilets (SST) during the 2000-2001 

monitoring period. We have not identified 

any public safety hazards within our 

developed sites, but there remains a large 

amount of maintenance and reconstruction 

work in campgrounds, most of which were 

constructed in the 1960s. 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Annually Failed to complete by 1986 Yes No 

The Forest is participating in a national 

effort by the Forest Service to inventory its 

entire "backlog" of maintenance that has 

been deferred because of lack of 

resources. This four-year effort began in 

1999. Three years of data has been 

entered. Once the inventory has been 

completed, it will be possible to document 

the kinds of facilities and the total amount of 

funds needed to maintain our developed 

sites to certain standards. These standards 

are based upon a national system entitled 

"Meaningful Measures." 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

Continue with the ongoing inventories of 

developed sites, as mandated by Congress. 

A-5 Recreation Opportunity Guide 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

FINDINGS 

The Forest elected not to complete this as 

other methods were available, such as our 

Internet website, that reach a greater 

percentage of Forest users. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

Delete this monitoring item, but provide 

more emphasis on developing "where to 

go" and "mountain range-specific" 

brochures or electronic information to 

ensure the public has access to information 

on Forest recreation opportunities. During 

the 2000-2001 monitoring period, the 

18 
RECREATION 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Off-road vehicle damage 

and Travel Plan 

effectiveness 

Forest completed an Off Highway Vehicle (OHV) Ethics Guide, “On The Right Trail.” 

REPORTING VAR I AB I Ll TY (+/-) WH I CH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Annually Conflicts with Forest No No 

Management Area goals. 

Increase of 20 or more 

situations or variances. 

A-6 Off-road Vehicle Damage and Travel Plan 

FINDINGS 

An analysis of off-highway vehicle use was 

conducted for a three-state area including 

National Forest and Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) lands in Montana, and 

North and South Dakota. The Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was 

released in January 2001. The selected 

alternative in the Final EIS restricts offhighway vehicle (OHV) use to existing 

roads and trails. 

The Forest is presently revising its Travel 

Plan to address resource and user 

concerns. An Environmental Assessment 

for travel planning in the Big Snowy 

Mountains was released in April 2001. That 

analysis was supplemented in October 

2001 with additional evaluation of the 

wilderness character of the Big Snowy 

Wilderness Study Area. The preferred 

alternative identifies access needs to gain 

entry to National Forest System lands and 

proposes changes in travel use on trails 

within the mountain range. Off-road/off-trail 

motorized travel would be prohibited and 

motorized use would be reduced to about 

18 percent of roads/trails as compared to 

59 percent under the existing Travel Plan. 

The analysis also addresses snowmobile 

use, which under the preferred alternative, 

would be restricted to areas accessible by 

snowmobiles while considering wildlife 

winter range use and sensitive high-alpine 

ecosystems. 

The Forest has scheduled to complete 

travel management plans for the Rocky 

Mountain Division and remaining portions of 

the Jefferson Division. An analysis for the 

Rocky Mountain Division will be initiated in 

FY 2002. 

Off-road vehicle damage increased 

significantly through the mid 1990s. This 

increase leveled off to current levels during 

the FY 00-01 monitoring period. All Terrain 

Vehicle (ATV) use is the fastest growing 

motorized recreation activity on the Forest. 

Motorcycle and 4x4/Jeep use is relatively 

stable. Reports of motorized vehicle 

damage; travel plan effectiveness; social 

conflicts; and law enforcement violations, 

by ranger district are provided below: 

Rockv Mountain Ranqer District 

Damage: There are user created roads in 

Teton, Hannan, Home Gulch, Red Lake, 

McCarty Hill, and Willow Creek drainages 

from 4x4 users. Snowmobiles are topping 

trees when snow depth is inadequate. 

Incursions of snowmobiles into wilderness 

in the Teton River drainage have been 

noted. 

19 
RECREATION 

To prevent unauthorized motorized access 

into the Bob Marshall Wilderness, North 

Fork Teton Trail 107 from north of FDR 144 

at the West Fork Administrative Site to the 

wilderness boundary has been closed to 

over-the-snow vehicles by Special Order 

LC-01-01. Teton Pass Ski Area has been 

closed to motorized vehicle use by Special 

Order LC-99-13. The purpose of this 

restriction is to ensure safety, prevent 

vandalism, reduce user conflicts, protect 

grizzly habitat security, and reduce erosion 

potential at the ski area. 

Travel Plan Effectiveness: Illegal 

snowmobile use in the wilderness continues 

to be a problem as a result of improved 

capabilities of snowmobiles (more power, 

deeper cleats, etc.), as are dual road use 

conflicts between snowmobiles and trucks 

on roadways during spring and fall. ATV 

and motorcycle use on roads is a safety 

issue where not permitted in the Travel 

Plan. The selected alternative in the Final 

OHV EIS has caused confusion with some 

OHV users as to what is actually closed 

versus their interpretation that anv 

established two-track route is legal for use. 

Social Conflict Between Users: The 

greatest conflicts occur in the Badger-Two 

Medicine between the various users. 

Information on motorized recreational use 

in this area was collected with respect to 

grizzly bear behavior in 2000-2001. At the 

same time, researchers involved with this 

study were in contact with recreational 

users and were, in some cases, able to 

prevent unauthorized uses through 

interaction with motorized users. 

Law Enforcement Violations: The District 

reported 100 incidents, 20 warning notices, 

and 5 violation notices regarding the use of 

Forest roads or trails and off-road vehicle 

use during the FY 00-01 monitoring period. 

Judith Ranqer District 

Damage: Heavy use of trails, as well as 

poor design of trails created decades ago, 

has resulted in erosion impacts along 

certain trails. These impacts are not the 

result of illegal use in violation of the Travel 

Plan. 

Travel Plan Effectiveness: The Travel 

Plan seems to be working well in the 

Highwoods, although illegal motorized use 

appeared to have increased during 2000- 

2001. The Big Snowies generate more 

reports of ATV and motorcycle violations, 

often occurring near the crest of the 

mountain range. In the Little Belts, the 

majority of Travel Plan violations occur in 

the Middle Fork Judith Wilderness Study 

Area. User-created trails by ATV operators 

are a problem. Arch Coulee Trail, Lost Fork 

Trail, and Morris Creek Trail are repeatedly 

used illegally by An/ operators, despite 

efforts to barrier the trails to their use. 

Social Conflict Between Users: Social 

conflict complaints are predominantly from 

the Middle Fork Judith Wilderness Study 

Area and the Big Snowy Wilderness Study 

Area. In the Middle Fork Judith, complaints 

are primarily from non-motorized users 

complaining about motorized users using 

the same trail, especially along the Judith 

River, where both user types are 

concentrated on the same trail. 

Complaints have been made about 

motorized use in the Big Snowies violating 

the Travel Plan. ATVs and motorcycles 

violate the Travel Plan along the perimeter 

of the Big Snowies. In the Highwoods 

conflicts seem minimal, possibly because 

users know that other kinds of users will be 

present. 

20 
R EC R EAT10 N 

Law Enforcement Violations: The District 

reported 11 incidents, and 11 warning 

notices, and no violation notices regarding 

the use of Forest roads or trails and offroad vehicle use during the FY 00-01 

monitoring period. 

Musselshell Ranqer District 

Damage: The district trail system has 

suffered from motorized use during the wet 

season, causing the need for one trail 

complex to be rebuilt after initial heavy 

investment in reconstruction. This has 

necessitated that the District place most of 

its trail construction and maintenance 

efforts on just a few miles of badly impacted 

trails. User-created ATV trails are a 

concern and occur frequently. ATV impacts 

are a larger problem than those from 

motorcycles, but both contribute to resource 

problems. 

Travel Plan Effectiveness: It is being 

adhered to with the exception of the 

ATV/motorcycle problem of numerous usercreated trails and use of these vehicles on 

wet trails, resulting in significant trail 

damage. Lack of personnel to enforce the 

Plan is a concern. The current Travel Plan 

allows cross-country travel in many 

locations, which can lead to user-created 

trails occurring in some areas. Closing 

trails to motorized use can be ineffective if 

the surrounding land is open to motorized 

use. 

Social Conflict Between Users: During 

FY 00-01, the Forest completed an 

Environmental Assessment for Access and 

Travel Management in the Big Snowy 

Mountains in response to the need to 

complete travel planning as directed by the 

three-state OHV decision made in January 

2001. That decision limited off-highway 

vehicle use to existing roads and trails until 

travel planning was completed on National 

Forest System and BLM lands. The 

analysis considers access needs to the 

Forest as well as several alternatives for 

managing travel within the Forest. 

Alternatives consider different mixes of 

motorized and non-motorized use of roads 

and trails. A supplement to the 

Environmental Assessment was developed 

to analyze impacts of travel management 

alternatives to the wilderness potential of 

the Big Snowy Wilderness Study Area. 

Mixed feelings exist within the public as far 

as how much and where nonmotorized and 

motorized (including snowmobile) use on 

and off trails should be permitted, 

particularly within wilderness study areas. 

Law Enforcement Violations: The District 

reported 27 incidents, 27 warning notices, 

and no violation notices regarding the use 

of Forest roads or trails and off-road vehicle 

use during the FY 00-01 monitoring period. 

White Sulphur Sprinqs and Belt Creek 

Ranqer Districts 

Damage: Impact areas include the Deep 

Creek drainage (motorcycles and ATVs); 

Dry Fork Belt Creek drainage (ATVs and 

user-created roads); Castle Mountain trails 

(motorcycles); Moose Park and Higgins 

Park (user-built roads); Miller Gulch (usercreated roads); Jefferson Creek (ATV use); 

and the Hoover Ridge area (motorcycles 

and ATVs). 

Travel Plan Effectiveness: Restrictions 

are not being adhered to in many areas, 

particularly in terms of closed roads and 

restricted trails. The large number of 

violators makes law enforcement that much 

more difficult, and law enforcement 

resources are sparse. Cross-country travel 

in areas open to such use can result in 

21 
RECREATION 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION Item? 

Condition of the visual Annually Deviation from approved No 

resource meets objectives in 

Forest Plan 

VQOs, Interdisciplinary (ID) 

Team review of environmental 

user-created trails. Concern has been 

expressed that the travel plan is difficult to 

read, or doesn't effectively portray Forest 

Plan goals and desired future recreation 

conditions. 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

No 

Social Conflict Between Users: ATV user 

conflicts occur during both the summer and 

hunting seasons and are centered in the 

Deep Creek drainage and the Pilgrim Creek 

drainage. Conflicts between motorcycle 

use and non-motorized users are limited 

mostly to the summer. Some hikers have 

expressed a desire for "quiet" trails. Some 

hunters perceive use of motorized 

equipment during hunting season as 

gaining an unfair advantage. 

Snowmobile/cross-country skier conflicts 

are centered in the area surrounding the 

Kings Hill Snowmobile Parking Lot area. 

Dual use conflicts occur along the 

Strawberry Butte (Road 119) and Moose 

Creek (Road 204) areas and involve 

snowmobile and wheeled vehicle conflicts 

during the spring and the fall. 

Law Enforcement Violations: The 

Districts reported 51 incidents, 47 warning 

notices, and 4 violation notices regarding 

the use of Forest roads or trails and offroad vehicle use during the FY 00-01 

monitoring period. 

A-7 Condition of Visual Resources 

FINDINGS 

Visual Quality Objectives (VQOs) are 

determined for all projects requiring 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

analysis, and are being met in accordance 

with the Forest Plan. The Forest landscape 

architect is involved in any large timber sale 

proposals or other management activities, 

and helps ensure that the scenery resource 

receives adequate consideration. 

From the year 2000 through 2001,67 

regeneration harvest units (clearcuts, seed 

trees, shelterwoods, or final cuts) were cut 

across the Forest, according to ArcView 

GIS information. No regeneration units 

occurred on the Rocky Mountain Ranger 

District or in the Highwood, Big Snowies, or 

Crazy Mountains. Five units were cut in the 

Little Snowies, and one unit in the Castles. 

The remaining 61 units were harvested in 

the Little Belt Mountains. 

Of the 67 regeneration units, none occurred 

in landscapes viewed from visually 

sensitive (Sensitivity Level 1) road and trail 

viewpoints, as described in the Forest Plan, 

Management Standard A-8. Many of these 

units were reviewed in the field before and 

after harvesting. Others have been 

reviewed indirectly from aerial photos to 

determine whether they met Visual Quality 

Objectives contained in the Forest Plan. 

No substantial deviation has been noted. 

22 
RECREATION 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring 

TO BE MEASURED ' EVALUATION Item? 

Comparison between Forest Annually More than 10% of projects out No 

projects which needed 

cultural resource 

consideration and Forest 

projects which received 

consideration of the cultural 

of corn pliance. 

A-8 Cultural Resource Management (Identification and Protection) 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

No 

FINDINGS 

Monitoring item A-8 requires a comparison 

between identified undertakings and the 

number of surveys conducted on an annual 

basis. During 2000,45 survey reports were 

written. During 2001,86 reports were 

completed. Forest records indicate that 

during the two-year reporting period, one 

project was initiated prior to consideration 

of cultural resources and two projects were 

initiated prior to finalization of cultural 

consideration. All undertakings eventually 

received full consideration. Forest project 

lists are compiled annually and are 

reviewed by the Forest Archeologist. In 

addition, the NEPA quarterly report also 

lists proposed projects and the Forest 

Archeologist is regularly consulted on 

unpredicted projects. Projects are 

considered by the Forest Archeologist to 

determine whether the proposed action 

constitutes an Undertaking (as defined in 

36 CFR 800), whether the action requires 

survey for cultural resources, or whether 

the proposed action can be considered 

under an existing Programmatic Agreement 

for the management of cultural resources. 

During 2000-2001, 97.7 percent of the 

projects received full cultural resource 

consideration prior to implementation. 2.3 

percent were technically out of compliance 

at the point of implementation. This was 

due in part to Forest Service NHPA 

(compliance) responsibilities for alterations. 

to private structures that occupy National 

Forest lands under Special Use Permit. 

Additional coordination with permit holders 

is recommended to make them aware of 

regulatory process. The standards in 

monitoring item A-8 have been met. No 

further evaluation is necessary at this time. 

23 
RECREATION 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Effectiveness of cultural 10% or more of the inspected 

resource mitigation of sites sites impacted 

proposed during FY 

Annually - 20% 

A-9 Cultural Resource Management (Effectiveness) 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

No No 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION Item? 

Interpreting, nominating, or Annually - 100% If sites have not been No 

protecting cultural resource sites interpreted, or protected 

sites during the fiscal year 

FINDINGS 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

No 

Inspection of cultural resource sites is 

required in monitoring item A-9. This 

standard requires a comparison of the 

imposed mitigation with the actual results of 

implementation. The effectiveness of 

mitigation measures is determined by 

monitoring the site to see if unanticipated 

impacts occurred. During this period, 

twenty-seven sites, which had the potential 

to be impacted, were located in project 

areas. Specific mitigation was included in 

the project plans to avoid impacts. 

Eighteen (66 percent) of these sites were 

revisited to determine effectiveness of 

mitigation measures. Unanticipated 

impacts occurred in conjunction with two of 

the sites. One of these was due to 

cumulative effects; the other was simply a 

misunderstanding in timeline. Neither 

produced severe or adverse impacts. Less 

than 10% of the sites were impacted, thus, 

the requirements of monitoring item A-9 

were met. No additional evaluation is 

necessary as a result of the 2000-2001 

reporting. 

Monitoring of previously recorded sites 

outside of Section 106 review was also 

conducted during FY 2000 and FY 2001. 

This monitoring included sites in the vicinity 

of proposed projects, in unsurveyed areas 

burned by wildfire, and those identified as 

priority for deferred maintenance and 

Forest Plan consideration. During this 

period, more than 60 cultural sites were 

inspected for impacts from natural causes 

(erosion, wildfire, etc.) or cultural causes 

(illegal collection, vandalism, inadvertent 

damage, etc.) 

A-I 0 Cultural Resource Management (Interpretation) 

FINDINGS 

24 

Currently, 536 sites have been recorded on 

the Forest. Of these, three have been 
RECREATION 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Inspect interpreted sites for 

impacts caused by of sites damaged as a result of 

increased public awareness interpretation 

Annually - 20% If an interpreted site was 

interpreted for the public, one has been 

listed on the National Register, one is a 

National Historic Landmark; an easement 

overlapping with a second Landmark 

District was recently acquired by the Forest 

Service. Four sites are currently being 

evaluated and stabilized for interpretive 

purposes. These include a historic period 

CCC camp, lime kilns, logging splash 

dams, and the Sacagawea Sulphur Springs 

site of the Lewis and Clark Great Falls 

Portage Landmark District. Several historic 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

No No 

administrative sites and recreation cabins 

have been actively maintained and 

preserved under the Secretary’s Historic 

Preservation Standards. During 00-01, five 

historic sites have been treated with active 

preservation measures. These include 

three Forest Service sites and two privately 

owned Special Use sites. Because several 

sites have been actively protected during 

this period, the requirements of monitoring 

item A-10 have been met. 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Effectiveness of Heritage Annually - 5% of If previously unidentified 

Program and surveys cultural resources are 

implementation of Forest 

Plan (assessment of 

inventory methods used to 

identify cultural resources) 

discovered in surveyed areas 

A-I 1 Cultural Resource Management (Inspection) 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

No No 

and visitation I I I I I 

FINDINGS 

The Forest Archeologist has conducted 

annual inspections of interpreted sites on 

the Forest. Currently there are three such 

sites. To date, only one of these sites has 

sustained damage as a result of increased 

public awareness. In 1997 it was observed 

that someone had carved his or her initials 

into one of the signs at 24TT006 (an 

interpreted pictograph panel in Sun 

Canyon). No additional impacts haveoccurred at this site or any other since 

1997. All interpreted sites were inspected 

during the 2000-2001 reporting period. No 

damage occurred. 

A-I 2 Cultural Resource Management (Program Effectiveness) 

25 
RECREATION 

FINDINGS 

The Programmatic Agreement with the 

Montana State Historic Preservation Off ice 

for the management of cultural resources 

on Forests in Montana has ensured 

compliance with monitoring item A-12. As 

part of the Programmatic Agreement (PA), 

all prescribed burn areas over 100 acres in 

size receive a 10 percent preburn sample 

survey and a 20 percent postburn sample 

survey. This survey methodology has been 

successfully utilized on the Forest during 

the FY 00-01 monitoring period. In 

addition, other areas which had received 

past survey, but were again included in a 

project were resurveyed. During FY 00-01, 

a total of 127 surveys for cultural resources 

were conducted. Of these, 13 were 

conducted as post project inventories under 

the PA, or included re-survey of prior 

coverage. Monitoring identified ten areas 

where no additional sites were found and 

three areas where evidence indicates that a 

site may exist, and further inspection is 

recommended. The post project surveys 

conductedbetween2000and2001 have 

successfully met the requirements of 

monitoring item A-1 2. Variability may be 

the result of new discovery technology, new 

understanding of site-types, or new 

policy/guidance in Cultural Resource 

Management (e.g., trails were not 

previously seen as a cultural resource until 

the last decade or so). 

26 
WILDERNESS 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Wilderness - maintenance of Annually Degradation of environment 

existing quality of ecosystem 

WILDERNESS 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

Deleted 

B-1 Wilderness - Quality of Ecosystem 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION Item? 

Bob Marshall-Great Bear- Annually Failure to meet timetable No 

Scapegoat Management 

Division the Plan. 

established in Appendix U of 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

No 

This monitoring item was deleted from the 

Forest Plan under Amendment 3 because 

wilderness monitoring has been outlined in 

detail in the Bob Marshall, Great Bear, 

Scapegoat Wilderness Recreation 

Management Direction (Forest Plan 

Amendment 1). 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION Item? 

Change in Roadless Annually +/- 10% of projected change in No 

Inventory roadless inventory 

B-2 Bob Marshall-Great Bear-Scapegoat Management 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

No 

FINDINGS 

The monitoring results are presented in the 

annual Wilderness Reports in Appendix A of 

this Monitoring Report for FY 2001. 

8-3 Change in Roadless Inventory 

FINDINGS 

No changes to inventoried roadless acres 

have occurred since our last monitoring 

report (1 999). The net acres of Roadless 

lands on the Forest reported at that time 

was 1,008,238. 

Reporting acres for inventoried roadless 

lands is complicated by the fact that acres 

have often been calculated using 

27 
WILD ERN ESS 

planimetric calculations in the past. Use of 

GIS to calculate acreages often leads to 

different results. So consistency in 

reporting is often lacking. 

The final rule establishing prohibitions on 

actions in inventoried roadless areas was 

published in the Federal Register on 

January 12,2001. The Forest Service was 

enjoined from implementing the rule 

through a court decision (Idaho vs. 

Dombeck). In order to provide continuing 

protection to roadless areas, the Chief of 

the Forest Service issued interim directives. 

Interim Directive 1920-2001 -1, issued on 

December 14, 2001, outlines authorities for 

approving certain actions within inventoried 

roadless areas and defines inventoried 

roadless area as those areas identified in 

the maps contained in the Forest Service 

Roadless Area Conservation, Final EIS, 

Volume 2, dated November 2000. The 

Forest noted errors in the mapping 

contained in that documentation. 

Boundaries in the Judith area differed from 

those provided in the Forest Plan. 

Corrections to the map were provided to the 

Washington Office. 

The Forest Plan projected total inventoried 

roadless acres for the Forest for the first 

decade (1 995) at 943,000. A ten percent 

change in roadless acres projected by the 

Forest Plan for 1995 would be +/- 94,300 

acres. Further evaluation would be initiated 

if the 1995 inventoried roadless acres fell 

below 907,932 or above 1,096,532. 

Current roadless acres indicate no need for 

further evaluation. 

28 
WILDLIFE 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Grizzly Bear - Maintain 

Occupied Habitat Capacity 

WI LDLl FE 

C-1 Threatened and Endangered Species: Grizzly Bear Habitat 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Annually Any indication of downward No No 

trend in grizzly bear population 

OBJECTIVES 

Monitor the maintenance of suitable and 

occupied grizzly bear habitat to detect any 

indication of a downward trend in 

population. . 

Follow the goals and objectives set forth in 

the Wildlife/Fisheries Program Document 

for the Lewis and Clark National Forest. 

METHODS 

Biological evaluations were developed 

based on the goals, standards,’and 

guidelines contained in the Forest Plan 

(pages 2-32 to 2-34 and Appendix H, I, J, 

K, and L). 

Monitoring is conducted as recommended 

in the revised Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan. 

Population data collected includes female 

with young (two or three year old) and 

females with cubs of the year. 

FINDINGS 

Grizzly Bear Recoverv Efforts 

In accordance with the Grizzly Bear 

Recovery Plan we continue to record sows 

with young (two or three year old) and cubs 

of the year. Results from 1987 to 2001 

have demonstrated occupancy by sows 

with cubs in all six Bear Management Units 

(BMUs) on the Rocky Mountain Ranger 

District. The BIRTE (Birch Teton) and 

BADTW (Badger Two-Medicine) BMUs 

continue to produce the most cubs of any 

BMUs on the District with the TETSU 

(Teton Sun) BMU being the third best 

producer of cubs. 

Table C-1 a displays the trend information 

that has been gathered to date. 

29 
WILDLIFE 

TABLE C-la. Trend Monitoring Information For Sows With 

Cubs or Young Grizzly Bear Management Units (BMUs) 

Information for 1995-1 998 not available at time of publishing 

FM = female grizzly TETSU = Teton Sun 

CB = cub grizzly NORFO = North Fork 

YG = young grizzly (>1 yr old) SOUFO = South ForWBeaver Willow 

BADTW = Badger Two Medicine DEAEL = Dearborn/Elk Creek 

BlRTE = Birch Teton 

Mortality: The Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan 

also calls for recording all known grizzly 

bear mortalities. Nineteen bears were lost 

from the Northern Continental Divide 

Ecosystem (NCDE) in 2000 and 19 bears 

were lost from the NCDE in 2001. In 2000 

and 2001, seven of the deceased bears 

were on the east side of the Continental 

Divide, although only one was on Lewis and 

Clark National Forest System lands. That 

bear was an adult male, captured and killed 

after breaking into the Forest Service 

Administrative Cabin at Green Fork in the 

fall of 2000. The remaining six mortalities 

occurred on private land or on the Blackfeet 

Indian Reservation. Five of those deaths 

were due to management actions and one 

was an illegal kill. 

Law enforcement efforts were carried out 

to deter the illegal take of grizzly bears on 

the Rocky Mountain Ranger District and to 

reduce the potential for bears to become 

food conditioned. The District's Law 

Enforcement Officer, wilderness and 

campground guards, and others completed 

summer and fall patrols that included grizzly 

protection goals as a major focus. 

The special Food Storage Order was 

implemented on the Rocky Mountain 

Ranger District in 1992, modified and 

adopted by the Bob Marshall Wilderness 

Complex (BMWC) in 1995, revised and 

signed in 1998, and revised and signed 

again in 2000. The most recent revisions 

30 
WILDLIFE 

clarified terms in the Order and were 

designed to increase its enforceability. This 

order governs the manner in which food is 

stored on the Rocky Mountain Ranger 

District as well as on the other Forests 

within the BMWC. Enforcement of this 

Order and the previous Order between 

1995 and 1999 were reported in our 1999 

Forest monitoring report. An incident is any 

situation in which food or other attractants 

were found not to be stored properly. An 

incident may not result in a warning or 

issuance of a citation depending on the 

specific circumstances, including type and 

magnitude of the problem and how 

immediately it is corrected. Data with 

regard to Food Storage Order incidents 

have not yet been tabulated for 2000 and 

2001. 

Nuisance Bear Actions: Nuisance bear 

incidents are defined in the RMRD Problem 

Bear Management Guidelines as follows: 

0 Sightings: observation of a bear not 

engaged in a human or property 

interaction made at greater than five 

yards from the bear. 

0 Repeat Sightings: subsequent 

sightings made within a five-day 

interval within 1/4 mile of initial 

sighting. 

0 Encounter: observation of a bear not 

engaged in a human or property 

interaction from a site that is less than 

5 yards from the bear. 

0 Threatening Encounter: bear-human 

interaction in which the human 

perceives the bear to be in the initial 

stages of attack. 

Property Interaction: actual or 

attempted removal or damage of 

human property, excluding livestock, 

by a bear. 

Human Injury: death or bodily injury 

directly or indirectly produced by a 

bear. 

Livestock Depredation: death or injury 

of livestock directly or indirectly 

produced by a bear. 

0 

0 

Between 1995 and 2001 there were a 

minimum of 11 1 nuisance bear incidents 

reported on the RMRD (Table C-1 b). The 

majority of those reports (61) were property 

interactions, which may reflect the tendency 

of people to report damage rather than to 

report sightings or repeat sightings that do 

not involve harm to personal possessions 

or threats to life and safety. Many separate 

nuisance reports represented repeat 

incidents with individual bears. For 

example, one or two grizzly bears may 

have been responsible for up to 13 

separate nuisance bear incidents in 1999. 

Most nuisance bear incidents were reported 

in July, August, and October (Table C-1 c). 

This may reflect increased human presence 

on the forest during those months, and 

therefore increased opportunities for 

encounters with bears, rather than 

reflecting patterns of bear activity. The 

reported incidents may underestimate the 

number of actual incidents occurring on the 

RMRD, as not all incidents are reported or 

recorded, and some may be reported 

directly to Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks 

(MFWP) personnel who are responsible for 

any actions taken to aversively condition or 

remove offending bears. 

31 
WILDLIFE 

Unk= 

Table C-1 b. Rocky Mountain Ranger District Nuisance Bear Incidents, 1995-2001 

Total 

iknown 

Table C-lc. Nuisance Bear Incidents by Year and Month 

32 
WILDLIFE 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Gray Wolf, Bald Eagle, 

Peregrine habitat capacity 

Grizzly Bear Conservation Efforts 

Biological evaluations were completed in 

response to six Forest management 

activities within grizzly bear habitat 

(Management Situation 1) in 2000 and 

2001. The activities were either wildlife 

improvement projects or projects in support 

of other resource activities (e.g., trail 

construction, small timber sales, range 

management plans). All projects resulted in 

a "not likely to adversely affect" or "No 

Effect" determination for the grizzly bear. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

None at this time. 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Annually Deterioration or continuing Yes No 

disturbance on more than 5% 

of suitable unoccupied habitat 

C-2 Gray Wolf, Bald Eagle, Peregrine Falcon Habitat 

METHODS 

Evaluate Forest compliance with the Gray 

Wolf Recovery Plan (USFWS 1987). 

Monitor suitable bald eagle nesting habitat 

for re-occupancy according to methods 

described in Montana Bald Eagle Working 

Group (1 986); monitor the distribution of 

wintering bald eagles. Survey historic and 

potential peregrine eyries for occupancy. 

WOLF FINDINGS 

During the summer and fall of 2000, wolf 

sign was reported along the Sun River 

drainage on the Rocky Mountain Ranger 

District, and several observations of wolves 

were reported at various locations along the 

Rocky Mountain Front both on and off 

National Forest System land. Rocky 

Mountain Ranger District personnel 

reported wolf howling in the vicinity of the 

Gates Park administrative site in the Bob 

Marshall Wilderness during the fall of 2000. 

In winter of 2000-2001, two wolves were 

observed traveling together in the Gates 

Park area by a MFWP biologist conducting 

aerial ungulate surveys. In June 2001, 

several observations of two adult wolves 

and six pups were reported from the Gates 

Park area. District wildlife personnel 

confirmed these numbers in August 2001. 

Rocky Mountain Ranger District staff 

provided support to U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service and Turner Endangered Species 

Fund staff to attempt to trap and radio-collar 

wolves from the "Gates Park Pack" for 

monitoring purposes. One pup was 

captured but pulled free of the trap before it 

could be immobilized and collared. No 

other wolves were captured. Wolves from 

this pack were observed and heard 

numerous times by personnel involved in 

managing the Biggs Flat Fire in October 

2001. Neither the fire nor the presence of 

firefighters and helicopters appeared to 

affect wolf presence in the general area. 

Observations of this pack in the North Fork 

Sun River drainage and along Gibson 

Reservoir in early 2002 indicated that at 

33 
WILDLIFE 

least seven wolves remain in this pack. 

Monitoring of the Gates Park Pack 

continues opportunistically and as a 

cooperative effort among the Rocky 

Mountain Ranger District, MFWP, and the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 

BALD EAGLE FINDINGS Montana. Table C-2a shows the results of 

U.S. Forest Service biologists cooperatively 

assisted USFWS and MFWP biologists in 

completing bald eagle surveys during the 

month of January for the years 1995-2001. 

This survey route is part of the National 

Bald Eagle Survey to monitor the trend 

across the United States and the State of 

the survey for the years of 1995-2001. 

Table C-2a. National Bald Eagle Survey 

The Forest continues to survey or follow up 

on leads of nests, but to date no bald eagle 

nests have been discovered on the Forest. 

The MFWP continues to monitor all known 

nest sites in the state and the Missouri 

River from Craig to Great Falls seems to be 

the most used area for nesting that is within 

the vicinity of the Lewis and Clark National 

Forest. 

PEREGRINE FALCON FINDINGS 

In 2000 and 2001, Ralph Rogers surveyed 

the Smith River area in conjunction with 

monitoring for the BLM. In 2000, the 

Sunset Cliff nest (found in 1999) produced 

two young and in 2001 it produced two 

young. In 2001 another peregrine falcon 

nest was discovered on the Smith River at 

Merganser Bend. This one, however, is 

north of the Forest boundary and had no 

production in 2001. Also, a new nest was 

found on the Rocky Mountain Ranger 

District in the South Fork of the Teton River. 

This nest produced two young. A total of 

five wild young peregrine falcons were 

produced on or near the Forest in 2001. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

Continue to do survey work to determine 

where any new nest sites are located and 

monitor the production of the nests on the 

Smith River and South Fork of the Teton 

River. 

34 
WILDLIFE 

VAR I AB1 Ll TY (+/-) W H I CH 

WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

EVALU AT1 ON 

Decrease of 5% or more in 

winter range capacity as 

measured by a three year 

running mean of elk population 

level, sex, and age ratios 

Decrease of 10% or more in 

habitat effectiveness in any 

timber compartment on the 

basis of a 100% annual 

sample. The goal is to 

complete habitat effectiveness 

calculations for all 

compartments prior to Forest 

Plan revision. 

C-3 Elk Winter Range Capacity 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

Yes Yes, at 

revision 

Yes Yes, at 

revision 

TO BE MEASURED 

age ratios I 

METHODS 

Information on elk population levels and 

sex:age ratios were obtained from MFWP 

progress reports, personal communications 

with MFWP biologists, and research 

reports. 

Elk habitat effectiveness ratings were 

calculated by the percent of the subcompartment in cover and the road density 

(miles of open road per square mile). 

FINDINGS FOR ELK POPULATIONS 

LEVEL 

Elk populations as defined by the State Elk 

Management Plan are being met. The 

Department continued the either sex 

hunting season the last nine days of the 

season in 1995, and it has been continued 

through to 2001. This season is targeted at 

reducing elk populations in some areas of 

the Little Belt/Castle Elk Management Unit. 

In the 2000-2001 hunting season the 

quotas on cow elk along the Rocky 

Mountain Front were reduced in order to 

build the population back to within the 

numbers that are required by the MFWP 

Elk Management Plan. Quotas were raised 

in the 2001 -2002 hunting season, reflecting 

increased numbers in annual herd counts. 

FINDINGS FOR ELK HABITAT 

EFFECTIVENESS 

In 2000-2001, the Dryfork Project analysis 

was documented in a Final EIS. This area 

lies within Hunting District 432. Elk security 

analysis was completed on this area and 

was determined to be at 19 percent for the 

Hunting District, and 54 percent for the 

Dryfork Project area. The final decision 

resulted in elk security increasing to 20 

percent in the hunting district and 39 

percent for the project area due to road 

closures. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

Continue to use the elk security model and 

incorporate it into the Forest Plan during the 

revision process. 

35 
WILDLIFE 

VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

EVALUATION 

Decrease of 5% or more in 

winter range capacity as 

measured by a 3 year running 

mean of bighorn sheep and 

mountain goat population level, 

sex, and age ratios 

C-4 Bighorn Sheep and Mountain Goat 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

Yes 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED ~~~~ ~ 

Bighorn Sheep & Mountain 

Goat; Winter range capacity 

(population level), sex and 

age ratios 

REPORTING 

PERIOD 

~~ 

Annually 

METHODS 

Data was obtained from MFWP progress 

reports, research summaries, and contacts 

with knowledgeable individuals. 

FINDINGS 

Table C-4a displays the general population 

trends of bighorn sheep on the Rocky 

Mountain Division. There have been no 

actions implemented by the Forest since 

1987 that would result in any decline or 

increase in the populations. Therefore, 

population fluctuations appear to be related 

to natural events, hunting regulations, or 

management actions by the MFWP. 

Table C-4b displays the general population 

trends of the Rocky Mountain goat on the 

Rocky Mountain Division. There have been 

no actions implemented by the Forest since 

1987 that would result in any decline or 

increase in the populations. Therefore, 

population fluctuations appear to be related 

to natural events, hunting regulations or 

management actions by the MFWP. 

Table C-4a. Bighorn Sheep Population - Rocky Mountain Division 

ND = No data, ID = Incomplete Data. 1995 was an incomplete count, only two Hunting Districts counted. 

(I) 32 sheep were added to the population north of the Teton River during February of 1991. 

(*) 22 sheep (21 females, 1 male) were added to the population on state and private land south of the Teton River 

during February 1999. 

36 
WILDLIFE 

(3) 27 sheep were removed from the Castle Reef population segment south of the Teton River in January 2000 

(4) 32 sheep were removed from the Castle Reef population segment south of the Teton River in December 

as part of an effort to restore sheep populations in the Bitterroot area. 

2000 and February 2001 as part of an effort to restore sheep populations near Butte. 

Table C-4b. Mountain Goat Population - Rocky Mountain Division 

ND = No data 

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

1996--lncomplete count. 

Table C-4b above was designed to track 

the goat populations on the RMRD that are 

within the two hunting districts that allow 

hunting. However, the MFWP has been 

counting goats south of the Teton River 

since 1994. These counts are incomplete, 

minimum counts because goats are 

observed and counted incidental to other 

wildlife surveys. The results of these 

surveys show that on average there were 

26 goats (range 12-43) counted inside of 

the Sun River Game Preserve, and 15 

goats (range 2-29) counted outside of the 

Sun River Game Preserve. In 2000,67 

goats were counted inside the Sun River 

Game Preserve along the Continental 

Divide, and in 2001, 12 goats were counted 

outside the Sun River Game Preserve in 

the vicinity of Scapegoat Mountain. 

On the Jefferson Division of the Forest, the 

goat population continues to grow within the 

Highwood Mountains. This population was 

the result of goats expanding their range 

from Square Butte and Round Butte that 

lies to the east of the Highwood Mountains. 

In 2000, two either sex permits for goats 

were issued and both were filled, one male 

and one unknown. In 2001, two either sex 

goat permits were issued and both were 

filled, both males. The minimum population 

in 2001 was estimated at about 60 animals 

by the MFWP. This herd is expanding and 

more permits will be recommended for the 

year 2002. 

The Big Snowies still supports some goats. 

During a black bear study in 2000 

completed by the MFWP, only three goats 

were seen on the south side of the Big 

37 
WILDLIFE 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Other Big Game Species: 

Mule Deer population trend, 

sex and age ratios 

Snowies. No total population is known, but 

it appears that the goat population is barely 

hanging on for unknown reasons at this 

time. 

During the period from 1995 to 2001, goats 

appear to be expanding their range in the 

Crazy Mountains. Prior to this the goats 

stayed on the Gallatin National Forest. 

Population figures are not known at this 

time. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

This item needs to be reviewed and revised 

to reflect something meaningful in this data. 

As for the information now, there is no way 

to project trends because the data is 

collected in an inconsistent manner and 

various degrees of effort. 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Annually Decrease of 10% or more in Yes Yes, at 

habitat capacity as measured revision 

by a three-year running mean 

of mule deer harvest data and 

hunting success. 

C-5 Other Big Game Species 

METHODS 

Data were obtained from MFWP progress 

reports, research summaries, and contacts 

, with knowledgeable individuals. 

whereas the remaining 5 deer moved west 

into the Little Belt Mountains. They moved 

into the headwaters of the Judith River 

drainage (Yogo Creek, Middle Fork of 

Judith River) and one moved as far west as 

O’Brien Park, near Kings Hill. 

FINDINGS 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

In the winter of 2000, the MFWP began a 

small mule deer study on and adjacent to 

the Judith River Wildlife Management Area. 

The objective of the study was to look at 

movements from the winter ranges to 

summer ranges. It is a precursor to a major 

mule deer study that may take place in the 

next several years south of the Judith River 

Wildlife Management Area. Seven deer 

were trapped and radio collared on Reed 

Hill. The study continued through 2001 with 

the following results. Two of the seven 

deer remained on Reed Hill yearlong, 

Work with the State to see if there is any 

meaningful way to monitor and record this 

information. If there is not, then delete this 

element. 

C-6 Small Game 

This monitoring item was deleted from the 

Forest Plan by Amendment 3, dated 1989. 

38 
WILDLIFE 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Distribution of lynx and 

wolverines based on annual 

sightings 

C-7 Furbearers 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE Monitoring Forest 

FURTHER EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Annually Yes Yes, at 

revision 

METHODS 

Data was obtained from reported sightings 

of these species by individuals (both private 

and public employees). Sightings are 

recorded in an electronic database and are 

used in analyzing effects of proposed 

projects on their distribution, 

concentrations, and use. 

FINDINGS 

Lona Term Trend Transects 

In 1997, the MFWP established four longterm monitoring transects for furbearers on 

the Forest. Three are on the Rocky 

Mountain Ranger District: one on the South 

Fork of Waldron Creek and the Teton Road 

adjacent to the Teton Pass Ski Hill; one 

along the South Fork of the Two Medicine 

River and North Fork of Badger Creek on 

Trails 101 and 103; and one along the 

Benchmark Road from Red Creek to the 

end of the road. The BadgerRwo Medicine 

transect is part of a loop that runs onto the 

Flathead National Forest. The fourth 

transect was established in the Little Belt 

Mountains. These transects are run three 

times each winter, weather permitting: once 

each month from January to March. 

The Waldron/Teton transect was only run 

twice each in 2000 and 2001 due to 

unfavorable weather conditions. The 

Waldron Creek segment is not a groomed 

trail although it does receive regular 

recreational use by snowmobilers, primarily 

on weekends. The Teton Road segment is 

groomed generally once a week and also 

receives regular recreational snowmobile 

use. Numerous lynx tracks were recorded 

on this transect in both 2000 and 2001, as 

they have been consistently for several 

years. The Two Medicine/North Badger 

transect was last run in 1999 and may be 

dropped from the survey. The Two 

Medicine segment of the trail-is groomed for 

approximately 2.5 miles at its northern end, 

which receives more recreational 

snowmobile use than the rest of the 

transect. Lynx tracks were recorded on this 

transect in 1999, and both lynx and 

wolverine tracks have been recorded in 

previous years. The Benchmark Road 

transect is not groomed but is regularly 

traveled by recreational snowmobilers. 

This transect was not run in 2001, but in 

previous years lynx tracks have been 

regularly observed on the upper half of the 

transect. Based on these track recordings, 

it appears the Rocky Mountain Division has 

a much better lynx population than the Little 

Belt Mountains. 

The Little Belt Mountains transect is 17 

miles long and is in a high snowmobile use 

area. In the years 2000 and 2001 not one 

wolverine track was recorded while 

completing this transect. 

39 
WILDLIFE 

1 OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD 

TO BE MEASURED 

Goshawk active nesting Annually 

territories 

VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

EVALUATION 

Decrease of 5% or more in 

active nest territories as 

measured by a 100% annual 

sample of known goshawk nest 

territories 

Additional Track Survevs 

Change 

Monitoring 

Item? 

No 

Snow track surveys continued to be 

completed on the Forest in 2000 and 2001. 

110 miles of survey were completed on the 

Jefferson Division. Wolverine tracks are 

still being recorded, however in less 

abundance than during the time period from 

1997 to 1999. Both winters of 2000 and 

2001 had below normal snow fall and 

marginal tracking conditions existed. This 

may have resulted in a movement shift for 

wolverine, however this is uncertain. 

Coyote, bobcat, mountain lion, snowshoe 

hare, and squirrel tracks were recorded. A 

possible lynx track was identified in late 

winter of 2001. 

All of the location information has been 

entered into a GIS data base to be used for 

analysis and display purposes. 

The Lewis and Clark National Forest was 

included in a National Canada lynx hair 

snare study. In the fall of 2000 and 2001, 

the 25 hair snare transects that were 

established in the Little Belt Mountains in 

1999 were monitored. Sixteen hair 

samples were collected in 2000 and 44 

samples collected in 2001 for DNA 

analysis. Results of the 2000 DNA samples 

revealed “hits” from ungulates, black bear, 

domestic cat, and one wolverine. The 

samples for 2001 have not been processed 

as of yet. This is the last year for this 

survey and will not be continued in 2002. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

C-8 Old Growth Habitat for Goshawk 

METHODS 

Continue collecting data via snow tracking 

surveys and camera sets. Work with the 

Regional Office to help coordinate a 

wolverine study. 

The goal is to monitor all of the known 

territories each year to establish occupancy 

and production; and compare the results of 

undisturbed territories (no high level of 

activity, e.g., logging, or oil and gas 

development) to territories with disturbance. 

A computer program has been developed 

to track all nest territories as to their 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

occupancy, production, and nest site 

characteristics. 

In 1992 the Forest completed its required 

five-year review of the Forest Plan. The 

five-year review revealed that the Forest 

was in need of a process that would 

standardize how the Forest would define, 

inventory and allocate old growth across 

the Forest. The Forest wildlife biologists 

developed this process and included in it 

40 
WILDLIFE 

the definitions of “Old growth Forest Types 

of the Northern Region” published by Pat 

Green, John Joy, Dean Sirucek, Wendel 

Hann, Art Zack, and Bob Naumann. This 

process defines how old growth will be 

queried from the existing Timber Stand 

Management Record System (TSMRS) 

data base, and how it will be field 

inventoried. This process was finished in 

1993 and has been the guidance for old 

growth inventory on the Forest since then. 

A computer program was then developed to 

interact with the Timber Stand Data Base 

and identify timber stands that correlate to 

specified aerial photo interpretation types. 

The timber stands identified by standard 

aerial photo reconnaissance are mapped 

and ground-truthed to determine whether 

they meet the definition of old growth forest, 

as defined in the Forest Plan (Glossary, 

page 14) and by the Regional guidance 

written by Green et al. 

Old growth stands are selected to provide 

distribution across different habitat types 

and to maintain a minimum of five percent 

within a timber compartment. Using the 

parameters defined in the draft R-1 

Goshawk Habitat Suitability, lower elevation 

Douglas-fir stands are prioritized .and 

selected. Higher elevation timber stands 

are generally dominated by lodgepole pine 

with mixtures of alpine fir or spruce. These 

mixed stands are prioritized on the basis of 

their proximity to meadows, seeps, springs, 

streams, or other environmental factors 

which contribute to the diversity of plant and 

animal life beyond that visible in 

surrounding stands. 

FINDINGS 

Table C-8a is a compilation of all the old 

growth forest acres that have been 

surveyed and allocated to date. Table C-8a 

also displays the progress the Forest has 

made in achieving Forest-wide old growth 

forest inventory. When one compares the 

total acres of the Forest (roughly 1,862,000 

acres) to what has been inventoried, 29 

percent of the Forest has been examined. 

The Little Belt Mountains and the Little 

Snowies has been the focus of the 

inventory because that is where most of the 

timber harvesting has taken and will take 

place. When one compares the acres of 

those two mountain ranges (roughly 

81 1,000 acres) to the acres of inventory, 

about 65 percent of these two mountain 

ranges have been examined. In fact the 

Little Snowies has had a total inventory and 

allocation of old growth completed. 

In 2000, during the analysis for the Dryfork 

Vegetation Restoration project, a wildlife 

model was developed that interacted with 

the TSMRS data base to map various 

wildlife habitats including old growth. The 

queries for old growth were the same as the 

ones developed in the 1993 old growth 

process. This query, in conjunction with the 

GIS system, allowed the Forest to map old 

growth across the Jefferson Division. This 

resulted in mapping 562,962 acres of 

potential old growth habitat, excluding the 

acres that have already been validated as 

existing old growth. 

During field surveys of potential old growth 

during the summers of 1999-2001 in the 

Judith Planning area, a total of 41,869 

acres of potential old growth (as defined by 

the PI strata for the model) were field 

examined by biologists and field 

technicians. There were 24,691 acres 

deemed old growth or potential old growth. 

Therefore, 59 percent of the acres 

examined were in fact old growth. 

When one looks at the old growth acres 

that have been inventoried within the Little 

41 
WILDLIFE 

Belt Mountains and the Little Snowy 

Mountains, about 9 percent of these two 

mountain ranges are in an old growth 

condition. About 35 percent of the Little 

Belt Mountains are still in need of inventory. 

Table C-8a. Acres Designated as Old Growth 1988-2001 

Acres of old growth allocated for retention to meet Forest Plan Standards via decision document 

(3) Acres in Belt Creek decreased by the amount that was coincident with the acres in Dryfork 

Goshawk Nest Territories 

The result of the goshawk monitoring 

completed from FY 1990 through FY 2001 

is summarized in Tables C-8b and C-8c. In 

2000 and 2001, the Forest continued to use 

the computer model developed for goshawk 

habitat and continued to do survey by call 

back tapes of goshawk in the predicted 

areas of habitat. In 2000, four additional 

goshawk territories were discovered on the 

Jefferson Division and two additional 

territories were recorded on the Rocky 

Mountain Division. In 2001, one new 

territory on the Jefferson Division was 

discovered when conducting old growth 

surveys and using the play back tapes. 

42 
W ILDLl FE 

Description 

1990 

Table C-8b. Goshawk (Nesting Territories on Rocky Mountain Division) 

Territories Monitored Active Produced 

0 0 0 0 

I I Nesting I Territories I Territories I Fledglings I 

Table C-8c. Goshawk (Nesting Territories on Jefferson Division) 

* Attempted to monitor, but data inconclusive 

As the Forest continues to survey potential 

habitat there are more territories being 

discovered. Therefore, knowledge in the 

data pool is being acquired and a larger 

population of goshawks is being 

discovered. The only trend data that can 

be examined is from 1997 to 2001 for the 

Jefferson Division, where the Forest has 

made a concerted effort to monitor all 

known territories. It appears that every 

year only about 30 percent of the territories 

are active and the amount of young 

produced varies widely. Reasons for low 

percentage of active territories are 

unknown, because there have been no 

activities taking place at any of the active 

territories. It is suspected that weather 

plays an important part in amount of young 

being produced (Clough, Lorraine, 2000, 

Nesting habitat selection and productivity of 

northern goshawks in west-central 

43 
WILDLIFE 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Special Interest Species: 

Golden Eagle and Prairie 

Falcon nesting territories 

Montana. MS Thesis, University of 

Montana). 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

It is recommended that the computer model 

for predicting goshawk habitat be further 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

3 years Decrease of 10% or more in Yes Yes, at 

active nest territories as revision 

measured by a 100% annual 

sample of selected nest 

territories 

developed and validated based on known 

stand conditions of all the known nesting 

territories. Survey work needs to continue 

to be completed to detect whether there are 

new territories present, as well as continued 

monitoring of the known territories. 

C-9 Special Interest Species 

METHODS 

The goal is to inventory and annually 

monitor a minimum number of nest 

territories each year so that in a three-year 

period all nests of each species have been 

monitored. By completing this monitoring, 

the Forest can obtain occupancy and nest 

production of all known sites. 

Biologists recorded and mapped the 

location and sightings of golden eagle and 

prairie falcon in order to identify activity 

centers for suspected nest sites. 

Knowledgeable individuals were contacted 

for information on known nest sites. 

Surveys were conducted in suitable nest 

habitat and around existing nest sites to 

determine whether new nest sites had been 

developed. Nest territories were visited 

during the nesting season to determine the 

number of active nest sites and nest 

production. 

FINDINGS 

As one can see, the monitoring of these 

nest sites have been very limited due to 

other priority work and limited funds. 

Generally these species nest on cliffs and 

very little if any activity has taken place in 

the vicinity of these nest sites. Therefore 

they are undisturbed and require very little 

monitoring to ensure production and that 

Forest activities are not having any impacts. 

A summary of golden eagle nesting 

territories is as follows: 

44 
WILDLIFE 

Description 1991 1992 1993 1994 

Nesting 

Territories 

Territories 

Monitored 

6 10 10 10 

0 1 0 0 

Table C-9a. Golden Eagle (Nesting Territories on Rocky Mountain Division) 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 

10 10 10 10 10 10 10 

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Description I 1991 I 1992 I 1993 I 1994 I 1995 I 1996 I 1997 I 1998 I 1999 I 2000 I 2001 

Description 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 

Nesting 

Territories* 

Territories 

Monitored 

54 54 54 54 54 54 54 

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

0 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Territories 

Monitored 

* Includes territories on adjacent State and BLM lands 

1998 1999 2000 2001 

54 54 54 54 

0 0 0 5 

Table C-9b. Golden Eagle (Nesting Territories on Jefferson Division) 

Description 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 

Nesting 

Territories* 

Territories 

Monitored 

20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 

3 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 

2000 2001 

20 20 

0 0 

Summary of prairie falcon nesting territories 

is as follows: 

Table C-9c. Prairie Falcon (Nesting Territories on Rocky Mountain Division) 

* Data incomplete prior to 1989 

Table C-9d. Prairie Falcon (Nesting Territories on Jefferson Division) 

* - Data incomplete prior to 1991 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

This information needs to be either 

collected or the monitoring item should be 

removed if it is determined that these 

species need not be monitored. This may 

be through the development of focal 

species throughout the region. 

45 
WILDLIFE 

VAR I AB I LlTY (+/-) WH IC H 

WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

EVALUATION 

Reduction in snags to below 

numbers needed to maintain a 

viable population level of 

woodpeckers in any timber 

compartment as measured by 

a three year running mean 

compared to the existing 

percent optimum habitat 

C-I 0 Cavity Nesting Habitat 

Change 

Monitoring 

Item? 

Yes 

IUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

'RESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

-0 BE MEASURED 

Cavity Nesting Habitat for 5 years 

METHODS 

An annual Forest review of selected timber 

sales is conducted to determine 

effectiveness of snag management 

guidelines and timber sale administrative 

guidelines. Monitoring efforts focus on 

stands where snag densities may change 

due to management activities. 

Cavity dependant species habitat was 

measured by examining the gain, loss, or 

no change status of National Forest System 

acres of mature conifer stands. 

Breeding bird plots were used to determine 

the presence or absence of avian species. 

FINDINGS 

Snag Management: Retention of snags is 

still a concern within timber harvest units. 

Coordination at the Environmental 

Assessment phase is still important to 

ensure snags are being marked during 

timber sale layout and how many are 

needed. In some cases the snags are 

marked with paint and in others they are 

signed with metal signs, designating them 

as wildlife trees. The forest has marked 

snags on 750 acres of cutting units over the 

past several years after the completion of 

the timber sales. In the future these acres 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

Yes, at 

revision 

can be revisited to determine the attritition 

of snags post timber harvest. 

Snag management is also being examined 

more at the landscape level on the Forest. 

Table C-10 looks at the total forested acres 

on the Jefferson Division and compares the 

amount of acres that have been harvested 

as well as burned with wildfire from 1940 to 

2001. The percentage of acres treated with 

timber harvest or wildfire is a very minor 

component of the land base within the 

Jefferson Division. Based on acres 

harvested versus acres of forested habitat, 

the timber program on the Forest has had 

an effect on only 6.7 percent of the forested 

habitat. While at the same time timber 

harvest has removed all or a portion of the 

snag habitat, natural fire has created 

38,883 acres of snag habitat. These are 

gross acres and one can not make a direct 

comparison of snags lost on 6.7 percent of 

the forest or snags gained on 4.4 percent of 

the forest. But one can make a 

determination that the timber management 

on the Forest is having very little effect on 

snag habitat on the Jefferson Division, 

therefore, very little effect on snag 

dependent species, especially when wildfire 

has created snag habitat during the same 

time period. 

46 
WILDLIFE 

Division Acres Forested 

ln'2000 and 2001, the Forest resurveyed all 

of the burns in the Jefferson Division for 

woodpecker use. This survey revealed that 

black-backed woodpeckers are still using 

recent burns in the Jefferson Division. 

However, they were only located in one 

burn area, Spring Creek, which burned in 

1999. The recent Lost Creek Fire of 2000 

did not have any black-backed 

woodpeckers. All the others that were 

surveyed failed to find any black-backed 

woodpeckers. 

Acres Harvested"' Acres Burned'') % Acres Affected by 

Table C-loa. Snag Habitat on the Lewis and Clark National Forest 

Jefferson 

Rocky Mt 

880,000 59,182 38,880 6.7/4.4% 

470,000 171,778 36% 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+I-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Aquatic Habitat Decrease of 5% or more in fish 

ConditionIQuality habitat capability based on 

predicted or actual changes in 

(Cutthroat Trout, Brook water quality or fish habitat 

Trout, Rainbow Trout) parameters in any stream or 

3 years 

RECOMMENDATION 

It is recommended to continue to examine 

snags across the landscape and not on an 

acre basis. Try to figure out a better way to 

sample for snags so that a more reliable 

picture can be painted in regards to snag 

habitat and modeling that habitat. 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

Yes No 

C-I 1 Aquatic Habitat 

METHODS 

Monitor impacts from management actions 

and natural events that take place on the 

Forest, such as grazing, timber sales, 

mining, prescribed fire, wildfire, and floods. 

FINDINGS 

During 2000-2001, the Musselshell Range 

and Dry Fork RecreationNegetation 

analyses were completed. Fish population 

status and stream habitat condition was 

updated for fisheries streams in these 

areas. 

Fisheries in the Musselshell analysis area 

consist entirely of non-native trout species. 

Brook trout remain abundant in most 

streams, but many riparian areas receiving 

grazing pressure are in need of improved 

management to provide better habitat for 

47 
WILDLIFE 

larger adult trout. In the Dry Fork area, the 

status of westslope cutthroat trout was 

updated, with a new population discovered 

in Gold Run Creek and five other tributary 

populations confirmed present. The 

mainstem population of cutthroat trout in 

the upper Dry Fork above Galena Creek 

continues to face a serious risk of 

displacement by non-native brook trout. 

Consequently, Forest Service and Montana 

Fish, Wildlife and Parks personnel are 

suppressing the brook trout population by 

electrofishing removals. 

Surveys also documented the general 

status of fish habitat and populations of 

native and non-native trout in the Sheep 

Creek Range analysis area. Again, the 

condition of many riparian areas which 

contribute to the quality of fish habitats is in 

need of improvement. Most of the fisheries 

are small non-native brook and rainbow 

trout, but some are also rearing areas for 

important downstream recreational 

fisheries. A few streams still support native 

westslope cutthroat trout, which, in the 

absence of non-native competitors, have 

managed to survive despite some adverse 

effects from grazing. 

Findings reported for Monitoring Element F4 Riparian Areas are directly relevant to the 

condition of fisheries habitats across the 

Forest. Deep narrow channels, vigorous 

bank vegetation, undercut banks and large 

substrate particles all contribute to higher 

quality fish habitat. Conversely, shallow 

wide channels with trampled down 

streambanks and predominantly fine 

substrate particles indicate degraded fish 

habitat conditions. Furthermore, these 

conditions favor non-native fish species like 

brook trout over native westslope cutthroat 

trout. 

The percentage of fish-occupied stream 

miles recently determined to be in an "atrisk" functional condition due to grazing 

impacts in the southern Little Belt 

Mountains is about 25 to 40 percent. This 

has resulted in proposed actions that will 

significantly change grazing management 

on pastures that border streams. Future 

monitoring will help determine if the 

changes are effective in moving riparian 

areas back toward healthy conditions which 

support the full array of fish and associated 

wildlife. 

Successful recovery of riparian areas with 

exclosure fencing has proven to be elusive 

(see Element F-4). Although improvements 

in fish habitat have been observed in Little 

Willow, Studhorse, and Cottonwood 

Creeks, results have so far been 

inconsistent in Bonanza, Checkerboard, 

Smith, and Big Hill Creeks. Exclosures 

may have to be lengthened and more 

recovery time allowed before widespread 

improvement in fish habitat can be 

achieved. It has become obvious that even 

short-term fence failures or breaches can 

lead to substantial setbacks in stream 

recovery. Exclosures require continual 

monitoring and frequent maintenance to 

ensure that habitat protection goals are fully 

met. 

On a more positive note, monitoring in 2000 

revealed a robust population of hybrid 

cutthroat trout in excellent habitat in Lake 

Creek, a small ungrazed .stream with a 

highly functional, well-vegetated low 

gradient channel in the upper NF Smith 

River drainage. Lake Creek provides a 

useful reference for natural conditions in 

streams of this channel type, which have 

often been impacted by a long history of 

grazing elsewhere on the Forest. 

48 
WILDLIFE 

During the summer of 2000, trespass 

livestock gained access to Lake Creek and 

caused measurable damage to undercut 

banks before they could be removed by 

their owner. Other exclosures and pasture 

fences were also breached temporarily in 

2000 or 2001, demonstrating the need for 

vigilant Forest Service and permittee range 

administration of grazing allotments in order 

to protect aquatic habitat. 

Monitoring continued to show that roads are 

the primary cause of adverse effects from 

timber management and recreational travel 

across the Forest. Sediment sources were 

identified and subsequent mitigation applied 

to roads in the Judith, Dry Fork, Jefferson, 

and Cottonwood drainages. Long-term 

solutions through the capital improvement 

program will continue to be pursued. 

Cooperative monitoring in 2001 with 

Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks revealed 

that a sparse fishery is reestablished in 

parts of Dry Fork Belt Creek after spring 

runoff from upstream tailings ponds and 

mine effluents subside. Subsequent testing 

of tissue samples from these fish indicated 

that levels of some toxic metals are high 

enough to warrant concern about human 

consumption. Results will be shared with 

the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

and an effort to advise the public will be 

initiated. 

During 2000-2001, wildfire, prescribed fire 

and floods did not play major roles in 

altering aquatic habitat on the Lewis and 

Clark National Forest. Incidental monitoring 

indicated that these events did not result in 

sustained or widespread effects on Forest 

streams. However, the 2000 McDonald 

Peak wildfire has undoubtedly resulted in 

increased sediment delivery to the N.F. Sun 

River, and the 2001 Biggs Flat and Lost 

Fork wildfires may yet have impacts on 

aquatic habitat in 2002 and beyond. 

Beginning in 2001, percent surface fines 

are being monitored annually at three 

stations on the South Fork Judith River as 

part of the Forest Service participation in 

the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) 

process for this stream. Forest Service 

personnel also collected macroinvertebrate 

samples at these sites and delivered them 

to Montana Department of Environmental 

Quality (DEQ) for analysis. Results of 

these efforts will be presented in future 

monitoring reports. 

Stream cover and pools (Element F-8) are 

not being routinely monitored on the Forest. 

Other stream parameters, such as channel 

cross-section, bank condition and surface 

fines are believed to be more directly 

indicative of management effects. Residual 

pool depths may be monitored at specific 

sites in the future if it is determined that this 

parameter will provide useful information 

about fish habitat condition. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

Habitat conditions and status of fish 

populations should continue to be 

monitored to detect effects from 

management activities on the Forest. 

Threats to aquatic habitats should be 

addressed, and opportunities to enhance 

stream conditions should be pursued. 

Allotment management plans should 

continue to be revised to promote 

restoration of aquatic habitats. 

Implementation of bank alteration standards 

and new monitoring strategies will be 

necessary to ensure that grazing 

management is effective at achieving 

riparian recovery. 

49 
WILDLIFE 

IEPORTING 

'ERIOD 

Annually 

Annually 

C-I 2 Habitat Improvement Outputs 

VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change 

WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring 

EVALUATION Item? 

Identify a 10% decline in 

accomplishments in T&E habitat 

improvement outputs as measured 

over a five-year average and 

compared with the level specified 

in the Forest Plan (pages 5-1 1) 

Identify a 20% decline in 

accomplishments in wildlife and 

fish habitat improvement outputs 

as measured over a five-year 

average and compared with the 

level specified in the Forest Plan 

No 

Yes 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

T&E Habitat Improvement 

outputs 

Description 

Wildl Hab Enhan- 01 

Wildl Hab Enhan- 02 

Wildl Hab Enhan- 03 

Wildl Hab Enhan- Total 

Wildl Structures- 01 

Wildl Structures- 02 

Wildl Structures- 03 

Wildl Structures- Total 

In Fish Strm Res- 01 

In Fish Strm Res - 02 

In Fish Strm Res - 03 

In Fish Strm Res - Total 

TES Aqu Str Enh- 01 

TES Aqu Str Enh- 02 

TES Aqu Str Enh- 03 

TES Aqu Str Enh- Total 

Wildlife and Fish Habitat 

Improvement Outputs 

Measure Forest Plan 

Acres 600 

Acres 

Acres 

Acres 

Structure 10 

Structure 

Structure 

Structure 

Miles No Measure 

Miles in current 

Miles plan 

Miles 

Miles No Measure 

Miles in current 

Miles plan 

Miles 

Target 

978 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

Yes 

Accomplishment 

980 

METHODS 

Analysis of data provided in the 

Management Attainment Report (MAR) 

which included: MAR 37.2, 66.2, 68.3, 72.4, 

and 76.2. 

FINDINGS past year's accomplishments. 

Most of the targets were met for FY 01. 

However, once again the Forest had a very 

short burning window, so not all of the 

burning targets were accomplished. Table 

C-12a just reflects FY 01 targets and 

accomplishments. Table C-l2c reflects 

24 

Table C-l2a. FY 2001 Targets and Accomplishments Compared to Forest Plan 

0 

24 

MAR 

Code 

66.2 

66.2 

66.2 

66.2 

37.2 

37.2 

37.2 

37.2 

68.3 

68.3 

68.3 

68.3 

72.4 

72.4 

72.4 

72.4 

24 

5 

I Unit of I 

34 

6 

2001 I 

978 2,020 

0 I 0 

10 I 

I 2 

5 I 8 

50 
WI LDLl F E 

MAR 

Code 

76.2 

76.2 

76.2 

76.2 

Unit of 2001 

Description Measure Forest Plan Target Accomplishment 

TES Terr Str Enh- 01 Acres 100 366 0 

TES Terr Str Enh- 02 Acres 1 

TES Terr Str Enh- 03 

TES Terr Str Enh- Total Acres 366 1 

Acres 

In FY 95 the MAR items were changed both 

in description and unit of measurement. 

Table C-12b reflects the old MAR items and 

units of measure and Table C-l2c will be 

the new reporting MAR items that will carry 

forth in the reporting process. In the case 

of inland fish and TES aquatic items, there 

is no corresponding measure in the forest 

plan. At the time of Forest Plan 

development these items were reported in 

numbers of structures developed. Since 

then the unit of measure has been changed 

to miles of habitat improved. 

Forest 7 year 

600 1,400 900 1,117 450 555 765 960 878 Non-Structural 

{Wildlife Acres) 

5 0 10 16 0 40 71 20 22 Non-Structural 

{Fish Acres) 

Non-Struct T&E Acres 100 0 0 500 634 620 210 239 31 5 

Wildlife Structures 10 0 3 2 7 8 3 8 4 

Fish Structures 25 19 11 19 23 30 18 6 18 

T&E Structures 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 5 1 

Description Plan 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Average 

In examining Table C-12b and C-l2c, one 

can track the accomplishments in relation to 

the Forest Plans projection. The Forest is 

meeting or exceeding the projected habitat 

improvement program with the exception of 

the wildlife structures. This part of the . 

program has not had the opportunity that 

was envisioned during the forest planning 

process. The Forest has chosen to 

emphasize the non-structural part of the 

program which is where the greatest 

opportunity is and the most benefits to 

wildlife are. 

51 
WILDLIFE 

Description 

Wildlife Habitat 

RestoredE n hanced 

(Acres) 

Inland Fish Streams 

RestoredEn hanced 

(miles) 

TES Terr Hab Restored 

Enhance (Acres) 

TES Aquatic Enhance 

(Miles) 

Wildlife Structures 

T&E Structures 

Table C-12c. Wildlife Habitat Improvement 

Accomplished by Appropriated and Partnership Funding 

Forest 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 

Plan 

600 416 903 485 485 846* 264 

Forest Plan 

hasnomile 14 3 4.75 4.75 10 19 

targets 

100 0 200 250 250 170* 0 

Forest Plan 

hasnomile 9 0 3 3.5 0 22 

targets 

10 2 1 0 1 0 

0 1 1 1 0 0 

2001 

980 

24 

0 

6 

1 

0 

7year 

Avg 

625 

11.3 

124 

4.9 

0.7 

0.4 

RECOMMENDATION 

Continue to emphasize the non-structure 

habitat improvement program for wildlife 

and threatened, endangered, and sensitive 

(TES) species. The Forest Plan may need 

to change in order to reflect the miles of 

stream habitat that can be improved or 

restored to native cutthroat trout versus the 

structure target that is currently in the plan. 

This could be done at revision time. 

C-13 Oil and Gas Activity 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

Monitoring - Rocky Mountain 

Front 

METHODS 

REPORTING 

PERIOD 

Annually 

VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

EVALUATION 

Display the number of 

guidelines applied or not 

applied to projects that were 

accomplished for the fiscal 

year. This data can then be 

used to determine the cause of 

any decreases in populations 

that the RMF Guidelines were 

developed to protect. 

Change 

Monitoring 

Item? 

Yes 

Change 

Forest 

e.g., gadoil development, timber harvest, 

seismic operations, new road construction]. 

Examine major permitted activities in 

relation to the application of the Rocky 

Mountain Front Guidelines [(BLM 1987) 

FINDINGS 

52 
-WILDLIFE 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Determine distribution of Annually Failure to record any 

sensitive wildlife & fish 

species on the Forest. period 

Monitor annual trends in 

wildlife & fish habitat and 

species population 

information within a two year 

No new oil and gas development projects 

were approved during 2000 or 2001 on 

National Forest System lands. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

None at this time. The last report 

recommended dropping this item, but until a 

final decision is made on the Chevron/Fina 

well sites and the Blackleaf Field, this item 

will remain as a monitoring item. 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

Yes No 

C-14 Sensitive Wildlife and Fish 

METHODS 

Amendment 12 added this monitoring item, 

along with C-15, to the Forest Plan. Habitat 

surveys are conducted and population data 

acquired for species on the Lewis and Clark 

National Forest's sensitive species list. 

FINDINGS 

Sensitive Fish 

During 2000-2001, fisheries surveys were 

conducted to further delineate the 

distribution of native westslope cutthroat 

trout (WCT) on the Forest, and to determine 

genetic integrity of these populations. 

(Surveys were also conducted to assess 

the status of other Forest fisheries.) Results 

of genetic sampling conducted 

cooperatively with Montana Fish, Wildlife 

and Parks (MFWP) since 1995 are 

displayed in Table C-l4a. No new 

genetically pure WCT populations have 

been discovered in the last two years, and 

four streams (Deadhorse, Placer, Oti Park 

and E.F. Woods) previously believed to 

support 100 percent pure populations have 

now been shown to contain fish that are 

slightly introgressed with rainbow or 

Yellowstone cutthroat trout, based on 

additional samples. One new slightly 

hybridized WCT population has been 

discovered in Urvi Creek. Several pure 

WCT populations continue to face threats of 

hybridization from downstream non-native 

trout, and slightly hybridized WCT 

populations could become further 

in t rog ressed. 

53 
WILDLIFE 

Table C-l4a. Electrophoretic Testing Results for Cutthroat Trout 

a Some streams sampled more than once. 

b Complete laboratory results not yet available or samples may be archived for future reference. 

Approximate current number, based on all information sources; totals are not additive. 

Since 1996, an experimental fish barrier 

has been in place to protect the pure WCT 

population of Chamberlain Creek. Brook 

trout have been removed by electrofishing 

every year since the barrier was built. 

During 2000-2001, only eight brook trout 

were found and removed from the creek 

above the barrier. The WCT population has 

expanded in the absence of brook trout 

competition, and has remained stable over 

the last four years (Figure C-l4a), despite 

lower than normal baseflows due to 

drought. In 2001, a contract was awarded 

for a new permanent fish barrier to be built 

in 2002 to replace the experimental barrier 

in Chamberlain Creek. Another fish barrier 

was completed in 2001 in Cottonwood 

Creek to protect one of the last WCT 

populations in the Highwood Mountains. In 

cooperation with MFWP, Forest Service 

personnel are also removing brook trout 

from above this barrier by electrofishing. 

WCT population response will be 

monitored. Plans to develop fish barriers to 

protect WCT from non-native trout 

hybridization or competition in two other 

streams are continuing. 

Figure C-I 4a 

54 
WILDLIFE 

The Forest’s first active replications of 

isolated WCT populations were carried out 

during 2000-2001 in cooperation with 

MFWP. In the Castle Mountains near 

White Sulphur Springs, Richardson Creek 

fish were transferred to a fishless reach of 

Fourmile Creek above a waterfall barrier. 

In the Little Belt Mountains near Monarch, 

fish from the headwater population of WCT 

in Gold Run Creek were moved above 

several waterfall barriers to allow them to 

colonize a fishless reach. These expanded 

populations will be monitored and more fish 

moved if necessary. The goal is to reduce 

extinction risk for each population. Similar 

plans are being made to replicate WCT 

populations from N.F. Deep (Little Belts), 

N.F. Running Wolf (Little Belts), and 

Cottonwood (Castles) Creeks. All 

replications are cooperative projects with 

MFWP and require fish disease testing, 

aquatic invertebrate sampling and 

amphibian habitat surveys before fish 

transfers are approved. 

The Forest continued to provide logistical 

and technical support in 2000 and 2001 for 

the introduction of fluvial arctic grayling into 

the South Fork and North Fork of the Sun 

River, as part of the Montana Fluvial Arctic 

Grayling Restoration Plan. The initial three 

year planting program has now been 

completed. MFWP is monitoring the 

success of this introduction, and so far, only 

limited numbers of grayling have retained a 

fluvial lifestyle by taking up residence in the 

rivers. Many more of the fish have dropped 

downstream into Gibson Reservoir. 

Sensitive Animals 

Harlequin surveys continue to be conducted 

on the Rocky Mountain Division. Since 

1992 the District has been divided in half 

and surveys alternate between the Birch 

CreeWBadger complex one year and the 

Sun River drainage the next year. The 

Teton River drainage was not 

systematically surveyed between 1992 and 

2001. Due to the number of incidental 

harlequin sightings on the North Fork of the 

Teton River during 2000, it was surveyed in 

2001 and will likely be incorporated into 

regular biennial surveys. The results of the 

monitoring are displayed in table C-l4b. 

Table C-l4b. Harlequin Duck (Minimum Brood Numbers on Rocky Mountain Division) 

* Incidental sightingshot systematically surveyed, the scheduled brood survey on Sun River not conducted in 

ns = not surveyed 

2000 due to fire season and Forest closure. 

Snow track surveys have been completed 

for lynx, wolverine, and fisher. See C-7 for 

this information. 

Amphibians and Reptiles 

From 2000 to 2001, 39 amphibian habitat 

surveys were conducted across the Forest 

by the biological staff. Additionally, 40 

incidental observations of amphibians and 

55 
WILDLIFE 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Determine distribution of Annually Failure to record any 

reptiles were recorded during that same 

period. Reproduction of Columbia spotted 

frogs was documented at 33 of these sites, 

indicating that populations are stable. 

Boreal toads (a sensitive species) 

reproduced at 10 sites, including the small 

vernal pond in Green Gulch where toad 

reproduction has been reported since 1996. 

The Green Gulch site was exclosed from 

livestock with a fence constructed by the 

Montana Conservation Corps in 2001. 

Although several new breeding sites for 

toads were discovered on the Rocky 

Mountain District, the species continues to 

be relatively rare in the Jefferson Division. 

Tailed frog larvae are still frequently 

encountered in streams along the Rocky 

Mountain Front. 

' 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

Yes Update 

Northern leopard frogs (sensitive species) 

were occasionally seen from 2000-2001 in 

the Highwood Creek drainage, but a 

breeding site has yet to be discovered 

there. The species has not been found 

anywhere else on the Forest. Monitoring of 

amphibian sites does indicate that the 

recent period of drought has reduced 

potential breeding habitat or shortened the 

wetted period available for maturation in 

many parts of the Forest. The significance 

of this lost reproduction is not presently 

known. 

Based on additional sightings in 2000 and 

2001, the western terrestrial garter snake is 

now believed to be present in nearly all 

riparian habitats across the Forest. 

Although other reptile species have been 

reported, none are very common or 

widespread. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

Continue to survey the Forest for 

distribution of sensitive species. Continue 

developing databases for GIS applications 

so that sensitive species information is 

readily available for project planning. 

Ensure that amphibian breeding sites are 

protected from adverse effects due to 

management activities. A monitoring 

program for known amphibian breeding 

sites should be given high priority. 

C-15 Sensitive Plant Program 

sensitive plants on the 

Forest. Conduct 

demographic monitoring and 

taxonomic studies to assess 

at 

Revision 

METHODS 

Conduct surveys of the habitat to acquire 

population data on the species that are on 

the Lewis and Clark National Forest's 

sensitive species list. 

FINDINGS 

56 
WILDLIFE 

Surveys for sensitive plants continue on all 

ground-disturbing projects. No new 

populations were discovered. The Forest 

hired Chuck Mark as forest ecologist in 

2001, and he will be in charge of the plant 

program. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

It is recommended that the Plant Atlas be 

converted to GIS layers within the next two 

years in order to make the information more 

readily available for project analysis. 

57 
RANGE 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PR ESC R I PT IO N , EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Range Outputs Annually + / - 10% of target 

PER IO D WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

RANGE 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

Yes 

D-I Range Outputs 

5-Year 70.8 12 35 0.3 1.4 

Table D-I a. Range Accomplishments 

FINDINGS 

Summary of Forest Plan ten-year average 

Range Management targets and actual 

accomplishments for FY 1987 through FY 

2001 are listed above. Outputs of 

Permitted Grazing Use have continued 

within Forest Plan projections. Permitted 

Grazing Use is expected to decrease as 

new range plans are implemented to 

58 
RANGE 

Year 

Forest Plan 

1987 

comply with Forest Plan standards and 

private lands are fenced out of grazing 

allotments. Completion of Range Plans has 

increased during the second decade and is 

expected to continue at the higher level 

through the next five years (see D-4). 

ConditiodTrend Studies Allotments Monitored 

0 0 

Structural Improvement outputs are 12 

percent below Forest Plan projections. 

Non-structural Improvement outputs have 

been much below projections in recent 

years. The five-year average for this 

decade has been only 23 percent of 

projected. These outputs are expected to 

__ 

1988 

1989 

1990 

1991 

1992 

1993 

1994 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Range Condition 

28 12 

8 4 

4 2 

0 0 

0 0 

2 1 

0 0 

Range Trend 

increase somewhat as new range plans are 

implemented. 

Noxious weed control continues much 

higher than Forest Plan projections 

because of identification of more infested 

acres and increases in noxious weed 

control budgets. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

At Forest Plan Revision, adjust permitted 

grazing projections to recognize 

adjustments that may be necessary to meet 

Forest Plan Standards. 

D-2 Range Condition and Trend 

REPORTING 

PERIOD 

Annually 

~~ ~ 

Annually 

VARIABILITY (+ / -) WHICH 

WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

EVALUATION 

Acres of range in fair or less 

condition that have not shown 

any improvement in condition 

score during the monitoring 

interval (1 0 years) 

Any acres in downward trend 

which were previously (at the 

last reading) stable or in an 

upward trend. Any acres in 

downward trend which still 

show a downward trend after 

another monitoring interval (10 

Change 

Monitoring 

Item? 

Yes 

Yes 

Forest 

Plan? 

Yes 

Yes 

Table D-2a. Range Condition and Trends 

59 
RANGE 

Year 

1995 

1996 

1997 

1998 

1999 

Decade Average 

Conditioflrend Studies Allotments Monitored 

0 0 

0 0 

4 2 

0 0 

0 0 

0 0 

2000 0 

2001 31 

Decade Average 6 

FINDINGS 

0 

22 

4 

There are 277 condition and trend studies 

on the 239 total range allotments on the 

Forest. Most4hese are on the 158 livestock 

grazing allotments rather than the packer, 

special use and administrative allotments. 

The Forest has changed to the ecosystem 

approach to evaluate rangelands. 

Condition and trend studies have not been 

monitored for several years because the 

two methods are not comparable. Thirtyone permanent ecosystem monitoring plots 

were established in 2001 to monitor range 

condition. 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+ / -) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Supply Annually More than 1% reduction in 

suitable range acres from 

previous year. Cumulatively, 

any reduction of 3% or more in 

suitable range acres over a 

five-year period. 

There are also 37 permanent vegetation 

trend studies on 25 livestock grazing 

allotments to monitor effectiveness of 

noxious weed treatment. Of these, four 

were read in 1995, two in 1996, one in 

1997, 1998,1999,2000, and 2001. 

Monitoring results indicate that leafy spurge 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

No Yes 

density is substantially reduced at beetle 

release sites. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

This monitoring report item does not reflect 

acres in condition or trend classes. It is 

recommended that this monitoring item be 

changed to “Status of Range Vegetation 

Acres” currently reported in range 

databases. This will require changes to the 

Forest Plan monitoring item and the 

variability, which would initiate further 

evaluation. Status of Range Vegetation 

Acres consists of reporting the number of 

acres in each of three categories for All 

Vegetation and Riparian Vegetation. These 

categories are: vegetation acres (1 ) 

meeting Forest Plan objectives, (2) moving 

toward Forest Plan objectives, (3) neither 

meeting nor moving toward Forest Plan 

objectives. 

D-3 Supply 

60 
RANGE 

Table D-3a. Suitable Range 

FINDINGS 

Suitable range acres are for National Forest 

land within allotments. National Forest ' 

suitable range increased by more than 

4,000 acres in 1994 because of a land 

exchange. However, the trend has been for 

acres suitable for livestock grazing to 

decline as a result of more precise range 

analysis, natural succession from grassland 

or open trees to closed tree cover 

vegetation, and closure of some allotments 

or portions of allotments. This trend is 

expected to continue, as the allotment 

management planning process brings the 

statistics up to date with existing conditions. 

Range improvements (water developments, 

prescribed burning, etc.) initiated through 

the allotment management planning 

process are expected to slow the decline in 

suitable acres and the resulting declines in 

carrying capacity. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

As the allotments are re-analyzed, the 

Forest Plan should be changed to more 

accurately account for acres suitable for 

livestock grazing. 

61 
RANGE 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Allotment Management Plan 

Status 

D-4 Allotment Management Plan Status 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+ / -) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

5 Years More than 10% of the allotment No Yes 

plans are outdated. Plans 

approved more than 15 years 

ago are considered outdated. 

1996 

Decade Average 

1998 

1997 

Table D-4a. Status Of Allotment Management Plans 

239 193 81 YO 

239 165 69% 

235 181 77% 

237 135 57% 

1999 

2000 

2001 

Decade Average 

237 120 51 % 

237 129 54% 

237 133 56% 

237 140 59% 

' Includes grazing, packer, special use and administrative allotments 

FINDINGS 

The data in Table D-4a shows a continual 

departure from the Forest Plan standard of 

less than ten percent of allotment 

management plans outdated. To bring 

allotment planning into compliance with the 

Forest Plan, a new allotment management 

planning process and organization was 

implemented in 1991 and revised in 1995 to 

revise all allotment management by 2005. 

The new process, organization, and 

schedule are beginning to be successful in 

increasing the number of plans completed 

and reducing the percentage of outdated 

plans. The planning process is one year 

be hind schedule. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

The Forest Plan establishes allotment 

management planning intervals of 10 or 20 

years depending upon the management 

area. For simplification, the monitoring 

report has used an average of 15 years. 

The allotment management planning 

process is based on planning for large 

groups of contiguous allotments at the 

62 
RANGE 

'same time and requires planning for 

allotments that are in several management 

areas. It is recommended that the Forest 

Plan be changed to have all allotments with 

the same planning interval of 15 years. 

63 
TIMBER 

REPORTING 

PERIOD 

Annually 

TIMBER 

VARIABILITY (+ / -) WHICH Change Change 

WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

A departure from management No No 

area goals 

E-1 Silvicultural Prescriptions Meet Management Area Goals 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Assure silvicultural 

management prescriptions 

are best suited to 

management area goals 

with all resources 

considered. 

METHODS 

One timber sale is reviewed on the ground 

annually by an interdisciplinary team. 

FINDINGS 

In 2000 a review was conducted on the 

proposed DanieWKinney Timber Sale on 

the Kings Hill Ranger District. This project 

also emphasized regeneration cutting in 

older lodgepole pine stands, consistent with 

Forest Plan objectives for Management 

Area B. Prescriptions were written and 

layout supervised by a certified silviculturist. 

The review team felt that prescriptions were 

appropriate to meet objectives. Changes 

were made to some prescriptions to 

address fuels concerns. Several boundary 

changes were recommended to meet 

riparian guidelines on westslope cutthroat 

streams. One unit was dropped prior to 

advertisement due to changed conditions 

(drought related) since the previous review 

was made. 

The proposed Anderson Select Commercial 

Thinning project was formally reviewed 

twice in FY 2001. The initial review in May 

2001 was conducted to determine 

compliance with the Forest Service 

Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The 

review also consisted of evaluating 

proposed silvicultural prescriptions. The 

prescriptions were appropriate for the 

reviewed sites and they sufficiently tiered to 

Forest Plan goals and objectives. 

Suggested changes were to modify the 

detailed prescription for aspen regeneration 

to improve the regeneration response and 

to remark one of the thinning units to 

ensure the best trees were reserved for 

future growth and that an adequate number 

of trees were removed to gain the best 

growth response. These site reviews 

included the Forest Supervisor, Deputy 

Forest Supervisor, District Rangers, Forest 

Planner, Forest Timber Management 

Officer, Forest Ecologist, Sale Preparation 

Forester, and Sale Administrator. 

Another review trip occurred in June 2001, 

which looked at the Miller Gulch and 

Smokey B Timber Sales. The District Fire 

Management Officer, the District Culturist, 

and the Forest Ecologist participated in this 

review. The Miller Gulch prescriptions were 

changed to incorporate prescribed burning, 

because too much fuel was left after the 

harvesting was complete. This proposed 

64 
TIMBER 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+ / -) WHICH Change 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION Item? 

Assure prescription not 5 years Test management area outputs Yes 

primarily chosen on basis of 

greatest dollar return or 

greatest timber output. 

against those predicted 

change is warranted, but an inadequate 

number and quality of reserve trees exists, 

which will not meet the prescription when 

burned. The only feasible mitigation is to 

pull back activity slash from leave trees. 

The Smokey B units were reviewed to 

determine if prescribed burning was still 

necessary for fuels reduction and plan for 

subsequent reforestation. Two of the units 

possessed adequate Doug las-f i r 

regeneration, but prescribed burning was 

determined to be necessary. The review 

group recognized that interplanting might 

be required after the burning treatment. 

The other two units definitely needed a 

prescribed fire treatment to reduce the fuels 

hazard and natural regeneration was still 

planned here. 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

Yes 

In July 2001 a monitoring trip was 

conducted to evaluate proposed site 

preparation and fuels treatment methods in 

the Corridor and South Deadman/Sawmill 

Timber Sales. The concerns were too 

much downed fuel was proposed to be left 

on-site for other resource purposes and that 

delayed fuels abatement was now 

conf I ict i ng with reforestation objectives. 

The following items were noted: 

(2) Inadequate fuels reduction, which 

necessitated a prescription change to 

jackpot burn the unit. 

(3) Proposed burning was planned within a 

streamside management zone, which is not 

desired. 

(4) Lack of a sufficient number of reserve 

trees to account for anticipated mortality 

from prescribed burning. 

(5) Lack of suitable reserve trees, which 

can withstand and survive a prescribed 

burning treatment. 

Silvicultural prescriptions have been or will 

be changed to reflect these findings. The 

Deputy Forest Supervisor, Forest Timber 

Management Officer, Forest Ecologist, 

District Culturist, and District Assistant Fire 

Management Officer participated in this 

review. 

In October of 2001 a monitoring trip was 

conducted which included soil, hydrology, 

and silviculture specialists to determine 

impacts of past, small scale salvage 

operations. Though some soil impacts 

were identified, regional soils standards 

appear to have been met. Prescriptions 

were appropriate and implemented as 

written. 

(1) Inadequate pullback of activity slash to 

protect leave trees was observed. 

E-2 Prescription Selections 

METHODS 

65 

Review of one large timber sale sold during 

the fiscal year(s). 
TIMBER 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Assure openings comply 

with size limits and are 

periodically evaluated for 

appropriateness 

FINDINGS 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+ / -) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Annually Unacceptable results of an ID No No 

Team Review 

The DanieWKinney Timber Sale (2001) 

review concluded that prescription choice 

was determined primarily by the desire to 

create more of a mix of vegetative structural 

stages through harvesting of old and 

decadent forest and regenerating treatment 

units with vigorous, younger forests. 

Timber harvest has been concentrated in 

already fragmented forests, which 

maintains elk security cover. Measures 

were taken which in fact reduced the cost 

effectiveness but enhanced long-term 

resource protection. This included the 

marking and long-term retention of reserve 

trees resulting in a direct cost to the 

government and a reduction of immediate 

volume obtained from the stands. These 

prescriptions were developed from the 

selected alternative, which only ranked 

fourth out of seven alternatives in regards 

to benefitkost ratios and net present value. 

E-3 Timber Openings 

METHODS 

One timber sale is reviewed on the ground 

annually by an interdisciplinary team. 

FINDINGS 

The 28 sale units in the DanieWKinney 

Timber Sale were all less than 40 acres. 

Many of these could not be enlarged 

because they were located next to 

previously harvestedhegenerated stands. 

The units were delineated based on timber 

type lines, past harvest, feasibility for tractor 

logging, and were sensitive to visual and 

watershed values. They were consistent 

with the Forest Plan and Regional Guide 

direction for even-aged harvesting and 

keeping openings 40 acres or less. The 

timber sale review also noted the units are 

much smaller than the stands created by 

historic processes. The review team 

recommended that future sale design give 

greater consideration to larger units. 

The Dry Fork Restoration Analysis 

identified the necessity of creating openings 

beyond 40 acres to accommodate 

landscape processes, while recognizing 

various resource concerns. There were 

eleven large treatment areas that would 

exceed the 40 acre limitation, because of 

historical patch size (greater than 40 acres), 

stand-replacement fire treatments, the need 

to shift age-class distribution towards 

younger, regenerating forests, and the need 

to break up continuous forest fuels. Five of 

the treatment areas were adjacent to 

previous harvest openings, but even here 

new harvest alone would exceed the 40 

acre limitation. Many of these silvicultural 

treatments will retain considerable reserve 

patches up to 40 percent of some treatment 

areas. The request to exceed the specified 

66 
TIMBER . 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

size limits was approved for implementation 

in October 1995 and incorporated into the 

REPORTING 

PERIOD 

Record of Decision in November 2001. 

VARIABILITY (+ / -) WHICH 

WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

EVALUATION 

+ / - 20% annually or + / - 10% 

over a five year period. 

E-4 Timber Offered/AlIowable Sale Quantity for Decade 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

Yes No 

Forest Plan (First Decade/Second Decade) 

1987 

Assure timber offered does Annually 

not differ from allowable sale 

quantity (ASQ) for 1 O-year I 

Allowable Sale Quantity 

12.0h4.6 

7.2 

1989 

1990 

1991 

The volume figures are obtained from the 

Timber Cut and Sold Reports. 

6.3 

8.3 

15.7 

FINDINGS 

1993 

1994 

1995 

The allowable sale quantity (ASQ) is the 

amount of timber that may be sold from 

7.3 

1.7 

1.4 

~ ~ 

suitable lands. For the Lewis and Clark 

National Forest, this is set at 12.0 mmbf on 

an annual basis. Not all harvest counts 

toward this total. A summary of the sold 

timber that counts toward ASQ for the 

period 1987 to 2001 is included below: 

1997 

1998 

1999 

Table E-4a. Allowable Sale Quantity (Million Board Feet) 

12.5 

6.6 

13.0 

2000 

2001 

0.6 

6.9 

The Lewis and Clark National Forest sold 

approximately 74 percent of the ASQ during 

the first decade of Forest Plan 

implementation (1 987-1 996). This is a 26 

percent variation from the ASQ. The trend 

into the second decade, 1997-2001, 

67 
TIMBER 

indicates about 54 percent of the ASQ has 

been sold. This is in part a reflection of 

harvesting on lands outside the timber base 

to accomplish other resource management 

objectives and salvage. The item remains 

valid as a monitoring tool primarily as an 

upper threshold, rather than as a target. 

The Forest Plan should reflect the need to 

use harvesting in most management areas 

such as sawlogs, poles, posts, houselogs, 

and firewood. The yearly timber program 

totals include the volume sold, volume 

offered for sale, and volume delayed 

because of appeals. During FY 01, the 

Forest sold or offered 8.7 mmbf. The 

DanieWKinney Timber Sale was offered 

late in the fiscal year so it shows as offered, 

but not sold on some reports. It was sold in 

to achieve other resource objectives. 

In addition to the ASQ, the Forest monitors 

its yearly timber program. The yearly 

timber program is an agreement between 

the Forest Supervisor and the Regional 

Forester based on yearly Congressional 

appropriations. The total timber program 

for the Forest includes all timber products 

October of 2001 and was credited in FY 

2001. The Dry Fork Timber Sale was 

originally planned to be sold in FY 2000, 

then 2001, but was delayed due to appeals 

and is scheduled to sell in 2002. 

A summary of FY 1987 through FY 2001 

timber program follows: 

Table E-4b. Timber Program (Million Board Feet) 

2001 I 17.0 I 3.6 I 5.1 I 0.0 I 

(1) Annual Forest sell program is the total of allowable sale quantity and additional sales (i.e., other products) 

(2) FY 1992 target includes planned carry-over volume of 10.5 MMBF. 

(3) FY 1994 target includes carry-over volume of 6.0 MMFB for Smokey B. 

Differences in total volume figures are due to rounding. 

68 
TIMBER 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Assure restocking is in 

progress within five years. 

E-5 Restocking 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+ / -) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION item? Pian? 

Annually Unacceptable results of an ID No No 

Team Review 

METHODS 

Stocking surveys are conducted on each 

District. 

FINDINGS 

Re-stocking of harvested areas has been 

successful throughout most of the Forest. 

The 2001 Reforestation Indices indicate 

that 96 percent of all stands with a final 

harvest cut since 1986 are progressing 

towards adequate stocking or were certified 

as adequately stocked within five years of 

the final harvest, and no failures occurred 

five or more years following final harvest. 

Final harvests include clearcut, 

shelterwood, or seed tree removal. A 

failure occurs when planned regeneration 

fails to provide adequate stocking and an 

alternate treatment is applied. 

The final harvest certification index 

indicates that 69 percent of stands were 

certified as adequately reforested within five 

years of final harvest. The stands that have 

failed to meet the five year time frame 

generally have required planting where 

natural regeneration had been the planned, 

but had not met prescribed stocking levels. 

Blowdown of seed trees in Douglas-fir 

stands and the invasion of heavy grasses 

after lodgepole pine harvest are among the 

causes for all or portions of some units to 

have poor natural regeneration. When this 

occurs, there is a period from when the 

stocking survey indicates poor natural 

regeneration to the time necessary for 

procuring seedlings from the nursery that 

the five-year time period is exceeded. An 

extended regeneration time period of 10 

years in lodgepole pine and 15 to 20 in dry 

Douglas-fir sites would be necessary to 

secure adequate natural regeneration. 

Additionally, events such as fires have 

caused a delayed regeneration period. 

The index for the number of stands with a 

regeneration harvest and certified since 

1986 with trees/acre greater than or equal 

to the prescribed treedacre shows that 97 

percent of the certified stands meet 

prescribed stocking levels. This index 

shows that even if stands are taking longer 

to be successfully reforested they are 

meeting the stocking levels developed in 

silvicultural prescriptions. 

Reforestation monitoring since 1986 also 

indicates that it takes a little over five years 

from the initial planting activity to certify the 

plantation as reforested, and about two 

years for units prescribed for natural 

regeneration to be certified as reforested. 

69 
TIMBER 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Assure timber acres 

E-6 Acres Harvested 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+ / -) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

5 years + / - 10% deviation over a five No Yes 

Description 

Forest Plan 

1987 

1988 

I harvested are as projected. I I year period. I I I 

Volume Under Contract Volume Harvested 

(mmbf)'" Acres Harvested (m m b f )'" 

1,800 

29.1 1,144 16.8 

26.4 775 11.1 

METHODS 

Data on acres harvested are taken from the 

Timber Stand Management Record System 

and from the Timber Cut and Sold Reports. 

FINDINGS 

About 806 acres were harvested in 2001 for 

a volume of 8.9 mmbf. The Forest Plan 

projected that annual harvest would be 

about 1,800 acres per year. Over the past 

15 years the area harvested has averaged 

1,107 acres per year, while over the past 

five years the area harvested has averaged 

1,020 acres per year. Acres harvested are 

expected to remain below Forest Plan 

expectations. It remains a valid monitoring 

item to ensure that harvesting over the lonb 

term is at a sustainable level. The volume 

per acre harvested has averaged 10.2 

MBF/acre. The Forest Plan estimated about 

7 MBF/acre. With increases in intermediate 

treatments and two-aged treatments, the 

acreage harvested relative to the volume 

removed will likely increase to approaching 

Forest Plan levels. 

Table E-6a. Timber Under Contract and Volume and Acres Harvested 

2001 I 8.9 I 806 I 8.9 I 

Data for Volume Under Contract for 1987 through 1990 has been adjusted to include estimates for per acre 

material (PAM). 

(*) Does not include personal firewood volume 

70 
TIMBER 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD 

TO BE MEASURED 

Assure accomplishment of 5 years 

thinning and other 

silvicultural treatments as 

E-7 Thinning and Silvicultural Accomplishments 

VARIABILITY (+ / -) WHICH Change Change 

WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

+ / - 10% deviation over a five No No 

year period. 

Plan (1' zzzzz am kSS3S Forest 

Decadd2" 

Description Decade) 

0 195 67 25 28 245 151 253 

0 0 0 0 0 50 24 48 

PlantlSeed acres 54150 

(Appropriated $) 

PlantlSeed acres 2701250 

(KV $1 

Site Prep. Natural 

(Appropriated $) 

Site Prep. Natural 

acres (KV $) 

Site Prep. Natural 

acres (other $) 

Site Prep. Natural 

acres (Purchaser) 

Thinning (TSl) 

acres 200 443 441 307 268 329 186 216 178 

(Appropriated $) 

Thinning (TSl) 

acres (KV $) 

Release acres 

(Appropriated $) 

Release acres 

JKV $1 

acres 21730259210 0 0 0 

1,064 490 590 190 0 0 0 9 

0 39 84 144 284 1,292 358 4 

0 300 253 269 203 321 422 857 

0 40 0 0 0 0 24 111 140 

120 127 195 72 5 0 0 0 

85120 0 0 0 0 0 

METHODS 

CU~bro(Dlcooao rnaJo-baacncnao~ 7Fzzzzzzoo CUCU 

148 373 134 59 304 295 117 

12 53 0 68 191 62 36 

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

374 0 0 855 0 0 0 

514 687 140 332 387 244 246 

348 98 85 525 15 0 171 

127 0 0 0 0 0 0 

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

101630 0 0 0 0 

Data for this monitoring item is obtained 

from the Regional Report from the Timber 

Stand Management Record System 

(TS M RS) . 

FINDINGS 

The following table indicates 

accomplishment of reforestation, timber 

stand improvement (TSI) and other 

silvicultural treatments. 

Table E-7a. Timber Stand Improvement and Other Treatments 

Most reforestation on the Forest is 

accomplished by natural regeneration. 

Assumptions in the Forest Plan were that 

about 1,740 acres would be reforested on 

71 
TIMBER 

’ OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change Change 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Ensure harvest by even-age Annually Unacceptable results of an ID No No 

management is compatible Team review 

with resource values. 

suitable lands annually during the first 

decade. About 18 percent (320 acres) 

would require planting, with the remaining 

1,420 acres being naturally regenerated. 

The experienced average for the past 15 

years has been 196 acres of planting 

annually, while over the last five years 253 

acres annually have been planted. Natural 

regeneration has been successful on an 

average of 754 acres annually over the 15- 

year period, while only 441 acres of natural 

regeneration has been established annually 

over the last five years. About 21 percent 

of lands regenerated over the last 15 years 

were by artificial (planting) reforestation, 

which is slightly above the expected rate. 

The artificial reforestation rate has been 

higher over the last five years at 29 percent, 

which is more than a 10 percent deviation 

from what the Forest Plan envisioned. 

However, regeneration needs are much 

lower than projected in the Forest Plan for 

the past five years. 

The Forest Plan projects 200 acres of precommercial thinning in the first decade. 

Since 1987, the Forest has averaged 270 

acres annually, which is above the 

projected level. Only 159 acredyear have 

received thinning over the last five years. 

This expected decline is due to the majority 

of the pre-1980s stands have now been 

thinned and other resource issues, 

especially the lynx conservation strategy, 

which has affected thinning priorities. The 

thinning average for the last five years is 

also beyond the 10 percent deviation in the 

Forest Plan. 

Annual prescribed burning for composition 

and stocking control was projected to be 20 

acres in the Little Snowies to control 

stocking levels in the ponderosa pine 

(Forest Plan page 4-57). The need for this 

type of treatment for natural fuels reduction 

and forest health across other forest types 

has become a major issue in recent years. 

The Forest has accomplished about 100 

acres from 1994 to 2001 total, although 

planning is in progress for significantly more 

acres in future years. 

E-8 Even-Age Harvest 

METHODS 

One timber sale is reviewed each year by 

an interdisciplinary team. 

FINDINGS mistletoe. 

systems were appropriate and met the 

objectives of Management Areas B and C. 

Clearcutting appeared to be optimum for 

units which were dominated by lodgepole 

pine and heavily infected with dwarf 

The review of DanieWKinney Timber Sale 

indicates that even-aged silvicultural 

All timber sales have had interdisciplinary 

involvement as core planning team 

72 
TIMBER 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Firewood Removal Annually Use increase exceeds 10% per 

members or, in the case of small timber 

sales, affected resources are reviewed by 

specialists. The analysis included the 

effects of silvicultural treatments 

implementing even-aged management. 

Although there are many trade-offs in how 

any particular piece of land is treated, the 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

No No 

treatment selected by the deciding official 

was determined to best meet the goals. 

Where clearcutting was selected, it was 

also determined to be the optimum 

treatment by a certified silviculturist 

considering all land management goals. 

Description 

1987 

E-9 Firewood Removal 

Personal Use Firewood 

Permits Sold 

Commercial and Personal Use 

Firewood Volume Sold (mmbf) 

1.487 3.5 

1994 

1995 

1996 

1997 

1998 

1999 

2000 

2001 

METHODS 

1,050 1.5 

1,116 1.5 

1,418 1.2 

1,045 1.4 

734 1 .o 

902 1.3 

777 1.2 

832 1.6 

Data is compiled annually from the Timber 

Sale Cut and Sold Reports. 

In FY 2001, about 1.5 mmbf of personal 

use and commercial firewood was removed 

from the Forest. A summary of FY 1987 

through 2001 firewood removal follows: 

FINDINGS 9 

Table E-9a. Commercial and Personal Use Firewood Removal 

I 9aa I 1,023 I 2.3 

1989 1.401 3.2 I 

1990 I 1,205 I 2.2 

1991 1,193 1 .a 

I 1992 I 1,127 1 1.6 I 

73 
TIMBER 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Evaluate availability of lands 

classified as suitable or 

unsuitable 

E-I 0 Suitable/Nonsuitable Lands 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

5 years + I - 5% change in acreage No No 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Projected yields 

METHODS 

The evaluation of land suitability for 

tentatively suitable lands and the further 

division of these lands into suitable forest 

land available for timber harvests is 

ongoing through project analysis and timber 

stand examinations. timber production. 

maintained in TSMRS. Additionally, during 

NEPA analyses, management allocations 

are reviewed for appropriateness. Several 

projects have resulted in Forest Plan 

Amendments modifying the management 

area assignment. This has resulted in a 

reduction in lands deemed suitable for 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+I-) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Annually Standard error of 10% at 1 No No 

standard deviation 

FINDINGS Suitable Acres identified in the 

Project analyses have refined the land 

suitability classes which identify stands that 

are tentatively suitable for timber production 

or non-suitable due to site conditions (ability 

to reforest, etc.). This information is 

Forest Plan: 282,307 acres 

265,749 acres 

Suitable Acres currently identified: 

Change: 16,558 acres (-5.9%) 

E-1 1 Projected Yields 

METHODS FINDINGS 

Establishment and repeated measurement 

of growth plots. 

Summary of growth plot establishment and 

remeasurement is as follows: 

74 
TIMBER 

1 979-1 985 

1986 

1987 

1988 

1989 

1990 

1991 

1992 

Table E-I 1 a. Growth Plots (Number of Plots) 

27 7 

2 2 

0 2 

1 0 

2 4 

2 6 

2 3 

1 7 

I I I Description Growth Plots Established Growth Plots Remeasured 1 

1994 

1995 

1996 

1997 

1998 

0 3 

0 9 

0 2 

0 0 

0 0 

1999 

2000 

2001 

0 0 

0 0 

0 1 

Growth plots are intended to evaluate how 

managed stands are growing over time; 

they are the primary tool we have for 

assessing the accuracy of yield tables used 

in forest planning. 

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. Therefore, growth plots 

that have had their planned timber activity 

accomplished and remeasurement 

completed, have data only from one 

measurement. 

Growth plot information is managed for the 

Region as a whole with like forest 

conditions combined regardless of the 

National Forest on which the information 

was collected. Measurements on plots 

which duplicate conditions on other Forests 

will not be continued as a result of Regional 

funding declines however previously 

collected data will be maintained for future 

use if needed. This will reduce the number 

of plots needed on the Lewis and Clark 

National Forest and projected by the Forest 

Plan. Currently, 12 plots are selected for 

continued measurement, and an additional 

nine plots have data suitable for analysis 

but will not be re-measured. When Forest 

Plan Revision occurs (2005-2008), it is 

anticipated the growth plot information 

would be analyzed to update yield 

projections. 

75 
4 

WATER AND SOIL 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING Change Change 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Adequacy and cumulative Annually - Projected deterioration of soil Yes Yes 

Effects of Project BMPs 100% Sample productivity or water usability 

WATER AND SOIL 

F-1 Adequacy and Cumulative Effects of Best Management Practices 

METHODS 

All proposed projects which have potential 

for impact to soil or water quality are 

monitored through review of the project 

environmental documentation. This review 

ensures that adequate best management 

practices (BMPs) have been prescribed to 

maintain and protect existing soil 

productivity and water quality conditions. In 

the case of significant vegetation removal, a 

cumulative effects analysis is also 

evaluated to predict increases in water and 

sediment yield as a result of the project. 

This year, we are also reporting results of 

soil quality monitoring under this reporting 

item. 

FINDINGS 

Soil and water resources were evaluated 

through the following environmental 

documents: South Fork Sun Prescribed 

Burn (2000), Musselshell Range 

Environmental Assessment (2001 ), and Dry 

Fork Vegetation Restoration Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (2001). 

Impacts to soil and water resources were 

determined to be within established 

guidelines and laws for all preferred 

alternatives. 

During FY 01, soil quality monitoring was 

conducted for eleven management units. 

Eight of these units represented timber 

harvest projects, and three represented 

prescribed burning projects. 

Soil quality monitoring was completed 

during the fall 2000 to quantify residual 

effects to soils within past timber harvest 

units in the Smoky Corridor timber sale 

area and in the Dry Fork project area (Little 

Belt Mountains). This monitoring showed 

that less than 15 percent of the activity area 

was affected by detrimental disturbance 

from soil rutting, displacement, severe 

burning, soil mass movement, or surface 

erosion, thereby meeting Region One Soil 

Quality Standards. Protective ground cover 

in all units was greater than 90 percent, 

with typically 80 percent of this being fine or 

coarse organic material. This suggests that 

long-term nutrient cycling is being 

maintained in these areas. ' However, this 

monitoring shows that residual soil 

compaction occurs on more than 15 

percent of the area within past harvest units 

that were logged with tractor yarding, and 

where site preparation was accomplished 

with tractor pile and burn, or tractor 

scarification. Residual soil compaction also 

occurs on more than 15 percent of an area 

along the valley bottom of Dry Fork Belt 

Creek, which has been affected by personal 

use firewood cutting. Residual soil 

compaction occurred on less than 15 

percent of the area within harvest units that 

were harvested with tractor yarding and/or 

jammer roads, and where site preparation 

76 
WATER AND SOIL 

was accomplished with lop and scatter, or 

broadcast burn methods. 

Possible cumulative effects from grazing 

within these past harvest units were also 

assessed. Minor grazing use was 

evidenced by visible livestock trails along 

temporary roads and main skid trails, and 

by light grazing utilization of grasses within 

past harvest units. However, no cumulative 

effects to soils from grazing use within past 

harvest units were discernible. 

Sampling was also conducted within the 

proposed Anderson Select Commercial 

Thinning project area in June 2001. The 

area has had past (1 980s) harvest activity 

using clear-cut treatments with tractor 

skidding, slash piling and burning. Areas 

adjacent to past harvest units have been 

proposed for commercial thinning. Only a 

small number of samples were taken, as 

such, results are not considered statistically 

valid to draw conclusion regarding 

percentage of these units that continue to 

show evidence of detrimental soil 

disturbance from past harvest activities, 

however general interpretations can be 

discussed: 

Soil cover is generally adequate to 

protect soil from accelerated erosion, 

including areas of major skid trails 

and reclaimed temporary roads; 

Soil compaction and displacement is 

generally limited to major skid trails, 

and due to plant recovery on these 

areas, root growth is working to 

break up the compacted layers; 

Severe burning is limited to areas 

where logging slash was piled and 

burned; and 

Soil rutting and mass wasting was 

not observed. 

A field reconnaissance of soil conditions 

within three prescribed burn units in the 

Judith project area was conducted in 

September 2001. The reconnaissance was 

conducted by obtaining visual estimates of 

ground cover, soil erosion, fine organic 

material, coarse woody material, and 

severely burned soils. 

The first unit had been mechanically treated 

in 1996 to remove about one third of the 

Ponderosa pine tree basal area in small 

group-select openings. The unit was then 

underburned in April 1999. Soil quality 

observations indicated that the burn was 

low severity with approximately 90 to 100 

percent ground cover with adequate 

retention of both fine and organic material 

and coarse woody material. No evidence of 

soil erosion was observed. 

The second and third units reviewed were 

burned during spring 2001, under 

conditions that represented the “wet end” of 

the burn prescription. On the second burn 

unit, approximately 85 to 95 percent ground 

cover was retained, with adequate retention 

of both fine organic, material and coarse 

woody material. No evidence of soil 

erosion was observed. The site showed 

approximately 10 percent tree mortality. 

On the third unit, soil quality observations 

indicated the burn was low to moderate in 

severity (i.e., no severely burned soil was 

observed). Only approximately 50 to 60 

percent ground cover was retained, with 

most fine organic material and coarse 

woody material consumed. Minor evidence 

of soil erosion was observed. The first 

order stream tributaries showed evidence of 

surface water runoff, which was moving 

suspended organic material (pine cones 

and pine needle duff), but did not appear to 

be carrying mineral soil as sediment. This 

site showed pockets of 100 percent tree 

mortality . 

77 
WATER AND SOIL 

RECOMMENDATIONS Environmental Impact Statement. Only 

Soil monitoring in prescribed burn areas will 

continue in order to determine how best to 

accomplish prescribed burning objectives 

while meeting Regional Soil Quality 

Standards. 

This monitoring item is covered under the 

regulatory requirements of NEPA, NFMA 

and the Clean Water Act. All projects with 

the potential to impact soil and water 

resources are required to be evaluated 

through an Environmental Assessment or 

alternatives that are not expected to 

significantly affect soil and water resources 

are chosen for implementation. In order to 

make this monitoring item more useful, it is 

suggested that the variability relate more to 

the effectiveness of BMPs as determined 

through monitoring as opposed to projected 

deterioration of soil productivity or water 

quality as identified through NEPA 

analyses. Forest-wide management 

standards (pages 2-50 to 2-52) should be 

revised to reflect the information above. 

F-2 Revegetation 

OUTPUT, 

MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, 

EFFECTS TO BE 

MEASURED 

Revegetation of 

temporarily 

disturbed areas and 

roads within five 

years 

REPORTING 

PERIOD 

Annually - 75% 

sample two 

years after 

termination 

1 VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

EVALUATION 

Unacceptable results of an ID 

Team Review 

Change 

Monitoring 

Item? 

Yes 

Change 

Forest Plan? 

Yes 

METHODS 

Revegetation efforts on temporarily 

disturbed areas and roads are monitored 

through Interdisciplinary Team reviews. 

These reviews are to be carried out on 75 

percent of the revegetation projects for the 

purpose of evaluating revegetation success 

and the need for additional revegetation 

efforts. The reviews occur within two years 

after project termination. 

Table F-2a. Project List for Revegetation 

78 
WATER AND SOIL 

Project Title 

Running Wolf T.S. 

Spring Basin 

I Scheduled 

Date of Review I 

Completion Completed . Comments 

1999 1999 All contractual requirements met 

2002 80% complete 

West Hopley 

Flat Whiskey T.S. 

Hensley Creek T.S. 

Absaroka II 

1996 1998 All contractual requirements met 

2004 75% complete 

2003 50% complete 

1996 1998 Sale comPleted and accePted 

I I I I summer2002 I 

I Dry Wolf Stewardship I 2003 I I 10% complete I 

T.S. = Timber Sale 

FINDINGS 

During 2000, BMPs were evaluated on the 

Forest as part of the State BMP Audit 

process. The audits were conducted on 

unit 36 of the Spring Basin Timber Sale and 

unit three of the Tenderfoot Creek 

Experimental Forest Timber Sale. 

On unit 36, six BMPs had minor departures 

from standard applications. Four of the 

departures were still effective in providing 

adequate protection for soil and water 

resources. These four departures involved 

directing road drainage to a stream 

crossing site, inadequate compliance with 

streamside management zone (SMZ) 

retention tree requirements, equipment 

operation in an SMZ, and inadequate SMZ 

width on slopes exceeding 35 percent. Two 

of the minor departures from standard 

applications had major, but temporary, 

impacts to soil and water resources. One 

road segment did not provide adequate 

road surface drainage which resulted in 

delivery to ephemeral channels. Another 

road segment was not adequately graded 

to maintain drainage features, which again 

resulted in delivery to ephemeral channels. 

On unit 3, two BMPs had minor departures 

and one BMP had a major departure from 

standard applications. The two minor 

departures had minor, but temporary impact 

to soil and water resources. These two 

departures involved directing road drainage 

to a stream crossing site, and not 

adequately protecting or stabilizing a 

crossdrain culvert because of a steep catch 

basin and high outlet. The major departure 

from standard application was related to 

inadequate SMZ width on slopes less than 

35 percent. Although this was considered a 

major departure from standard application 

procedures, the departure was still effective 

79 
WATER AND SOIL 

in providing adequate protection for soil and 

water resources. 

A field review was completed on two timber 

sales authorized under the salvage sale 

rider of the 1995 Recission Bill. These two 

sales were the Foothills Salvage Timber 

Sale and Dead Clyde Salvage Timber Sale. 

The Foothills Salvage was comprised of 

seven small units totaling 73 acres. 

Portions of four units where SMZs occurred 

were identified and reviewed. Two of the 

five SMZs were actually dry, vegetated 

swales and therefore posed no risk to water 

quality. Harvest activities along three other 

SMZs were determined to be in compliance 

with the Montana SMZ law. Although some 

harvest did occur within the SMZs, more 

than adequate leave tree requirements 

were met and there appeared to be no 

equipment operation within this zone. Due 

to responsive sale administration, timber 

within the SMZ in one unit was dropped 

because yarding difficulties in terms of 

crossing the streambed were identified prior 

to cutting. Because of the relatively low 

volume harvested, soil disturbance from 

skid trails posed little risk of down slope 

impacts to water quality. 

0 

The Dead Clyde Salvage was comprised of 

eight units between 2 and 26 acres. Three 

units were reviewed, two of which were on 

flat ground where standing water and 

saturated soils were likely to occur during 

most years. Soils in both units were either 

dry or frozen as no rutting or other major 

soil displacement was observed. There 

were no intermittent or perennial streams in 

or adjacent to these units, so the risk of 

impacting water quality was basically nonexistent. 

The last unit reviewed in the Dead Clyde 

Salvage was the closest unit in the sale 

area to any streams. It was located about 

400 feet from an intermittent channel to the 

south and about 150 feet from a perennial 

stream to the north. A temporary road 

skirted the perimeter of the unit between 

these two drainages. Except for a few low 

gradient segments, the road basically 

followed the contour around the unit. The 

road base was about 70 percent vegetated 

with forbs and grass and an occasional 

conifer seedling. The geology of the area 

produced very sandy soils that could be 

highly mobile. However, due to the high 

infiltration capacity of the soil, the vegetated 

road base and the low gradient of the road, 

only very minimal and spotty surface 

erosion was observed on the road surface. 

Skid trails within the unit were basically no 

longer visible. There was no indication of 

water movement down slope to the 

temporary road. 

The perennial stream on the north end was 

investigated. Except for the fine textured 

soil banks, it is a relatively stable channel 

controlled by woody debris and adjacent 

tree roots. The harvest unit boundary was 

about 150 feet from the channel at the 

closest point. There were no effects from 

the timber harvest or temporary road 

observed. The main impact to the channel 

was from livestock accessing the channel 

from the harvest unit. The remainder of the 

stream adjacent to this unit was not 

affected by the harvest due to a 200 to 400 

foot buffer zone. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

This monitoring item duplicates some 

information that may be documented under 

three other monitoring items F-3, 4, and 5. 

Revegetation of disturbed areas is required 

on activities in riparian areas, floodplains, 

wetlands, and municipal watersheds. It is 

also a basic BMP that is usually required for 

80 
WATER AND SOIL 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Water quality effects of 

activities in municipal 

watersheds 

a variety of activities, e.g., harvest, road 

obliteration or closure, and mining or drilling 

activities. The recommendation is to 

combine this item with items F-3, F-4 and 

F-5, into one item titled Forest Projects - 

BMP Monitoring. This single item would 

cover implementation and effectiveness 

monitoring on all project specific BMPs 

covered under FSH 2509 which includes 

BMPs for watershed management, 

REPORTING VAR I AB I LlTY (+/-) WH IC H Change Change . PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Annually - all Adverse water quality affects or Yes Yes 

projects violates water quality standards 

recreation, vegetation manipulation, timber 

harvest, roads, trails, facilities, minerals, 

range management, fire suppression, and 

fuels management. Revise Forest-wide 

management standards (pages 2-50 to 2- 

52) to emphasize BMP application, 

effectiveness and monitoring, but drop 

narratives related to specific items of 

revegetation. 

F-3 Water Quality In Municipal Watersheds 

METHODS 

Activities which take place in municipal 

watersheds are monitored through water 

quality predictions, administrative reviews, 

and water quality sampling. The purpose of 

these monitoring efforts is to assure that 

reasonable BMPs were prescribed, 

implemented and effective in reducing 

water quality impacts. O'Brien Creek and 

Willow Creek are the two municipal 

watersheds within the Forest. 

FINDINGS 

A water quality station was established on 

O'Brien Creek in 1992 to evaluate the 

effects of upslope timber harvest and road 

building activities on water quality. 

Suspended sediment and discharge data 

was collected during the spring and 

summer months during 1992,1993 and 

1994. Analysis of the data and evaluation of 

the sampling methodology suggests that 

the data cannot be used to draw valid 

conclusions about the effects of these 

activities on water quality. The reasons for 

this are due to the complex interactions 

between (1) annual variations in 

precipitationhun-off rates resulting in 

variations in surface and instream erosion 

processes (magnitude, frequency and 

timing), (2) annual variations in sediment 

storage, transport and delivery rates, (3) 

dilution of suspended sediment by tributary 

inflows, and (4) measurement uncertainty. 

Additionally, these complex interactions 

make it difficult, if not impossible, to 

differentiate between sediment related to 

present management from sediment related 

to past management and management 

related to sediment from natural sediment. 

Suspended sediment sampling is generally 

not a cost effective methodology for 

detecting trends associated with non-point 

pollution over time. Due to the temporal 

and spatial variability mentioned above, it is 

suggested that at least 5 to 10 years of 

both, pre and post monitoring are likely to 

81 
WATER AND SOIL 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Activities in riparian areas, 

flood plains, and wetlands 

be necessary to reliably detect a 

sedimentary cumulative watershed effect 

(NCASI 1999). Pre activity monitoring was 

not possible in O'Brien Creek since 

significant timber harvest and road 

construction already occurred prior to the 

start of monitoring in 1992. Suspended 

sediment sampling is better suited for 

detecting differences in 

upstream/downstream conditions for a 

specific localized activity with a known point 

source of sediment, or for comparing 

sediment loads of hydrologically equivalent 

watersheds for the same period of time 

(MacDonald and others 1991). 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Annually - 50% Unacceptable results of an ID Yes Yes 

of all projects Team review 

On April 25, 1995, personnel from the 

Lewis and Clark National Forest met with 

the Mayor of Neihart to review data 

obtained from the monitoring station and to 

discuss the possibility to discontinue this 

station. In lieu of a water quality station on 

O'Brien Creek, it was agreed that on-site 

field reviews of recent activities in the 

drainage would be adequate to address the 

concern of water quality impacts. The 

station was discontinued after the 1994 

runoff season. 

On August 17, 1995 Forest personnel met 

with the Mayor of Neihart to review recent 

management activities in the O'Brien Creek 

drainage and to discuss the potential 

implication of these activities on the 

municipal water supply for Neihart. Overall, 

there was agreement between all present, 

that these recent timber harvest and road 

activities were located far enough upslope 

so that any potential sediment produced 

from the activities would be filtered before 

reaching the municipal water supply 

reservoir near the bottom of O'Brien Creek. 

However, the Mayor did request that no 

more timber harvest occur in this drainage. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

See recommendations under F-1 , F-2, and 

F-7. Revise Forest Plan Management Area 

(MA) descriptions for MA-J (pages 3-49 to 

3-52) to accurately define the MA-J 

boundary in O'Brien Creek and revise the 

direction to manage timber for the sole 

purpose of maintaining high quality water 

for municipal use. 

F-4 Riparian Areas, Flood Plains, and Wetlands 

METHODS 

Activities in riparian areas, flood plains, and 

wetlands are monitored through 

administrative reviews and long-term 

project monitoring. The purpose of these 

reviews or monitoring is to verify that the 

NEPA decision and Best Management 

Practices (BMPs) are implemented as 

planned, and are effective in improving or 

protecting soil and water resources. Longterm monitoring uses established methods 

that can be found in Rosgen (1 996), 

Harrelson et al. (1994), Bevenger and King 

(1995), and Bunte and Abt (2001). 

82 
WATER AND SOIL 

Permanent cross-sections were established 

along each reach by setting rebar in 

concrete. Channel geometry was 

measured at each cross-section site three 

different years between 1995 and 2001. 

Channel geometry was measured using 

basic surveying techniques. 

Channel substrate was measured using the 

pebble count methodology (Wolman 1954). 

Pebble counts are taken above and below 

each cross-section, perpendicular to 

streamflow. The substrate data is a 

composite of the total pebble counts for the 

reach by year of survey. The data was 

evaluated statistically using a Pearson chisquared statistic in a 2x2 contingency table 

for particle sizes less than 2 mm, less than 

4 mm, and less than 8 mm. 

The pebble count methodology does have 

its limitations and drawbacks, the majority 

of which revolve around observer bias in 

the selection and measurement of particles 

(Marcus et al. 1995). Reducing the effects 

of observer bias can be reduced, but 

generally requires an increase in sampling 

time and requires consistent use of the 

same observers. Since seasonal work 

forces change over time, consistent use of 

the same observers is not possible. 

Significant shifts in substrate composition 

can affect fish habitat. Excessive amounts 

of fine sediment in streams have long been 

known to damage trout habitat, especially 

spawning gravels where eggs and fry are 

smothered or trapped by particles smaller 

than 6 mm (Bjornn and Reiser 1991; 

Weaver and Fraley 1991). Accumulations 

of silt and sediment on stream substrates 

also impair trout habitat by clogging 

interstitial spaces needed for cover, 

overwinter survival and invertebrate food 

production; sedimentation that reduces pool 

depths can decrease the stream’s carrying 

capacity for adult and juvenile trout (Waters 

1995). 

FINDINGS 

Forest Wide 

An administrative review of range 

management across the Forest was held 

October 1-5, 2001. An integrated team 

reviewed implementation of recent grazing 

decisions on six allotments; one on the 

Rocky Mountain District, one on the Kings 

Hill District, and four on the Musselshell 

District. Review of two allotments on the 

Judith District was cancelled due to snow. 

Objectives: The objectives of the review 

were to determine if: 

0 decisions are being implemented, 

0 allowable use standards are being 

met, 

0 proposed bank standards are being 

met and how they should be applied, 

and 

0 allotments are being administered 

and if they are in compliance. 

FINDINGS 

Portions of three decisions were modified 

from what was planned; a water 

development was changed from a pumping 

station to a spring development to reduce 

costs, a riparian exclosure was smaller than 

planned, which resulted in exclosing only 

the spring source, and a decision was 

made to monitor an allotment rather than 

reduce stocking levels by 31 percent. 

Out of 19 pastures reviewed, current year’s 

grazing resulted in exceeding utilization 

standards in nine of the pastures. In some 

cases, it was only the key polygon that 

exceeded the standard, while the pasture 

overall did not. 

83 
WATER AND SOIL 

Out of 19 pastures reviewed, current years 

grazing resulted in moderate to high bank 

alteration levels in eight of the pastures. 

The amount of bank length affected ranged 

from 45 percent to 100 percent of the reach 

length reviewed. Implementation of a bank 

standard would be difficult to comply with in 

all eight pastures. Additional fencing was 

recommended to address some of these 

concerns. 

RECCOMENDATIONS 

The Forest has generally been successful 

in implementing the grazing decisions, but 

has not met standards sufficiently. There 

has been a significant increase in the 

amount of administration over previous 

years. This review indicates that the Forest 

needs to (1) improve its response to 

weather and forage production conditions, 

(2) be more aggressive in implementing 

portions of decisions (e.g., stocking 

reductions) before full implementation, (3) 

implement decisions as designed, and (4) 

increase monitoring and administration 

further to meet standards. 

Castle Mountains 

The Castle Mountains Range Analysis FEIS 

identified four reaches to monitor to 

determine how effective the planned 

changes in grazing management are in 

improving conditions of degraded riparian 

areas. Two of these reaches are located in 

the Checkerboard Allotment, one within an 

exclosure and one immediately below the 

exclosure. Another reach is located in the 

Bonanza Allotment and the last reach is 

located up stream in an exclosure in the 

Blackhawk Allotment. Both exclosures 

were built in 1995. 

Analysis of the data suggests an improving 

trend is occurring only in the South Fork 

Bonanza exclosure. The data for the other 

reaches suggests that conditions are 

changing either without an obvious direction 

in trend, or with a declining trend. These 

other reaches are apparently, still highly 

unstable. Data and trends for the individual 

reaches are discussed below. Refer to 

Table 1. 

Analysis of three USGS gaging stations 

near the Castle Mountains indicate that 

snowmelt runoff and summer rain events 

during 1997 produced significant peak flow 

conditions at these stations. The three 

stations are: Roberts Creek Tributary near 

Judith Gap (#06124600), Big Coulee 

Tributary near Martinsdale (#06117800), 

and Musselshell River near Harlowton 

(#06120500). Peak stream discharge has 

dropped significantly at these stations since 

1997. As a result, bank erosion and 

sediment transport capacity has also likely 

dropped significantly since 1997. 

Analysis of precipitation data from 1996 to 

2001 suggests that the spring and summer 

rain events of 1997 were significantly large 

and widespread. The data was collected at 

three weather observation sites located in 

White Sulphur Springs, Lennep and 

Martinsdale. The average total precipitation 

for these sites for May through August 1997 

was 14.0 inches. 1998 had the next 

highest rainfall for those same months at 

8.7 inches. The 1997 rainfall’s totals were 

similar between the sites: 15.2 inches at 

Lennep, 12.8 inches at White Sulphur 

Springs and 14.0 inches at Martinsdale. 

This information suggests that precipitation 

and runoff characteristics were similar 

across the Castle Mountains in 1997, and 

similar for the four survey reaches. 

84 
WATER AND SOIL 

PARAMETERS 

channel width 

Increase in 

floodplain 

elevation 

Total undercut 

banks 

PARAMETERS 

No obvious 

change in 

width and 

depth 

PARAMETERS 

channel width 

shift in 

channel 

location, and 

width or depth 

OTHER 

Number of 

useable 

cross-sections 

Beaver 

influenced (# 

of total x-s) 

SUMMARY OF 

Improving 

trend (% of 

total x-s) 

Static trend 

(“h of total x-s) 

Declining 

trend (“10 of 

total x-s) 

Substrate 

trend 

Decrease in 

Increase in 

Significant 

The 2001 

Table 1. Data Comparison Between Grazed 

and Ungrazed Reaches in the Castle Mountains 

SOUTH FORK BONANZA LOWER BONANZA - CHECKERBOARD EXCLOSURE OUTSIDE CHECKERBOARD 

EXCLOSURE - NOT GRAZED GRAZED - NOT GRAZED EXCLOSURE - GRAZED 

1997 I 1999 I 2001* 1997 I 1999 I 2001* 1997 I 1999 I 2001* 1997 I 1999 I 2001* 

SUGGESTING IMPROVING TREND (percent of total number of cross-sections exhibiting condition) 

na 50% 17% na 17% 22% na 47% 0 na 25% 13% 

na 61% 72% na 11% 44% na 53% 13% na 13% 0 

0 (’95) 44% 67% 11% 33% 6% na 13% 0 na 13% 0 

(‘96) 

SUGGESTING STATIC TREND (percent of total number of cross-sections exhibiting condition) 

na 33% 67% na 17% 28% na 13% 75% na 25% 75% 

SUGGESTING DECLINING TREND (percent of total number of cross-sections exhibiting condition) 

na 0 6% 56% 39% na 20% 25% na 25% 25% 

na 0 0 na 61% 0 na 27% 0 na 0 0 

INFORMATION 

18 18 18 18 18 18 16 15 8 8 8 8 

0 0 0 0 0 0 na 1 8 0 0 0 

TRENDS (refer to trend definitions below) 

na 72% 39% na 6% 22% na 27% 0 na 38% 13% 

na 17% 56% na 6% 28% na 20% 62% na 24% 49% 

na 11% 6% na 88% 50% na 53% 38% na 38% 38% 

coarser coarser finer ns finer finer finer coarser ns finer coarser ns 

cross-sections are compared to the previous survey year, i.e., 1999. 

South Fork Bonanza, Blackhawk 

Allotment, Reach 33, Not Grazed 

Eighteen permanent cross-section sites 

were established on this reach in 1995. A 

riparian exclosure fence was built prior to 

85 
WATER AND SOIL 

monitoring in 1995. The reach was 

resurveyed in 1997, 1999, and 2001. 

Visual comparison of the cross-section 

plots for 1995 and 1999 suggest that 

conditions are improving at 72 percent of 

the sites. Refer to Chart 1 for a typical 

cross-section that exhibits these trend 

characteristics. Channel and floodplain 

characteristics that support this conclusion 

include: 

1) an obvious decrease in channel 

width occurred at 50 percent of the 

cross-sections, while none showed 

an increase; 

2) new, stable undercut banks 

developed at 44 percent of the 

cross-sections; and 

3) an obvious increase in floodplain 

elevation occurred at 61 percent of 

the cross-sections, while none 

showed a decrease. 

Seven of the cross-sections that showed a 

decrease in width also showed an increase 

in depth. Three of the cross-sections (1 7 

percent) exhibited no obvious change in 

width and depth and therefore, appear to 

be in a static mode. Only two crosssections (1 1 percent) exhibited a declining 

trend. One was due to a significant shift in 

channel location (bank erosion), while a 

new channel was formed at the other crosssection. This last cross-section is the most 

upstream site near the exclosure fence. It 

is influenced by cattle that congregate 

along the stream just outside the exclosure. 

Visual comparison of the cross-section 

plots for 1999 and 2001 indicate that 

conditions are still improving at 39 percent 

of the sites. Channel and floodplain 

characteristics that support this conclusion 

include: 

1) an obvious decrease in channel 

width occurred at 17 percent of the 

cross-sections, while only 6 percent 

showed an increase; 

developed at 22 percent of the 

cross-sections (since 1999); and 

3) an obvious increase in floodplain 

elevation occurred at 72 percent of 

the cross-sections, while none 

showed a decrease. 

2) new, stable undercut banks 

Ten of the cross-sections (56 percent) 

exhibited no obvious change in width and 

depth and therefore, appear to be in a static 

mode. Only one cross-section exhibited a 

declining trend. No undercut banks existed 

in 1995, but now, 67 percent of the crosssections have developed stable undercut 

banks. Three of those cross-sections have 

now developed undercuts on both sides of 

the channel. 

The most significant change in crosssection geometry appears to have occurred 

between 1995 and 1999. The percentage 

of cross-sections exhibiting a static trend 

has increased from 17 percent in 1999 to 

56 percent in 2001. It is possible that some 

of the cross-sections that were improving 

up to 1999, but have now become static, 

may have reached their potential channel 

form, i.e., a properly functioning E type 

stream. A channel in its optimal form 

provides the greatest level of stable banks, . 

sediment transport capacity, resistance to 

flood related erosion, and aquatic habitat. 

E stream types are highly sensitive to 

grazing impacts, but are also highly resilient 

once the cause is eliminated. This 

corresponds with the high percentage of 

cross-sections exhibiting improvement in 

1999, and the possibility that some of these 

have already reached their potential by 

2001. 

Additionally, the 1997 runoff event did not 

appear to affect this reach as 72 percent of 

86 
WATER AND SOIL 

the cross-sections exhibited improvement 

up to 1999. It is likely that significant 

improvement had already occurred prior to 

the event, which significantly increased the 

ability of this reach to withstand the erosive 

energy of high streamflows. Properly 

functioning E type channels are highly 

resistant to flood events. 

All of these changes have likely occurred 

because excessive bank trampling and over 

utilization of riparian vegetation by livestock 

has been eliminated. Riparian vegetation 

10 

a 

E6 z 

0 

s 

z4 

4 

w 

2 

0 

Note: The 

elevation. 

has increased in vigor and density, 

improved bank stability and armoring, and 

resulted in less erosion during high flows. 

More vigorous and dense vegetation has 

also increased sediment trapping capability, 

resulting in increased bank building, 

narrower channels, and elevated 

floodplains. Elevated floodplains may also 

be the result of increased leaf litter and 

organic soil layer, and reduced soil 

compaction. The formation of undercut 

banks again, indicates a more vigorous and 

dense vegetation and associated rootmass. 

Chart 1. Cross-section Analysis South Fork Bonanza Exclosure 

ELEVATION axis is plotted at approximately twice the scale of the DISTANCE axis to better depict 

No undercut banks existed at this cross-section. 

the change in 

87 
WATER AND SOIL 

Chart 2. Substrate Data South Fork Bonanza Exclosure 

CUMULATIVE PARTICLE SIZE DISTFUBUTION 

South Fork Bonanza Exclosure 

z 

IW 

LL 

Iz 

W 

0 

K 

W 

9 

a 

z 

n 

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 

PARllclEsIzE(mn) 

2001 

1999 

1997 

1995 

- 

Note: A shift in individual lines upward and to the left suggests an increase in fines has occurred, while a shift downward and 

to the right suggests a decrease in fines has occurred. 

The substrate data indicates a noticeable 

shift towards more coarse material between 

1995 and 1997. Refer to Chart 2. This shift 

is statistically significant at the 99 percent 

confidence level for cumulative particle 

sizes finer than 2 mm and finer than 4 mm. 

In 1995, particle sizes finer than 2 mm 

comprised 41.5 percent of the total counts, 

while in 1997 they decreased to only 32.4 

percent. The majority of this decrease can 

be attributed to silt and very fine sand 

particle sizes. A slight shift, again towards 

more coarse material, occurred between 

1997 and 1999. For particle sizes finer 

than 2 mm and finer than 4 mm, the change 

was not significant, while for particle sizes 

finer than 8 mm, the change was 

significant, but only at the 90 percent 

confidence level. 

A shift towards more coarse substrate is 

likely the result of 1) a decreased sediment 

load due to more stable banks, 2) instream 

sediment loss through floodplain deposition 

and bank building, 3) increased sediment 

transport capacity through the reach due to 

increased velocities associated with 

narrower channels, and 4) increased 

sediment transport capacity due to high 

runoff conditions that may have occurred in 

1997. Causes one through three are 

processes that are characteristic of an 

improving trend for E type streams. 

The substrate data for 1999 and 2001 

indicates a slight shift back towards more 

fine material. This shift is statistically 

significant only at the 90 percent confidence 

level for cumulative particle sizes finer than 

2 mm and finer than 4 mm. In 1999, 

particle sizes finer than 2 mm comprised 

88 
WATER AND SOIL 

29.9 percent of the total counts, while in 

2001 they increased to 35.3 percent. 

Nearly all of this increase can be attributed 

to silt particle sizes. It was noted that 

approximately five cow/calf pairs had 

entered the exclosure and stayed for 

approximately seven days, about a week 

prior to the 2001 survey. They impacted 

mainly the upper portion of the exclosure 

where evidence of silt deposition, bank 

trampling, forage utilization, and cow pies 

were observed. These cattle are likely the 

cause for the measured increase in particle 

sizes finer than 2 mm. 

Bonanza Creek, Bonanza Allotment, 

Reach 38b, Grazed 

Eighteen permanent cross-section sites 

were established on this reach in 1996. 

The reach was resurveyed in 1997,1999, 

and 2001. 

In contrast to the reach discussed above 

where livestock have been excluded from 

the riparian area, lower Bonanza Creek is 

still grazed. Management prior to the 1998 

season was season long (50 pair for 62 

days), while management in 1998 changed 

to a higher intensity, variable season 

system (59 pair for 30 days). 

Visual comparison of the cross-section 

plots for 1995 and 1999 indicate that 

conditions are declining at 88 percent of the 

sites. Refer to Chart 3 for a typical crosssection that exhibits these trend 

characteristics. Channel and floodplain 

characteristics that support this conclusion 

include: 

(1) an obvious increase in channel width 

occurred at 56 percent of the crosssections, while only 17 percent showed a 

decrease; 

(2) a significant shift in channel location 

and width or depth occurred at 61 percent 

of the cross-sections; and 

(3) an obvious increase in floodplain 

elevation occurred at only 11 percent of the 

cross-sections. 

Only one cross-section (6 percent) 

exhibited no obvious change in width and 

depth and therefore, appears to be in a 

static mode. Only one cross-section (6 

percent) exhibited an improving trend. 

Although new undercut banks developed at 

33 percent of the cross-sections by 1999, 

they were not considered stable because 

they were not present in 2001. Apparently 

these undercuts developed in response to a 

high flow event prior to the 1999 survey, but 

have since collapsed. The collapse is due 

to the lack of deep-rooted vegetation along 

the upper portion of the reach (visual 

observation), and due to high levels of bank 

alteration by livestock as discussed below. 

Visual comparison of the cross-section 

plots for 1999 and 2001 indicate that 

conditions are still declining at 50 percent of 

the sites. Channel and floodplain 

characteristics that support this conclusion 

include: 

(1) an obvious increase in channel width 

occurred at 39 percent of the crosssections, while only 22 percent showed a 

decrease; 

(2) undercut banks decreased and were 

present at only one cross-section (6 

percent), down from 33 percent in 1999; 

(3) floodplain elevations have lowered 

slightly at 24 percent of the cross-sections. 

Five cross-sections (28 percent) exhibited 

no obvious change in width and depth and 

therefore, appear to be in a static mode. 

Only four cross-sections (22 percent) 

exhibited an improving trend. 

89 
WATER AND SOIL 

The most significant change in crosssection geometry appears to have occurred 

between 1995 and 1999. The percentage 

of cross-sections exhibiting a static trend 

has increased from 6 percent in 1999 to 28 

percent in 2001. Four cross-sections that 

were declining up to 1999 have now 

become static (22 percent of total), while 

the other four are now improving (22 

percent of total). The one cross-section 

that was improving in 1999 is now 

declining. 

Except for a small percentage of crosssections that may show signs of 

improvement, changes at the other crosssections have likely occurred because bank 

trampling and high utilization of riparian 

vegetation by livestock has continued to 

occur. Bank alteration was measured 

during the 2001 survey along ten, 100 foot 

transects. On the average, 73 percent of 

the banks exhibited hoof prints or vertical 

bank shear that resulted in exposed soil 

and roots. This level of bank alteration can 

significantly destabilize streambanks and 

increase the risk of flood related erosion. 

Therefore, high flows have also likely 

contributed to observed erosion, especially 

where the channel is entrenched, the banks 

are both, undercut and unstable, and the 

channel has moved against steep, high 

cutbanks. Riparian vegetation is not 

providing adequate bank armoring, which 

results in more erosion during high flows. 

Instead of trapping sediment and building 

banks, exposed bank soils are a chronic 

source of sediment to the stream system. 

These characteristics suggest that the 

channel exhibits both excessive lateral 

movement and downcutting and is therefore 

highly unstable. It is likely that the 1997 

runoff event significantly affected this 

stream because of its high level of 

instability. 

This is in stark contrast to the improvement 

occurring upstream in the South Fork 

Exclosure. Absolute, one to one 

comparisons between these two reaches 

are, however, not completely appropriate 

because 1) the two reaches are 

approximately three miles apart and have 

somewhat different natural and human 

influences, 2) the North Fork of Bonanza 

enters the mainstem between these two 

reaches which causes differences in 

streamflow regimes, and 3) portions of the 

twa reaches are different stream types with 

different geomorphic characteristics. 

However, it is important to consider that the 

1997 event did not appear to affect the 

channel in the South Fork exclosure. 

90 
WATER AND SOIL 

Chart 3. Cross-section Analysis Lower Bonanza Creek 

CHANNEL CROSS-SECTION PLOT 

Lower Bonanza Creek 

X-SECTION 15 

10 

a 

0 10 20 30 40 50 

DISTANCE (ft) 

Note: The ELEVATION axis is plotted at approximately twice the scale of the DISTANCE axis to better depict the change in elevation. No 

undercut banks existed at this cross-section. 

Chart 4. Substrate Data Lower Bonanza Creek 

CUM U LATlVE PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION 

Lower Bonanza Creek 

100 

90 

80 

z 9 70 

c 

60 w 

E 50 

I40 

0 

30 

20 

10 

0 

n 

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 

PARTICLE SIZE (mm) 

Note: A shift in individual lines upward and to the left suggests an increase in fines has occurred, while a shift downward and to the right 

suggests a decrease in fines has occurred. 

91 
WATER AND SOIL 

The substrate data indicates a slight shift 

towards finer material between 1996 and 

1997. Refer to Chart 4. This shift is 

statistically significant only at the 90 percent 

confidence level and only for particle sizes 

finer than 2 mm. A noticeable shift towards 

finer material occurred again between 1997 

and 1999. However, this shift is statistically 

significant at the 95 percent confidence 

level for particle sizes finer than 2 mm and 

at the 99 percent confidence level for 

particle sizes finer than 4 mm and finer than 

8 mm. In 1997, particle sizes finer than 2 

mm comprised 27.5 percent of the total 

counts, while in 1999 they comprised 32.3 

percent. Nearly all of this increase can be 

attributed to very fine, fine, and coarse sand 

particle sizes. 

The substrate data for 1999 and 2001 

indicates a slight shift, again, towards more 

fine material. This shift is statistically 

significant at the 95 percent confidence 

level for particle sizes finer than 2 mm and 

finer than 4 mm. In 1999, particle sizes 

finer than 2 mm comprised 32.3 percent of 

the total counts, while in 2001 they 

comprised 38.4 percent. Nearly all of this 

increase can be attributed to silt and very 

fine sand particle sizes. 

In 1998, new grazing management was 

implemented along this reach. The 

substrate data for 1996 and 1997 (pre 

change in management) was combined and 

compared to the combined data for 1999 

and 2001 (post change in management). 

The substrate data indicates a noticeable 

shift towards finer material between pre 

1998 and post 1998 data. Refer to Chart 5. 

This shift is statistically significant at the 99 

percent confidence level for particle sizes 

finer than 2 mm, finer than 4 mm, and finer 

than 8 mm. 

Chart 5. Substrate Data Lower Bonanza Creek 

CUMULATIVE PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION 

Lower Bonanza Creek 

Note: A shift in individual lines upward and to the left suggests an increase in fines has occurred, while a shift downward and to the right 

suggests a decrease in fines has occurred. 

92 
WATER AND SOIL 

A shift towards finer substrate could be the 

result of: (1) increased sediment load from . 

bank alteration by grazing, (2) bank erosion 

of unstable banks during high flow events, 

(3) decreased sediment transport capacity 

through the reach due to decreased 

velocities associated with wider, shallower 

channels, and/or (4) decreased sediment 

transport capacity due to drought conditions 

and lower magnitude peak flow events after 

1997. The geology of this watershed 

produces fine textures soils and 

streambanks, thereby increasing the 

sensitivity to bank alteration from livestock 

and bank erosion from streamflow on 

unstable streambanks. It is likely that all of 

these causes contribute, to varying 

degrees, to the observed increase in fines. 

However, livestock grazing contributes 

specifically to causes one through three. 

Again, the shift towards finer substrate 

likely indicates a declining trend in physical 

stream conditions. 

Excessive amounts of fine sediment in 

streams have long been known to damage 

trout habitat, especially spawning gravels 

where eggs and fry are smothered or 

trapped by particles smaller than 6 mm 

(Bjornn and Reiser 1991 ; .Weaver and 

Fraley 1991). Accumulations of silt and 

sediment on stream substrates also impair 

trout habitat by clogging interstitial spaces 

needed for cover, overwinter survival and 

invertebrate food production; sedimentation 

that reduces pool depths can decrease the 

stream’s carrying capacity for adult and 

juvenile trout (Waters 1995). 

Given the level of bank alteration measured 

in 2001, the continued decline in crosssection geometry and the continued shift 

towards finer substrate, the change in 

management towards a higher intensity 

grazing system is not likely to result in an 

improving trend in the future. Additional 

adjustments will be required to reduce 

grazing pressure on this reach and reverse 

the trend. Because bank trampling is the 

primary means by which livestock directly 

affect the stream channel, bank alteration 

standards will likely be required in order to 

achieve a properly functioning riparian 

system that fully supports all beneficial 

uses. 

It is not appropriate to compare substrate 

data between the South Fork Exclosure and 

Lower Bonanza because (1) the two 

reaches are approximately three miles 

apart, (2) the North Fork of Bonanza enters 

the mainstem between these two reaches 

which causes differences in streamflow 

regimes, and (3) The upper portion of the 

Lower Bonanza reach is a much more 

entrenched stream type with different 

geomorphic characteristics than the South 

Fork reach. 

Checkerboard Creek, Checkerboard 

Allotment, Reach 50 

Twenty-nine permanent cross-section sites 

were established on this reach in 1996, five 

above the exclosure, sixteen within the 

exclosure, and eight below the exclosure. 

The reach was resurveyed in 1997, 1999, 

and 2001. 

Prior to 2000, the pasture was grazed 

season long with 50 pair of cattle. The 

Castle Mountain Range EIS Decision was 

implemented in this allotment in 2000. The 

management was changed to a five-pasture 

rest-rotation system. The grazing season 

varies between 21 days and 32 days and 

allows 176 pair to graze. The pasture will 

be rested one out of every five years. 

Influences other than grazing have affected 

the results of data collected along this 

stream, including beaver, flood events, and 

93 
WATER AND SOIL 

channel characteristics. By 1997, beaver 

had moved into the area above the 

exclosure. The creation of beaver dams 

and associated ponds made all five crosssections above the exclosure no longer 

useable. Beaver expansion continued and 

by 1999 one cross-section at the upper end 

of the exclosure became unusable, and by 

2001 four more cross-sections at the upper 

end and three at the lower end became 

unusable. There are 8 total cross-sections 

now unusable within the exclosure, or 50 

percent of the original 16. Data comparison 

between years, and between inside versus 

outside the exclosure, becomes less 

statistically valid because of this influence. 

However, colonization by beaver should not 

be viewed as detrimental to beneficial use 

of the stream. The dams have created 

deep pools for fish, raised water tables 

resulting in increased baseflow, and 

increased floodplain accessibility during 

flood events trapping sediment, causing 

deposition and raising the elevation of 

previously entrenched channel types. 

During June of 1997, significantly high 

runoff conditions caused significant bank 

erosion and a risk of a meander cutoff 

inside the exclosure. Work was initiated to 

stabilize the banks and reduce the risk of 

forming a new channel. Dozens of hay 

bails were staked and willow sprigs were 

planted at high-risk bank locations. This 

effort was successful in eliminating the 

formation of a new channel and helped , 

improve the rate of recovery along portions 

of the streambanks. 

Portions of this stream reach are highly 

entrenched G and F stream types. They 

are highly sensitive to both, bank alteration 

by livestock and erosion due to streamflow. 

And, unlike E stream types, these 

entrenched stream types are not highly 

resilient. Because of their entrenched 

characteristics, floodplain area is limited, so 

flood-waters do not have the ability to 

disperse and lose energy. Instead, 

floodwaters are confined, resulting in high 

streamflow energy and high levels of bank 

erosion. The 1997 flood event likely 

caused significant bank erosion along this 

reach. Additionally, water tables have 

generally dropped to lower levels and left 

riparian vegetation high and dry. Banks no 

longer have deep-rooted riparian vegetation 

and therefore, no longer have the ability to 

armor banks or bind soils. The combination 

of all these characteristics substantially 

increases the time frames needed for 

recovery of riparian systems. Although 

visual observations indicate that bank 

vegetation is increasing in vigor and density 

and helping to stabilize previously unstable 

banks, it is unlikely that any portion of this 

reach has reached its potential channel 

form. The potential stream type is either a 

C or an E, except where influenced by 

beaver dams or ponds. 

Visual comparison of the cross-section 

plots within the exclosure for 1995 and 

1999 indicate that conditions are declining 

at 53 percent of the sites (1 5 usable crosssections). Channel and floodplain 

characteristics that support this conclusion 

include: 

(1) an obvious increase in channel width 

occurred at 20 percent of the crosssections; and 

(2) a significant shift in channel location 

and width or depth occurred at 27 percent 

of the cross-sections. 

Only three cross-sections (20 percent) 

exhibited no obvious change in width and 

depth and therefore, appear to be in a static 

mode. Only four cross-sections (27 

percent) exhibited an improving trend. 

94 
WATER AND SOIL 

New, undercut banks developed at only 13 

percent of the cross-sections since 1995. 

Visual comparison of the cross-section 

plots for 1999 and 2001 indicate that 

conditions are still declining, but only at 38 

percent of the sites (now only eight usable 

cross-sections). No cross-sections 

exhibited an improving trend. 

The most significant change in crosssection geometry appears to have occurred 

again between 1995 and 1999. The 

percentage of cross-sections exhibiting a 

static trend has increased from 20 percent 

in 1999 to 62 percent in 2001. Three crosssections that were improving up to 1999 are 

now declining, while the other one is now 

static. Four cross-sections that were 

declining in 1999 are now under water in 

beaver ponds. 

In order for this stream to reach its potential 

channel form, either a new floodplain needs 

to be created, or beaver ponds need to be 

built to trap sediment and raise the channel 

grade and water tables back to a higher 

level. Since portions of this stream are 

highly entrenched, the evolution of the 

channel back to a stable system will require 

extensive bank erosion to widen the 

channel and provide a new floodplain in the 

absence of beaver. Future flood events will 

provide the energy necessary for this 

erosion to occur. However, it appears that 

beaver may help in recovering this riparian 

system and reduce or eliminate the need 

for new floodplain development. 

Visual comparison of the cross-section 

plots below the exclosure for 1995 and 

1999 indicate that conditions are declining 

at 38 percent of the sites. Channel and 

floodplain characteristics that support this 

conclusion are limited to an obvious 

increase in channel width that occurred at 

two of the cross-sections and a substantial 

increase in channel depth at another crosssection. 

Only two cross-sections (24 percent) 

exhibited no obvious change in width and 

depth and therefore, appear to be in a static 

mode. Four cross-sections (38 percent) 

exhibited an improving trend. New, 

undercut banks developed at only 13 

percent of the cross-sections since 1995. 

Visual comparison of the cross-section 

plots for 1999 and 2001 indicate that 

conditions are still declining at 38 percent of 

the sites. Only one cross-section exhibited 

an improving trend. 

The most significant change in crosssection geometry appears to have occurred 

again between 1995 and 1999. The 

percentage of cross-sections exhibiting a 

static trend has increased from 24 percent 

in 1999 to 49 percent in 2001. One crosssection that was improving up to 1999 is 

now declining, while the other two are now 

static. One cross-section that was declining 

in 1999 is now improving, one is static and 

the other is still declining. 

Unlike the highly entrenched stream 

characteristics within the exclosure, most of 

the reach below the exclosure is a much 

less entrenched C stream type. This 

stream type is therefore less sensitive to 

both, bank alteration by livestock and 

erosion due to high streamflows. Also 

unlike entrenched stream types within the 

exclosure, C stream types are more 

resilient. They have more floodplain area, 

so flood-waters have better ability to 

disperse and lose energy and therefore 

have less streamflow energy and less bank 

erosion. However, it is likely the 1997 flood 

event still caused significant bank erosion 

along this reach, especially on the outside 

95 
I WATER AND SOIL I 

of meander bends where banks had been 

destabilized due to livestock alteration. 

Water tables along this reach have 

generally not dropped significantly, so 

streambanks are still comprised of deeprooted riparian vegetation, which can armor 

banks and bind soils. The combination of 

all these characteristics substantially 

increase the resiliency and reduces the 

time frames needed for recovery, relative to 

the exclosure. However, very high bank 

alteration levels were measured during the 

2001 survey. On the average, 63 percent 

of the banks exhibited hoof prints or vertical 

bank shear that resulted in exposed soil 

and roots. This has likely increased 

sediment loads and reduced the recovery 

rate of this reach. Four, 100 foot transects 

were measured along this reach. 

The substrate data within and below the 

exclosure suggests a slight shift towards 

finer material between 1995 and 1997, 

however the shift is not statistically 

significant. A noticeable shift towards more 

coarse material occurred between 1997 

and 1999, both within and below the 

exclosure. Refer to Charts 5 and 6. The 

shift is most dramatic within the exclosure. 

Except for the less than 2 mm particle sizes 

below the exclosure, this shift is statistically 

significant at the 99 percent confidence 

level for particle sizes finer than 2 mm, finer 

than 4 mm, and finer than 8 mm. The shift 

for particle sizes finer than 2 mm below the 

exclosure is significant at the 95 percent 

confidence level. In 1997, particle sizes 

finer than 8 mm comprised 37.5 percent of 

the total counts within the exclosure (48 

percent below the exclosure), while in 2001 

they comprised just 24.3 percent (32.7 

percent below the exclosure). Nearly all of 

this decrease can be attributed to the loss 

of silt and very fine to medium sand (0.5 

mm) particle sizes within the exclosure, but 

the decrease covers the entire range of size 

classes (silt to 8 mm) below the exclosure. 

i 

A noticeable shift back towards finer 

material occurred between 1999 and 2001, 

both within and below the exclosure. The 

shift is again, most dramatic within the 

exclosure. This shift is statistically 

significant at the 99 percent confidence 

level for particle sizes finer than 2 mm, finer 

than 4 mm and finer than 8 mm, both within 

and below the exclosure. In 1997, particle 

sizes finer than 8 mm comprised 24.3 

percent of the total counts within the 

exclosure (32.7 percent below the 

exclosure), while in 2001 they comprised 

36.0 percent (44.9 percent below the 

exclosure). Nearly all of this increase can 

be attributed to silt and very fine sand (0.5 

mm) particle sizes, both within and below 

the exclosure. 

96 
WATER AND SOIL 

Chart 5. Substrate Data Checkerboard Creek 

CUMULATIVE PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION 

Checkerboard in Exclosure 

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 

PARTICLE SIZE (rnrn) 

Note: A shift in individual lines upward and to the left suggests an increase in fines has occurred, while a shift downward and to the right 

suggests a decrease in fines has occurred. 

Chart 6. Substrate Data Checkerboard Creek 

100 

90 

z 80 

9 c 70 

60 

E 50 

+ 

z 40 w 

0 

K 30 

w 

20 

10 

0 

CUMULATIVE PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION 

Checkerboard Below Exclosure 

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 

PARTICLE SIZE (rnm) 

I 

suggests a decrease in fines has occurred. 

97 
WATER AND SOIL 

The substrate data was compared between 

the exclosure and below the exclosure. All 

years of data for the two sites were 

combined and are displayed in Chart 7. 

The substrate data indicates a shift towards 

finer material below the exclosure. This 

shift is not significant for particle sizes finer 

than 2 mm, but is statistically significant at 

the 99 percent confidence level for particle 

sizes finer than 4 mm and finer than 8 mm. 

This difference could be attributed to (1) 

increased sediment load from bank 

alteration by grazing, (2) bank erosion of 

unstable banks during high flow events, (3) 

decreased sediment transport capacity 

through the reach below the exclosure due 

to decreased velocities associated with 

wider, shallower channels, and/or (4) 

increased sediment transport capacity 

through the exclosure due to increased 

velocities associated with more entrenched 

channel types. Again, the finer substrate 

below the exclosure may indicate a 

declining trend in physical stream 

conditions, especially in light of the 

sediment trapping capacity of new beaver 

dams within the exclosure, which should 

have reduced sediment loads delivered to 

the reach below the exclosure. 

Overall, the cross-section information and 

the substrate data are not adequate to 

provide certain conclusions on trends within 

or outside the exclosure. Some of this may 

be due to beaver colonization and the need 

to drop cross-sections over time. Additional 

surveys will be needed in the future to 

better clarify the current results. However, 

given the level of bank alteration measured 

in 2001 and the lack of consistent 

improvement in channel conditions, 

additional adjustments in grazing 

management may be required to reduce 

grazing pressure on this reach in order to 

achieve a properly functioning riparian 

system in the future. 

Chart 7. Substrate Data Checkerboard Creek 

Note: A shift in individual lines upward and to the left suggests an increase in fines has occurred, while a shift downward and to the right 

suggests a decrease in fines has occurred. 

98 
WATER AND SOIL 

South Fork Judith River 

Three reaches in the South Fork drainage 

are monitored to help de'termine recovery 

time frames for degraded riparian areas. 

All reaches are located in the South Fork 

Allotment, one in the Hidden Lake Pasture, 

and two in the Smith Creek Pasture. Two 

reaches are located within exclosures. The 

Smith Creek exclosure was built in 1992 

and the Big Hill exclosure was built in 1996. 

Biq Hill Exclosure, Hidden Lake Pasture 

Nine permanent cross-section sites were 

established on this reach in 1996. A jackleg fence was built at the upper end of the 

reach just prior to monitoring in 1996. This 

jack-leg'was tied into existing pasture and 

drift fences to create a semi-exclosed 

reach. The reach was resurveyed in 2001. 

Visual comparison of the cross-section 

plots for 1996 and 2001 indicate that 

conditionsare static at 56 percent of the 

sites. Three cross-sections (33 percent) 

exhibited an improving trend, while only one 

cross-section (1 1 percent) exhibited a 

declining trend. No undercut banks have 

developed at any of the cross-sections. 

The substrate data suggests that no 

significant change occurred between 1996 

and 2001. 

Overall, conditions have not improved 

significantly along this reach over five 

years. This is likely due to (1) moderate to 

highly entrenched, low to moderate 

resiliency stream types, (2) livestock 

trespass into the exclosure intermittently 

over five years, and (3) upstream sediment 

loads transported downstream through 

exclosu re. 

Smith Creek Exclosure, Smith Creek 

Pasture 

A riparian exclosure fence was built in 1992 

to improve this highly impacted site. 

Twelve permanent cross-section sites were 

established in 1992; seven within the 

exclosure and five below the exclosure. 

The reach was resurveyed in 1996 and 

2001. Before the 2001 survey, another 

riparian exclosure was built that 

encompassed the five cross-sections below 

the original exclosure, so these five crosssections were not influenced by livestock 

during 2001. 

Visual comparison of the five cross-section 

plots for 1992 and 1996 indicate that 

conditions are static at three sites (43 

percent) inside the exclosure. Two crosssections (28.5 percent) exhibited an 

improving trend while two cross-sections 

exhibited a declining trend. No undercut 

banks have developed at any of the crosssections. By the 2001 survey, beaver had 

moved into the reach and constructed 

beaver dams that influenced the top five 

cross-sections. For the two remaining 

cross-sections, the trends remained as they 

were in 1996. One cross-section exhibited 

a static trend, while one cross-section 

exhibited a declining trend. 

Visual comparison of the cross-section 

plots for 1992 and 1996 indicate that 

conditions are static at three sites (60 

percent) outside the exclosure. One crosssection exhibited a declining trend and one 

cross-section exhibited an improving trend. 

No undercut banks have developed at any 

of the cross-sections. 

Visual comparison of the cross-section 

plots for 1996 and 2001 indicate that 

conditions are still static at three sites (60 

percent) outside the exclosure. Two cross0 

99 
WATER AND SOIL 

sections now exhibit a declining trend, while 

none exhibited an improving trend. Again, 

No undercut banks have developed at any 

of the cross-sections. 

Substrate data was not gathered along this 

reach. 

Except for vigorous grass, forb, and willow 

regeneration, and recent beaver expansion, 

conditions have not improved significantly 

inside the exclosure over nine years. It is 

not completely clear why significant 

recovery in channel form has not occurred. 

Except for some moderately entrenched 

segments and relatively steep channel 

grade, vegetation and substrate 

characteristics suggest this is a highly 

resilient site. Additional surveys will be 

required in the future to provide more 

conclusive evidence to determine trends. 

Although the reach below the exclosure is 

also highly resilient, it is also highly 

sensitive to livestock impacts due to fine 

textured soils. Except for one cross-section 

that showed improvement between 1992 

and 1996, all other cross-sections were 

static or declining, between 1992 and 2001. 

The slow recovery documented along the 

reaches exclosed supports other research 

that suggests highly degraded riparian 

systems require total rest from grazing prior 

to initiating new management. Clary and 

Webster (1 989, 1990) suggest: “Degraded 

riparian areas may need complete rest to 

initiate the recovery process. The length of 

rest will depend upon vegetative 

composition and streambank condition. It 

may be as short as one year or it may be 

15 years or longer. Recovery of degraded 

streambank form usually will require more 

time than the recovery of plant community 

composition, in some cases much more 

time, particularly if the channel has become 

incised and confined. Once an area has 

improved to a mid or high-seral status, 

through the use of rest or careful 

management, rotation management 

systems may allow riparian habitats to 

remain in good condition while being 

grazed.” 

The fact that these reaches (along with the 

Checkerboard reach) have been excluded 

from livestock grazing for four to nine years 

and still have not shown significant 

improvement in channel form suggests that 

substantial changes to grazing 

management are likely required for 

moderately degraded systems that continue 

to be grazed. The changes will likely 

require a significant reduction in time spent 

(days grazed) in riparian areas. Changes in 

grazing management that rely on low to 

moderate reductions in AUMs, conversion 

to high intensity grazing systems and 

installation of water developments may not 

be sufficient to improve highly degraded 

riparian systems to a properly functioning 

condition that fully supports all beneficial 

uses, if they continue to be grazed. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

See recommendations under F-2. Revise 

discussions of riparian areas in the Forest 

Plan by including discussion of State 

Streamside Management Zone laws and 

regulations and Proper Function Condition 

Assessment methodology and related 

policy. 

100 
WATER AND SOIL 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Effects of other activities on 

watershed conditions 

F-5 Other Effects 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Annually - 20% Unacceptable management Yes No 

of all projects practices of land productivity 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION Item? 

Elimination of soil and water Five Years Less than 50% by 1990; less Yes 

restoration backlog than 100% by 1995 

METHODS 

Projects which are not located in a riparian 

zone or municipal watershed, or do not 

require revegetation, but still have potential 

to impact soil and water resources, are 

monitored through administrative reviews. 

The purpose of these reviews is to verify 

that the contract and BMPs are being 

implemented as specified, and that BMPs 

are effective. 

FINDINGS 

Please refer to monitoring item F-2, 

Revegetation, for information on other 

projects that have the potential to impact 

soil and water resources. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

See recommendations under F-2. 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

Yes 

F-6 Water and Soil Backlog 

Reirdon Gulch (Dl) 3 

Cutrock Gulch (Dl) 3 

South Fork Judith River (D4) 10 

Holiday Camp (D4) 2 

Seed trailhead 

Reseed to stabilize gully 

Construct 1/2 mile riparian fence 

Plant willows in exclosure 

METHODS FINDINGS 

Progress in reducing the soil and water 

restoration backlog is monitored by tracking 

the number of acres restored by each 

District at the end of each fiscal year. 

Table F-6a identifies the restoration 

projects that were accomplished on the 

Forest during FY 00-01. Table F-6b lists 

the acres accomplished by year. 

Table F-6a. Restoration Project List 
WATER AND SOIL 

Project Title 

Big Hill Creek (D4) 

Halfmoon Creek (D4) 

Minerva Creek (D6) 

Little Snowy Mountains (D6) 

Big Snowy Mountains (D6) 

Acres Comments 

2 Drop trees for bank protection 

2 Plant willows in exclosure 

2 Repair exclosure fence 

2 Road closure maintenance 

5 Road closure maintenance and erosion 

control 

Jellison to Haymaker (D6) 

Lucky Boy (D6) 

Lion Creek (D6) 

Additional rehabilitation work planned, but not 

yet im plemen ted . 

._ .- 

4 Road closure maintenance and erosion 

control 

3 Erosion control 

4 Erosion control of road drainage 

Table F-6b. Soil and Water Restoration Accomplishments (Acres) 

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 

Acres 57 50 94 50 129 133 61 116 112 

1999 2000 2001 

139 42 95 

The Forest Plan goal of 100 percent 

accomplishment by 1995 has been met. 

The total acreage improved from 1995 to 

2001 was 698. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

The soil and water restoration backlog 

identified during the Forest Plan analysis in 

1988 has been eliminated. This monitoring 

item should continue, but the title should 

change to Soil and Water Improvement 

Accomplishments. Typically in the past, 

only soil and water improvement funds 

(NFSI) were tracked under this monitoring 

item . However, all accomplishments, 

regardless of funding source, should be 

included here, if they truly restore or 

improve soil and water resources. Revise 

the Forest Plan by dropping statements 

related to soil and water backlog (pages 2-7 

and 2-50) and include discussion on 

improving water quality in Water Quality 

Limited Streams. 

102 
WATER AND SOIL 

' Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

Yes 

F-7 Water and Stream Quality 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Water and stream quality as 

affecting fish habitat and 

other uses: validation of 

estimates of sediment 

REPORTING 

PERIOD 

Annually 

VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

Not meeting State or Federal 

water quality standards or 

significant (90% confidence) 

deterioration, by best available 

Change 

Monitoring 

Item? 

Yes 

METHODS 

Water quality as affecting fish habitat and 

other uses is to be monitored through water 

quality sampling of representative streams 

and intra-gravel sediment. This monitoring 

allows identification of deterioration in water 

quality, assurance of effectiveness of 

BMPs, as well as validation of estimates on 

sediment and water yield. 

FINDINGS 

Water quality stations were established on 

Whitetail Creek and the South Fork of the 

Judith River in 1992 to evaluate the effects 

of upslope timber harvest and road building 

activities on water quality. Suspended 

sediment and discharge data was collected 

during the spring and summer months from 

1992 to 1995. Analysis of the data and 

evaluation of the sampling methodology 

suggests that the data cannot be used to 

draw valid conclusions about the effects of 

these activities on water quality. The 

reasons for this are due to the complex 

interactions between (1 ) annual variations 

in precipitation/run-off rates resulting in 

variations in surface and instream erosion 

processes (magnitude, frequency and 

timing), (2) annual variations in sediment 

storage, transport, and delivery rates, (3) 

dilution of suspended sediment by tributary 

inflows, and (4) measurement uncertainty. 

Although the data provided fair to good 

correlations between average daily 

discharge and suspended sediment loads 

(tons/day), these complex interactions 

make it difficult, if not impossible, to 

differentiate between sediment related to 

present management from sediment related 

to past management, and management 

related to sediment from natural sediment. 

Suspended sediment sampling is generally 

not a cost effective methodology for 

detecting trends associated with non-point 

pollution over time. Due to the temporal 

and spatial variability mentioned above, it is 

suggested that at least five to ten years of 

both, pre and post monitoring are likely to 

be necessary to reliably detect a 

sedimentary cumulative watershed effect 

(NCASI 1999). Pre-activity monitoring to 

determine natural or baseline conditions 

was not possible in either Whitetail Creek or 

the South Fork since significant timber 

harvest, road construction, wildfire, and 

grazing already occurred prior to the start of 

monitoring in 1992. Suspended sediment 

sampling is better suited for detecting 

differences in upstream versus downstream 

conditions for a specific activity with a 

known point source of sediment, or for 

comparing sediment loads of hydrologically 

equivalent watersheds for the same period 

of time (MacDonald and others 1991). 

Suspended sediment is just one part of the 

overall sediment yield within a watershed. 

103 
WATER AND SOIL 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION Item? 

Riparian areas and streams: Annually Significant (90% confidence) Yes 

stream cover and pools decline in condition 

Bedload is the other part and generally has 

the greatest channel impact and potentially 

the greatest, long-term water quality impact. 

Bedload may, or may not be correlated with 

suspended sediment and has similar 

inherent problems associated with data 

collection and analysis (NCASI 1999). No 

intra-gravel sediment sampling was 

completed during the years 1995 through 

1999. 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

Yes 

For the reasons disclosed above, 

suspended sediment sampling was 

discontinued at the Whitetail and South 

Fork Judith stations after the 1995 runoff 

season. However, stream discharge is still 

collected at the South Fork station. This 

gaging station was originally established by 

the U.S. Geological Survey and maintained 

by them from 1958 to 1979. The Lewis and 

Clark National Forest restarted the station 

in 1992 and assumed all operation and 

maintenance responsibilities. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

Due to the complexity and uncertainty 

involved in sediment monitoring and 

analysis, it is recommended that this item 

be dropped and replaced with project 

specific monitoring that includes such 

methods as channel cross-section 

geometry surveys, pebble counts and photo 

points. It should also include 

accomplishments of general 

reconnaissance stream surveys that collect 

more visual and subjective information such 

as channel and bank stability ratings, 

substrate composition, riparian vegetation 

types, and fisheries habitat information on 

pools and cover. The Forest Plan should 

be revised by dropping statements related 

to water and sediment yield limits (page 2- 

7) and validation (page 2-50). 

F-8 Stream Cover and Pools 

METHODS AND FINDINGS 

Relevant monitoring activities for this item 

are included in the discussion of fish habitat 

in section C-1 1 , Aquatic Habitat. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

This monitoring item duplicates what is 

reported under C-1 1 , Aquatic Habitat 

Condition. It is recommended that this item 

be dropped as a separate monitoring item 

and that accomplishments and results be 

reported under C-1 1 . 

104 
WATER AND SOIL 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Public Health - Water Annually - Violating State or Federal 

Systems Monthly when drinking water standards 

F-9 Public Health 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

No No 

Year 

1999 

2000 

2001 

METHODS 

Public water systems are operated in 

accordance with State and Federal Safe 

Drinking Water Acts which require routine 

testing for bacterial contamination. Table 

F-9 displays the total number of sites 

tested, the frequency of testing, and 

percent of tests with acceptable results for 

the years 1999 through 2001. 

Systems Open Required Completed Free 

36 21 5 21 5 96% 

38 223 220 93% 

40 234 231 92% 

Table F-9a. Total Number, Frequency, and Results of Sites Tested 

I I Public Water I RoutineTests I Routine Tests I Percent Coliform I 

FINDINGS 

All required routine tests were completed in 

1999. Testing was less than 100 percent of 

required for years 2000 and 2001. 

Between four and eight percent of samples 

tested positive for coliform bacteria over all 

years. Appropriate steps were taken for all 

positive samples including follow up 

sampling, chlorination and/or system shut 

down and signing. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

The recommendation is to keep this 

monitoring item as is. 

105 
MINERALS 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Effect of Mining Activity Annually - Adverse effect of Forest 

100% of active 

operations on a 

monthly basis departure from approved 

Service project on mineral 

activities or revision or 

MINERALS 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

No No 

G-I Effect of Mining Activities 

METHODS 

This item includes monitoring effects of 

mineral activities resulting from the approval 

of Notices of Intent or Operating Plans for 

mineral activities that were conducted during 

2000-2001. It also includes monitoring the 

effects other Forest Service approved 

projects may have on mineral operations. 

According to the Forest Plan monitoring 

requirements, 100 percent of all active 

operations are to be monitored on a monthly 

basis for either adverse effects of Forest 

Service projects on mineral activities or 

revisions or departures from an approved 

operating plan. 

FINDINGS 

Prior to initiating ground-disturbing activities, 

a mining proponent is required to submit a 

Notice of Intent (NOI) or a Mineral Plan of 

Operation. These instruments specify the 

nature of the proposed activities, the location 

and timing of any surface disturbing activities, 

and any necessary reclamation measures. 

During FY 00-01, one mining Plan of 

Operation and three mineral material 

proposals were received and reviewed. 

Environmental analyses were conducted for 

each proposal. All proposals were analyzed 

for compliance and consistency with Forest 

Plan goals, objectives, and management 

standards. Modifications or additions were 

made, if necessary, to ensure compliance 

with Forest Plan standards and to mitigate 

issues and concerns. In addition, some 

activities took place under Plans of 

Operations that were approved in a previous 

year during which the proposal was not 

completed. 

Under the 1997 decision resulting from the 

Forest’s Environmental Impact Statement 

(EIS) and Record of Decision for oil and gas 

leasing on the Forest, the Forest Supervisor 

decided not to offer oil and gas leases on the 

Rocky Mountain Division for the next 

planning period (10 to 15 years). Leasing, 

with stipulations, was allowed in areas on the 

Jefferson Division where it was shown that oil 

and gas activities were environmentally 

compatible with other resource values. 

This decision was appealed through the 

Forest Service administrative appeal process 

and the decision upheld at that level. A suit 

was brought forth by the Rocky Mountain Oil 

and Gas Association and the Independent 

Petroleum Producers of America. The case 

was heard in the U.S. District Court in Helena 

in February 2000, and the Forest Service 

decision was again upheld. Plaintiffs 

appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of 

Appeals, where on May 2001 the decision 

was again upheld. Plaintiffs asked the 

106 
MINERALS 

Supreme Court for writ of certiorari, but were 

denied. The decision has now been upheld 

at all levels of appeal and litigation. 

On June 29,2000 the Forest received a 

request to offer National Forest System lands 

on the Jefferson Division in the Little Belt 

Mountains for lease. Fifteen properties 

totaling 28,090 acres in Judith District were 

put on the Bureau of Land Management 

(BLM) lease sale. Stipulations as outlined in 

the 1997 Oil and Gas Leasing EIS were 

applied and these parcels were offered on 

the May 30,2001 lease sale, but no offers 

were received. They will now be available 

noncompetitively for two years from the 

original lease sale date. As of September 30, 

2001, no such offers had been received. 

Mineral activity has slowed somewhat and is 

probably reflective of low metals prices and 

the fact that many companies are closing 

offices in Montana. One Mineral Plan of 

Operation was approved in FY 00 and none 

in FY 01. The Vortex sapphire mine has 

changed its name to the Yogo Mine. Under 

an amended plan of operation, approved in 

July 2000, underground workings were 

expanded to include an new 1,000-foot 

incline adit connecting to extended drifts and 

workings previously accessed only by shaft. 

A 12’x60’ underground garage 12’ high to be 

constructed next to the adit for mine vehicle 

storage and maintenance was also approved. 

In December 2000, Secretary of Agriculture, 

Dan Glickman, signed the Record of Decision 

withdrawing 405,000 acres of National Forest 

System lands within the Lewis and Clark and 

Helena National Forests from location and 

entry under the mining laws. This action 

prohibits the location and staking of mining 

claims on the entire Rocky Mountain Division 

and follows a moratorium of such actions that 

was initially put in place in February 1999. 

Table G-la. Project List for Mining Activities, FY 00-01 

107 
MINERALS 

Canoy Claims - Yogo Peak 

Whitaker Claims- Running Wolf 

site as requested. 

Approved Mineral Plan of 

Operation in 1998 

Claimant deceased; had refused 

to submit NO1 or Mineral Plan of 

Operation; no Mineral Plan of 

Operation submitted yet from next 

of kin. 

Comments 

in regard to determining surface 

facilities necessary for operation; 

field visits to sites in FY 01. Dye 

tracer tests conducted and water 

samples collected from adjacent 

creek show some release of adit 

water to groundwater. 

Administrative Use Mineral 

Materials 

Free Use Mineral Materials 

Permits. 

Mineral Material Permits Sold 

Ongoing hand pick and shovel 

work last observed during site visit 

in FY 1999 

Need to determine appropriate 

surface use on claim(s) 

FY 01 - 1,000 yards pit-run shale 

-- 100 yards crushed 

No permits issued 

No permits sold 

Administrative Use Mineral 

Materials 

Free Use Mineral Materials 

permits. 

Mineral Material permits sold 

approved in 1996 

FY 00 - 5,000 yards crushed 

FY 01 - 8,000 yards crushed 

No permits issued 

310 yards shale sold in FY 2000, 

and another 200 sold in FY 2001 

a 

expired; claimant sent certified 

notice to complete reclamation or 

submit new Mineral Plan of 

Administrative Use Mineral 

Operation; no response. 

FY 01 - 500 yards pit-run shale 

Materials 

Free Use Mineral Materials 

Permits 

I Mineral Material Permits Sold I No Dermits sold I 

No permits issued 

G-2 Geophysical Prospecting 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Effect of Prospecting Annually - Adverse effect upon surface 

100% of active resources of departure from 

oDerations on a conditions of the amroved 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

Yes No 
MINERALS 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Effect of Drilling 

I I biweekly basis I p ermit I I I 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Annually - Adverse effect upon surface Yes No‘’) 

100% of active resources or departure from 

operations on a conditions of the approved 

This monitoring item includes effects from the 

issuance of prospecting permits (geophysical 

exploration). There have been no 

geophysical prospecting permits requested or 

issued for oil and gas exploration since 1987. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

No recommendation is made at this time; 

may need to revisit during Forest Plan 

revision. 

G-3 Drilling Effects 

.. I weekly basis I permit I I 

” Under the 1997 decision on oil and gas leasing, no new leasing will be allowed on the Rocky Mountain Division 

I 

for the next 10-1 5 years. Existing leases will be allowed to continue, but will not be re-leased upon expiration. 

The Forest Plan was amended (Amendment 21) to reflect changes in Management Area prescriptions on the 

Rocky Mountain Division resulting from the leasing decision. 

FIND1 NGS 

This monitoring item focuses primarily on oil 

and gas drilling proposals. 

The lease on which Fina Oil and Chemical 

Company proposed to drill in 1983 was 

returned to the original lessee, who has 

expressed an interest in continuing with the 

original proposal. This lease, and other 

leases in the Badger-Two Medicine area of 

the Rocky Mountain Ranger District (RMRD), 

are currently under suspension until the 

Forest completes review under Section 106 

of the Historic Preservation Act. In January 

2002, the Keeper of the National Register 

determined that an area of roughly 89,000 

acres was eligible as a traditional cultural 

district. The Fina drilling proposal is outside, 

but adjacent to, this area boundary. The 

drilling proposal submitted by Chevron USA 

(and now under lease to Ocean Energy) is 

within the district boundary. No decision has 

yet been made on the Chevron/Ocean 

Energy drilling proposal. 

Proceedings under the lawsuit filed in protest 

of approval of the Fina drilling proposal have 

also been administratively terminated, but 

may be reopened “for good cause” by any of 

the parties to the suit. 

In October 2000, Resource Management 

Associates (also known as Grizzly 

Resources) submitted a notice of staking on 

their lease in the Muddy Creek drainage on 

the Rocky Mountain Ranger District. A notice 

of staking is a preliminary indication of 

interest in a particular drilling location. It is to 

be followed up with a formal Application for 

Permit to Drill (APD). An onsite inspection 

was held with the lessee and Forest Service 

and BLM resource specialists on July 31, 

2001. In August, the BLM sent a letter to the 

109 
MINERALS 

proponent reminding them of submittal 

requirements for a complete APD. No 

response has been received yet. 

No drilling proposals were received during 

the 2000-2001 period. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

No recommendation is made at this time. 

G-4 Rehabilitation 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Areas 

REPORTING 

PERIOD 

Annually - 

100% of activity 

on a weekly 

basis during 

rehabilitation. 

A final 

inspection will 

be made within 

5 years after 

rehabilitation 

has been 

completed 

VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

EVALUATION Item? 

Rehabilitation less than 90% of No 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

No 

FINDINGS 

Requirements for reclamation were 

established for each mining proposal and 

made part of the approved operating plan. 

Reclamation bonds were established for 

proposals, based on the costs that would be 

incurred to rehabilitate the area of proposed 

activity. These bond amounts were collected 

prior to allowing any activity to take place, 

and retained until final reclamation standards 

are met. 

The Forest has been working cooperatively 

with the Montana Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) and the Montana Department 

of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to address 

mine wastes at the Block P Mill Tailings site 

on the White Sulphur Springs Ranger District 

in the Little Belt Mountains. The Doe Run 

Resources Company of Missouri was been 

identified as the responsible party for cleanup actions at the site. In 2000-2001, the 

company completed a final Engineering 

Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA) to identify 

long-term clean up alternatives at the site. In 

September 2001, the Barker-Hughesville 

Mining District, which includes the Block P 

mill site, was listed on the National Priority 

List (NPL), pending public comment. The 

Forest Service and EPA, in conjunction with 

the Montana DEQ, are completing an Action 

Memorandum that will document the 

selection of the clean-up actions to be 

implemented at the site. Final clean-up 

actions are anticipated to begin in the 

summer of the year 2002. 

The Forest continues to identify abandoned 

or inactive mine sites requiring reclamation 

110 
MINERALS 

Project Title 

actions to address safety or environmental 

concerns. In September 2001, the Carpenter 

CreeWSnow Creek Mining District was listed 

on the NPL, pending public comment. Mill 

tailings have been deposited on National 

Forest System lands, similar to the situation 

at the Block P Mill Tailings site. A contract 

was awarded for preliminary environmental 

assessment work to be started early FY 

2002. 

Mineral operations inspected for rehabilitation 

are fisted in the following table. 

Year Dates Comments 

Completed Reviewed ’ 

Table G-4a. FY 00-01 Project List for Rehabilitation of Disturbed Areas 

Kent’s Gulch Pit 

Hamilton Mine 

Bear Park Pit 

1999 July 2000, 2001 Sear’s abandoned mine shaft, building 

and waste piles turned into Forest 

aggregate pit. 

Forest conducted trash pickup and 

revegetation in FY 00. 

used as slash and debris burn site 

1999 July 2000, 2001 Mine owner did major rehabilitation, 

1999 Summer 2000 Monitored for weeds and erosion, now 

~ 

Belt Creek Ranger District D-3 

None I I I 

Judith Ranger District D-4 

Yogo Mine I Ongoing I July2001 I Mine undergoing periodic reclamation as 

Green Mountain 1999 

I I I operations proceed. 

Musselshell Ranger District D-6 

July 2000 Numerous prospect pits and a collapsed 

shaft backfilled and revegetated 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Mineral Availability Annually - Denial of more than 10% of 

100% sample proposed projects 

FINDINGS 

Final inspections and determination of 

reclamation success will need to be 

completed on the remaining activities listed 

above. 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

No No 

G-5 Mineral Availability 

111 
MINERALS 

direction on mineral resources and activities, 

including exploration and development. 

Denials of more than 10 percent of proposed 

mineral activities are to be reported. 

FI NDl NGS 

A Final EIS for oil and gas leasing was 

completed in September 1997. Under the 

Record of Decision, no new leasing will be 

authorized on the Rocky Mountain Division 

for the next planning period of 10 to 15 years. 

This will affect the availability of lands for 

exploration and development of leasable 

mineral resources. Existing leases will 

continue, however, and proposals on those 

leases will be addressed. There were 28,090 

acres of National Forest System lands 

offered for lease during the BLMs May 30, 

2001 lease sale. No bids were received for 

any of these parcels, though the two-year 

noncompetitive availability window remains 

open until May 31, 2003. 

No actions proposed under the general 

mining laws were denied during FY 00-01, 

although additional mitigation or other 

environmental requirements may have been 

imposed. Most mineral material requests 

were small scale and were also approved. 

A land exchange proposed in the Tenderfoot 

area includes land on which a mining claim is 

located. The Forest is attempting to resolve 

this issue through negotiations with both the 

claimant and the exchange proponent. It is 

desirable to have a consistent and equitable 

exchange of both surface and mineral rights 

on both acquired and exchanged lands. An 

IBLA decision in 2000 nullified claims on 

forest lands that were staked after the 

segregation for the exchange. 

A Small Tracts Act sale proposed in the 

Castle Mountains will address a newly 

discovered innocent encroachment. A recent 

land survey has revealed an old cabin that 

was inadvertently constructed partially on the 

Forest. The Forest is working with the owner 

under the process set forth in the Small Tract 

Act to transfer between 0.5 to 5 acres. It is 

necessary to review mineral potential on the 

lands to be transferred. It is anticipated that 

the necessary resource reviews will be 

completed, and the parcel transferred, in FY 

2002. 

112 
LANDS 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATED Monitoring 

TO BE MEASURED FURTHER EVALUATION Item? 

Compliance with use permits Annually Unacceptable results or No 

deviation from permits 

LANDS 

J-1 Compliance With Use Permits 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

No 

METHODS 

The computerized Special Use Data 

System (SUDS) has been implemented on 

the Forest. This program is used primarily 

to prepare billings. It has not been as 

beneficial as the previous computer 

program (FLUR), but with each update, it 

seems to become a little more user friendly 

and useful in gathering information and 

records. Forms are now kept on the 

Internet and users go there to get the most 

recent forms rather than hard copy files that 

were used in the past. 

FINDINGS 

The Forest Supervisor has delegated 

authority for issuance and administration of 

special use permits to the District Rangers 

to the extent allowed in the Forest Service 

Manual. 

The condition of facilities authorized 

through special use permits is generally 

satisfactory. Annually, the Rocky Mountain 

District inspects 25 percent of its recreation 

residences, and the Kings Hills District 

began inspecting their recreation 

residences in 1999 and intends to have 

inspections performed on a regular 

schedule also. Ski areas are inspected 

before and during the ski season. Outfitter 

camps are periodically inspected and are 

generally unannounced. For other special 

use permits, on-the-ground inspections are 

done primarily for health and safety issues 

and whenever specific problems arise. 

The Rocky Mountain Ranger District is 

currently evaluating a Master Development 

Plan submitted by the Teton Uplift Ski Area, 

that includes improvement of existing 

facilities and expansion of winter uses 

within their special use permit area. An EA 

should be released for public review in 

2002. 

Resolution of two recreation residence 

permit fee appeals took place during the 

2000-2001 timeframe. The Forest 

negotiated with appellants to come to a 

satisfactory resolution and the appeals 

were dropped. 

Special use permits are generally current 

and in conformance with federal policy. 

The electronic Special Use Data System 

(SUDS) is maintained and updated by both 

the Districts and the Resource Section in 

the Supervisor’s Office. As we become 

more familiar with the program, 

maintenance and updates will be done at 

the district. All SUDS bills are prepared in 

the Supervisor’s Office, sent electronically 

to the districts for review, then completed in 

the Supervisor’s Office. 

113 
LANDS 

21 

1 

4 

The Lewis and Clark National Forest 

administers the following special use 

Irrigation Water Pipeline e1 2 

Water Transmission Pipeline e1 2 

Water Conveyance Easement 

permits: 

Table J-la. Special Use Permits 

114 
LANDS 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Right-of-way Easements 

Accomplishment 

J-2 Right-of-way Easements 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALU AT1 ON Item? Plan? 

Annually - Less than 75% No No 

1 OO~O Sample accomplishment of 5-Year 

Proaram 

Year 

1990 

1991 

FINDINGS rights-of-way easements. However, the 

The Forest Plan does not specify a level of 

accomplishment for the acquisition of 

Monitoring Section does refer to the 

Forest's five-year program. 

Conservation Easements Road FUW Acquired Trail WW Acquired 

0 1* 0 

0 1* 0 

Table J-2a. Easement Acquisitions (Cases) 

~~ 

1992 

1993** 

1994 

1 995 

1996 

0 1* 0 

1 0 0 

0 9 12* 

0 3 0 

0 0 0 

1998 

1999 

2000 

2001 

0 0 0 

0 0 0 

0 0 0 

0 0 0 

*Corrections made to data reported in previous Annual Monitoring and Evaluation Reports 

**5 Road and 9 Trail RAWS were acquired through the Crazy Mountain L&WCF Purchase in FY 1993 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Land Ownership Adjustment Annually - Less than 75% 

Accom DI ish m en t 100% Sample accomplishment of 5-Year 

J-3 Land Ownership Adjustment 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

No No 

FINDINGS 

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 five-year program. 

The Forest does not have an established 

Land Exchange Program but rather relies 

115 
LANDS 

Description Federal Lands Disposed 

1990 0.61 9* 

1991 o.o* 

1992 o.o* 

1993 704.34* 

1994 o.o* 

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. 

targets for accomplishments. The Forest 

had no annual target with the Region in FY 

2000 and no purchase, donation, Small 

Tracts cases or exchanges were 

accomplished in FY 2000. 

Federal Lands Acquired 

0.0 

o.o* 

9,659.1 1 * 

10,074.72 

0.0 

The Forest Plan specifically states that "---it 

is not the intent of the Forest Service to 

pursue this direction (land exchange) 

except on a willing grantor basis." For this 

The forest is pursuing a land for land 

proposal by The Bair Ranch Foundation in 

the Tenderfoot area of the Little Belt 

Mountains, and two small tract cases in FY 

reason it would be very difficult to "lock-in" 2001. 

1995 

1996 

1997 

1998 

1999 

Table J-3a. Land Adjustment Accomplishments (Acres) 

0.086 0.0 

1.98 0.0 

0.0 0.0 

0.0 0.0 

1,152.0 0.0 

2000 

2001 

0.0 0.0 

0.0 0.0 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION Item? 

Landline Location Annually - Less than 75% No 

Accomplishment 100% Sample accomplishment of 5-Year 

J-4 Landline Location 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

No 

FINDINGS 

The Forest Plan target for landline location 

is 29 miledyear for the second decade of 

the Forest Plan (1997-2006). In FY 2000, 

the Forest was funded for 10 miles and 

accomplished 10 miles; in FY 2001, the 

Forest was funded for 16 miles and 

accomplished 19 miles. For the first five 

years of the Forest Plan's second decade, 

the Forest accomplished an average of 53 

percent of its annual target. 

116 
LANDS 

. Description 

Forest Plan Projected Output- Second Decade 

1990 

1991 

1992 

1993 

1994 

The Forest has a total of 1,636 miles of 

property boundary. Of this, 424 miles have 

been posted to standard leaving 1,157 

miles not posted. If 29 miles per year were 

to be achieved until the entire boundary 

was posted, it would take 40 years to 

complete the job. In the interim many miles 

would need maintenance. 

Landline Location 

29 

22 

23 

24 

17 

22* 

The Forest and Rangeland Renewable 

Resource Planning Act of 1974 (RPA) set 

the year 201 0 as a goal for completing the 

posting off all National Forest boundaries. 

For this to be achieved on the Lewis and 

1995 

1996 

1997 

1998 

Clark National Forest, an annual average of 

about 180 miles of accomplishment would 

be needed in the period 2001 through 2010. 

25 

20 

16 

16 

Consequences of failing to achieve property 

boundary targets create trespass problems 

for the recreating public and the abutting 

landowners. In addition, management 

decisions may at times be compromised for 

lack of a posted National Forest boundary. 

Also, by deferring the property boundary 

job, valuable physical evidence attesting to 

the original corner location is being 

obliterated or lost to the forces of humans 

and nature. 

.___ 

2000 

2001 

Table J-4a. Landline Location Accomplishment (Miles) 

.- 

10 

19 

I 1999 I If3 I 

117 
FACl LIT1 ES 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Road And Trail 

Construction; Local Roads; 

Trails; Arterial/Collector 

Roads 

FACl LIT1 ES 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Annually - + / - 20% of programmed No No 

100% Sample construction/reconstruction 

accomplished 

L-I Road and Trail Construction/Reconstruction 

ROAD FINDINGS 

In the second decade of the Forest Plan, 

projected outputs for road construction and 

reconstruction were 12 and 25 miles 

respectively. These numbers did not 

include roads built for minerals or special 

use purposes, but did include mileage 

coducted annually under both Capital 

Improvement and Purchaser Credit 

Programs. 

During 2000, the Forest used money from 

the 10 percent funds and Timber Purchaser 

Credit Programs to reconstruct 3.1 miles of 

road using non-appropriated 10 percent 

funding, and reconstructed 7.0 miles using 

timber sale funding. Under both funding 

sources the total accomplished were 10.1 

miles, or 40 percent of Forest Plan target. 

During 2001, a total of 0.7 miles and 22.9 

miles were constructed and reconstructed, 

respectively. 

The average annual accomplishment for 

the first ten-year period of the Plan (1 987- 

1996), was 5.6 miles of construction and 

16.1 miles of reconstruction, and is 62 

percent and 67 percent, respectively, output 

projected in the Forest Plan. For the first 

five years of the second decade, annual 

averages are at 16 percent and 63 percent 

of projected outputs for construction and 

reconstruction, respectively. This exceeds 

the +A20 percent variance identified in the 

Forest Plan. The reasons for the under 

accomplishment are programmed timber 

sales that slipped behind anticipated 

schedules due to prolonged analysis, 

appeals, and litigation; short falls in 

anticipated Capital Improvement Program 

allocations related to Regional prioritization; 

and reduced road construction funding. 

Consequences of not meeting Forest Plan 

target’s in this program area primarily result 

in the inability to improve inadequate roads 

through relocation and reconstruction. 

Inadequacies include segments of road that 

are difficult to maintain; road segments that 

contribute to water quality problems and 

soil resource damage get done; a backlog 

in transportation facility conditions that 

continue to deteriorate, loading the Forest 

with increasing costs; roads that provide 

service levels inconsistent with that which 

was planned. 

118 
FACILITIES 

Description 

Forest Plan - 1 st decade 

1990 

1991 

Table L-1 a. Miles Of Road Constructed/Reconstructed 

Capital Investment/ Purchaser Credit Capital Investment/ Purchaser 

Construction Credit Reconstruction 

9.0 24.0 

3.1 29.7 

17.4 20.3 

1992 

1993 

1994 

1995 

20.2 17.9 

3.2 9.8 

1.5 13.4 

1 .o 22.6 

1996 

Forest Plan - 2"' decade 

1997 

1998 

3.0 1.3 

12 25 

1.5 14.1 

2.3 22.4 

TRAIL FINDINGS 

1999 

2000 

2001 

The Forest Plan projects an average of 

14.0 miles of trail construction and 

reconstruction annually. In FY 2000 and 

5.3 9.6 

0.0 10.1 

0.7 22.9 

2001, 9.9 and 14.1 miles, respectively, of 

construction/reconstruction work occurred 

using appropriated funds. Outputs in 2000 

slightly exceeded the Forest Plan variance 

of +/-20 percent of projected outputs 

1991 

1992 

1993 

1994 

Table L-1 b. Total Trail Construction/Reconstruction (Miles) 

11 .o* 

9.0" 

13.6* 

22.1 * 

I Year I Total Trail ConstructiodReconstruction (Miles) I 

1996 

1997 

1998 

-~ I Forest Plan 14.0- I 

11.5 

2.1 

1.4 

1999 

2000 

2001 

11 .o 

9.9 

14.1 

119 
FAClLlTl ES 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Miles of Roads Open to 

Public Use 

L-2 Miles of Open Roads 

~ 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Annually - + / - 20% of target miles to be Yes NO 

100% Sample open to public 

FINDINGS 

The Forest has approximately 1,600 miles 

of system road. The total mileage has been 

declining as a result of road 

decommissioning and a continuing review 

of the road inventory. In addition, the 

backlog of road maintenance needs has 

stressed the need to ensure we are capable 

of maintaining the roads we do allow to 

remain open to public travel. The Forest 

Plan identifies road management direction 

for various management areas. This 

includes defining whether an area will be 

managed for low, moderate, or high level of 

public access. Low level is defined as 

between 0.5 to 1.5 miles of open road per 

square mile of area, moderate mile and 

high level is greater than 3 miles of open 

road per square mile: The Forest Travel 

Plan and road closures resulting from 

project analyses shows the following road 

density, restrictions and closures: 

Table L-2a. Miles of Open Road and Total Road by Management Area. 

*Miles of oDen road includes all Level 0.2. 3,4, and 5 maintenance level roads. 

By definition, all Level 1 maintenance roads are closed to motorized travel. 

120 
FACILITIES 

Description Forest Plan 1997 1998 

Road Decommissioning 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Overall, miles of open road are on the low 

end of the range of mileage. 

accomplished under the Interim Forest 

Road Policy. 

1999 2000 2001 

7.9 0.0 24.5 

While not a Forest Plan monitoring item, a 

focus of the roads program is to accelerate 

decommissioning of roads no longer 

needed for the Forest Transportation 

System. Priorities are guided by the Clean 

Water Action Plan with emphasis placed on 

those roads having the most impact on 

watershed and fishery resources and will be 

In FY 2000 a contract was let with work 

accomplished in FY 2001. The sum of this 

contract (1 7.8 miles) and force account 

work (6.7 miles). Decommissioning 

techniques used to stabilize and restore 

unneeded road beds include permanent 

barriers and berms, water diversions, 

scarification, seeding, and approach 

obliteration. 

Table L-2b. Road Decommissioning (Miles) 

121 
PROTECTION 

VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

EVALUATION 

Unacceptable results of an ID 

Team review, or if less than 

70% of timber volume is 

programmed from high-risk 

mountain pine beetle stands. 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Assure harvest emphasizes 

the removal of high risk 

stands for mountain pine 

beetle attack and that timber 

sales are located to breakup continuous natural fuel 

accumulations 

Change 

Monitoring 

Item? 

Yes 

PROTECTION 

P-I High Risk Stands 

Forest 

Plan 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 

14 79 90+ 80 90 67 64 89 70 79 66 

REPORTING 

PERIOD 

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 

36 54 64 95 91 

5 Years 

FINDINGS 

In 2000, 95 percent of the harvest volume 

was from old, decadent lodgepole pine 

stands at high risk to mountain pine beetle 

infestation. These 2000 sales were 

Tenderfoot, South Deadman/Sawmill, 

Corridor, and Hensley. Approximately 91 

percent of the harvest volume in 2001 was 

considered high-risk lodgepole pine, which 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

Yes 

included South Deadman/Sawmill, Flat 

Whiskey, and small roundwood sales. 

Recent analysis indicates that the dry 

forest, mixed conifer stands are higher 

priority as the Forest has never 

experienced epidemic populations of 

mountain pine beetle in lodgepole stands. 

Harvest has been increasing in stands 

dominated by Douglas-fir and ponderosa 

pine. 

Table P-la. Removal of High Risk Lodgepole Pine (Percent) 

P-2 AcresNolume of Insect and Disease 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION. EFFECTS WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

and disease infestations 

FINDINGS 

EVALUATION Item? 

disease or spread of an 

existing insect or disease. 

5 Years Introduction of new insect or No 

Plan? 1 

Mountain pine beetle in ponderosa pine and 

lodgepole pine are present with levels 

ranging from 500 to over 1,500 acres. 

122 
PROTECTION 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Management practices to Annually Significant increase in insect 

ensure activities do not 

promote an increase in 

insect or disease organisms 

and disease. 

Mortality is increasing in ponderosa pine 

dominated stands as they become 

overstocked and advanced successionally. 

The groups of mountain pine beetle 

mortality are becoming more numerous in 

the Little Belt and Big and Little Snowy 

Mountain Ranges. An infestation in 

ponderosa pine south of Monarch along 

Belt Creek is now quite noticeable and a 

public concern. The Western Balsam Bark 

Beetle continues to cause mortality, which 

is sometimes extensive in the subalpine 

firkpruce zone of most Forest units. Such 

mortality was especially noted in the north 

end of the Crazy Mountains and in many 

locations in the Little Belt Mountains. The 

cause of this bark beetle outbreak is related 

to the phenomenon, “Subalpine Fir 

Decline”, which is poorly understood but 

involves other bark beetles, root diseases, 

and drought. Even though these bark 

beetles are probably still at endemic levels, 

continued drought will exacerbate 

environmental conditions, which could lead 

to further outbreaks and mortality. 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

No No 

Root rots continue to cause very sitespecific mortality on the Forest. The main 

root diseases occurring here are Armillaria 

and Brown Cubical Root and Butt Decay. 

Advancing succession will provide 

conditions suitable for increased root 

disease expansion and mortality. 

Dwarf mistletoe, specifically lodgepole pine 

dwarf mistletoe, occurs throughout the 

Forest. Dwarf mistletoe will continue to 

cause declines in diameter and height 

growth where infections are heaviest. Only 

extensive stand-replacement fire will reduce 

mistletoe-infected acres. 

Limber pine decline continues on the 

Forest. Mortality is associated with severe 

defoliation from Dothistroma needle blight 

along with additional defoliation from 

Lophodermella needle cast. Other causal 

factors are white pine blister rust, drought, 

winter damage, and intertree competition. 

White pine blister rust is known to occur in 

whitebark pine also. Blister rust poses a 

great threat to the regeneration and future 

survival of whitebark pine as a significant 

landscape component. The reintroduction 

of fire on a landscape basis in conjunction 

with selecting trees resistant to blister rust 

for seed collection is necessary to ensure 

that whitebark pine maintains its essential 

ecological role in upper subalpine systems. 

P-3 Management Practices 

FINDINGS management practices. Silvicultural and 

There has not been any significant increase 

in insect or disease agents as a result of 

prescribed burning prescriptions recognize 

existing insect and disease conditions and 

promote actions to either reduce or mitigate 

123 
PROTECTION 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION Item? 

Assure prescribed fire meets Annually +/- 10% beyond standard No 

MT air quality standards guidelines 

effects that could cause increased 

infestations or infections. Increased 

prescribed burning will scorch and weaken 

some overstory tree species and isolated 

insect mortality can be expected. Fire Use 

for Resource Benefits in the Bob Marshall 

Wilderness will allow insects and diseases 

to follow their ecological roles depending on 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

No 

the spatial and temporal scale of fire 

events. Wildfires will continue to increase 

in size and intensity due to the advanced 

succession of many forest types, which will 

provide conditions for increased insect 

infestations. Wildfires will also reduce the 

acres of dwarf mistletoe and root rot 

infections. 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Fuel Treatment Outputs Annually - + / - 25% of programmed 

100% Sample targets 

P-4 Prescribed Fire and Air Quality 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

No . No 

FINDINGS 

Projections of air quality impacts from 

prescribed burning are made in the 

environmental analyses supporting these 

types of actions. The Montana Department 

of Environmental Quality (DEQ) monitors 

air quality standards. All prescribed burning 

projects are coordinated through the 

Montana State Airshed Group, which 

requires each burn to be identified and the 

number of burn acres proposed 24 hours in 

advance. The decision to issue burn 

restrictions is made by the program 

coordinator, a working meteorologist who 

coordinates weather and smoke dispersion 

forecasts with MT DEQ. The Montana 

State Airshed Group issues burning 

restrictions when smoke dispersion is poor 

or there is the potential for smoke 

accumulations to exceed air quality 

standards. 

There have been no reported air quality 

complaints about Forest Service prescribed 

burning during the past several years, 

however, there has been some major 

smoke impacts from wildfires across 

Montana and the west which have affected 

visibility and air quality for Great Falls and 

surrounding communities. Due to 

topography surrounding the communities of 

Monarch and Neihart, they experienced 

heavy smoke concentrations during the 

wildfires of 2000 such as Maudlow-Toston 

and other fires on the Helena National 

Forest. 

P-5 Fuel Treatment Outputs 

124 
PROTECTION 

Description 

Activity 

Fuels 

Natural 

Fuels 

FINDINGS 

Forest 

Plan 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 

1,470 1,053 737 533 328 833 385 393 429 187 525 361 487 177 

700 1,025 675 860 1,108 972 1,215 1,189 2,300 2,517 760 6,009 2,210 756 

Much of the current fuels program is being 

developed in response to the need to 

restore the role of natural fire ecology in 

ponderosa pine and dry Douglas-fir forests. 

The objective is to reintroduce 

underburning and keep fuel loading at 

natural levels, rather than let fuels build up 

to late successional levels, which could 

result in stand replacement wildfires. As a 

result, the number and size of projects 

being developed to respond to forest health 

objectives has increased well beyond 

Forest Plan projections. The Forest’s target 

levels for prescribed burning in 2000 and 

2001 were 6,600 and 8,000 acres, 

respectively. This includes both acres 

treated through wildland fire use under 

controlled situations (identified as natural 

fuels in Table P-5a) and managementignited fires (activity fuels) for resource 

management such as range and wildlife 

habitat improvement or burning following 

timber harvest. Environmental conditions 

such as drought, however, will be a 

deciding factor in the ability to carry out 

these projects. During the past several 

years, drought conditions and abnormally 

TO BE MEASURED 

Wildfire Acres Burned 

long and severe fire conditions have 

reduced opportunities for prescribed 

burning. The need to break up large 

concentrations of heavy forest fuels or to 

provide mosaics in large areas of high-risk 

lodgepole pine stands is still evident. 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Annuallv - + / - 25% above oroiected No No 

Under the new National Fire Plan, (as 

funded by Congress) there is a focused 

effort to reduce future wildland fire risk for 

rural communities. The Forest is 

coordinating with county officials, Montana 

Department of Natural Resources and 

Conservation (DNRC), other federal 

agencies, and local communities to identify 

fuels reduction projects. Community 

support is critical prior to seeking funding 

for fuel treatments on National Forest 

System lands adjacent to private lands (or 

possibly on private lands) for communities 

at risk from wildland fire. There is also a 

need for community fire protection agencies 

and property owners to coordinate and 

develop site-specific projects that will 

decrease risk of fire ignition, reduce 

wildland fire behavior potential, and provide 

protection for wildlandhrban interface 

structures. 

Table P-5a. Activity and Natural Fuel Accomplishments (Acres) 

P-6 W i I df i re 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION. EFFECTS WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

125 
PROTECTION 

1989 

1990 

1991 

1992 

1993 

1994 

1995 

I 100% Sample average annual wildfire burned 

acres I 

Wildfire Fire Use Total 

13 

32,013 

795 

25 

1 

3,918 

7 

FINDINGS 

1996 

1997 

1998 

1999 

2000 

2001 

There has been a record drought pattern 

across much of central Montana during the 

past four years, this has resulted in a longer 

fire season, above normal fire occurrence 

and increased fire behavior resulting in 

large fires, which sometimes exceeded 

initial attack resources. In some cases, 

allowing natural fire to burn meets Forest 

3,747 

13 c1 13 

164 70 234 

1,362 <1 1,362 

9,038 c1 9,038 

4,067 7,600* 11,667 

Plan resource goals and objectives. 

Allowing such fires to burn under controlled 

and heavily monitored conditions is a cost 

effective way to accomplish resource goals 

and reduce fuel buildup. Table P-6a below 

shows acres of area burned by wildfire. It 

has only been since 1997 that we’ve 

identified separately those acres 

considered as wildfire and those identified 

as fire use fire for resource reasons. 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION Item? 

Cost of Suppression and 5 Years + / - 5% increase in real costs No 

Protection Organization 

Table P-6a. Wildfire Area Burned (Acres) 

Change 

Forest 

Plan? 

No 

P-7 Suppression and Protection Costs 

FINDINGS Suppression costs have averaged $2.1 

million in the past five years (1 997-2001), 

due largely to severe drought conditions. 

126 
PROTECTION 

W i Idf ire 

Average costs for the previous five-year 

period were about $1.2 million. Costs for 

fire suppression during the current five-year 

period have increased by more than the 5 

percent as identified in the Forest Plan, 

however the predominant reason is drought 

conditions. Even though suppression costs 

have increased, the Lewis and Clark 

National Forest has not incurred large fire 

Fire Use Total 

costs as experienced by some of Forests 

during the past five years. Suppression 

costs for the late season Biggs Flat 

(wildland fire use fire), which burned about 

7,600 acres, were approximately 

$1,150,000. This fire cost about $151 per 

acre, which is much lower than the $300 to 

$1,000 per acre cost for many large 

wildland fires. 

2000 

2001 

Table P-7a. Suppression and Protection Costs (Thousand Dollars) 

$4,155 $3 $4,158 

$2,266 $1,162 $2,278 

127 
WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS 

REPORTING 

PERIOD 

100% Sample 

Annually 

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS 

W-I Effects on Eligible Rivers 

VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change Change 

WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Any action that would No No 

adversely impact or degrade an 

eligible river’s qualification 

and/or potential classification 

1 OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

eligible rivers qualifications 

(free-flowing and 

“outstanding remarkable” 

resource values) and 

assigned potential 

classification (wild, scenic, 

FIN DINGS 

During the FY 00-01 timeframe, no projectlevel 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. 

This determination was made by comparing 

activities that were implemented in or along 

eligible rivers with Forest Plan Goal 11 and 

Forest Plan Standard W-1 (wild potential 

classification), W-2 (scenic potential 

classification), and W-3 (recreational 

potential classification). The rivers 

monitored for project-level activities were: 

Smith River, North Badger Creek, North 

and South Fork Sun River, Dearborn River, 

North Fork Birch Creek, Green Fork of 

Straight Creek, Tenderfoot Creek, and 

Middle Fork Judith River. 

Under the Tenderfoot Land Exchange, the 

Forest proposes to acquire private lands 

along the Tenderfoot Creek (T14N, R4E, 

sections 21, 22, and 23) adjacent to 

segments of the creek identified as eligible 

for scenic river classification. This land 

exchange has not yet been completed, but 

acquisition of these lands will ensure that 

scenic values can be maintained. 

In 2001, the Forest began conducting an 

analysis of conditions in the Judith 

watershed. The project area includes the 

Middle Fork Judith River, portions of which 

are potentially classified as a recreational 

river. Proposed actions include prescribed 

burning, and possible thinning or slashing 

near the river corridor. Roaded access 

along the Middle Fork has been identified 

as a water quality issue; alternatives to the 

current road location will be addressed as 

well. All actions need to conform to 

management direction for potential 

recreational river classification. Under 

direction for recreational rivers, timber 

harvesting is allowed with standard 

restrictions to protect the immediate river 

environment. Cumulative sediment 

analyses must be conducted for projects 

requiring road construction or significant 

land disturbances in areas of “outstandingly 

remarkable” fishery values. 

Through site-specific analysis, additional 

information on identified and potentially 

eligible rivers is collected. A river suitability 

study may be completed as part of the 

Forest Plan revision. 

128 
GENERAL 

REPORTING 

PERIOD 

5 Years - 100% 

Annual Sample 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

values used in Forest Plan 

VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change Change 

WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

In general, + / - 25%; however, Yes No 

very large cost items such as 

stump-truck costs would have a 

smaller degree of acceptable 

variability. 

FINDINGS 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring 

GENERAL 

1-1 COSTS AND VALUES 

Change 

Forest 

Continuously 

since the only available tracking system for 

validating costshalues is designed solely 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

If issues cannot be dealt with No No 

under the Forest 

Communications Plan 

The 1995 Forest Monitoring Report 

recommended deleting this monitoring item, 

for the timber resource. 

1-2 EMERGING ISSUES 

or changing social values 

I 

FINDINGS Front Mineral Withdrawal, and the Timber 

Sale Program. 

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 through FY 2001. While each 

Ranger District was involved with several 

smaller scale projects requiring public 

involvement, the key projects necessitating 

more extensive efforts because of the 

sensitivity of the issues involved were: 

National and Statewide Initiatives, Forestwide Travel Planning, Forest-wide Range 

Inventory and Analysis, Rocky Mountain 

In April 2001, the Lewis and Clark National 

Forest received approval to reestablish a 

ranger district at Belt Creek. The Kings Hill 

District was divided roughly along the Belt 

CreeWSmith River watershed divide. The 

new district is now called the Belt Creek 

Ranger District (roughly 225,000 acres) and 

the remainder of Kings Hill Ranger District 

(roughly 306,000 acres) is now named the 

White Sulphur Springs Ranger District. The 

purpose of the split was to increase public 

service and give the District Rangers a 

better opportunity to manage the new 

districts in a collaborative fashion. The 

129 
GENERAL 

districts share staff and coordinate on work 

programs. Mike Herrin is district ranger at 

Belt Creek and Tim Benedict is ranger at 

the White Sulphur Springs Ranger District. 

MINERALS 

Oil and Gas Proposals: See item G 

e Block P Mill Tailings Clean-up: See item 

G 

Rocky Mountain Front Mineral 

Withdrawal: On February 3, 1999, Mike 

Dombeck, former Chief of the USDA Forest 

Service, announced a two-year moratorium 

on locatable mineral entry (hard rock 

mining) of 429,000 acres of National Forest 

System lands (NFS) in the Lewis and Clark 

and Helena National Forests to preserve 

the area for traditional cultural purposes by 

Native Americans, protection of threatened 

and endangered species, and preservation 

of outstanding scenic values and roadless 

character. The lands proposed for the 

withdrawal included all NFS lands in the 

Rocky Mountain division of the Lewis and 

Clark National Forest outside of existing 

Wilderness east of the Continental Divide 

and NFS lands on the Lincoln Ranger 

District of the Helena National Forest east 

and outside of the Scapegoat Wilderness. 

A notice was filed in the Federal Register 

February 3, 1999, which prevented the 

staking of new mining claims while an 

environmental analysis was completed to 

evaluate closing the area to entry under the 

United States mining laws for 20 years. 

The lands remain open to all other activities 

consistent with applicable forest plans and 

those related to the exercise of valid 

existing rights. 

The final environmental document and 

Record of Decision (ROD) was signed 

December 20,2000, and published in the 

Federal Register January 22, 2001. The 

ROD, signed by Secretary of Agriculture 

Dan Glickman, was the recommendation 

and consent to the Secretary of the Interior 

for formal withdrawal of 405,000 acres of 

National Forest System lands of the Helena 

and Lewis and Clark National Forests from 

future mineral exploration and development 

for 20 years. This mineral withdrawal did 

not apply to private lands. When the 

Secretary of the Interior approved the 

mineral withdrawal, amendments to the 

Helena and Lewis and Clark Forest Plans 

were implemented reflecting the withdrawal. 

RANGE 

Forest-wide Range Inventory and 

Analysis: In January 1991, the concept of 

"block" or "ecosystem" range inventory and 

analysis for updating or revising Allotment 

Management Plans was approved by the 

Lewis and Clark Forest leadership team. 

Allotments were combined into study areas 

and prioritized for action. 

An environmental study of grazing 

allotments within the Musselshell drainage 

of the Little Belt Mountains was initiated in 

June 1999. The analysis covered 14 cattle 

allotments and 12 special use permits. 

During the initial public comment period, 

five comments expressing concerns to be 

incorporated in the Environmental 

Assessment were received. The EA was 

released May 1, 2000, with another public 

comment period closing June 16, 2000. A 

final decision was released February 9, 

2001, with the appeal period ending in 

March. Two appeals were. received. Upon 

Regional Forester review, the decision was 

remanded to the forest for further 

environmental analysis. Additional analysis 

of the Musselshell range allotments will be 

completed with a new environmental 

130 
GENERAL 

document planned for release for public 

comment in 2002. 

Pre-work started on the Sheep Creek 

Range EA in March 2000. Late in Fiscal 

Year 2001, the staff of the White Sulphur 

Springs Ranger District began an 

environmental study of the grazing 

allotments in the Sheep Creek area 

covering the future management of 27 

cattle and horse allotments, five special use 

pastures, two agriculture special uses and 

two administrative pastures in the Little Belt 

Mountains. The Forest Service will be 

updating, revising or developing allotment 

management plans (AMP) to improve or 

maintain the upland range plant 

communities and riparian areas. 

TIMBER SALE PROGRAM 

Dry Fork Vegetation and Recreation 

Restoration Project: In 1998, timber 

harvest, prescribed burning, and recreation 

site improvements were proposed in the 

Dry Fork drainage of Belt Creek. A scoping 

letter was sent to 376 individuals, interested 

groups and tribal officials, and two public 

field trips were conducted to the project 

area. Thirty-five responses were received 

during the initial comment period. An 

Environmental Assessment was released 

for public review in September 1999. 

Sixteen responses were received following 

release of the EA. The comment period 

was re-opened for 30 days in February 

2000, and a public meeting was held March 

6. An additional 75 comments were 

received. The Decision Notice for the EA 

was released June 15. Three appeals were 

filed on the decision. The appeals 

reviewing official remanded the decision 

back to the forest for additional analysis. 

On November 17,2000, the Forest Service 

published a Notice of Intent to prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement for the Dry 

Fork project area. The draft environmental 

document was released April 6,2001. After 

a 45-day public comment period ended, 

eight letters were received. Responses to 

comments were developed for inclusion in 

the final EIS and decision. The final 

environmental document and Record of 

Decision will be available for public review 

in FY 2002. 

Judith Restoration Analysis: Lewis and 

Clark National Forest staff has begun data 

collection and preliminary analysis on 

approximately 21 4,000 acres of the Judith 

Ranger District within the Little Belt 

Mountains. The analysis area includes the 

Middle Fork and South Fork of the Judith 

River. Resource specialists are looking for 

opportunities to improve water quality, 

enhance westslope cutthroat trout habitat, 

reduce forest fuels buildup around private 

lands, and maintain historical forest density 

and diversity. Crews collected data and 

surveyed the area during the 2001 field 

season and are currently beginning 

alternative development and analysis. 

Public comment about possible issues 

related with the Judith analysis area was 

collected during the summer of 2001. 

TRAVEL PLANNING 

The Forest is in the center of a regional 

(eastern Montana) issue which revolves 

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 

National 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 

131 
GENERAL 

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 analysis of the 

expressed public demand, environmental 

impacts, and cost of access for each 

individual situation.” 

Big Snowy Mountains Access and Travel 

Management: Initial efforts to review 

public access to, and travel management 

within the Big Snowy Mountains began in 

1994. Travel planning became priority 

forest work in FY 2000, and a forest travel 

planning position was established. 

In April 2001, an Environmental 

Assessment for the Big Snowies was 

released to the public for comment. During 

this time, District Court Judge Donald 

Molloy issued a ruling concerning an ongoing civil suit over management of 

Wilderness Study Areas (WSA). Since 84 

percent of the Big Snowies is a WSA, the 

Forest staff decided to do a supplemental 

analysis of effects of travel management 

alternatives on the Wilderness character of 

the area. The supplement was released to 

the public in October 2001. A Decision 

Notice will be issued on the project in early 

2002. 

Forest Travel Plan Revision: The Forest 

Travel Plan was signed December 30, 

1987, with an effective date of June 1, 

1988. Although numerous changes have 

been made to the Jefferson Division of the 

1988 Travel Plan through various 

environmental analysis documents which 

resulted in closing some roads and adding 

others, a broad analysis of the Little Belt 

Mountains, Castle Mountains and Crazy 

Mountains has not been completed. While 

access in the Rocky Mountain Division of 

the forest was studied as part of the 

Northern Continental Divide ecosystem, no 

changes have been made to the 1988 

Travel Plan. 

In 2000-2001, pre-work began on Travel 

Plan revision for the Rocky Mountain 

Division. An environmental analysis will . evaluate the impacts of motorized and nonmotorized travel on existing roads and trails 

within the planning area, as well as address 

the impacts on areas currently open to 

cross-country motorized and non-motorized 

travel. 

LANDS 

Bair Land Exchange: In 1996, the Lewis 

and Clark National Forest, University of 

Montana, and Bair Company entered into a 

three-party agreement to share information 

and develop courses of action to meet the 

goals of both the National Forest and the 

Bair Company for checkerboard ownership 

sections of land in the Lower Tenderfoot 

Drainage, a tributary of the Smith River. 

The University provided information and 

analyzed tools to predict future vegetative 

and other resource trends in the drainage; 

research and educational opportunities 

were provided for the school. Another part 

of the agreement was directed at a potential 

land exchange or purchase of Bair lands, 

as well as management opportunities. 

The Lewis and Clark National Forest and 

Bair Ranch Foundation then entered into an 

agreement to initiate a land exchange 

between the Forest Service and the Bair 

Ranch Foundation for the checkerboard 

ownership sections. Public scoping for the 

land exchange closed October 17, 1997. 

Public concerns and issues of the potential 

exchange are being incorporated in an 

environmental assessment. In March 2001 

132 
GENERAL 

a letter was sent to those who had made 

prior comments to inform them of the status 

of the project. 

The appraisal process was completed in 

June 2001. The Bair Ranch Foundation 

then received a counter-proposal to 

purchase the exchange lands from an 

adjoining landowner. The Foundation is 

now deciding whether or not to proceed 

with the land exchange with the Lewis and 

Clark National Forest. 

NATIONAL AND STATEWIDE 

INITIATIVES 

Roads Policy: On March 2, 2000, a draft 

environmental document was released for 

public comment on the national policy 

addressing how the Forest Service should 

manage its existing road system. This 

policy revises how the Forest Service 

manages the more than 380,000 miles of 

road already in the national forest 

transportation system. The policy is 

intended to: 

Make the existing forest road system 

safe, responsive to public needs, 

environmentally sound, affordable 

and efficient to manage; 

Be implemented through extensive 

public involvement and analysis at 

the local level; 

procedure to help land managers 

and the public identify heavily used 

roads that need to be maintained or 

upgraded and roads that are unused 

or environmentally damaging that 

can be decommissioned; and, 

Place a new emphasis on 

maintaining and reconstructing 

existing roads rather than building 

new roads, given the extensive road 

Implement a scientific analysis 

system that is already in place in 

most national forests. 

The public comment period for this policy 

direction closed May 17, 2000. Final 

administrative policy for Forest 

Transportation Systems was filed in the 

Federal Register on January 12,2001. 

Resulting Forest Service Manual direction 

requires that every National Forest System 

administrative unit must complete a forestscale roads analysis by January 2003. 

Beginning in mid-March, staff of the Lewis 

and Clark National forest initiated an 

analysis of primary forest roads, important 

local roads, and roads providing legal 

access or ROW. 

Roadless Initiative: On October 13, 1999, 

President Clinton directed the Forest 

Service to initiate proposed rulemaking to 

determine management of approximately 

40 million acres of inventoried roadless 

areas on National Forest System lands. 

Ten national listening sessions and open 

houses at every national forest were 

scheduled to allow the public to comment 

on the proposal. The "scoping" comment 

period ended on December 20, 1999. The 

USDA Forest Service also initiated a 

national website for information updates 

about the roadless initiative at that time. 

The Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

was released in early May 2000. More than 

300 public meetings were held around the 

country, both information-sharing and public 

comment forums. Comments were 

accepted until July 17. The Final EIS was 

released November 13, 2000. The Final 

Rule for roadless area management was 

published in the Federal Register January 

12, 2001 ; however, the effective date of the 

Final Rule was delayed until May 12, 2001, 

to allow the new administration time for 

review. On July 10, 2001 the new 

133 
GENERAL 

administration published the Advanced 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The 

public comment period ended September 

10,2001 and a rule has not yet been 

announced. 

Bureau of Land Management and Forest 

Service Travel Management: The Bureau 

of Land Management (BLM) and the Forest 

Service (FS) proposed restricting 

motorized, cross-country travel on BLM and 

National Forest System lands in Montana, 

North Dakota, and portions of South 

Dakota. This proposal does change most 

of the current limited or closed 

designations, or designated intensive use 

areas. Exceptions for off-road travel were 

considered in an analysis for activities such 

as: game retrieval, camping and disabled 

access. Off-road vehicle access allowed 

under the terms and conditions of a federal 

lease or permit were not affected by this 

proposal. 

This change in management direction was 

accomplished through an interagency plan 

amendment and environmental impact 

statement (EIS). The plan amendment 

addressed the use of wheeled, motorized 

vehicles designed for and/or capable of 

travel off roads and trails. The amendment 

did not address snowmobile use. The Draft 

EIS was released mid-November 1999, with 

the public comment period open until 

February 24, 2000. Public meetings were 

held in December and January. The final 

EIS and Record of Decision were released 

January 5,2001. 

National Fire Plan: Following the fire 

season of 2000, the Secretaries of 

Agriculture and Interior responded to an 

information request from the President with 

a report that has evolved into the National 

Fire Plan. This plan addresses five 

emphasis areas: firefighting, rehabilitation 

and restoration, hazardous fuel reduction, 

community assistance, and accountability. . 

To respond to these areas, the following 

actions have been taken on the Lewis and 

Clark National Forest: 

Firefighting Resources 

11 new permanent positions have 

been added 

An Interagency Hotshot Crew is 

located in Great Falls (20 positions) 

49 temporary fire positions have 

been filled 

0 1,521 acres of non-wilderness Lewis 

and Clark National Forest land 

burned in FY 2000 

$3,553 was spent to rehabilitate 

burned acres 

Hazardous Fuel Reduction 

Re habilitation 

0 Eight fuel management treatment 

projects were proposed 

6,127 acres were planned for 

treatment 

0 FY 2001 funding for planning and 

operations has been allocated 

0 Staff worked with communities and 

private landowners to reduce wildfire 

risk and expand local economic 

opportunities. 

Community Assistance 

OTHER ISSUES 

A. Recreation Residence Appraisal: 

Recreation residence permit holders were 

provided the opportunity to appeal the 

decision to implement new base fee 

scheduling for recreation residence lots on 

national forest lands. The average fee 

increase for cabin sites on the Lewis and 

Clark National Forest was 21 percent 

(although some decreased) as compared to 

the Regional average increase of 103 

percent. The new fee was appealable 

when the permit holder received the first Bill 

134 
GENERAL 

for Collection following the fee change. 

Nine appeals were filed following FY 2000 

perm it bi I I i ngs. 

B. Tenderfoot Experimental Forest: The 

Lewis and Clark National Forest has been 

working with Forest Service Research to 

implement a research project in the 

Tenderfoot Experimental Forest. The 

proposal involves watershed management 

after vegetative treatment including logging 

and prescribed burning. Scoping for this 

proposal began May 22, 1997. An 

Environmental Assessment was released in 

February 1998. Eleven comments were 

received on the EA. The NEPA decision to 

implement the project was signed by 

Supervisor Flora in July 1998. Two appeals 

were received on the decision, but the 

Regional Forester denied the appeals. 

The research project requires 3.9 miles of 

new system road and 2.3 miles of 

temporary road construction in the 

Experimental Forest. Access roads to the 

project area were constructed in 1999, with 

research planned for the spring of 2000, 

and harvest completed in 2000. Clean up 

and burning preparations are progressing; 

and prescribed burning will start in 2002, if 

weather conditions allow. 

C. South Fork-Sun River Burn: Staff of 

the Rocky Mountain Ranger District 

proposed introducing management ignited 

fire into approximately 10,000 acres of the 

Scapegoat Wilderness over five years. The 

proposal would accomplish two objectives - 

to create a more defensible Wilderness 

boundary to control wildfire and to restore 

the natural role of fire in the Wilderness 

complex. An initial public comment period 

began October 17,1997, and 17 comments 

on the proposal were received. An 

interdisciplinary team included public 

concerns in the environmental analysis of 

this project. The Environmental 

Assessment was released April 10,2000, 

with a comment period ending May 26. 

Two public open houses were held in 

Augusta and Great Falls. 

Forest Supervisor Rick Prausa released the 

decision to prescribe burn approximately 

10,000 acres within the Scapegoat 

Wilderness portion of the Bob Marshall 

Wilderness Complex on March 2, 2001, 

with the appeal period ending April 16. One 

appeal was received, but was dismissed, as 

the appellant did not participate during the 

entire analysis process. Most of the 

prescribed burns will be ignited by 

helicopter with an aerial ignition device and 

will occur over a five-year period. In 

October 2001, district personnel completed 

blasting control lines along the prescribed 

fire’s northeast boundary in preparation for 

actual burning during the spring 2002. 

D. Forest Plan Revision: The Lewis and 

Clark Forest staff is preparing for Forest 

Plan revision in FY 2005. Preliminary steps 

to the revision include a broad-scale 

assessment to describe historic conditions, 

current status and future trends of 

ecological and social conditions. This will 

help determine any need for change from 

current direction. This process will be done 

by an eastside planning unit (to include all 

National Forests east of the Continental , 

Divide). The assessment will evaluate 

issues common to all eastside forests. This 

will provide an ecosystems approach and 

help with consistency between eastside 

forests. Issues to be analyzed include 

vegetation, species viability, watershed 

condition, recreation/access/traveI 

management, and social and economic 

factors. This assessment will help 

formulate a proposed action to be carried 

forward into the Forest Plan EIS process 

and is scheduled to be complete during FY 

135 
GENERAL 

2002. Public input will help develop 

alternatives to be evaluated for the Forest 

Plan. 

E. Dry Wolf Stewardship Project: The 

Lewis and Clark National Forest was 

selected to test new project planning and 

contracting authorities. Termed 

"stewardship contracting," this new way of 

doing business provides greater 

opportunities for the public to participate in 

planning and monitoring national forest 

projects. 

The preliminary proposal involved 

exchanging forest products for work in and 

around the Dry Wolf Campground on the 

Judith Ranger District. The proposal 

included important rehabilitation needs in 

the campground, on nearby trails, and 

within surrounding vegetation. Multiple 

public meetings have been held to develop 

partnerships with local community 

residents, who have helped develop the 

project. A solicitation for contract proposals 

was issued in December 2000, and in late 

March, the project was awarded to a local 

contractor. This was the first contract of 

this type to be awarded in Region 1. Work 

began in late May and will continue into FY 

2002. 

A second pilot project has been approved 

that will test some of the same authorities, 

but it will focus on ways to rehabilitate 

grazing lands with value derived from 

harvesting forest products. 

F. Forest Communications Facilities: 

Staff of the Lewis and Clark National Forest 

began evaluating the communications 

system across the forest to determine 

additional needs or revisions to existing 

communication facilities and equipment. As 

fire lookouts were reduced over time, 

primary communications links for many 

backcountry and remote areas were lost. 

During the 1988 fire season, better 

communications coverage to address 

safety for personnel, aircraft and fire related 

activities were identified as crucial; this 

need was demonstrated again during the 

2000 and 2001 fire seasons. Also, 

increased use of the forest by agency and 

public users has multiplied the number of 

instances where critical communications 

are necessary. 

Possible facility locations were identified 

using a combination of local knowledge and 

computer-generated models showing areas 

for best coverage. No locations were 

proposed within either existing Wilderness 

areas, Wilderness Study Areas, or Forest 

Plan recommended Wilderness areas. All 

proposed sites are accessible from existing 

roads or trails. 

G. Canada Lynx: Between 1991 and 

1998, several petitions were filed 

requesting listing of the lynx as an 

endangered species. These petitions, 

responses, and follow-up lawsuits resulted 

in a settlement agreement between 

Plaintiffs and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service to propose listing of the Canada 

lynx. Because of the likelihood of adverse 

effects to lynx under current forest 

management plans, the Forest Service and 

USFWS signed a Lynx Conservation 

Agreement in February 2000. The 

agreement will promote the conservation of 

the Canada lynx and its habitat on federal 

lands managed by the Forest Service. It 

also identifies actions that the two agencies 

agree to take while plans are being 

amended to reduce or eliminate adverse 

effects of risks to the lynx and its habitat. 

Until plan changes are made, the Forest 

Service will not authorize any activity that is 

likely to adversely affect lynx. 

136 
GENERAL 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS 

TO BE MEASURED 

Evaluate lands identified as 

not meeting physical or 

biological characteristics 

used initial allocations 

An interdisciplinary team, was established to 

develop a Northern Rockies amendment 

that will include 22 administrative units in 

the northern Rockies, a great proportion of 

lynx habitat. Scoping was initiated on the 

proposed forests plan amendments in 

August 2001. A public open house was 

held in Great Falls on September 27. 

REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH Change Change 

PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER Monitoring Forest 

EVALUATION Item? Plan? 

Continuous All changes will be evaluated No No 

annually 

1-3 Land Allocations 

FINDINGS 

No changes in land allocations were made 

during the FY 00-01 period. 

The following Table I-3a shows the 

management area changes made as a 

result of project implementation analysis. 

The acreage calculations were not based 

on GIS determinations; acreages may differ 

somewhat in other evaluations. 

Table I-3a. Allocations of Management Areas and Acres 

Management Area 

(Forest Plan, page 3-2) 

Management Area A 

Management Area B 

Management Area C 

Management Area D 

Management Area E 

Management Area F 

Management Area G 

Management Area H 

Management Area I 

Management Area J 

Management Area K 

Management Area L 

Management Area M 

Management Area N 

Management Area 0 

Management Area P 

Management Area Q 

Management Area R 

Management Area S 

Management Area T 

Total Forest Acres 

1987 Acres 

16,261 

330,838 

11 1,664 

24,456 

116,519 

352,746 

247,644 

31,778 

37,867 

11,100 

9,125 

16,112 

3,281 

41,838 

22,702 

384,407 

51,834 

33,225 

0 

1,843,397 

137 

Net Change 

+13,582 

-41,476 

-51,261 

+17,997 

+13,113 

-554 

+30,242 

-3,270 

-79 

-238 

-1,209 

+610 

+7,089 

No Change 

No Change 

No Change 

+96 

+2,600 

+12,980 

130,924 

-580 

2001 Acres 

29,843 

289,362 

60,403 

42,453 

129,632 

352,192 

277,886 

28,508 

37,788 

10,862 

7,916 

. 16,722 

10,370 

41,258 

22,702 

384,407 

51,834 

33,321 

2.600 

12,980 

1,843,397 
GENERAL 

OUTPUT, MANAGEMENT REPORTING VARIABILITY (+/-) WHICH 

PRESCRIPTION, EFFECTS PERIOD WOULD INITIATE FURTHER 

TO BE MEASURED EVALUATION 

Validation of employment 5 Years 

and income projections 

+ / - 20% of predicted changes 

Land allocation adjustments totaling 

130,924 acres have been made during 

implementation of the Forest Plan. This 

represents about a 7 percent change in 

land allocation and is considered a minor 

modification. The changes in management 

areas have reduced the suitable forest 

acres (those acres managed for scheduled 

timber harvest) by 16,558 (from 287,307 to 

Change Change 

Monitoring Forest 

Item? Plan? 

No No 

265,749). This is about a 6 percent 

reduction of the total suitable forest land 

identified in the Forest Plan for forest 

production. This small change has not 

affected the annual allowable sale quantity 

(1 2.1 MMBF), nor has it had much effect on 

the long-term sustained yield of the Forest 

(23.8 MMBF). 

Activity 

Timber 

Grazing 

Land Use 

Recreation (Undesignated Areas) 

1-4 EMPLOYMENTANCOME PROJECTIONS 

Collection Data 

$1,109,437 

$6031 7 

$1 9,262 

$176,636 

FINDINGS 

Employment and income projections in the 

Forest Plan were based on projected 

outputs for softwood and sawtimber, and 

have historically been reported only for the 

timber resource using Timber Sale Program 

Information Reporting System (TSPIRS) . data. The latest TSPIRS report was 

prepared for the 1998 timber sale program, 

and as such, reporting using TSPIRS data 

alone is not reliable. Other revenue data is 

collected to determine the basis on which to 

make 25 percent payments to States. This 

includes all annual collections from National 

Forest System lands from such activities as 

grazing fees, mineral collections, timber 

sales, and recreation fees. Through the 

Secure Rural Schools and Community SelfDetermination Act of 2000, counties were 

offered an alternative to receiving payments 

under the 25 Percent Fund Act, whereby 

they could elect to receive their share of the 

average of the three highest 25 percent 

payments made to the State during the 

period of FY 1986 through FY 1999 (full 

payment). Most of the counties covered by 

the forest have elected to receive full 

payment under the new law. This will also 

have an affect on data used to determine 

this monitoring item. Collection data from 

2001 is not available at this time. The 

following table shows the collection data 

from the Lewis and Clark National Forest 

for FY 2000. 

Table 1-4a. Annual Forest Collection Summary by Resource Class for FY 2000 

138 
GENERAL 

Activity 

Power 

Minerals 

Admission and User Fees 

KV Collections U 

Purchaser Credit Charges 

Specified Road Credits 

Salvage Sale 

TOTAL 

Collection Data 

$594 

$69,526 

$0 

$1 07,958 

$459,259 

$1 -990.22a 

$21 7 

$13,178 

139 
IV. COMPARISON OF OUTPUTS, ACTIVITIES, AND BUDGETS 

IV. COMPARISON OF OUTPUTS, ACTIVITIES, AND BUDGETS 

The following two tables compare the 

outputs, activities, and budgets with those 

projected in the Forest Plan during the 

second decade of Forest Plan 

implementation. Please see previous 

reporting for prior years. 

Table 1. Comparison of Projected Outputs/Activities for Second Decade of Plan 

Output of Activity 

Developed Use 

Dispersed Use 

Wilderness 

Non-wilderness 

Wildlife Habitat 

Improvement 

Fish Habitat Improvement 

T&E Habitat I m prove men t 

Wildlife Structures 

Fish Structures 

T&E Structures 

Permit Grazing Use 

Range Improvement 

Nonstructural 

Structural . AMPs 

Noxious Weed Control 

Total Vol. Sold 

;i lvicu It u re Exams 

Reforest- Appro 

TSI-Appropriated3 

TSI-Kv 

Soil Inventory 

SoilNVater Improvement. 

Minerals Mgmt 

Land Exchange 

Landline Location 

Road Construction 

Road Reconstruct. 

Trail 

Construction/Reconstruction 

Fuels Management-BD 

Fuels Management-FFP 

Reforest-Othe P' 

IA = Not Available at time of publica! 

Unit of 

Measure 

M RVD 

M RVD 

MRVD I 

Acres 

Acres 

Acres 

Structures 

Structures 

Structures 

M AUM 

Acres 

Structures 

Plans 

Acres 

MMBF 

M Acres 

Acres 

Acres 

Acres 

Acres 

Acres 

Acres 

Cases 

Acres (net) 

Miles 

Miles 

Miles 

Miles 

Acres 

Acres 

)n 

Fores 

2"d Dc 

189'" 

101 

793 

600 

5 

100 

10 

25 

0 

72.1 

1,229 

40 

10 

400 

17 

28 

5 

250 

200 

0 

2,000 

45 

160 

60 

29 

12 

25 

14 

1,410 

700 

1997 

NA 

NA 

NA 

485'5' 

250 

0 

4.7P 

3(7) 

1(8) 

73.7 

0 

43 

23 

1,200 

15 

NA 

1 34 

140 

85 

0 

0 

116 

19 

0 

16 

1.5 

8.1 

2.1 

187 

2,517 

1998 

NA 

NA 

NA 

485'5' 

250 

1 

1(8) 

73.3 

300 

28 

24 

1,200 

5.6 

NA 

59 

1,255(') 

525 

0 

0 

112 

26 

0 

16 

2.3 

3.7 

1.4 

525 

760 

4.75@) 

3. d7) 

1999 

NA 

NA 

NA 

846'5' 

170 

0 

oV) 

1 o@) 

OW 

68.7 

500 

62 

11 

1,100 

9.8 

NA 

304 

578 

15 

0 

0 

139 

37 

,152 

6 

5.3 

12.0 

11 .o 

361 

6,009 

2000 

NA 

NA 

NA 

264m 

0 

0 

19@) 

22") 

68.6 

600 

24 

0 

1,900 

2.4 

NA 

295 

306 

0 

0 

0 

42 

16 

1 

IO 

0 

10.1 

9.9 

487 

2,210 

Total of PlanVSeed and Site Prep. Natural Appropriated (see Table E-7a) 

Reforest-Other is the sum of PlanVSeed and Site Prep. from KV, Trust Funds, and Purchaser Work (see Table E-7a) 

Total of Release Acres and Thinning TSI Appropriated (see Table E-7a) 

Total of Release Acres and Thinning TSI KV (see Table E-7a) 

Management Attainment Reporting (MAR) items changed in 1995; now reflects acres restored 

New MAR item reflects miles of inland fish habitat restoredenhanced - no Forest Plan output 

New MAR item reflects miles of TES aquatic habitat enhanced - no Forest Plan output 

New MAR item reflects number of T&E structures - no specific Forest Plan output 

Corrections made to previous reporting 

NA 

NA 

980'5' 

24@' 

0 

1 

OW 

6(7) 

69.5 

300 

19 

0 

1,800 

3.6 

NA 

117 

282 

171 

0 

0 

95 

12 

1 

9 

0.7 

22.9 

14.1 

177 

756 

1 40 
IV. COMPARISON OF OUTPUTS, ACTIVITIES, AND BUDGETS 

Heritage 

Wildlife and Fish 

Soil, Air, Water 

Facility Maintenance 

Land Ownership Mgmt 

The following table shows the budget 

identified in the Forest Plan to implement 

Forest Plan direction. The second column 

compares the Forest Plan budget (based 

293 672 48 1 

101 231 168 

71 163 351 

150 344 283 

on 1978 dollars) to the equivalent amount in 

2001 dollars. The third column shows the 

Forest’s actual 2001 budget allocation. All 

dollars are reported in thousand dollars. 

location) 

Land Acquisition 

Road Maintenance 

Table II. Comparison of FY 2001 Budget Allocation Vs. Forest Plan Projections 

98 225 15 

242 555 950 includes Federal Hwy 

Trail Maintenance 

Co-op Law Enforcement 

Reforestation-Approp 

(includes TSI, tree 

improvement) 

KV (Trust Fund) 

CWFS-Other (Trust Fund) 

Timber Salv. Sale (Perm) 

Brush Disposal (Perm) 

noxious weeds) 

Range Improvement (inc. 

State and Private Forestry 

I (includes land exchanges, 

sDecial uses, landline 

Trust i3 10% Funds 

177 406 441 

26 60 67 

59 135 129 

64 1 47 103 

15 I34 70 

20 46 338 

15 34 25 

31 71 479 

0 0 12 

Land 

Capital Investment funds (for 

recreation. roadtrail, facility 

construction. This is outside 

constrained budget) 

725 1,664 

-. 

Total Budget 4,135 9,489 9,652 

141 
IV. COMPARISON OF OUTPUTS, ACTIVITIES, AND BUDGETS 

The budget in the Lewis and Clark National 

Forest Plan (June 1986) was an estimate of 

the funds needed to implement the 

activities proposed in the Forest Plan. 

Since that time many of the costs used in 

the Forest Plan have changed. New 

activities and/or emphasis items, although 

authorized by the Forest Plan, have 

changed or expanded. Since the 

development of the Forest Plan we have 

additional and more accurate information 

on the real costs of resource support to 

timber, for example. 

The Forest Service budget process has 

changed significantly in recent years as well 

but in all cases, when Congress passes the 

Appropriation Bill, the dollars and targets 

are disaggregated to the forest level and 

the forest is given a budget allocation and 

targets to execute. This "Actual Allocation" 

may or may not resemble our budget 

request. There are several reasons why 

the budget allocation we receive differs 

from the program we requested in the 

outyear process. The main reason for the 

difference is that Congress' decision on 

budgets and targets is influenced by more 

than just the President's budget 

submission. The following are examples of 

influences on Congress; committee 

member's interest, successful lobbying 

efforts, the overall size of the budget (and 

deficit), and the popularity or unpopularity of 

certain items in the budget. When this 

budget comes to us in the form of an 

Appropriation Act (a law) we are required to 

execute it as Congress has specified. 

142 
V. LIST OF PREPARERS 

V. 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 Years 2000- 

2001. 

The FY 2000-20001 Monitoring and Evaluation Team: 

NAME 

Bonnie Dearing 

Mike Enk 

Don Godtel 

Guy Schmidt 

Dale Schaeffer 

Sandra French 

Mark Nienow 

Eldon Rash 

Robin Strathy 

Vernon Cromwell 

Jane Weber 

Tom Osen 

Kraig Lang 

Steve Martin 

Chuck Mark 

Lee Clark 

Amv Barker 

FUNCTIONAL RESOURCE AREA 

Public Information Officer 

Fisheries Biologist 

Wildlife Biologist 

Transportation Planner 

Lands Specialist 

Archeologist 

Hydrologist 

Range Conservationist 

Land Ma nag e men t PI ann i ng/M i n e ra Is 

Geologist 

Lewis and Clark Interpretive Center Director 

Recreation Planning 

Wilderness Specialist; Rocky Mountain Ranger District 

Timber Management 

Ecologist 

Fire Management Specialist 

Writer-Editor 

In addition, the following individuals reviewed the report: 

NAME 

Rick Prausa 

George Weldon 

Michael Muiioz 

William Fortune 

Betty Holder 

Mike Herrin 

Tim Benedict 

FUNCTIONAL RESOURCE AREA 

Forest Supervisor 

Deputy Forest Supervisor 

District Ranger, Rocky Mountain Ranger District 

District Ranger, Musselshell Ranger District 

District Ranger, Judith Ranger District 

District Ranger, Belt Creek Ranger District 

District Ranger, White Sulphur Springs Ranger District 

143 
VI. APPROVAL 

VI. APPROVAL 

I have reviewed the annual Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report for Fiscal Years 

2000-2001 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: 

RICK PRAUSA DATE 

Forest Supervisor 

1 44 
APPENDIX A 

Number of Trail Encounters 

APPENDIX A 

Number of Other Parties 

CamDed Within Siaht or 

2001 ROCKY MOUNTAIN RANGER DISTRICT 

BOB MARSHALL WILDERNESS REPORT 

SOCIAL INDICATORS 

Opportunity Class 

I 

II 

Appendix Table A-1. Social Indicator Standards 

With Other Parties Continuous Sound 

80% probability of 0 

encounters per day per day 

80% probability of 1 or fewer 

80% probability of 0 parties 

80% probability of 0 parties 

111 

IV 

encounters per day per day 

80% probability of 3 or fewer 

encounters per day 

80% probability of 5 or fewer 

encounters per day 

80% probability of 1 or 0 

parties per day 

80% probability of 3 or fewer 

parties per day 

Opportunity Class 

I 

II 

111 

IV 

SOCIAL INDICATOR: TRAIL 

ENCOUNTERS 

Number Of Days Days Encounters Percent Of 

Monitored Exceed Standards Probability 

4 days 1 75% 

2 days 0 100% 

41 days 0 100% 

51 days 5 90% 

Planned Frequency 

As a minimum, trail encounters in 

Opportunity Classes Ill and IV will be 

monitored annually. An intermediate level 

of monitoring requires that each trail 

segment be monitored at least twice per 

month in July and August and once per 

month September through November. 

The majority of our Opportunity Class Ill 

and IV trail segments were monitored at 

least one time in 2001 and most were 

monitored at least twice per month in July 

and August. Due to fire activity in the fall, 

only a minimal level of monitoring was 

accomplished during the months of 

September and October. Trail encounter 

monitoring was also limited in Opportunity 

Class I and II areas during 2001 as most of 

our patrol emphasis and campsite inventory 

work was focused in Opportunity Class Ill 

and IV areas. 

Actual Frequency 

Appendix Table A-2. Trail Encounter Monitoring Results 

145 
APPENDIX A 

Problem Areas 

Other Parties Days Exceeding 

Opportunity Class Observed Standards 

I 0 0 

The Continental Ldide Trail within 

Opportunity Class IV areas leading to the 

Chinese Wall in the South Fork and West 

Fork of the Sun River Drainage continue to 

have a number of days with more than five 

encounters per day during the heavy use 

period of July and August. However, on 

average in Opportunity Classes II, Ill, and 

IV all areas were within the 80 percent 

probability standard. 

Opportunity Class I and II areas had such 

low sample sizes in 2001 that it would not 

be prudent to draw any conclusions from . 

the data. On average in Opportunity Class 

I there was only a 75 percent probability of 

encountering zero other parties per day and 

this is a violation of the standard for this 

opportunity class. Wilderness Rangers and 

Managers do still feel there are potential 

problems with trail encounters between 

parties on the Prairie Reef Lookout Trail 

249 in Opportunity Class I. The Lookout, 

staffed for a 70-day season, recorded over 

Percent Probability 

100% 

250 people visiting the site in 2001. This 

situation will require more intensive review 

and monitoring during the 2002 field 

season. 

~ 

II 0 0 100% 

111 6 1 83% 

IV 41 1 98% 

SOCIAL INDICATOR: OCCUPIED 

CAMPSITE ENCOUNTERS 

Planned Frequency 

As a minimum, campsite encounters in 

Opportunity Classes Ill and IV will be 

monitored annually. An intermediate level 

of monitoring requires that sites will be 

monitored at least twice per month during 

July and August, and once per month 

September - November. Campsite 

encounters in Opportunity Classes I and II 

will be monitored as workload permits. 

' 

Actual Frequency 

Campsites were monitored on the same 

schedule as trail encounters (see actual 

frequency comments in the Trail Encounter 

Section above). 

Appendix Table A-3. Campsite Encounter Monitoring Results 

Monitorina Results 

With the data that was collected in the 2001 

field season, the District does not have any 

areas that are exceeding the standards at 

this time. 

RESOURCE INDICATORS 

146 
APPENDIX A 

Area Of Barren Core 

(Square Feet) 

Opportunity Class I: 

(1 00 SQ FT) 

Opportunity Class 11: 

(500 SQ FT) 

Opportunity Class 111: 

(1,000 SQ FT) 

Opportunity Class IV: 

(2,000 SQ FT) 

Appendix Table A-4. Barren Core 

Number of Human Impacted Sites 

Above a Particular Condition Class Index 

Per 640 Acres 

No moderately or highly impacted sites per 

640 acre area 

No more than 1 moderately impacted site and 

0 highly impacted sites per 640 acre area 

No more than 2 moderately impacted sites 

and 0 highly impacted sites per 640 acre area 

No more than 2 moderately impacted sites 

and 1 highly impacted site per 640 acre area 

Number of Human Impacted 

Sites Per 640 Acre Area 

1 permitted 

2 permitted 

3 permitted 

6 permitted 

Opportunity Class 

I 

II 

111 

IV 

Appendix Table A-5. Barren Core 

Number of Sites 

Number of Inventoried with Exceeding 

Sites Visited Barren Core Barren Core 

15 10 4 

38 12 5 

79 56 17 

Number of Sites 

3 0 No Data 

RESOURCE INDICATORS: BARREN 

CORE 

Only 56 percent of the sites inventoried had 

the barren core measurements completed 

by the rangers in the last field season. 

These sites are going to be re-inventoried 

this coming field season to complete the 

inventory forms to gather more information 

about this situation on the District. Although 

the information that was gathered was 

limited, the District does have a number of 

sites where the standard for the area of 

barren core is exceeded. Some of the 

problem with data collection in 2001 was 

due to discrepancies in the way the rangers 

perceived the areas that were actually 

barren core. Also some of this concern has 

to do with the extremely dry conditions that 

were experienced on the district this past 

summer. With the drought conditions 

experienced over the past several years, 

regeneration of plants within barren core 

areas has been severely limited due to lack 

of moisture. 

RESOURCE INDICATOR: CAMPSITE 

INVENTORIES 

Planned Frequency 

Inventory the entire area every five years 

(20 percent per year). This year due to the 

lack of or the failure to enter previous years 

campsite inventories into the data base it 

was concluded that the District would reinventory all sites to get more information 

on our situation and location of these sites. 

Actual Frequencv 

A total of 140 campsites were inventoried in 

2001 and results entered into the data 

base. Most of these sites were located in 

147 
APPENDIX A 

High Index 

Opportunity Classes Ill and IV. We estimate 

that this is approximately 30 percent of the impacted 

human impacted sites that exist on the 

District. impacted 

36 campsites were minimally 

60 campsites were moderately 

44 campsites were heavily impacted 

Percent of Sites 

Percent Exceeding BC 

Appendix Table A-6. Rocky Mountain Ranger District 

I I 3 I 0 0% No Data oo/o 

II 

111 

IV 

20 3 15% 3 15% 

38 9 24% 5 13% 

79 31 40% 16 20% 

Inventory Results 

During the fall archery and general hunting 

season three outfitter base camps were 

evacuated during the Biggs Flat Fire. Two 

camps were relocated for the duration of 

the hunting season to other locations, one 

on the Forest and one to private land. One 

was evacuated and then allowed to return 

for the remainder of the hunting season. In 

addition, several public campsites were 

closed to all grazing and camping due to 

loss of forage and the presence of hazard 

trees. 

Opportunity Class 

I 

I1 

111 

Appendix Table A-7. Resource Indicators: 

Number of Human Impacted Sites Per 640 Acre Area 

Number of Sites Visited Number of Violations 

3 All within standards 

20 1 violation 

38 4 violations 

I IV I 79 I 8 violations I 

RESOURCE INDICATORS: NUMBER OF 

HUMAN IMPACTED SITES PER 640 

ACRE AREA 

In Opportunity Class II there was one 

violation in Geo-unit 4-4-4 which is on 

Whitetail Creek in the Scapegoat. 

Result of Inventory 

No violations in Opportunity Class I. 

In Opportunity Class Ill there were four 

violations, in Geo-unit 4-3-5 there was one 

violation on the West Fork of the Sun River. 

In Geo-unit 4-4-3 there was one violation in 

the Scapegoat; two violations in Geo-unit 4- 

4-4, one on the lower Dearborn River just 

148 
APPENDIX A 

Opportunity Number of 

Class Sites Visited Moderate 

I 3 2 

If 20 8 

111 38 13 

IV 79 36 

inside the wilderness boundary and one at 

the confluence of Pass Creek and the 

Dearborn River also in the Scapegoat. 

In Opportunity Class IV there were eight 

violations. In Geo-unit 4-2-5 there were Fork of the Sun River. In Geo-unit 4-3-2 

three violations, one around the confluence 

of Headquarters Creek and the North Fork 

of the Sun, one at the confluence of Cabin 

Creek, and one at the confluence of Circle 

Creek and the North Fork of the Sun River. 

In Geo-unit 4-3-3 there were four violations, 

all of these violations were on the West 

there was one violation on the South Fork 

of the Sun River in the Pretty Prairie area. 

Times Standards 

Heavy Were Exceeded 

0 2 Violations 

3 3 Violations 

10 10 Violations 

31 9 Violations 

Appendix Table A-8. Resource Indicators: Number 

of Human Impacted Sites Above a Particular Index 

RESOURCE INDICATORS: NUMBER OF 

HUMAN IMPACTED SITES ABOVE A 

PARTICULAR INDEX 

In Opportunity Class I there were two 

violations that occurred due to moderate 

use in these areas. In Opportunity Class II 

we had a total of three violations. One 

violation was in the Scapegoat on Whitetail 

Creek. This is a high use area, due to 

outfitter use during the summer and fall 

hunting seasons. There was another 

violation on the upper North Fork Sun 

around the Wrong Creek Guard Station, 

and one more violation up around Cave 

Creek. 

In Opportunity Class Ill we had ten 

violations on the district. The areas of 

concern are the same as they have been in 

the past. Two in the Birch Creek area, two 

in the upper Dearborn area, one in the 

lower Dearborn, two in the upper West Fork 

Sun, one each in the upper North Fork Sun, 

the mouth of Lick Creek, and one on the 

upper North Fork Sun. 

In Opportunity Class IV areas there were 

nine violations of the standard for number 

of human impacted sites above a particular 

condition class per 640 acre area. These 

violations occurred along the North Fork of 

the Sun River from the mouth of Glen 

Creek north to the Gates Park area, the 

South Fork of the Sun River from the mouth 

of the West Fork north to the north end of 

the Pretty Prairie area, and in the West 

Fork of the Sun drainage upstream from the 

confluence with the South Fork to the 

Indian Point area. 

149