DOCSLIB.ORG

Montana Forest Insect and Disease Conditions and Program Highlights, 2007

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Montana United States Forest Insect and Disease Conditions Department of Agriculture and Program Forest Service Highlights Northern Region Forest Health 2007 Protection Report 08-1 Montana Department of Pine tussock moth in Natural Resources ponderosa pine and Conservation Forestry Division Lindgren funnel trap for Pine Engraver Beetles in thinned ponderosa pine MOONNTTAANNAA M FFoorreesstt IInnsseecctt aanndd DDiisseeaassee CCoonnddiittiioonnss aanndd PPrrooggrraamm HHiigghhlliigghhttss -- 22000077 Report 08-1 2008 Compiled By: Amy Gannon, Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, Forestry Division Scott Sontag, USDA Forest Service, Northern Region, State and Private Forestry, Forest Health Protection Contributors: Gregg DeNitto, Ken Gibson, Marcus Jackson, Blakey Lockman, Scott Sontag, Nancy Sturdevant, USDA Forest Service, Northern Region, State and Private Forestry, Forest Health Protection; Brennan Ferguson, Amy Gannon, Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, Forestry Division Data Summary: William O‘Donnell, USDA Forest Service, Region One, Engineering Map Production: Cartographics LLC Cover Photo: Pine tussock moth in ponderosa pine, courtesy of Scott Sontag, USDA Forest Service. Lindgren funnel trap for Pine Engraver Beetles in thinned ponderosa pine, courtesy of Amy Gannon, USDA Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, Forestry Division i ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS.........................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................1 SUMMARY OF CONDITIONS ......................................................................................2 Bark Beetles ...........................................................................................................2 Defoliators ..............................................................................................................3 Root Diseases ........................................................................................................3 Foliage Diseases....................................................................................................4 Dwarf Mistletoes ....................................................................................................4 White Pine Blister Rust .........................................................................................4 ANNUAL AERIAL SURVEY .........................................................................................5 BARK BEETLE CONDITIONS IN BRIEF .....................................................................7 Mountain Pine Beetle (MPB) .................................................................................7 Douglas-fir Beetle (DFB) .......................................................................................7 Fir Engraver (FE)....................................................................................................8 Western Balsam Bark Beetle (WBBB)..................................................................8 Pine Engraver Beetle (IPS)....................................................................................9 Spruce Beetle (ESB) ..............................................................................................9 Western Pine Beetle (WPB)...................................................................................9 DEFOLIATOR CONDITIONS IN BRIEF .......................................................................9 Douglas-fir Tussock Moth.....................................................................................9 Gypsy Moth ............................................................................................................9 Larch Casebearer (LCB)......................................................................................10 Pine Tussock Moth ..............................................................................................10 Ponderosa Pine Needle Miner.............................................................................10 Western Spruce Budworm (WSBW) ...................................................................10 DISEASE CONDITIONS IN BRIEF.............................................................................12 Root Disease ........................................................................................................12 Stem Decay...........................................................................................................14 Foliage Disease....................................................................................................14 Dwarf Mistletoe ....................................................................................................14 INSECT AND DISEASE CONDITIONS BY REPORTING AREA...............................16 Beaverhead Reporting Area................................................................................16 Bitterroot Reporting Area....................................................................................19 Custer Reporting Area.........................................................................................22 Deerlodge Reporting Area...................................................................................24 Flathead Reporting Area .....................................................................................27 Gallatin Reporting Area.......................................................................................30 Helena Reporting Area ........................................................................................35 Kootenai Reporting Area.....................................................................................38 Lewis & Clark Reporting Area.............................................................................42 Lolo Reporting Area ............................................................................................45 Garnet Reporting Area ........................................................................................49 INDIAN RESERVATIONS...........................................................................................50 Blackfeet IR ..........................................................................................................50 Crow IR .................................................................................................................50 iii Flathead IR............................................................................................................51 Fort Belknap IR ....................................................................................................52 Northern Cheyenne IR .........................................................................................53 Rocky Boys IR......................................................................................................53 NATIONAL PARKS ....................................................................................................54 Glacier NP.............................................................................................................54 Yellowstone NP....................................................................................................55 STATE NURSERY......................................................................................................56 SPECIAL PROJECTS ................................................................................................57 1. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Thinning Treatments on DFB-Caused Tree Mortality..................................................................................................57 2. Evaluating Efficacy of Verbenone and GLV on Rocky Boy‘s IR..........................57 3. Testing Efficacy of Verbenone and Green-leaf Volatilesin Reducing MPB-Caused Mortality in PP and WBP on Lewis & Clark NF .....................58 4. Bark Beetle Trapping on Wild Horse Island .......................................................59 5. Elytroderma Needle Disease Thinning and Pruning Project ......................59 6. Limber Pine Monitoring Plots........................................................................60 COMMON AND SCIENTIFIC NAMES ........................................................................61 PUBLICATIONS 2007 ................................................................................................62 DIRECTORY OF PERSONNEL..................................................................................66 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Beaverhead Reporting Area and Beaverhead National Forest Ranger Districts ........................................................................................16 Figure 2 Bitterroot Reporting Area and Bitterroot National Forest Ranger Districts ........................................................................................19 Figure 3 Custer Reporting Area and Custer National Forest Ranger Districts......................................................................................................22 Figure 4 Deerlodge Reporting Area and Deerlodge National Forest Ranger Districts ........................................................................................24 Figure 5 Flathead Reporting Area and Flathead National Forest Ranger Districts......................................................................................................27 Figure 6 Gallatin Reporting Area and Gallatin National Forest Ranger
Recommended publications
  • Contract for Deed Billings Montana

    Contract for Deed Billings Montana

    Contract For Deed Billings Montana Dell remains unargued: she castaways her knitter waste too charmingly? Dresden Howie unthread some socage and feudalize his toiletry so barometrically! Moral and congested Alfred quartersaw almost presentably, though Hadleigh exteriorize his sandbag outsell. Must be a graduate within an accredited law school. Borders thousands of acres of BLM lands. One line you support do harm to provide sure that utilize tax bills are edge to you directly from possible tax collector. Which types of real estate cases so should handle water often? House hunting made easy. Montana foreclosed home auctions and Montana bank owned properties. Crow Agency, requesting that the Graham leases be canceled. Owners of exempted mobile homes will be notified by the department when they receive his property classification and appraisal notices. Never miss an opportunity remains a cheap home, by saving your searches. Are you spin you enough to delete this alert? The movies The Re. The petition was directed to the Billings Area Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs. This is Yellowstone Country! Contact us to side working and one concept our agents to land access to power entire island of homes available. It was violent enough and had just want others to collect when something works. Since forfeiture often beside the concern remedy, notice form name be used in access all cases where a default is imminent. DISMISSED and the decision of the Acting Area Director is AFFIRMED. Did the District Court err in finding that question First Citizens Bank of Billings had no obligation to terrain that thirst the required deeds were placed in escrow by Double S Investors? The Departmentis charged with the responsibility of the management of bay trust obligations inthe best play of Indian beneficiaries.
  • The Flaxville Gravel As an Alluvial Plain...28

    The Flaxville Gravel As an Alluvial Plain...28

    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1991 The Flaxville alluvial plain : a cartographic spatial analysis David Middleton The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Middleton, David, "The Flaxville alluvial plain : a cartographic spatial analysis" (1991). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 8961. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/8961 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Maureen and Mike MANSFIELD LIBRARY Copying allowed as provided under provisions of the Fair Use Section of the U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW, 1976. Any copying for commercial purposes or financM gain may be under^en only with the author’s written consent. University of Montana The Flaxville Alluvial Plain: A Cartographic Spatial Analysis By David Middleton B.A., Eastern Washington University, 1986 B.A., Humboldt State University, 197 9 Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA 1991 Approved by: Chairman, Board of Examiners ^éan. Graduate School j y r u u S / 9 9 / DsOte UMI Number: EP39762 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
  • Summits on the Air – ARM for USA - Colorado (WØC)

    Summits on the Air – ARM for USA - Colorado (WØC)

    Summits on the Air – ARM for USA - Colorado (WØC) Summits on the Air USA - Colorado (WØC) Association Reference Manual Document Reference S46.1 Issue number 3.2 Date of issue 15-June-2021 Participation start date 01-May-2010 Authorised Date: 15-June-2021 obo SOTA Management Team Association Manager Matt Schnizer KØMOS Summits-on-the-Air an original concept by G3WGV and developed with G3CWI Notice “Summits on the Air” SOTA and the SOTA logo are trademarks of the Programme. This document is copyright of the Programme. All other trademarks and copyrights referenced herein are acknowledged. Page 1 of 11 Document S46.1 V3.2 Summits on the Air – ARM for USA - Colorado (WØC) Change Control Date Version Details 01-May-10 1.0 First formal issue of this document 01-Aug-11 2.0 Updated Version including all qualified CO Peaks, North Dakota, and South Dakota Peaks 01-Dec-11 2.1 Corrections to document for consistency between sections. 31-Mar-14 2.2 Convert WØ to WØC for Colorado only Association. Remove South Dakota and North Dakota Regions. Minor grammatical changes. Clarification of SOTA Rule 3.7.3 “Final Access”. Matt Schnizer K0MOS becomes the new W0C Association Manager. 04/30/16 2.3 Updated Disclaimer Updated 2.0 Program Derivation: Changed prominence from 500 ft to 150m (492 ft) Updated 3.0 General information: Added valid FCC license Corrected conversion factor (ft to m) and recalculated all summits 1-Apr-2017 3.0 Acquired new Summit List from ListsofJohn.com: 64 new summits (37 for P500 ft to P150 m change and 27 new) and 3 deletes due to prom corrections.
  • Nonforested Terrestrial Ecosystems Report

    Nonforested Terrestrial Ecosystems Report

    Assessment Forest Plan Revision Final Nonforested Terrestrial Ecosystems Report Prepared by: Kim Reid Rangeland Management Specialist for: Custer Gallatin National Forest February 16, 2017 1 Custer Gallatin National Forest Assessment – Nonforested Terrestrial Ecosystems Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Process, Methods and Existing Information Sources .................................................................................... 2 Scale .............................................................................................................................................................. 3 Current Forest Plan Direction ....................................................................................................................... 4 Custer Forest Plan ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Gallatin Forest Plan ................................................................................................................................... 7 Existing Condition ......................................................................................................................................... 7 Key Ecosystem Components ..................................................................................................................... 7 Structure and Composition ..................................................................................................................
  • References for Montana Plant Community Field Guide

    References for Montana Plant Community Field Guide

    References For Montana Plant Community Field Guide Achuff, P. L. 1989. Old-growth forests of the Canadian Rocky Mountain National Parks. Natural Areas Journal 9:12-26. Agee, J. K., and J. Kertis. 1987. Forest types of the north Cascades National Park Service complex. Canadian Journal of Botany 65:1520-1530. Aiken, S. G., M. J. Dallwitz, C. L. McJannet, and L. L. Consaul. 1996 onwards. Festuca of North America: Descriptions, Illustrations, Identification, and Information Retrieval, 2nd Version: URL, April 1998. http://biodiversity.uno.edu/delta/. Aiken, S.G. and S. J. Darbyshire. 1990. Fescue Grasses of Canada. Agriculture Canada Publication 1844/E. Aldous, A. E., and H. L. Shantz. 1924. Types of vegetation in the semiarid portion of the United States and their economic significance. Journal of Agricultural Research. 28(2):99-125. Alexander, R. R. 1985. Major habitat types, community types, and plant communities in the Rocky Mountains. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM-123, Fort Collins, CO. 105 pp. Alexander, R. R. 1985. Major habitat types, community types, and plant communities in the Rocky Mountains. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM-123. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO. 105 pp. Alexander, R. R., G. R. Hoffman, and J. M. Wirsing. 1986. Forest vegetation of the Medicine Bow National Forest in southeastern Wyoming: A habitat type classification. USDA Forest Service Research Paper RM-271. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO. 39 pp. Antos, J. A. 1977. Grand fir (Abies grandis (Douglas) Forbes) forests of the Swan Valley, Montana.
  • Geologic Map of the Sedan Quadrangle, Gallatin And

    Geologic Map of the Sedan Quadrangle, Gallatin And

    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEOLOGIC INVESTIGATIONS SERIES I–2634 Version 2.1 A 25 20 35 35 80 rocks generally fall in the range of 3.2–2.7 Ga. (James and Hedge, 1980; Mueller and others, 1985; Mogk and Henry, Pierce, K.L., and Morgan, L.A., 1992, The track of the Yellowstone hot spot—Volcanism, faulting, and uplift, in Link, 30 5 25 CORRELATION OF MAP UNITS 10 30 Kbc Billman Creek Formation—Grayish-red, grayish-green and gray, volcaniclastic mudstone and siltstone ၤ Phosphoria and Quadrant Formations; Amsden, Snowcrest Range and Madison Groups; and Three Overturned 45 20 10 30 20 P r 1988; Wooden and others, 1988; Mogk and others, 1992), although zircons have been dated as old as 3.96 Ga from P.K., Kuntz, M.A., and Platt, L.B., eds., Regional geology of eastern Idaho and western Wyoming: Geological 40 Ksms 45 Kh interbedded with minor volcanic sandstone and conglomerate and vitric tuff. Unit is chiefly 30 30 25 45 45 Forks Formation, Jefferson Dolomite, Maywood Formation, Snowy Range Formation, Pilgrim Ksl 5 15 50 SURFICIAL DEPOSITS quartzites in the Beartooth Mountains (Mueller and others, 1992). The metamorphic fabric of these basement rocks has Society of America Memoir 179, p. 1–53. 15 20 15 Kbc volcaniclastic mudstone and siltstone that are gray and green in lower 213 m and grayish red above; Estimated 40 Qc 5 15 Qoa Limestone, Park Shale, Meagher Limestone, Wolsey Shale, and Flathead Sandstone, undivided in some cases exerted a strong control on the geometry of subsequent Proterozoic and Phanerozoic structures, Piombino, Joseph, 1979, Depositional environments and petrology of the Fort Union Formation near Livingston, 15 25 Ksa 50 calcareous, containing common carbonaceous material and common yellowish-brown-weathering 60 40 20 15 15 (Permian, Pennsylvanian, Mississippian, Devonian, Ordovician, and Cambrian)—Limestone, Ksa 20 10 10 45 particularly Laramide folds (Miller and Lageson, 1993).
  • Appendix E: Wild and Scenic Rivers Eligibility Study Process Table of Contents

    Appendix E: Wild and Scenic Rivers Eligibility Study Process Table of Contents

    Appendix E: Wild and Scenic Rivers Eligibility Study Process Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 2 Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policy ........................................................................................................ 2 Eligibility Process ........................................................................................................................................... 2 Overview ................................................................................................................................................... 2 Step 1: Identify all free-flowing named streams ....................................................................................... 3 Step 2: Identify the region of comparison for each resource ................................................................... 4 Step 3: Develop evaluation criteria to identify ORVs ............................................................................... 6 Step 4: Evaluate named streams and determine if they are free-flowing and possess ORVs .................. 9 Step 5: Classification of eligible streams ................................................................................................... 9 Step 6: Develop management direction to be included in the proposed action .................................... 12 Public Feedback on Wild and Scenic River Eligibility .............................................................................
  • Inactive Mines on Gallatin National Forest-Administered Land

    Inactive Mines on Gallatin National Forest-Administered Land

    Abandoned-Inactive Mines on Gallatin National Forest-AdministeredLand Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Abandoned-Inactive Mines Program Open-File Report MBMG 418 Phyllis A. Hargrave Michael D. Kerschen CatherineMcDonald JohnJ. Metesh PeterM. Norbeck RobertWintergerst Preparedfor the u.s. Departmentof Agriculture ForestService-Region 1 Abandoned-Inactive Mines on Gallatin National Forest-AdministeredLand Open-File Report 418 MBMG October 2000 Phyllis A. Hargrave Michael D. Kerschen Catherine McDonald John J. Metesh Peter M. Norbeck Robert Wintergerst for the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service-Region I Prepared Contents List of Figures .V List of Tables . VI IntToduction 1 1.IProjectObjectives 1 1.2AbandonedandInactiveMinesDefined 2 1.3 Health and Environmental Problems at Mines. 3 1.3.1 Acid-Mine Drainage 3 1.3.2 Solubilities of SelectedMetals 4 1.3.3 The Use of pH and SC to Identify Problems. 5 1.4Methodology. 6 1.4.1 Data Sources : 6 1.4.2Pre-Field Screening. 6 1.4.3Field Screening. 7 1.4.3.1 Collection of Geologic Samples. 9 1.4.4 Field Methods ' 9 1.4.4.1 Selection of Sample Sites 9 1.4.4.2 Collection of Water and Soil Samples. 10 1.4.4.3 Marking and Labeling Sample Sites. 10 1.4.4.4ExistingData 11 1.4.5 Analytical Methods """"""""""""""""'" 11 1.4.6Standards. 12 1.4.6.1Soil Standards. 12 1.4.6.2Water-QualityStandards 13 1.4.7 Analytical Results 13 1.5 Gallatin National Forest 14 1.5.1 History of Mining 16 1.5.1.1 Production 17 1.5.1.2Milling 18 1.6SummaryoftheGallatinNationaIForestInvestigat~on 19 1.7 Mining Districts and Drainages 20 Gallatin National Forest Drainages 20 2.1 Geology "' ' '..' ,.""...' ""." 20 2.2 EconomicGeology.
  • Proposed Action–Revised Forest Plan, Custer Gallatin National Forest

    Proposed Action–Revised Forest Plan, Custer Gallatin National Forest

    United States Department of Agriculture Proposed Action–Revised Forest Plan, Custer Gallatin National Forest Forest Service January 2018 In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (for example, Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S.
  • Outdoor Alliance Draft EIS Comments (2019)

    Outdoor Alliance Draft EIS Comments (2019)

    June 4, 2019 Virginia Kelly Custer Gallatin National Forest P.O. Box 130, (10 E Babcock) Bozeman, MT 59771 Submitted online at https://cara.ecosystem-management.org/Public/CommentInput?project=50185 Re: Comments on the Custer Gallatin National Forest draft EIS Dear Virginia and Forest Planning Team: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Custer Gallatin forest plan revision. These comments are submitted on behalf of Outdoor Alliance and Outdoor Alliance Montana, a coalition of national and Montana-based advocacy organizations that includes Southwest Montana Climbers Coalition, Montana Backcountry Alliance, Southwest Montana Mountain Bike Association, Western Montana Climbers Coalition, Mountain Bike Missoula, Winter Wildlands Alliance, International Mountain Bicycling Association, American Whitewater, and the American Alpine Club. Our members visit the Custer Gallatin National Forest (CGNF) to hike, mountain bike, fat-tire bike, paddle, climb, backcountry ski, cross- country ski, and snowshoe. Outdoor Alliance is a coalition of ten member-based organizations representing the human powered outdoor recreation community. The coalition includes Access Fund, American Canoe Association, American Whitewater, International Mountain Bicycling Association, Winter Wildlands Alliance, The Mountaineers, the American Alpine Club, the Mazamas, Colorado Mountain Club, and Surfrider Foundation and represents the interests of the millions of Americans who climb, paddle, mountain bike, backcountry
  • Hunting Districts 315 and 580)

    Hunting Districts 315 and 580)

    CRAZY MOUNTAINS EMU (Hunting Districts 315 and 580) Description: This 1,708-square-mile EMU includes the Crazy Mountain Range and adjacent foothill and prairie habitats in south central Montana. The area is a mixture of private (78%) and public (22%) lands, including portions of both the Gallatin and Lewis and Clark national forests (16%), state school trust lands (DNRC – 5%), and USDI Bureau of Land Management (BLM – 0.2%). Land ownership patterns within the boundary of the national forests are characterized by checkerboard ownership. The EMU contains two roadless areas encompassing 149,467 acres of public and private lands that offer wilderness-type recreation. However, much of this roadless area is not elk habitat. This EMU contains over 590,000 acres of occupied elk habitat (54% of EMU). National forest lands provide a large portion of spring, summer and fall elk habitat, but private lands in mountain foothill and sagebrush-grassland habitats provide over 80% of elk winter range during normal winters and virtually all of the available winter range during severe winters. Public Access: Access by road to elk habitat is limited in most of HD 580 where the checkerboard pattern of land ownership complicates management of access. With few exceptions, public access to elk habitat on the north and east slopes of the Crazies is controlled entirely by private landowners. There are only 3 points in HD 580 where the public may legally access national forest lands – the Big Timber Canyon road in the southeast corner, the Cottonwood Creek/Forest Lake road on the north end and Sixteenmile Creek in the northwest corner of the hunting district.
  • Knife River Flint Distribution and Identification in Montana

    Knife River Flint Distribution and Identification in Montana

    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2016 Knife River Flint Distribution and Identification in Montana Laura Evilsizer University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Indigenous Studies Commons, and the United States History Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Evilsizer, Laura, "Knife River Flint Distribution and Identification in Montana" (2016). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 10670. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/10670 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. KNIFE RIVER FLINT DISTRIBUTION AND IDENTIFICATION IN MONTANA By Laura Jean Evilsizer B.A. Anthropology, Whitman College, Walla Walla, WA, 2011 Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Master of Arts in Anthropology, Cultural Heritage University of Montana Missoula, MT May, 2016 Approved By: Scott Wittenburg, Dean of The Graduate School Graduate School Dr. Douglas H. MacDonald, Chair Department of Anthropology Dr. John Douglas Department of Anthropology Dr. Julie A.