Draft Environmental Assessment

Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan

May 2021

Prepared by

Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge Complex Lewistown, Montana

Estimated Lead Agency Total Costs Associated with Developing and Producing this Environmental Assessment: $18,000 EA Table of Contents PROPOSED ACTION 3 BACKGROUND 4 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE ACTION 7 ALTERNATIVES 8 ALTERNATIVE A – [NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE] 8 ALTERNATIVE B – OPEN LIMITED MOUNTAIN LION HUNTING – [PROPOSED ACTION ALTERNATIVE] 8 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 11 NATURAL RESOURCES 12 VISITOR USE AND EXPERIENCE 21 CULTURAL RESOURCES 22 REFUGE MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS 23 SOCIOECONOMICS 25 MONITORING 26 SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS 26 ALTERNATIVE A – NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 26 ALTERNATIVE B – OPEN LIMITED MOUNTAIN LION HUNT – [PROPOSED ACTION ALTERNATIVE] 27 LIST OF SOURCES, AGENCIES AND PERSONS CONSULTED 27 LIST OF PREPARERS 28 STATE COORDINATION 28 TRIBAL CONSULTATION 28 PUBLIC OUTREACH 28 DETERMINATION 29 SIGNATURES 29 REFERENCES 30 APPENDIX A – APPLICABLE STATUTES, EXECUTIVE ORDERS, AND REGULATIONS 32 APPENDIX B – MOUNTAIN LION HUNTING PLAN 33 APPENDIX C – COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATION 51

2 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan Draft Environmental Assessment Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan

Date: May 6 2021 This Environmental Assessment (EA) is being prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) to evaluate the effects associated with the proposed action and complies with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in accordance with Council on Environmental Quality regulations (40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1500-1509) and Department of the Interior (43 CFR 46; 516 DM 8) and Service (550 FW 3) regulations and policies. The NEPA requires examination of the effects of proposed actions on the natural and human environment. Appendix A outlines all laws and executive orders evaluated through this draft EA.

Proposed Action The Service is proposing to open a limited mountain lion hunting opportunity on the Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges (NWR) (referred to as “the refuge”) in accordance with the refuge’s comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) and Mountain Lion Hunting Plan. Mountain lion hunting would follow season dates detailed in Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks (MTFWP) Archery Only and Fall Season regulations that run concurrently with the traditional general deer and elk archery and firearms seasons. MTFWP also provides clarification of regulations on national wildlife refuges under the Hunter Access section in their mountain lion hunting regulations. Public hunting is an historical wildlife-dependent use of the refuge and is designated as one of the priority public uses as specified in National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Improvement Act). A proposed action may evolve during the NEPA process as the Service refines its proposal and gathers feedback from the public, tribes, and other agencies. Therefore, the final proposed action may be different from the original. The proposed action will be finalized at the conclusion of the public comment period for this EA.

3 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan The UL Bend NWR is within the boundaries of Charles M. Russell NWR and is managed as part of that refuge (Figure 1). Together, they encompass an area of 1.1 million acres that span approximately 125 air miles along the Missouri River, from the Fort Peck Dam west to the boundary with the Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument. Throughout this document, the two refuges are referred to as “the refuge” unless individually named.

Background National wildlife refuges are guided by the mission and goals of the National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System), the purposes of an individual refuge, Service policy, and laws and international treaties. Relevant guidance covers the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (NWRSAA), as amended by the Improvement Act, Refuge Recreation Act of 1962, and selected parts of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Manual. Although the UL Bend NWR is within the boundary of the Charles M. Russell NWR, they were established through different authorities. Charles M. Russell NWR was established pursuant to: • Executive Order 7509, dated December 11, 1936 • Refuge Recreation Act

4 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan • Bankhead–Jones Farm Tenant Act • Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 1929 UL Bend NWR was established pursuant to: • Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act • Migratory Bird Conservation Act • Fish and Wildlife Act 1956 • Refuge Administration Act • Wilderness Act legislation Each refuge was established for specific purposes, as described below. Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge • “For the conservation and development of natural wildlife resources and for the protection and improvement of public grazing lands and natural forage resources: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall restrict prospecting, locating, developing, mining, entering, leasing, or patenting the mineral resources of the lands under the applicable laws: … Provided, however, that the natural forage resources therein shall be first utilized for the purpose of sustaining in a healthy condition a maximum of four hundred thousand (400,000) sharp-tailed grouse, and one thousand five hundred (1,500) antelope, the primary species, and such nonpredatory secondary species in such numbers as may be necessary to maintain a balanced wildlife population but, in no case, shall the consumption of forage by the combined population of the wildlife species be allowed to increase the burden of the range dedicated to the primary species: Provided further, That all the forage resources within this range or preserve shall be available, except as herein provided with respect to wildlife, for domestic livestock” (Executive Order 7509, dated December 11, 1936). • “Shall be administered by him [Secretary of the Interior] directly or in accordance with cooperative agreements . . . and in accordance with such rules and regulations for the conservation, maintenance, and management of wildlife, resources thereof, and its habitat thereon” (16 U.S. Code 664, Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act). • “Suitable for (1) incidental fish and wildlife-oriented recreational development, (2) the protection of natural resources, (3) the conservation of endangered species or threatened species” (16 U.S. Code 460k–1), “the Secretary . . . may accept and use . . . real . . . property. Such acceptance may be accomplished under the terms and conditions of restrictive covenants imposed by donors” (16 U.S. Code 460k–2, Refuge Recreation Act [16 U.S.C. 460k–460k–4], as amended).

5 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan • “Purposes of a land-conservation and land-utilization program” (7 U.S. Code 1011, Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act). • “Particular value in carrying out the national migratory bird management program” (16 U.S. Code 667b, An Act Authorizing the Transfer of Certain Real Property for Wildlife). • “Conservation, management, and . . . restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats . . . for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans” (16 U.S. Code 668dd [a] [2], NWRSAA). • “For use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds” (16 U.S. Code 715d, Migratory Bird Conservation Act). UL Bend National Wildlife Refuge • “For use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds.” (16 U.S. Code 715d, Migratory Bird Conservation Act), “reserved for the UL Bend National Wildlife Refuge” (Public Land Order 4588, dated March 25, 1969), “for the protection of lands for migratory waterfowl management” (Public Land Order 4826, dated May 15, 1970). • “Shall be administered by him [Secretary of the Interior] directly or in accordance with cooperative agreements . . . and in accordance with such rules and regulations for the conservation, maintenance, and management of wildlife, resources thereof, and its habitat thereon” (16 U.S. Code 664, Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act). • “Particular value in carrying out the national migratory bird management program” (16 U.S. Code 667b, An Act Authorizing the Transfer of Certain Real Property for Wildlife). • “For the development, advancement, management, conservation, and protection of fish and wildlife resources” (16 U.S. Code 742f [a] [4]). • “For the benefit of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in performing its activities and services. Such acceptance may be subject to the terms of any restrictive or affirmative covenant, or condition of servitude” (16 U.S. Code 742f [b] [1], Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956). • “Conservation, management, and . . . restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats . . . for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans” (16 U.S. Code 668dd [a] [2], NWRSAA). • “To secure for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness . . . wilderness areas . . . shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such manner as would leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of their wilderness character, and for the

6 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan gathering and dissemination of information about their use and enjoyment as wilderness” (16 U.S. Code 1131, Wilderness Act). The mission of the Refuge System, as outlined by the NWRSAA, as amended by the Improvement Act (16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq.), is: “... to administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management and, where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.” In addition, the NWRSAA mandates the Secretary of the Interior in administering the Refuge System to (16 U.S. Code 668dd[a][4]): • provide for the conservation of fish, wildlife, and plants, and their habitats within the Refuge System; • ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the Refuge System are maintained for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans; • ensure that the mission of the Refuge System described at 16 U.S. Code 668dd(a)(2) and the purposes of each refuge are carried out; • ensure effective coordination, interaction, and cooperation with owners of land adjoining refuges and the fish and wildlife agency of the states in which the units of the Refuge System are located; • assist in the maintenance of adequate water quantity and water quality to fulfill the mission of the Refuge System and the purposes of each refuge; • recognize compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses as the priority public uses of the Refuge System through which the American public can develop an appreciation for fish and wildlife; • ensure that opportunities are provided within the Refuge System for compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses; and • monitor the status and trends of fish, wildlife, and plants in each refuge.

Purpose and Need for the Action The purpose of this proposed action is to expand wildlife-dependent recreation by opening a limited mountain lion hunting opportunity on the refuge in accordance with the refuge’s CCP and Mountain Lion Hunting Plan. Mountain lion hunting would follow season dates detailed in MTFWP Archery Only and Fall Season regulations that run concurrently with the traditional general deer and elk archery and firearms seasons. MTFWP provides clarification of access,

7 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan rules, and regulations on national wildlife refuges under the Hunter Access section in their mountain lion hunting regulations. The need of the proposed action is to meet the Service’s priorities and mandates as outlined by the NWRSAA to “recognize compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses as the priority public uses of the System through which the American public can develop an appreciation for fish and wildlife; and ensure that opportunities are provided within the System for compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses” (16 U.S. Code 668dd(a)(4)).

Alternatives Alternative A – [No Action Alternative] Under the No Action Alternative, the refuge would continue to prohibit mountain lion hunting. Other hunting seasons would remain in place, as outlined in the refuge hunting regulations. The current hunting program on the refuge allows for the take of elk, pronghorn, white-tailed deer, mule deer, bighorn sheep, waterfowl (ducks and geese), upland gamebirds (turkey, ring- necked pheasant, mourning dove, sage-grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, Hungarian partridge), and coyotes. Season dates, limits, and harvest methods are generally consistent with state regulations, except for mule deer and coyotes. Both have refuge-specific restrictions at the time of publishing. Specific regulations are available to the public at the web site www.fws.gov/cmr or at any office of the refuge (Lewistown, Sand Creek, Jordan, and Fort Peck). Public hunting on the refuge is compatible with the purposes of the refuge, as described in the CCP and accompanying hunting compatibility determination, approved in 2012. The Service solicited public review and comment through the posting of notices at the refuge, notices in local newspapers and the Federal Register, public meetings, and formal public review of the compatibility determination as part of the draft CCP and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the refuge. Although this alternative supports the mission of the Refuge System, it does not offer increased opportunities for public hunting and fishing in support of Secretarial Order (S.O.) 3347 and S.O. 3356. Alternative B – Open Limited Mountain Lion Hunting – [Proposed Action Alternative] The refuge has prepared a Mountain Lion Hunting Plan (Appendix B), which is presented in this document as the Proposed Action Alternative. Under the Proposed Action Alternative, big game hunting opportunities would be expanded to include a limited mountain lion hunting opportunity to support a national effort to increase hunting and fishing opportunities on public lands (S.O. 3347 and S.O. 3356).

8 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan The Service is proposing to open a limited mountain lion hunting opportunity on the refuge in accordance with the refuge’s CCP and Mountain Lion Hunting Plan. Mountain lion hunting would follow season dates detailed in MTFWP Archery Only and Fall Season regulations that run concurrently with the traditional general deer and elk archery and firearms seasons. MTFWP also provides clarification of regulations for national wildlife refuges under the Hunter Access section in their mountain lion hunting regulations. The refuge-specific regulations will be published in the Federal Register as part of the 2021- 2022 Refuge-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations. Measures to Avoid Conflicts The Service can establish regulations for individual species or parts of the refuge depending on conflicts with other wildlife-dependent priority uses. Hunting may be permanently or periodically closed to species or to areas of the refuge if the Service decides it is needed for wildlife, habitat, or public protection. Hunting opportunities are limited in season, area, and methods of take to provide safe recreational experiences that are compatible with habitat goals and objectives, and state and federal regulations. Carrying out the Mountain Lion Hunting Plan would support applicable federal, refuge, and state regulations, and the Service would conduct regular evaluation of mitigation measures. Biological Conflicts The Service reduces biological conflicts with regulations and management. Hunting activities would be limited or not allowed where there are significant biological concerns. Monitoring of species and habitat conducted by the state, the Service, and others would be periodically reviewed with a primary interest in natural resource protection. Limitations in seasons and methods of take decrease hunting pressure and increase protections during specific wildlife events. The proposed mountain lion hunting opportunity would occur only during the fall season and would run concurrently with the general deer and elk season dates. The refuge provides habitat and wildlife sanctuary during winter. Limiting hunting to the fall season would support the purpose for which the refuge was established. Public Use Conflicts The Service reduces potential public use conflicts among hunting activities and other compatible recreational uses on the refuge through the designation of areas closed to hunting, and by carrying out state, federal, and refuge-specific regulations. Areas open and closed to hunting are shown on refuge hunting brochures. In addition, limitations in hunting seasons and methods of take further promote public safety and allow for an acceptable balance of multiple hunting activities and other compatible visitor opportunities. Overall, the Service does not anticipate that conflicts under this alternative would be greatly changed from current

9 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan conditions, largely because deer and elk hunting is already permitted during the fall season, and mountain lion hunting would only be permitted during this time. Administrative Use Conflicts The greatest potential for administrative use conflicts relates to the conduct of refuge habitat management activities in areas and seasons open to hunting. If a problem is identified, the Service has the authority to close areas for the protection of species, habitat, and the public. Management activities that are unusual and conducted over a long time, such as construction, typically are posted to the Refuge web site, or otherwise communicated to the public through means such as by phone or news release. The following measures would be used to reduce conflicts: • The Slippery Ann Elk Viewing Area would remain closed to hunting to reduce conflicts with visitors participating in wildlife observation and photography. • The Sand Creek Administrative Site would remain closed to hunting to ensure the safety of staff and visitors. • The use of dogs would not be allowed to reduce disturbance to big game hunters and other wildlife species present on the refuge. • No motorized vehicles or game carriers would be allowed in designated wilderness areas to ensure consistency with the purpose of wilderness designation. Under the Proposed Action Alternative, limited mountain lion hunting would take place in the fall, under refuge and state regulations. This alternative provides a recreational experience to the public while maintaining a sustainable mountain lion population. The refuge incurs costs annually by carrying out the existing hunting program. Starting a limited mountain lion hunt, administered by MTFWP to run concurrently with the traditional general deer and elk archery and firearms seasons, would not be expected to incur other costs for the refuge. Under this alternative, the refuge law enforcement officer and MTFWP wardens would monitor the hunting and would conduct license, bag limit, and access compliance checks. Refuge staff would administer the hunt. This alternative offers increased opportunities for public hunting and fulfills the Service’s mandate under the NWRSAA. The Service has determined that the Mountain Lion Hunting Plan is compatible with the purposes of the refuge and the mission of the Refuge System (Appendix C).

10 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences This section is organized by affected resource categories, and for each affected resource it covers (1) the existing environmental and socioeconomic baseline in the action area, and (2) the effects and impacts of the proposed action and any alternatives. The effects and impacts of the proposed action considered here are changes to the human environment, whether adverse or beneficial, that are reasonably foreseeable and have a reasonably close causal relationship to the proposed action or alternatives. This EA covers the written analyses of the environmental consequences on a resource only when the impacts on that resource would be more than negligible and therefore considered an “affected resource.” Any resources that would not be more than negligibly impacted by the action have been dismissed from further analyses. The refuge consists of approximately 1,718 square miles in Fergus, Garfield, McCone, Petroleum, Phillips, and Valley counties in Montana. The refuge is comprised primarily of upland, wetland, and riparian habitat types. The proposed action would occur across the entire Refuge, except for the Slippery Ann Elk Viewing Area and the Sand Creek Administrative Area, in all habitat types (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Areas Closed to Hunting on Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge.

11 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan For more information regarding and the general characteristics of the refuge’s environment, see Section 3 of the Refuges’ CCP, which can be found at https://ecos.fws.gov/ServCat/. The following resources either (1) do not exist within the project area, or (2) would either not be affected or would be only negligibly affected by the proposed action: • geology and soils • air quality • water quality • floodplains As such, these resources are not analyzed further in this EA. For more information on the environmental consequences of the proposed action, see the refuge’s CCP. This EA tiers from the refuge CCP and associated EIS and provides further analysis related to the proposed action. Natural Resources Mountain Lion Affected Environment Description of Affected Environment for the Affected Resource The refuge is located in the Northern Great Plains and is comprised of diverse habitats such as native prairie, forested coulees (ravines), river bottoms, and badlands (arid lands dissected by steep, eroded slopes). Wildlife is as diverse as the topography and includes elk, mule deer, white-tailed deer, pronghorn, bighorn sheep, mountain lion, sharp-tailed and sage grouse, prairie dogs, other mammals, reptiles and amphibians, furbearers and small predators, and more than 236 species of birds. See CCP sections 3.1-3.2 for more information. MTFWP released their Montana Mountain Lion Monitoring and Management Strategy in 2019. The refuge lies within MTFWP’s Eastern Mountain Lion Ecoregion. Lion populations in the ecoregion occur at an overall low density, and subpopulations occur in discontinuous patches of suitable habitat, such as on the refuge and the surrounding area. MTFWP reports that “Lion distribution and abundance has significantly increased in eastern Montana since the 1980s and recovery likely continued through the 2010s.” Mountain lions can be found in all the refuge’s habitat types, but use forested coulees and river bottoms most often. Although the population on the refuge is currently unknown, several studies have been conducted on the refuge and the surrounding region during the last decade. This work has focused on habitat selection, dispersal, and survival rates. Generally, the studies show the lion population is highly mobile, moving on and off the refuge frequently. The refuge is neither a “source” nor a “sink” for the lion population in the region; lions found on the refuge

12 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan are fully susceptible to mortality factors that exist in the area surrounding the refuge, and the region’s lion population generally appears to be stable. MTFWP manages mountain lion hunting in the State of Montana. Lion hunting in the ecoregion is allowed during three distinct seasons; Archery Only (concurrent with the deer and elk archery only season), Fall Season Without Dogs (concurrent with the general deer and elk season), and Winter Season. MTFWP manages harvest with a set of Hunting District specific quotas using season and sex-specific sub quotas. During the past 15 years, approximately 95 percent of all hunter harvested lions in Montana were taken during the Winter Season with the aid of dogs. Harvest has steadily increased since the 1990s. Description of Environmental Trends and Planned Actions The climate of the region is typical of the Northern Great Plains, with moderately cold winters and occasional cold periods exceeding -20 degrees Fahrenheit(°F), and generally pleasant summers with occasional hot periods exceeding 100°F. Precipitation is generally less than 20 inches annually, falling as rain and snow, with the months of May and June being the wettest period of the year. Both climate and precipitation are quite variable from season-to-season and year-to-year, with extreme wet periods and extreme dry periods occurring somewhat regularly. Wet periods and droughts that occur for multiple years are not uncommon. As the climate warms globally due to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide, the Northern Great Plains is experiencing longer, hotter, and drier dry periods. This causes naturally occurring fuels such as dry grass, shrubs, and dead standing and downed trees to become more flammable. The refuge has experienced an increase in both the occurrence and size of wildland fires over the last 25 years. See CCP sections 3.2 and 4.5 for more information. Vegetated land such as what occurs on the refuge is a tremendous factor in carbon sequestration. Large naturally occurring communities of plant and animals that occupy major habitats are effective both in preventing carbon emission and in acting as biological “scrubbers” of atmospheric carbon dioxide. See CCP section 3.1 for more information. Mountain lions are a wide-ranging habitat generalist that exist currently in all the major ecoregions within North America, except the Arctic region. Lions are opportunistic and adaptable predators that prey and scavenge on a variety of species, but in Montana prey primarily on elk and deer. Climate change is expected to negligibly affect lions in the refuge region during the near term. Impacts on Affected Resource Alternative A Estimated Hunter Numbers: 0 Estimated Take: 0

13 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan Hunting for mountain lion is not currently allowed on the refuge. Hunting is currently allowed for big game, waterfowl, and upland game birds. Not opening a limited mountain lion hunting season would not impact any other refuge resources from current conditions. Mountain lion populations would not be expected to change, and populations of their primary prey species, elk and deer, would not be expected to change. Associated habitat and vegetation conditions would not be expected to change. Alternative B Estimated Hunter Numbers: fewer than 1,000 Potential Take: 0-20 Estimated Take: fewer than five Hunting of mountain lion would only be allowed during Montana’s Archery Only Season and Fall Season Without Dogs, which runs concurrently with the general elk and deer seasons. It is very difficult to purposefully target lion during these seasons, and hunting lions without dogs is an opportunistic endeavor that results in a low probability of harvest. Opening lion hunting during these seasons is not expected to attract more hunters that are specifically targeting lions. Instead, it is expected that elk and deer hunters that are interested and properly licensed to hunt lion would take advantage of opportunistic lion encounters to attempt harvest. Therefore, opening lion hunting is not expected to increase the number of big game hunter visits to the refuge, which the Service estimates to be approximately 90,000 a year. Mountain lion harvest would be managed by MTFWP through their existing season and quota system. MTFWP has a sub-quota system in place that limits the number of lions that may be harvested during the Archery Only Season and Fall Season Without Dogs. Total possible lion harvest for the MTFWP hunting districts that contain refuge lands is 20 lions. The refuge lands make up a small proportion of land jurisdiction within these districts, and annual lion take on the refuge is expected to be fewer than five lions annually. Overall, lion harvest in the hunting districts and region surrounding the refuge would not increase. Opening lion hunting on the refuge is not expected to reduce the lion population on the refuge from current levels. Mountain lions are highly mobile and move on and off the refuge regularly. They are already susceptible to harvest off the refuge during the Archery Only Season and Fall Season Without Dogs, as well as during the Winter Season (with dogs), which results in 95 percent of the lion harvest in Montana. Populations of their primary prey species, elk and deer, would not be expected to change. Associated habitat and vegetation conditions would not be expected to change.

14 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan Non-Target Wildlife and Aquatic Species Affected Environment Description of Affected Environment for the Affected Resource The refuge is located in the Northern Great Plains, and is comprised of diverse habitats such as native prairie, forested coulees (ravines), river bottoms, and badlands (arid lands dissected by steep, eroded slopes). Wildlife is as diverse as the topography and includes elk, mule deer, white-tailed deer, pronghorn, bighorn sheep, mountain lion, sharp-tailed and sage grouse, prairie dogs, other mammals, reptiles and amphibians, furbearers and small predators, and more than 236 species of birds. See CCP sections 3.1-3.2 for more information. Description of Environmental Trends and Planned Actions Opening lion hunting on the refuge is not expected to attract more hunters that are specifically targeting lions. Instead, it is expected that elk and deer hunters that are interested and properly licensed to hunt lion would take advantage of opportunistic lion encounters to attempt harvest. Therefore, opening lion hunting is not expected to increase the number of big game hunter visits, expand the area or time periods where hunters are present, or add disturbance or impact to any other non-targeted wildlife on the refuge. Impacts on Affected Resource Alternative A Disturbance or impacts to any non-targeted wildlife would not be expected to change from current levels. Alternative B Disturbance or impacts to any non-targeted wildlife would not be expected to change from current levels. The small potential harvest of mountain lion (range 0 to 20, with fewer than five expected) would not increase appreciably the risk of lead ingestion by birds and other wildlife that scavenge gut piles from hunter harvested game. Threatened and Endangered Species, and Other Special Status Species Affected Environment Description of Affected Environment for the Affected Resource There are currently eight species known to be found on the refuge that are listed on the threatened and endangered species list (Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, 16 U.S. Code 1531-1544; 36 CFR Part 13; 50 CFR Parts 10, 17, 23, 81, 217, 222, 225, 402, and 450): • Endangered: black-footed ferret, interior least tern, pallid sturgeon, whooping crane • Threatened: Canada lynx, northern long-eared bat, piping plover, red knot

15 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan A former candidate species, greater sage-grouse, is found throughout the refuge in sage-steppe habitats on the edge of core areas and found in greater abundance in higher quality and larger core areas next to the refuge. See refuge CCP section 3.2 for more information. Description of Environmental Trends and Planned Actions Opening lion hunting on the refuge is not expected to attract more hunters that are specifically targeting lions. Instead, it is expected that elk and deer hunters that are interested and properly licensed to hunt lion would take advantage of opportunistic lion encounters to attempt harvest. Therefore, opening lion hunting is not expected to increase the number of big game hunter visits, expand the area or time periods where hunters are present, or add disturbance or impact to threatened or endangered species on the refuge. There is a concern about the bioavailability of spent lead ammunition (bullets) on the environment, endangered and threatened species, birds (especially raptors), mammals, and humans, or other fish and wildlife susceptible to biomagnification. Lead shot and bullet fragments found in animal carcasses and gut piles are the most likely source of lead exposure (Kelly et al. 2011). Many hunters do not realize that the carcass or gut pile they leave in the field usually contains lead bullet fragments. Research continues on the effects of lead ammunition and the fragments it can deposit in killed game. Avian predators and scavengers can be susceptible to lead poisoning when they ingest lead fragments or pellets in the tissues of animals killed or wounded by lead ammunition. Lead poison may weaken raptors and increase mortality rate by leaving them unable to hunt or making them more susceptible to vehicles or power line accidents (Kramer and Redig 1997). In a study of bald eagles and golden eagles admitted to the Raptor Rehabilitation Program at the College of Veterinary Medicine at Washington State University from 1991 to 2008, researchers found that 48 percent of bald eagles and 62 percent of golden eagles tested had blood lead levels considered toxic by current standards. Of the bald and golden eagles with toxic lead levels, 91 percent of bald and 58 percent of golden respectively, were admitted to the rehabilitation facility after the end of the general deer and elk hunting seasons in December (Stauber 2010). Impacts on Affected Resource Alternative A Under alternative A, the existing hunting program would continue. Disturbance or impact to threatened or endangered species would not be expected to change from current levels. The Service prepared an Intra-Service Section 7 Biological Evaluation during the CCP and EIS process completed in 2012 (see refuge CCP Appendix H). Alternative B Disturbance or impacts to any threatened or endangered species would not be expected to change from current levels. Lead ammunition can be used during the mountain lion and big game hunting seasons. However, the amount of lead introduced to the environment because of

16 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan this activity would be negligible and many participants in these hunts will choose non-lead methods of take such as archery. The Service encourages the use of non-toxic ammunition and educates hunters and anglers about the issues of lead. The small potential harvest of mountain lion (range 0 to 20, with fewer than five expected) would not increase appreciably the risk of lead ingestion by birds and other wildlife that scavenge gut piles from hunter harvested game. The refuge prepared a Section 7 Biological Evaluation in coordination with the Montana Ecological Services Field Office for the proposed action. Black-footed ferrets: Black-footed ferrets have been extirpated in the UL Bend part of the refuge. Ferret habitat consists primarily of complexes of prairie dog towns. After continued occupancy on the refuge since 1994, the last known individual was seen on the refuge in 2019 during spring breeding surveys. Prairie dog colony collapse due to an epizootic sylvatic plague outbreak that began in 2017 and continued through 2020 is believed to be the cause of the extirpation of the black-footed ferret on the refuge. Black-footed ferrets are a prairie dog obligate species, and the prairie dog colony on which the ferrets relied has decreased by more than 75 percent during the last three years. These areas are only marginal and infrequently used as lion habitat. Actual levels of disturbance would be insignificant and would not increase from that which currently occurs with existing hunting activity in these areas. Mountain lion hunting may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, black-footed ferrets or their habitat. Canada lynx: Canada lynx typically live in subalpine forest habitats and are known to occur west of the continental divide in Montana. These habitat types and historical range do not exist on the refuge. There have been no known sightings nor would they be expected to occur on the refuge. Therefore, mountain lion hunting would not affect Canada lynx. Greater sage-grouse: The refuge has both greater sage-grouse and sage-step habitat throughout the refuge. Mountain lion hunting may indirectly effect sage-grouse habitat though disturbance from vehicle traffic by hunters traveling along established routes through these habitat types. However, this vehicle impact would not be significant, as disturbance associated with this hunting would not increase more than what already occurs during current hunts. Mountain Lion hunting may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, sage-grouse or their habitat. Interior least tern: Interior least terns have been documented on the shoreline of Fort Peck Reservoir within the refuge. Mountain lion hunting may indirectly affect least terns from boat traffic associated with access to hunting areas by lion hunters. Boating use and shoreline foot travel would be insignificant as it relates to mountain lion hunting, as use of shoreline habitat by terns during hunting season would be minimal to low. Mountain lion hunting may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, interior least terns or their habitat.

17 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan Northern long-eared bat: In Montana, this species is known to occupy specific habitat within a limited range along the Missouri and Yellowstone river drainages near the North Dakota border. The most likely habitat type that would be suitable for this species on the refuge would be cottonwood river bottom along the Missouri River corridor. Mountain lion hunting may occur in and possibly affect this habitat type. However, the hunting would not result in additional impacts to this habitat type than currently exist with ongoing hunting seasons. Mountain lion hunting may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, northern long-eared bats or their habitat. Pallid sturgeon: Pallid sturgeon are present in the Missouri River section of the refuge. However, mountain lion hunting would not affect pallid sturgeon. Piping plovers: Piping plovers have been documented on the shoreline of Fort Peck Reservoir within the refuge. Mountain lion hunting may indirectly affect plovers from boat traffic associated with access to hunting areas by lion hunters. Boating use and shoreline foot travel would be insignificant as it relates to mountain lion hunting as use of shoreline habitat by plovers during hunting season would be low or non-existent. Mountain Lion hunting may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, piping plovers or their habitat. Red knots: Red knots migrate through Montana. Migratory stopovers in Montana are rare but are most common at larger wetlands. Actual occurrence of this species on the refuge is unknown. Potential habitat could be found in the eastern part of the Fort Peck Reservoir. Mountain lion hunting could affect this species indirectly through the use of boats and foot access along shorelines. However, there would be no increase in this type of use over current hunting seasons. Mountain lion hunting may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, red knots or their habitat. Whitebark pine: Whitebark pine exist in the subalpine forest of the Snowy Mountains in Fergus County and are not present on the refuge. Therefore, mountain lion hunting would not effect whitebark pine. Whooping cranes: Whooping cranes migrate through Montana and potentially across the refuge. Nesting by whooping cranes has not been documented on the refuge. Mountain lion hunting may potentially affect possible stop-over areas of whooping cranes should it occur. However, this affect would be insignificant as most of the mountain lion hunting season would occur after potential migration and stop-over by whooping cranes. Therefore, mountain lion hunting may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, whooping cranes or their habitat.

18 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan Habitat and Vegetation (including vegetation of special management concern) Affected Environment Description of Affected Environment for the Affected Resource Uplands make up most of the refuge, and comprise grassland, shrubland, and forest. The grassland and shrubland communities compose more than 60 percent of the upland area, while forest communities cover approximately 30 percent of the uplands. Common grass species include western wheatgrass, bluebunch wheatgrass, green needlegrass, and blue grama. Shrubs important to wildlife include big sagebrush, silver sagebrush, juniper, chokecherry, golden currant, redosier dogwood, and silver buffaloberry. Key upland trees include ponderosa pine, Douglas fir, and some limber pine. Riparian habitat areas include wetland and upland vegetation associated with rivers, streams, and other drainage ways. The riparian areas of the refuge occupy a relatively small part of the landscape, but wildlife use these areas disproportionately more than any other habitat type. Vegetation within the larger riparian systems is dominated by mature forests of plains cottonwood with an understory of shrubs, grasses, and wetlands. Other trees and shrubs include green ash, redosier dogwood, common chokecherry, and silver sagebrush, while the riparian understory includes grasses (redtop, inland saltgrass, western wheatgrass, and foxtail barley) and a variety of forbs, sedges, and rushes. See refuge section CCP 3.2 for a detailed description of these habitats. Description of Environmental Trends and Planned Actions In the uplands, Japanese brome has invaded all grasslands, especially those in poor condition or in the sage-steppe shrublands. Some areas of cottonwood riparian areas along the Missouri River are in a degraded condition with monotypic nonnative grasses such as smooth brome and crested wheatgrass. Within the last few decades, the occurrence of salt cedar in river bottoms along the Missouri River in the western third of the refuge has increased. The climate is typical of the Northern Great Plains, with moderately cold winter and occasional cold periods exceeding -20°F, and generally pleasant summers with occasional hot periods exceeding 100°F. Precipitation is generally less than 20 inches annually, falling as rain and snow, with the months of May and June being the wettest period of the year. Both climate and precipitation are quite variable from season-to-season and year-to-year, with extreme wet periods and extreme dry periods occurring somewhat regularly. Wet periods and droughts that occur for multiple years are not uncommon. As the climate warms globally due to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide, the Northern Great Plains is experiencing longer, hotter, and drier dry periods. This causes naturally occurring fuels such as dry grass, shrubs, and dead standing and downed trees to become more flammable.

19 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan The refuge has experienced an increase in both the occurrence and size of wildland fires over the last 25 years. See refuge CCP sections 3.2 and 4.5 for more information. Vegetated land, such as what occurs on the refuge, is a tremendous factor in carbon sequestration. Large naturally occurring communities of plants and animals that occupy major habitats are effective both in preventing carbon emission and in acting as biological “scrubbers” of atmospheric carbon dioxide. See refuge CCP section 3.1 for more information. Opening lion hunting on the refuge is not expected to attract more hunters that are specifically targeting lions. Instead, it is expected that elk and deer hunters that are interested and properly licensed to hunt lion would take advantage of opportunistic lion encounters to attempt harvest. Therefore, opening lion hunting is not expected to increase the number of big game hunter visits, expand the area or time periods where hunters are present, or add disturbance or impact to habitats and vegetation on the refuge. Impacts on Affected Resource Alternative A Current habitat and vegetation conditions would not be expected to be impacted. Alternative B Current habitat and vegetation conditions would not be expected to be impacted. Wilderness or Other Special Designation Affected Environment Description of Affected Environment for the Affected Resource The refuge contains designated wilderness, proposed wilderness, wilderness research areas that were recommended to be designated as proposed wilderness in the refuge CCP, and several other special management areas. In 1976, Congress designated approximately 20,890 acres as the UL Bend Wilderness Area, which was later modified to its current size of approximately 20,819. The refuge currently maintains 15 areas of nearly 155,288 acres as proposed wilderness units and maintains nine areas of approximately 19,942 acres of wilderness study area (see CCP Appendix F for locations, boundaries, and descriptions). Other special management areas either on or running through the refuge are the Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail, Hell Creek and Bug Creek National Natural Landmarks, Research Natural Areas, Upper Missouri Breaks Wild and Scenic River, and Missouri Breaks Back Country Byway. See refuge CCP section 3.3 for more information. Description of Environmental Trends and Planned Actions The region’s climate is typical of the Northern Great Plains, with moderately cold winters and occasional cold periods exceeding -20°F, and generally pleasant summers with occasional hot

20 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan periods exceeding 100°F. Precipitation is generally less than 20 inches annually, falling as rain and snow, with the months of May and June being the wettest period of the year. Both climate and precipitation are quite variable from season-to-season and year-to-year, with extreme wet periods and extreme dry periods occurring somewhat regularly. Wet periods and droughts that occur for multiple years are not uncommon. As the climate warms globally due to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide, the Northern Great Plains is experiencing longer, hotter, and drier dry periods. This causes naturally occurring fuels such as dry grass, shrubs, and dead standing and downed trees to become more flammable. The refuge has experienced an increase in both the occurrence and size of wildland fires over the last 25 years. See refuge CCP sections 3.2 and 4.5 for more information. Vegetated land, such as what occurs on the refuge, is a tremendous factor in carbon sequestration. Large naturally occurring communities of plants and animals that occupy major habitats are effective both in preventing carbon emission and in acting as biological “scrubbers” of atmospheric carbon dioxide. See refuge CCP section 3.1 for more information. Wilderness and other special management areas are expected to be influenced similarly to refuge areas that do not have special designations. Impacts on Affected Resource Alternative A Current uses and conditions of wilderness and other special management areas would not be expected to change. Alternative B Current uses and conditions of wilderness and other special management areas would not be expected to change. Visitor Use and Experience Affected Environment Description of Affected Environment for the Affected Resource The refuge attracts approximately 250,000 visitors to enjoy a variety of recreational activities related to the six wildlife-dependent recreational uses that are identified in the Improvement Act as priority uses (hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, photography, interpretation, and environmental education). Approximately 103,900 hunters come to the refuge; 90,000 of which hunt big game. Approximately 60,000 fishing visits are attributed to the refuge throughout the year, which does not include the roughly 160,000 fishing visits attributed to Fort Peck Lake. The refuge provides outstanding wildlife-viewing opportunities due to the abundance of wildlife, generating nearly 20,300 photography visits a year. The auto tour route and Slippery Ann Elk

21 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan Viewing Area receive approximately 4,000 visitors during the elk rut each year. See refuge CCP section 3.4 for more information. Description of Environmental Trends and Planned Actions Opening lion hunting on the refuge is not expected to attract more hunters that are specifically targeting lions. Instead, it is expected that elk and deer hunters that are interested and properly licensed to hunt lion would take advantage of opportunistic lion encounters to attempt harvest. Therefore, opening lion hunting is not expected to increase the number of big game hunter visits, expand the area or time periods where hunters are present, or add disturbance or impact to any other current visitor activity on the refuge. Impacts on Affected Resource Alternative A Current visitor use experiences would not be expected to change. Alternative B Current visitor use experiences would not be expected to change. Up to 20 big game hunters that are properly licensed and fortunate enough to see a mountain lion while hunting would have the opportunity to harvest a lion. Cultural Resources Affected Environment Description of Affected Environment for the Affected Resource The refuge has a rich human history that has shaped the landscape from prehistoric times to the present day. The refuge has 363 known archaeological sites. Approximately 275 of those sites are either National Register-eligible or have not been evaluated and therefore are treated as eligible. There are several traditional tribal cultural properties on the refuge, including burial locations, plant-gathering areas, and ceremonial locations, although some were inundated by the creation of Fort Peck Lake. See refuge CCP section 3.5 for more information. The refuge offers various exposures of geologic and paleontological interest, including 465 known paleontological sites. Several of these sites have been designated as “national natural landmarks” for paleontological resources. As a general practice of the Service, these sites are not identified in public facing documents to protect the sites from potential looting. See refuge CCP section 3.6 for more information. Description of Environmental Trends and Planned Actions Opening lion hunting on the refuge is not expected to attract more hunters that are specifically targeting lions. Instead, it is expected that elk and deer hunters that are interested and properly licensed to hunt lion would take advantage of opportunistic lion encounters to attempt harvest. Therefore, opening lion hunting is not expected to increase the number of big game hunter

22 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan visits, expand the area or time periods where hunters are present, or add disturbance or impact to any cultural or paleontological resources on the refuge. Impacts on Affected Resource Alternative A Disturbance or impacts to any cultural or paleontological resources would not be expected to change from current levels. Alternative B Disturbance or impacts to any cultural or paleontological resources would not be expected to change from current levels. Refuge Management and Operations Land Use on the Refuge Affected Environment Description of Affected Environment for the Affected Resource Refuge operations include management of facilities, structures, and other land or water use. The refuge relies on staff, equipment, and facilities to carry out both day-to-day operations and long-term programs such as land acquisition. The refuge maintains three field stations (Sand Creek Wildlife Station, Fort Peck Wildlife Station, and Jordan Wildlife Station) and a headquarters facility (Lewistown). All areas have office buildings, maintenance shops, and equipment storage buildings. The field stations also have fire equipment caches and various residences and bunkhouse units. Currently, there are approximately 670 miles of road. The refuge’s primary land use is to protect habitat for wildlife conservation, with a secondary use for livestock grazing. The Service issues approximately 55 livestock grazing special use permits annually, for an average total use of roughly 16,000 animal unit months per year . The period of use varies between areas, but livestock grazing primarily occurs from May through October. Description of Environmental Trends and Planned Actions Opening lion hunting on CMR is not expected to attract more hunters that are specifically targeting lions. Instead, it is expected that elk and deer hunters that are interested and properly licensed to hunt lion would take advantage of opportunistic lion encounters to attempt harvest. Therefore, opening lion hunting is not expected to increase the number of big game hunter visits, expand the area or time periods where hunters are present, or add disturbance or impact to refuge management and operations on the refuge.

23 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan Impacts on Affected Resource Alternative A Disturbance or impacts to refuge management and operations would not be expected to change from current levels. Alternative B Disturbance or impacts to refuge management and operations would not be expected to change from current levels. Administration Affected Environment Description of Affected Environment for the Affected Resource The refuge has approximately 20 staff, including refuge managers, refuge specialists, maintenance mechanics, federal wildlife officers, firefighters, a wildlife biologist, a budget analysist, and an office assistant. The refuge has an operations and maintenance budget of nearly $2.5 million, and a fire management budget of nearly $900,000. Hunting activities are time-consuming and costly. The Service estimates that law enforcement activities may involve approximately 30 to 35 hours per week from September through February. Transportation costs associated with law enforcement are estimated at nearly $400 per week but fluctuate with fuel and maintenance costs. Communication related to refuge violations and public safety requires an estimated 8 to 10 hours per week during the hunting season. Many hours are required to provide information to the public throughout the season, using methods such as by phone, web site, brochures, news releases, and at the visitor’s center. Approximately $10,000 per year is associated with planning and printing hunting information for distribution at offices, kiosks, and the visitor center. The money required for maintenance of refuge infrastructure (such as roads, parking areas, signs, and facilities) is variable, but often can be more than $250,000 per year. In addition, time and cost are associated with public coordination with MTFWP on the administration of activities such as special hunts. Wildlife monitoring for hunted species is completed by MTFWP. Description of Environmental Trends and Planned Actions Opening lion hunting on the refuge is not expected to attract more hunters that are specifically targeting lions. Instead, it is expected that elk and deer hunters that are interested and properly licensed to hunt lion would take advantage of opportunistic lion encounters to attempt harvest. Therefore, opening lion hunting is not expected to increase the number of big game hunter visits, expand the area or time periods where hunters are present, or add impact or other costs to the administration or budget of the refuge.

24 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan Impacts on Affected Resource Alternative A Impacts to the administration or budget of the Refuge would not be expected to change from current levels. Alternative B Impacts to the administration or budget of the Refuge would not be expected to change from current levels. Socioeconomics Local and Regional Economies Affected Environment Description of Affected Environment for the Affected Resource The Service, with the assistance of the U.S. Geological Survey, developed a detailed socioeconomic analysis during the development of the refuge CCP. For more information, please see refuge CCP section 3.7. Description of Environmental Trends and Planned Actions Opening lion hunting on the refuge is not expected to attract more hunters that are specifically targeting lions. Instead, it is expected that elk and deer hunters that are interested and properly licensed to hunt lion would take advantage of opportunistic lion encounters to attempt harvest. Therefore, opening lion hunting is not expected to increase the number of big game hunter visits, expand the area or time periods where hunters are present, or alter the socioeconomic conditions found in the area around the refuge. Impacts on Affected Resource Alternative A Impacts to the socioeconomic conditions found in the area around the refuge would not be expected to change from current levels. Alternative B Impacts to the socioeconomic conditions found in the area around the refuge would not be expected to change from current levels. Environmental Justice Affected Environment Description of Affected Environment for the Affected Resource Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, requires all federal agencies to incorporate environmental justice into their missions by finding and addressing disproportionately high or

25 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs and policies on minorities and low-income populations and communities. Description of Environmental Trends and Planned Actions Opening lion hunting on the refuge is not expected to attract more hunters that are specifically targeting lions. Instead, it is expected that elk and deer hunters that are interested and properly licensed to hunt lion would take advantage of opportunistic lion encounters to attempt harvest. The hunting is not expected to increase the lion harvest or decrease the lion population in the area, including on the nearby Native American Reservations. Opening lion hunting is not expected to increase the number of big game hunter visits, expand the area or time periods where hunters are present, or add or detract from the environmental justice conditions found in the area around the refuge. Impacts on Affected Resource Alternative A Factors impacting environmental justice conditions found in the area around the refuge would not be expected to change from current levels. Alternative B Factors impacting environmental justice conditions found in the area around the refuge would not be expected to change from current levels.

Monitoring MTFWP is the lead agency charged with monitoring resident wildlife populations that are hunted. They use an adaptive harvest management strategy informed by the Montana Mountain Lion Integrated Population Model. A detailed description of MTFWP’s harvest strategy and population model can be found in the “Montana Mountain Lion Monitoring and Management Strategy” released in 2019.

Summary of Analysis Alternative A – No Action Alternative As described above, the refuge would continue to prohibit mountain lion hunting. Other hunting seasons would remain in place, as outlined in the refuge hunting regulations. Hunting is currently allowed for big game, waterfowl, and upland game birds. Not opening a limited mountain lion hunting season would not impact any other refuge resources from current conditions. Mountain lion populations would not be expected to change, and populations of their primary prey species, elk and deer, would not be expected to change. Associated habitat and vegetation conditions would not be expected to change.

26 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan This alternative does not meet the purpose and needs of the Service as described above because it would not provide additional wildlife-dependent recreation opportunities. Alternative B – Open Limited Mountain Lion Hunting – [Proposed Action Alternative] As described above, under the Proposed Action Alternative, limited mountain lion hunting would take place in the fall, under refuge and state regulations. This alternative provides a recreational experience to the public while maintaining a sustainable mountain lion population. Opening mountain lion hunting on the refuge is not expected to attract more hunters that are specifically targeting mountain lions. Instead, it is expected that elk and deer hunters that are interested and properly licensed to hunt mountain lions would take advantage of opportunistic mountain lion encounters to attempt harvest. The refuge incurs costs annually from running the existing hunting program. Carrying out a limited mountain lion hunt, administered by MTFWP to run concurrently with the traditional general deer and elk archery and firearms seasons, would not be expected to incur added costs for the refuge. This alternative offers increased opportunities for public hunting and fulfills the Service’s mandate under the NWRSAA. The Service has determined that the Mountain Lion Hunting Plan is compatible with the purposes of the refuge and the mission of the Refuge System (see draft compatibility determination in Appendix C).

List of Sources, Agencies and Persons Consulted The following agencies and organizations were consulted during the development of this EA: • Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Regions 4, 6 and 7 • Lisa Talcott, Refuge Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior Region 7 • Aaron Mize, Hunt and Fish Chief, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior Regions 5 and 7 • Bernardo Garza, Hunt and Fish Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior Regions 5 and 7 The Service’s Ecological Services program Montana Field Office Supervisor was contacted about the Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan on March 24, 2021. The refuge made a request to review the list of species threatened, endangered, proposed, and under review as part of the EA Section 7 consultation rule associated with the Mountain Lion Hunting Plan.

27 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan List of Preparers • Paul Santavy, Project Leader; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Charles M. Russell Complex, Lewistown, MT • Shaylene Piedalue, Wildlife Refuge Specialist; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Charles M. Russell Complex, Fort Peck Field Station, MT • Toni Griffin, Conservation Planning; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior Regions 5 and 7

State Coordination Representatives of the refuge worked in coordination with MTFWP regional wildlife managers, wildlife biologists, and regional supervisors to develop the proposal for a limited mountain lion hunting opportunity on the refuge. MTFWP supports the Service’s intention to provide a limited mountain lion hunting opportunity (without dogs), that would follow season dates detailed in MTFWP Archery Only and Fall Season regulations, which run concurrently with the traditional general deer and elk archery and firearms seasons. MTFWP supports the refuge’s consideration of a fall only lion season, not wanting to expand lion hunting later than the end of the general deer and elk season dates as the refuge provides habitat and wildlife security during winter, which is the most vulnerable time for all wildlife species. MTFWP shared the organization’s and public’s interests and responded to the proposed hunting opportunity in verbal and written communications. These discussions helped adjust the refuge’s plan to align, where possible, with state management goals. Overall, the state was supportive of the Service’s proposal of a limited mountain lion hunting opportunity, and both agencies confirmed the continuance of a strong collaboration. The refuge received a letter of concurrence from the MTFWP Regional Supervisors of Regions 4, 6 and 7 on August 13, 2020.

Tribal Consultation The Service mailed an invitation for comments to all tribes potentially affected by initiating an EA to expand hunting opportunities at the refuge. The Service extended an invitation to engage in government-to-government consultation in accordance with Executive Order 13175.

Public Outreach Public scoping opportunities and input from tribes, state agencies, local individuals, non- government organizations, and Service staff occurred as part of the CCP. MTFWP joined as part

28 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan of the planning team. The Service considered comments generated throughout the planning process in the development of the Mountain Lion Hunting Plan. The public will have a period of 30 days to review the Draft Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan, the compatibility determination, and associated EA. These documents will be available at www.fws.gov/mountain- prairie/huntfish.php#. Hard copies will be available on request.

Determination This section will be filled out upon completion of the public comment period and at the time of finalization of the EA.

☐ The Service’s action will not result in a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. See the attached “Finding of No Significant Impact”.

☐ The Service’s action may significantly affect the quality of the human environment and the Service will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.

Signatures Submitted By:

Project Leader Signature: Date: Concurrence:

Refuge Supervisor Signature: Date:

Approved:

Regional Chief, National Wildlife Refuge System Signature: Date:

29 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan References

Gigliotti, L.C., M.R. Matchett, and D.S. Jachowski. 2019. Mountain lions on the prairie: habitat selection by recolonizing mountain lions at the edge of their range. Restoration Ecology. 27(5):1032–1040.

Hunt W.G., R.T. Watson, J.L. Oaks, C.N. Parish, K.K. Burnham, R.L. Tucker, Belthoff, and G. Hart. 2009. Lead Bullet Fragments in Venison from Rifle-Killed Deer: Potential for Human Dietary Exposure. PLoS ONE. 4(4):e5330. .

Iqbal S., W. Blumenthal, C. Kennedy, F.Y. Yip, S. Pickard, W.D. Flanders, K. Loringer, K. Kruger, K.L Caldwell, M. Jean Brown. 2009. Hunting with lead: association between blood lead levels and wild game consumption. Environmental Research. 109(8):952–9. .

Kelly, T.R., P.H. Bloom, S.G. Torres, Y.Z. Hernandez, R.H. Poppenga, W.M. Boyce, C.K. Johnson. 2011. Impact of the California lead ammunition ban on reducing lead exposure in golden eagles and turkey vultures. PLoS ONE. 6(4):e17656. .

Kendall, R.J., T.E. Lacher Jr., C. Bunck, B. Daniel, C. Driver, C.E. Grue, F. Leighton, W. Stansley, P.G. Watanabe, and M. Whitworth. 1996. An ecological risk assessment of lead shot exposure in non-waterfowl avian species: upland game birds and raptors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 15:4–20.

Kramer, J.L. and P.T. Redig. 1997. Sixteen years of lead poisoning in eagles, 1980-95: an epizootiological view. Journal of Raptor Research. 31(4):327–332.

Kunkel, K, T. Vosburgh, and H. Robinson. 2012. Ecology of cougars (Puma concolor) in north- central Montana. Final Report to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Matchett, R. 2012. Mountain lion research in the Missouri River Breaks. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge, Lewistown, MT.

Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks. 2019. Montana Mountain Lion Monitoring and Management Strategy. Helena, Montana.

Robinson, H.S., T.K. Ruth, J.A. Gude, D. Choate, R. DeSimone, M. Hebblewhite, M.R. Matchett, M.S. Mitchell, K. Murphy, and J. Williams. 2015. Linking resource selection and mortality

30 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan modeling for population estimation of mountain lions in Montana. Ecological Modeling. 312:11—25.

Scheuhammer, A.M. and S.L. Norris. 1996. The ecotoxicology of lead shot and lead fishing weights. Ecotoxicology. 5(5):279-95. .

Stauber, E., N. Finch, P.A. Talcott, and J.M. Gay. 2010. Lead poisoning of bald (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and golden (Aquila chrysaetos) eagles in the U.S. inland Pacific Northwest – An 18-year retrospective study: 1991-2008. Journal of Avian Medicine and Surgery. 24:279-287. .

Streater, S. 2009. Wild meat raises lead exposure. Environmental Health News. accessed March 2017.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013. Issuance of Annual Regulations Permitting the Hunting of Migratory Birds: Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. . –––. 2016. Adaptive Harvest Management: 2017 Hunting Season. U.S. Department of the Interior. Washington, DC. .

31 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan Appendix A – Applicable Statutes, Executive Orders, and Regulations Cultural Resources American Indian Religious Freedom Act, as amended, 42 U.S. Code 1996 - 1996a; 43 CFR Part 7 Antiquities Act of 1906, 16 U.S. Code 431-433; 43 CFR Part 3 Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, 16 U.S. Code 470aa-470mm; 18 CFR Part 1312; 32 CFR Part 229; 36 CFR Part 296; 43 CFR Part 7 National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, 16 U.S. Code 470-470x-6; 36 CFR Parts 60, 63, 78, 79, 800, 801, and 810 Paleontological Resources Protection Act, 16 U.S. Code 470aaa-470aaa-11 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S. Code 3001-3013; 43 CFR Part 10 Executive Order 11593 – Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment, 36 Fed. Reg. 8921 (1971) Executive Order 13007 – Indian Sacred Sites, 61 Fed. Reg. 26771 (1996)

Fish and Wildlife Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, as amended, 16 U.S. Code 668-668c, 50 CFR 22 Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, 16 U.S. Code 1531-1544; 36 CFR Part 13; 50 CFR Parts 10, 17, 23, 81, 217, 222, 225, 402, 450 Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, 16 U.S. Code 742a-m Lacey Act, as amended, 16 U.S. Code 3371 et seq.; 15 CFR Parts 10, 11, 12, 14, 300, and 904 Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as amended, 16 U.S. Code 703-712; 50 CFR Parts 10, 12, 20, and 21 Executive Order 13186 – Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds, 66 Fed. Reg. 3853 (2001)

Natural Resources Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S. Code 7401-7671q; 40 CFR Parts 23, 50, 51, 52, 58, 60, 61, 82, and 93; 48 CFR Part 23 Wilderness Act, 16 U.S. Code 1131 et seq. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S. Code 1271 et seq. Executive Order 13112 – Invasive Species, 64 Fed. Reg. 6183 (1999)

32 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan Appendix B – Mountain Lion Hunting Plan

33 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan Draft Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan April 2021

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge

333 Airport Road, Lewistown, MT 59457

Submitted By: Paul Santavy, Project Leader, Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge

Signature Date

Concurrence: Lisa Talcott, Refuge Supervisor

Signature Date

Approved: Stacy Armitage, Assistant Regional Director, National Wildlife Refuge System

Signature Date Table of Contents I. Introduction ...... 2 II. Statement of Objectives ...... 6 III. Description of Mountain Lion Hunting Program ...... 7 Areas to Be Closed to Hunting ...... 7 Hunting Seasons ...... 7 Hunting Harvest Quotas ...... 7 Hunting Access ...... 8 Hunter Permit Requirements ...... 8 Consultation and Coordination with the State ...... 11 Law Enforcement ...... 11 Funding and Staffing Requirements ...... 11 IV. Conduct of the Hunting Program ...... 12 Hunter Permit Application, Selection, and Registration Procedures ...... 12 Refuge-Specific Hunting Regulations ...... 12 Relevant State Regulations ...... 12 Other Refuge Rules and Regulations for Hunting ...... 13 V. Public Engagement ...... 15 Outreach for Announcing and Publicizing the Hunting Program ...... 15 Anticipated Public Reaction to the Hunting Program ...... 15 How Hunters Will Be Informed of Relevant Rules and Regulations ...... 15 VI. Compatibility Determination ...... 16

List of Figures Figure 1. Location of Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges...... 5 Figure 2. Areas Closed to Hunting on Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge, Close Extent. Slippery Ann Elk Viewing Area and Sand Creek Administrative Site ...... 9 Figure 3. Areas Closed to Hunting on Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge. Slippery Ann Elk Viewing Area and Sand Creek Administrative Site ...... 10

1 Draft Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges

Mountain Lion Hunting Plan

I. Introduction National wildlife refuges are guided by the mission and goals of the National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System), the purposes of an individual refuge, United States (U.S.) Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) policy, and laws and international treaties. Relevant guidance is provided by the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (NWRSAA), as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Improvement Act), Refuge Recreation Act of 1962, and selected parts of the Code of Federal Regulations and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Manual. Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) was established pursuant to:

• Executive Order 7509, dated December 11, 1936 • Refuge Recreation Act • Bankhead–Jones Farm Tenant Act • Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 1929 UL Bend NWR was established pursuant to:

• Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act • Migratory Bird Conservation Act • Fish and Wildlife Act 1956 • Refuge Administration Act • Wilderness Act legislation Each refuge was established for specific purposes, as described below. Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge • “For the conservation and development of natural wildlife resources and for the protection and improvement of public grazing lands and natural forage resources: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall restrict prospecting, locating, developing, mining, entering, leasing, or patenting the mineral resources of the lands under the applicable laws: … Provided, however, that the natural forage resources therein shall be first utilized for the purpose of sustaining in a healthy condition a maximum of four hundred thousand (400,000) sharp-tailed grouse, and one thousand five hundred (1,500) antelope, the primary species, and such nonpredatory secondary species in such numbers as may be necessary to maintain a balanced wildlife population but, in no case, shall the consumption of forage by the combined population of the wildlife species be allowed to increase the burden of the range dedicated to the primary species: Provided further, that all the forage resources within this range or preserve shall be available, except as herein

2 provided with respect to wildlife, for domestic livestock.” (Executive Order 7509, dated December 11, 1936) • “Shall be administered by him [Secretary of the Interior] directly or in accordance with cooperative agreements ... and in accordance with such rules and regulations for the conservation, maintenance, and management of wildlife, resources thereof, and its habitat thereon.” (16 U.S. Code 664, Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act) • “Suitable for (1) incidental fish and wildlife-oriented recreational development, (2) the protection of natural resources, (3) the conservation of endangered species or threatened species” (16 U.S. Code 460k–1), “the Secretary ... may accept and use ... real ... property. Such acceptance may be accomplished under the terms and conditions of restrictive covenants imposed by donors.” (16 U.S. Code 460k–2, Refuge Recreation Act [16 U.S. Code 460k–460k–4], as amended) • “Purposes of a land-conservation and land-utilization program.” (7 U.S. Code 1011, Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act) • “Particular value in carrying out the national migratory bird management program.” (16 U.S. Code 667b, An Act Authorizing the Transfer of Certain Real Property for Wildlife) • “Conservation, management, and ... restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats ... for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.” (16 U.S. Code 668dd [a] [2], National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act) • “For use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds.” (16 U.S. Code 715d, Migratory Bird Conservation Act) UL Bend National Wildlife Refuge • “For use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds.” (16 U.S. Code 715d, Migratory Bird Conservation Act), “reserved for the UL Bend National Wildlife Refuge” (Public Land Order 4588, dated March 25, 1969), “for the protection of lands for migratory waterfowl management.” (Public Land Order 4826, dated May 15, 1970) • “Shall be administered by him [Secretary of the Interior] directly or in accordance with cooperative agreements ... and in accordance with such rules and regulations for the conservation, maintenance, and management of wildlife, resources thereof, and its habitat thereon.” (16 U.S. Code 664, Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act) • “Particular value in carrying out the national migratory bird management program.” (16 U.S. Code 667b, An Act Authorizing the Transfer of Certain Real Property for Wildlife) • “For the development, advancement, management, conservation, and protection of fish and wildlife resources.” (16 U.S. Code 742f [a] [4]) • “For the benefit of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in performing its activities and services. Such acceptance may be subject to the terms of any restrictive or affirmative covenant, or condition of servitude.” (16 U.S. Code 742f [b] [1], Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956)

3 • “Conservation, management, and ... restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats ... for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.” (16 U.S. Code 668dd [a] [2], National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act) • “To secure for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness … wilderness areas ... shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such manner as would leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of their wilderness character, and for the gathering and dissemination of information about their use and enjoyment as wilderness.” (16 U.S. Code 1131, Wilderness Act)

Located within the boundary of the Charles M. Russell NWR, UL Bend NWR is, in essence, a refuge within a refuge (Figure 1). Together, they encompass an area of 1.1 million acres that span approximately 125 air miles along the Missouri River, from the Fort Peck Dam west to the boundary with the Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument. The two refuges are commonly referred to as “the refuge” unless individually named. The refuge affords visitors solitude, serenity, and unique opportunities to experience natural settings and wildlife similar to what Native Americans and, later, Lewis and Clark observed. The expansive badlands, cottonwood river bottoms, old-growth forested coulees, sagebrush steppes, and mixed-grass prairies appear out of the sea that is the northern Great Plains. The diversity of plant and animal communities found on the refuge stretch from the high prairie through the rugged breaks, along the Missouri River, and across Fort Peck Reservoir. Wildlife is as diverse as the topography and includes elk, mule deer, white-tailed deer, pronghorn, mountain lion, bighorn sheep, sharp-tailed grouse, prairie dogs, and more than 236 species of birds. The refuge is an outstanding example of a functioning, resilient, and intact landscape in an ever- changing West. The mission of the Refuge System, as outlined by the NWRSAA, as amended by the Improvement Act (16 U.S. Code 668dd et seq.), is: “. . . to administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management and, where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife and plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.”

4 Figure 1. Location of Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges.

5 The NWRSAA mandates the Secretary of the Interior in administering the System to (16 U.S. Code 668dd[a][4]):

• provide for the conservation of fish, wildlife and plants, and their habitats within the Refuge System; • ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the Refuge System are maintained for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans; • ensure that the mission of the Refuge System described at 16 U.S. Code 668dd(a)(2) and the purposes of each refuge are carried out; • ensure effective coordination, interaction, and cooperation with owners of land adjoining refuges and the fish and wildlife agency of the states in which the units of the Refuge System are located; • assist in the maintenance of adequate water quantity and water quality to fulfill the mission of the Refuge System and the purposes of each refuge; • recognize compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses as the priority public uses of the Refuge System through which the American public can develop an appreciation for fish and wildlife; • ensure that opportunities are provided within the Refuge System for compatible wildlife- dependent recreational uses; and • monitor the status and trends of fish, wildlife, and plants in each refuge. Therefore, it is a priority of the Service to provide wildlife-dependent recreation opportunities when those opportunities are compatible with the purposes for which the refuge was established, and the mission of the Refuge System. Hunting has been an important traditional public use of the refuge throughout its history. For many visitors, the refuge is synonymous with big game hunting. Long known for its ability to offer outstanding opportunities to hunt for Rocky Mountain elk, mule deer, white-tailed deer, pronghorn, as well as Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep, the refuge offers multiple opportunities for outdoor recreation. Hunters currently are able to take part in a variety of hunting opportunities, from areas with significant road access, to areas with relatively no roads, as provided for through wilderness and proposed wilderness units. Each year, approximately 103,900 hunters come to the refuge. Of these, there are approximately 90,000 big game visits. In recent years, the refuge has instituted several special hunting opportunities including youth hunts with a refuge-sponsored orientation day at the refuge, and an accessible hunting blind to provide people that use a wheelchair an opportunity to hunt elk and deer.

II. Statement of Objectives The objective of the mountain lion hunting program on the refuge is to expand wildlife- dependent recreation by opening a limited mountain lion hunting opportunity in accordance with the refuge’s Comprehensive Conservation Plan. Mountain lion hunting will follow season dates detailed in Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks (MTFWP) Archery Only and Fall Season Regulations, which run concurrently with the

6 traditional general deer and elk archery and firearms seasons. The Service will work with MTFWP to provide the opportunity for limited hunting of mountain lion that keep population levels consistent with state objectives, and provide opportunities not found on other public lands. The Service will consider opportunities for starting a mountain lion hunting program to encourage and facilitate special youth hunts and mobility-impaired hunters. This expanded use has the potential to attract new users and provide opportunities that are acceptable and compatible with the purpose of the refuge and mission of the Refuge System, while maintaining the remote and primitive experience unique to the refuge. Mountain lion sightings on the refuge have been numerous enough in recent years to suggest a well-established population. The abundance of elk and deer, especially on the western half of the refuge, provides an adequate prey base to support mountain lions.

III. Description of Mountain Lion Hunting Program

Areas to Be Closed to Hunting Hunting takes place refuge-wide with the exception of administrative areas, closed areas (Slippery Ann Elk Viewing Area), and recreational areas (see Figures 2 and 3).

Hunting Seasons Season setting and permit allocations are primarily done through a process administered through MTFWP. The refuge is an active partner in this process, and wildlife objectives are considered in the refuge’s management recommendations in these efforts. At times, the refuge has promulgated more restrictive regulations to address wildlife objectives within the refuge. Mountain lion hunting (without dogs) will follow season dates detailed in MTFWP Archery Only and Fall Season regulations, which run concurrently with the traditional general deer and elk archery and firearms seasons.

Hunting Harvest Quotas The refuge includes portions of eight hunting districts within three administrative regions (R4, R6, and R7) managed by MTFWP. Each hunting district that encompasses the refuge in Region 4 (two districts total) has a lion harvest quota (either sex) of three. The potential total number of lions harvested on the refuge in those two hunting districts ranges from 0–6 during Archery Only or Fall Season Without Dogs. Each hunting district that encompasses the refuge in Region 6 (five districts total) has a lion harvest quota (either sex) of one. The potential total number of lions harvested on the refuge in those five hunting districts ranges from 0–5 during Archery Only or Fall Season Without Dogs. Region 7 consists of one large hunting district that has a lion harvest quota (either sex) of nine. The potential total number of lions harvested on the refuge in that specific hunting district ranges from 0–9 during Archery Only or Fall Season Without Dogs.

7 The potential total number of lions harvested on the refuge annually ranges from 0–20. MTFWP provides clarification in their annual hunting regulations on the closing of hunting districts once its respective quotas are reached during those specific hunting seasons.

Hunting Access Hunters currently are able to take part in a variety of hunting opportunities from areas with significant road access to areas with relatively no roads as provided for through wilderness and proposed wilderness units. Motorized vehicles are permitted only on developed roads and parking areas. Driving off roads, or on roads marked as closed by signs or barriers, is prohibited. Parking in front of gates, on bridges, or on water control structures is prohibited. Refuge access will be managed primarily to benefit natural processes, but some improvements will be made to provide quality visitor experiences. Special regulations for public access will be provided on the refuge’s web site. Boating and landing sites for seaplanes will be allowed. More detailed information regarding refuge access and regulations can be found on the Charles M. Russell NWR web site at www.fws.gov/refuge/charles_m_russell/. MTFWP also provides clarification of access, rules, and regulations on national wildlife refuges under the Hunter Access section in their mountain lion hunting regulations.

Hunter Permit Requirements All hunting licenses and permits will be issued by MTFWP. No other licenses or permits are needed from the refuge. Youth and disabled hunter licenses, as described in MTFWP regulations, are valid on the refuge. All state permit rules apply on refuge lands in addition to refuge-specific rules.

8 Figure 2. Areas Closed to Hunting on Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge, Close Extent. Slippery Ann Elk Viewing Area and Sand Creek Administrative Site.

9 Figure 3. Areas Closed to Hunting on Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge. Slippery Ann Elk Viewing Area and Sand Creek Administrative Site.

10 Consultation and Coordination with the State Representatives of the refuge worked in coordination with MTFWP regional wildlife managers, wildlife biologists, and regional supervisors to develop the proposal for a limited mountain lion hunting opportunity on the refuge. MTFWP supports the Service’s intention to provide a limited mountain lion hunting opportunity (without dogs) that will follow season dates detailed in MTFWP Archery Only and Fall Season regulations, which run concurrently with the traditional general deer and elk archery and firearms seasons. MTFWP supports the refuge’s consideration of a fall-only lion season, as the refuge provides habitat and wildlife security during winter, which is the most vulnerable time for all wildlife species. MTFWP shared with the Service the organization’s and public’s interests and responded to the proposed hunting opportunity in verbal and written communications. These discussions helped the Service adjust its plan to align, where possible, with state management goals. Overall, MTFWP was supportive of the Service’s proposal of a limited mountain lion hunting opportunity, and both agencies confirmed the continuance of a strong collaboration. The refuge received a letter of concurrence from the MTFWP regional supervisors of Regions 4, 6, and 7 on August 13, 2020.

Law Enforcement Enforcement of violations on the refuge is the responsibility of commissioned refuge law enforcement officers. Other refuge officers, special agents, state game wardens, and the local sheriff’s department may aid the full-time officer at the refuge. Any law enforcement officer may enforce state laws on the refuge. The following methods are used to inform the public and enforce hunting regulations: publication of the Code of Federal Regulations, a refuge brochure indicating hunting regulations and areas closed to hunting, signage along refuge boundaries, and sometimes other communications, such as via web site or phone. Refuge law enforcement officers will randomly check hunters for compliance with federal and state laws.

Funding and Staffing Requirements Hunting activities are time-consuming and costly. The Service estimates that law enforcement activities may involve approximately 30 to 35 hours per week from September through February. Transportation costs associated with law enforcement are estimated at nearly $400 per week but will fluctuate with fuel and maintenance costs. Operation of open and closed signs, as well as communication related to refuge violations or public safety, requires an estimated 8 to 10 hours per week during the hunting season. Many hours are required to provide information to the public throughout the hunting season, using methods such as by phone, web site, brochures, news releases, and at the visitor center. The refuge also incurs costs associated with printing hunting information for kiosks and the visitor center, and with maintaining refuge infrastructure (roads, parking lots, signs, facilities). In addition, time and cost are associated with coordination with the state on the administration of activities such as special hunts. Monitoring will involve the assessment of many species, but 11 MTFWP will gather much of the information from state surveys and volunteer efforts (such as deer surveys). The refuge incurs costs annually by carrying out the existing hunting program. Starting limited mountain lion hunting, administered by MTFWP to run concurrently with the traditional general deer and elk archery and firearms seasons, will not add any further costs for the refuge.

IV. Conduct of the Hunting Program

Hunter Permit Application, Selection, and Registration Procedures Hunter permit application, selection, and registration procedures are conducted in coordination with MTFWP. Where appropriate, the refuge will try to align regulations with MTFWP. For special hunting opportunities, the Service will assist with control and flexibility in limiting the number of hunters and access permits, the days of hunting, and the methods of take. The Service will follow procedures and schedules according to state-used programs and special hunting operations.

Refuge-Specific Hunting Regulations Listed below are refuge-specific regulations that pertain to hunting on Charles M. Russell NWR as of the date of publication of the revised Code of Federal Regulations and the final rule in the Federal Register. Code of Federal Regulations Section 32.45 – Montana (f) Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge - (3) Big game hunting. We allow hunting of big game on designated areas of the refuge subject to the following conditions: (i) We allow the use of portable blinds and stands. (ii) We limit each hunter to three stands or blinds. The hunter must have their automated licensing system (ALS) number visibly marked on the stand(s) or blind(s). (iii) You may install portable stands and blinds no sooner than August 1, and you must remove them by December 15 of each year (see Section 27.93 of this chapter).

Relevant State Regulations All other state regulations apply and are available on the MTFWP web site.

12 Other Refuge Rules and Regulations for Hunting Parking, Camping, Fires, and Boating

• Motorized vehicles are permitted only on developed roads and parking areas. Driving off roads, or on roads marked as closed by signs or barriers, is prohibited. Parking in front of gates, on bridges, or on water control structures is prohibited. • All camping units and parties are limited to 14 days within any 30-day period. Camping with a vehicle must take place within 100 yards of numbered roads that are designated as open. • Select a safe place for campfires. Build only small fires, and make certain that your fire is completely out when you leave. Campfires must be attended at all times. • The use of boats, canoes, and any other watercraft are allowed. Boating and landing sites for seaplanes will be allowed. Aircraft • The use of aircraft over refuge lands to disturb, harass, drive, pursue, rally or hunt wildlife, or to locate wounded animals is strictly prohibited. • It is illegal to use unmanned aircraft (drones) on or over refuge lands. • Aircraft must not land on refuge lands. Landing of fixed-winged aircraft is only allowed on the surface of Fort Peck Reservoir in the Landing Area and in Landing Zones that are defined in the Charles M. Russell NWR Guide Map. Refuge and Cultural Resources Federal law protects all government property, including natural items such as antlers, plants, historic, and archaeological features. Searching for or removing objects of antiquity or other value is strictly prohibited. • Collection of antlers and animal skulls is illegal. These items are an important source of renewable calcium for elk, deer, and other wildlife on the refuge. • The picking or harvesting of any berries, mushrooms, or plants (including edible) is prohibited on the refuge. • Removing any natural items, such as fossils, rocks, dried wood, and black diamond willow from the refuge is prohibited. • There are many interesting historic buildings on the refuge. Enjoy them as they are, and do not remove parts of the buildings or artifacts found within or around them. Closures Most of the refuge roads become inaccessible during wet periods due to the soil composition referred to as “gumbo.” Washouts and closures may happen often due to significant precipitation. See the refuge’s web site for updates pertaining to road closures due to precipitation or other management related purposes, along with seasonally closed roads.

13 The Service may close hunting of species on the refuge if there is a concern about a long-term or sudden decline in the population at regional, state, or larger scales, though the state traditionally adjusts hunting regulations based on population trends. Blinds and Tree Stands Portable tree stands and ground blinds are permitted. All portable tree stands and blinds must have the automated licensing system number visibly marked on the stand/blind. Tree stand identification must be visible from the ground. Ground blind identification must be visible from the outside of the blind. Each hunter is limited to three portable tree stands or ground blinds. Portable tree stands and ground blinds can be installed on August 1 and must be removed by December 15 of each year. The construction or use of any permanent tree stand, ladder, or blind and the use of nails, wire, or screw-in spikes with stands is prohibited. Accessible Wildlife Viewing and Hunting Blinds The refuge has two hunting and viewing blinds available for use. Both blinds are open to the public with the understanding that visitors with disabilities have priority use. The blinds are available on a first come, first serve basis. For detailed information, visit www.fws.gov/refuge/Charles_M_Russell/visit/visitor_activities/Accessible_Blinds.html.

• The Hell Creek Blind is available for use year-round and is located in the bottoms of Hell Creek, approximately 25 miles north of Jordan, MT, close to Hell Creek State Park. For more information on the Hell Creek Blind, call the Sand Creek Field Station or check the refuge web site. • The Manning Blind is available for use year-round and is located along the Missouri River (Manning Bottoms) on the western side of the refuge and is approximately 10 miles east of Highway 191 and the Fred Robinson Bridge. For more information on the Manning Blind, call the Sand Creek Field Station or check the refuge web site. Game Retrieval Retrieving non-permitted species is prohibited on all refuge lands. Retrieving permitted species from areas closed to hunting is not allowed. Game carts are not allowed in UL Bend Wilderness. However, the use of a game cart is approved for the proposed wilderness units. Light The use of artificial lights to attract, search for, or spot wildlife is prohibited. Bait Baiting or the use of bait for hunting is not permitted on the refuge.

14 More detailed information regarding refuge access and regulations can be found on the refuge website at www.fws.gov/refuge/charles_m_russell.

V. Public Engagement

Outreach for Announcing and Publicizing the Hunting Program Public scoping opportunities and input from tribes, state agencies, local individuals, non- government organizations, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service staff occurred as part of the refuge’s comprehensive conservation plan (signed in 2012). MTFWP joined as part of the planning team. The Service considered comments received throughout the planning process for the development of the Draft Mountain Lion Hunting Plan. The public will have a period of 30 days to review the draft Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan, Compatibility Determination, and associated Environmental Assessment. The draft Mountain Lion Hunting Plan, Compatibility Determination, and associated Environmental Assessment will be available at www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/huntfish.php. Hard copies will be available on request.

Anticipated Public Reaction to the Hunting Program The Service expects that reactions to the opening of a limited mountain lion hunting opportunity on the refuge will be mixed. The Service anticipates that animal rights activists will express strong opinions against the plan during the public comment period. Also, those who hunt with dogs may be concerned that they could miss the opportunity to harvest a mountain lion in their desired district if the quotas are met during Archery Only or Fall Season Without Dogs.

How Hunters Will Be Informed of Relevant Rules and Regulations Information about hunting and other wildlife-dependent public uses may be obtained at the website (www.fws.gov/refuge/charles_m_russell/) and the following office locations: Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge Headquarters Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks Lewistown Area Resource Office 333 Airport Road Lewistown, MT 59457 (406) 538-8706

Sand Creek Field Station 8407 Highway 191 North Roy, MT 59471 (406) 464-5181

Fort Peck Field Station 270 MT Highway 117 Fort Peck, MT 59223 (406) 526-3464

15 VI. Compatibility Determination Hunting and all associated program activities proposed in this plan are compatible with the purposes of the refuge. See the Draft Compatibility Determination for Mountain Lion Hunting on Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuge (www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/huntfish.php).

16 Appendix C – Compatibility Determination

51 Draft Environmental Assessment for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan Draft Compatibility Determination for Mountain Lion Hunting on Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuge

Use: Mountain Lion Hunting

Refuge Name: Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuge

Establishing and Acquisition Authorities:

Although the UL Bend National Wildlife Refuge is within the boundary of the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge, they were established through different authorities.

Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge was established pursuant to: • Executive Order 7509, dated December 11, 1936 • Refuge Recreation Act • Bankhead–Jones Farm Tenant Act • Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 1929

UL Bend National Wildlife Refuge was established pursuant to: • Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act • Migratory Bird Conservation Act • Fish and Wildlife Act 1956 • Refuge Administration Act • Wilderness Act legislation

Refuge Purpose(s): Each refuge was established for specific purposes, as described below.

Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge • “For the conservation and development of natural wildlife resources and for the protection and improvement of public grazing lands and natural forage resources: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall restrict prospecting, locating, developing, mining, entering, leasing, or patenting the mineral resources of the lands under the applicable laws: … Provided, however, that the natural forage resources therein shall be first utilized for the purpose of sustaining in a healthy condition a maximum of four hundred thousand (400,000) sharp-tailed grouse, and one thousand five hundred (1,500) antelope, the primary species, and such nonpredatory secondary species in such numbers as may be necessary to maintain a balanced wildlife population but, in no case, shall the consumption of forage by the combined population of the wildlife species be allowed to increase the burden of the range dedicated to the primary species: Provided further, That

1 all the forage resources within this range or preserve shall be available, except as herein provided with respect to wildlife, for domestic livestock.” (Executive Order 7509, dated December 11, 1936) • “Shall be administered by him [Secretary of the Interior] directly or in accordance with cooperative agreements ... and in accordance with such rules and regulations for the conservation, maintenance, and management of wildlife, resources thereof, and its habitat thereon.” (16 U.S. Code 664, Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act) • “Suitable for (1) incidental fish and wildlife-oriented recreational development, (2) the protection of natural resources, (3) the conservation of endangered species or threatened species” (16 U.S. Code 460k–1), “the Secretary ... may accept and use ... real ... property. Such acceptance may be accomplished under the terms and conditions of restrictive covenants imposed by donors.” (16 U.S. Code 460k–2, Refuge Recreation Act [16 U.S. Code 460k–460k–4], as amended) • “Purposes of a land-conservation and land-utilization program.” (7 U.S. Code 1011, Bankhead–Jones Farm Tenant Act) • “Particular value in carrying out the national migratory bird management program.” (16 U.S. Code 667b, An Act Authorizing the Transfer of Certain Real Property for Wildlife) • “Conservation, management, and ... restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats ... for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.” (16 U.S. Code 668dd [a] [2], National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act) • “For use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds.” (16 U.S. Code 715d, Migratory Bird Conservation Act)

UL Bend National Wildlife Refuge • “For use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds.” (16 U.S. Code 715d, Migratory Bird Conservation Act), “reserved for the UL Bend National Wildlife Refuge” (Public Land Order 4588, dated March 25, 1969), “for the protection of lands for migratory waterfowl management.” (Public Land Order 4826, dated May 15, 1970) • “Shall be administered by him [Secretary of the Interior] directly or in accordance with cooperative agreements ... and in accordance with such rules and regulations for the conservation, maintenance, and management of wildlife, resources thereof, and its habitat thereon.” (16 U.S. Code 664, Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act) • “Particular value in carrying out the national migratory bird management program.” (16 U.S. Code 667b, An Act Authorizing the Transfer of Certain Real Property for Wildlife) • “For the development, advancement, management, conservation, and protection of fish and wildlife resources.” (16 U.S. Code 742f [a] [4]) • “For the benefit of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in performing its activities and services. Such acceptance may be subject to the terms of any restrictive or affirmative covenant, or condition of servitude.” (16 U.S. Code 742f [b] [1], Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956)

2 • “Conservation, management, and ... restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats ... for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.” (16 U.S. Code 668dd [a] [2], National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act) • “To secure for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness … wilderness areas ... shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such manner as would leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of their wilderness character, and for the gathering and dissemination of information about their use and enjoyment as wilderness.” (16 U.S. Code 1131, Wilderness Act)

National Wildlife Refuge System Mission: The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System) is to administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management, and, where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.

The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 mandates the Secretary of the Interior in administering the Refuge System to (16 U.S. Code 668dd[a][4]): • provide for the conservation of fish, wildlife, and plants, and their habitats within the Refuge System; • ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the Refuge System are maintained for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans; • ensure that the mission of the Refuge System described at 16 U.S. Code 668dd(a)(2) and the purposes of each refuge are carried out; • ensure effective coordination, interaction, and cooperation with owners of land adjoining refuges and the fish and wildlife agency of the states in which the units of the Refuge System are located; • assist in the maintenance of adequate water quantity and water quality to fulfill the mission of the Refuge System and the purposes of each refuge; • recognize compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses as the priority public uses of the Refuge System through which the American public can develop an appreciation for fish and wildlife; • ensure that opportunities are provided within the Refuge System for compatible wildlife- dependent recreational uses; and • monitor the status and trends of fish, wildlife, and plants in each refuge.

3 Description of Use:

What is the use? The use is a limited mountain lion hunting program administered by Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks (MTFWP) in alignment to state Wildlife Management Areas, and in accordance with the refuge’s comprehensive conservation plan. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will work with MTFWP to provide the opportunity for limited hunting of mountain lion and provide opportunities not found on other public lands. Opportunities for implementing a mountain lion hunting program will be considered to encourage and facilitate young hunters and mobility- impaired hunters. This expanded wildlife-recreational use has the potential to attract new users and, therefore, provide opportunities that are appropriate and compatible with the purpose of the refuge and mission of the Refuge System while maintaining the remote and primitive experience unique to the refuge.

Where is the use conducted? The expanded hunting use will occur refuge-wide, except for administrative areas, closed areas (Slippery Ann Elk Viewing Area), and recreational areas, as shown by refuge area maps provided in the hunting plan, brochures, and other forms of communication (See Figures 1 and 2).

Figure 1. Areas Closed to Hunting on Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge, Close Extent. Slippery Ann Elk Viewing Area and Sand Creek Administrative Site.

4 Figure 2. Areas Closed to Hunting on Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge. Slippery Ann Elk Viewing Area and Sand Creek Administrative Site.

5 When is the use conducted? Mountain lion hunting will follow season dates detailed in MTFWP Archery Only and Fall Season regulations, which run concurrently with the traditional general deer and elk archery and firearms seasons (September through November).

How is the use conducted? The use is conducted according to state, federal, and refuge-specific regulations. Hunter permit application, selection, and registration procedures are conducted in coordination with MTFWP. Where appropriate, the refuge will try to align regulations with MTFWP.

For special hunting opportunities, the Service will assist with control and flexibility in limiting the number of hunters and access permits, the days of hunting, and the methods of take. The Service will follow procedures and schedules according to state-used programs and special hunting operations.

Charles M. Russell NWR publishes hunting and refuge-specific regulations annually at www.fws.gov/refuge/Charles_M_Russell/visit/rules_and_regulations.html, as well as in brochures provided at refuge offices and kiosks.

MTFWP also publishes hunting regulations annually at https://fwp.mt.gov/hunt.

Regulations pertaining to hunting on all national wildlife refuges are available in 50 Code of Federal Regulations 32.2 and can be found at www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/50/32.2.

Code of Federal Regulations Section 32.45 – Montana

(f) Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge - (3) Big game hunting. We allow hunting of big game on designated areas of the refuge subject to the following conditions: (i) We allow the use of portable blinds and stands. (ii) We limit each hunter to three stands or blinds. The hunter must have their automated licensing system (ALS) number visibly marked on the stand(s) or blind(s). (iii) You may install portable stands and blinds no sooner than August 1, and you must remove them by December 15 of each year (see Section 27.93 of this chapter).

Why is the use being proposed? The purpose of the use is to increase hunting and fishing opportunities on federal lands in accordance with Secretarial Orders 3347 and 3356.

This expanded use has the potential to attract new users and, therefore, provide opportunities that are appropriate and compatible with the purpose of the refuge and mission of the Refuge System while maintaining the remote and primitive experience unique to the refuge.

6

Mountain lion sightings, encounters with hunters, and poaching on the refuge have been frequent enough in recent years to suggest a well-established mountain lion population. The abundance of elk and deer, especially on the western half of the refuge, provides an adequate prey base to support mountain lions.

Availability of Resources: This added hunting opportunity will not require more time or monetary resources. Carrying out the mountain lion hunting plan can occur under current administrative conditions. The refuge’s annual hunting regulations are the only updates that need to occur. The regulations are contained in a pdf document that refuge staff update every year and post on the web site. Current law enforcement staffing levels are adequate for safety and management related to the expanded hunting use. Monitoring will rely heavily on state surveys and research information.

The refuge hunting regulation brochure is available to inform the public of hunting opportunities, refuge regulations, and safety precautions. Maps are also available, which show the location of roads, recreation areas, and those areas closed to hunting.

The current road system provides access for hunters onto the refuge for hunting. Most refuge roads become impassible with only a minimal amount of precipitation. During the hunting season, this may cause clustering of hunters in localized, accessible areas of the refuge.

Increased use of the Missouri River as an access point provides many with the opportunity for solitude and a primitive and unconfined hunting. This allows for access to resources that cannot be attained via the road system or easily on foot. Several wilderness units are only accessible on foot or via the Missouri River.

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: For a more in-depth evaluation of effects, refer to the draft environmental assessment associated with the refuge’s draft mountain lion hunting plan.

Temporary disturbance will exist to wildlife near the activity. Mountain lions will be harvested based upon quotas set for each hunting district by MTFWP. Closed areas will provide some sanctuary for game and nongame species, reduce conflicts between hunters and other visitors, and provide a safety zone around communities and administrative areas. The harvest of these species will be compensatory mortality, with minimal impact to the overall health of the populations.

Temporary negative effects on the habitat are expected due to the use of camping grounds, tree stands, and possible illegal off-road travel. To mitigate the possible impacts, the refuge has established camping areas that provide parking and vault toilets. The Service also enforces a pack- in, pack-out policy that encourages visitors to remove their trash.

The action meets the purpose and needs of the Service as described above, but with expanded wildlife-dependent recreation opportunities. There will be a limited number of mountain lions allowed to be hunted, as well as associated seasons to satisfy different hunting user groups. There are no foreseen long-term effects on sensitive non-target species, but periodic assessments may lead to necessary changes in public use activities.

7

Activities as part of the refuge’s draft mountain lion hunting plan may negligibly affect other hunting and recreational uses and refuge administration. Adherence and enforcement of state, federal, and refuge-specific regulations are intended to facilitate public safety, multiple-use interests, and wildlife-habitat conservation. With respect to indirect or cumulative effects, there are no anticipated adverse effects to area land use, Native American trust resources, cultural resources, environmental justice, listed threatened and endangered species, or other biological community resources.

Public Review and Comment: The Service is soliciting public review and comment of this draft compatibility determination through the posting of notices at the refuge and in local newspapers and the Federal Register as part of the draft mountain lion hunting plan and environmental assessment for the refuge.

Determination (check one below):

☐Use is not compatible.

☒Use is compatible with the following stipulations.

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: To ensure compatibility with the Refuge System and refuge goals and objectives, mountain lion hunting can only occur under the following conditions: • carrying out the expanded use as described in the draft Charles M. Russell and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuges Mountain Lion Hunting Plan, in accordance with applicable state, federal, and refuge-specific regulations • season is concurrent with the state’s traditional deer and elk hunting seasons (Archery Only and Fall Season) • hunting without dogs to reduce disturbance to other wildlife

Justification: In view of the above and with the stipulations described before, mountain lion hunting will not materially interfere with or detract from the Refuge System mission or purposes of the refuge. Hunting is a priority public use of the Refuge System and providing an expanded use to include a mountain lion hunting program contributes to achieving one of the refuge goals. Disturbance of wildlife will occur, but the effects are expected to be temporary and minimal. Mountain lion hunting is not expected to adversely affect the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the refuge or the Refuge System.

Public hunting is a historical wildlife-dependent use of the refuge and is designated as one of the priority public uses as specified in the Improvement Act. Infrastructure is already in place to support hunting programs, and current staffing levels and money are adequate. Special regulations are in place to reduce negative effects on the refuge and associated wildlife. Montana state law further controls hunter activities. Hunting is a legitimate wildlife management tool that can be used to control wildlife populations. Hunting harvests a small percentage of the renewable resources, which is in accordance with wildlife management objectives and principals.

8

Signatures:

Paul Santavy, Project Leader Date

Review:

Lisa Talcott, Refuge Supervisor Date

Approval:

Stacy Armitage Date Assistant Regional Director, NWRS

Mandatory 10- or 15-Year Re-Evaluation Date 2036

9