DOCSLIB.ORG

CHARLES M. RUSSELL NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE 2001 Annual

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CHARLES M. RUSSELL NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE 2001 Annual CHARLES M. RUSSELL NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE & Hailstone, Halfbreed, Lake Mason and War Horse National Wildlife Refuges and the CMR Wetland Management District 2001 Annual Narrative Report U.S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM 8 ^ i—i sr1 co^ M CO Tl M w n W ' o M REVIEW AND APPROVALS CHARLES M. RUSSELL NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE Lewistown, Montana ANNUAL NARRATIVE REPORT Calendar Year 2001 \ > A. HIGHLIGHTS 5 B. CLIMATIC CONDITIONS 7 C. LAND ACQUISITION 10 1. Fee Title 10 D. PLANNING 10 1. Master Plan 10 2. Management Plans 10 4. Compliance with Environmental and Cultural Resource Mandates 11 5. Research and Investigations 11 E. ADMINISTRATION 13 1. Personnel 13 4. Volunteer Programs 16 5. Funding 16 Total 16 6. Safety 16 7. Technical Assistance 17 8. Other 18 F. HABITAT MANAGEMENT 18 2. Wetlands 18 5. Grasslands 18 7. Grazing 20 8. Haying 22 9. Fire Management 22 10. Pest Control 23 11. Water Rights 26 12. Wilderness and Special Areas 26 G. WILDLIFE 26 2. Endangered and/or Threatened Species 26 3. Waterfowl 35 4. Marsh and Water Birds 35 5. Shorebirds, Gulls, Terns, and Allied Species 35 6. Raptors 36 7. Other Migratory Birds 36 8. Game Animals 36 10. Other Resident Wildlife 43 11. Fisheries Resources 44 12. Wildlife Propagation and Stocking 45 13. Surplus Animal Disposal 49 14. Scientific Collections • 49 15. Animal Control 50 17. Disease Prevention and Control 50 H. PUBLIC USE • 50 1. General 50 2. Outdoor Classrooms - Students 51 5. Interpretive Tour Route 52 > 3 6. Interpretive Exhibits/Demonstrations - 52 7. Other Interpretive Programs 53 8. Hunting 54 11. Wildlife Observations 70 12. Other Wildlife Oriented Recreation 71 15. Off-Road Vehicles 71 17. Law Enforcement • 71 19. Concessions (Outfitters) 72 I. EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES 72 1. New Construction 72 2. Rehabilitation 73 3. Major Maintenance 74 4. Equipment Utilization and Replacement 75 5. Communication Systems 76 6. Computer Systems 76 8. Other 77 J. OTHER 77 4. Credits 77 K. FEEDBACK 77 4 A. HIGHLIGHTS Wildbom black-footed ferret on the North Hawley prairie dog colony, UL Bend NWR (Matchett) The UL Bend black-footed ferret population crashed. The spring 2001 black-footed ferret spotlight survey located 27 animals, 8 males, 18 females and 1 unknown. At that time, we thought we were on-track for continued success with wildbom kit production and were expecting over 40 kits for the third year in a row. Spotlighting for wildbom kits began in July. After exhaustive searches through September, only 8 females with 18 kits could be located. By mid- November the population totaled 15 ferrets. The causes for this decline are unknown. Reduced prairie dog numbers, likely because of a severe and continuing drought for the last 3-4 years, may have contributed. Although it hasn't gone epizootic in prairie dogs, sylvatic plague is extremely lethal to ferrets and may also have played a role. Spring 2001 was our second attempt to breed ferrets in the field pens built at Bowdoin NWR. Disappointingly, no kits were produced despite all efforts to produce kits from 9 females. For the fourth year, CMR closed the mule deer hunting season 2 weeks early (except in HD 700 and the permit-only area of HD 652) from the traditional 5-week rifle season permitted by Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP). There has been a great deal of hunter support for this management approach and field reports indicate more deer and larger bucks. A systematic aerial mule deer survey was conducted in 2000 over about 25% of the Refuge. That survey was repeated in 2001 and indicate our objective of a minimum of 20 mature mule deer bucks/100 does post-season was nearly met on the western half of CMR, but Valley, McCone and Garfield Counties remained below the objective. 5 The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation was instrumental in purchasing 4283 acres of in-holdings on the Refuge. The Wildlife Tour Route was resurfaced for a cost of $700,000. Ground breaking for the Interagency Interpretive Center at Fort Peck occurred. The multi million dollar facility is expected to be a great asset to the area. CMR will have will have a full time Information Officer at the facility when completed. 6 B. CLIMATIC CONDITIONS Sunset over CMR The first five months of 2001 started out as the driest recorded since 1931. Luckily, the unpredictable Montana weather changed for the better in June bringing the fifth straight year for above average precipitation for the Fort Peck Unit of the Refuge. Both Sand Creek and Jordan Units continue in a drought. Most of the precipitation fell as rain in the months of June and July. The snowfall total was 14.3 inches, only half of the yearly normal, and the least amount since 1992. Total precipitation at the Fort Peck Unit was 12.70 inches, 9.96 inches at the Sand Creek Unit, and 11.45 inches at the Jordan Unit. January was warmer and drier than normal with less wind. The most significant snowfall occurred Jan. 13-16. Total snowfall for the month was 3.3 inches with measurable amounts on the ground the whole month. Total precipitation for the month was .18 inches. The high temperature was 47 degrees and the low was -6 degrees. Temperatures for the month were almost 10 degrees warmer than normal. February continued the "drier than normal" trend. Temperatures were almost 10 degrees colder than normal. The highest temperature was 41 degrees with the low -21 degrees. Temperatures below zero were recorded on 16 days. February 25 brought 3.3 inches of snow and measurable snow remained on the ground the entire month. Total precipitation for the month was .14 inches. > 7 Dry weather continued in March with only .06 inch of precipitation. It was the fourth driest March recorded at the Glasgow weather station. March snowfall was 1.3 inches. This was the lowest snowfall since 1994. The maximum temperature for March set a new record on the 19th of 67 degrees. The low temperature was 7 degrees. Snow cover ended on March 12. This ended a 127 day period of continuous snow cover going back to Nov. 5, 2000. April precipitation totals continued the "drier than normal" trend. Total precipitation for the month was .57 inches. Warmer than normal temperatures continued with a new record high on both the 27th and 28th of 87 degrees. The low temperature was 13 degrees. A total of 1.1 inches of snow fell during the month. May was the windiest May ever recorded with 22 days of wind over 30 mph and 11 days over 40 mph. The dry trend continued for the fifth month in a row. Much needed rain fell on May 29. Total precipitation for the month was .77 inches. The month was warmer than normal with a high temperature of 92 degrees, but also produced a new record low of 28 degrees on May 21. June ended the 5-month dry trend. It was much wetter than normal, the wettest since 1963 and the seventh wettest June on record. During the first half of the month, 4.6 inches of rain fell with 2.13 inches on the 3rd and 4th, and 1.52 inches from June 12-14. Only .29 inch of rain fell in the second half of the month. It was the fourth year in a row that June was wetter and cooler than the normal. It was the second windiest on record. Total precipitation was 4.89 inches. The high temperature was 90 degrees and the low was 42 degrees. July was also much wetter than normal. It was the second wettest on record at the Glasgow weather station, surpassed only by the 5.93 inches of precipitation recorded in 1993. Total precipitation was 5.29 inches. The total June and July precipitation of 10.18 inches was the second wettest on record. Temperatures were close to normal with humidity higher than normal causing frequent thunderstorms. The high temperature for the month was 98 degrees and the low was 53 degrees. August ended the wet weather and became the driest August recorded at the Glasgow weather station. Precipitation for the month was a trace. Temperatures were warmer than normal with the high temperature at 98 degrees and the low at 53 degrees. It was the eighth straight August warmer than normal with 11 of the last 12 Augusts being hotter than July. September was warmer and drier than normal. Thirty-five days in a row without measurable precipitation ended on September 5. This was the longest dry period for these months recorded since 1973. The total precipitation for the month was .40 inch. The high temperature for the month was 93 degrees, with the low being 41 degrees. This was the first September where the low never dipped below 40 degrees. 8 The following table lists weather data for the three CMR field stations: Temperature F Inches Annual Year High Low Precipitation 2001 104 -16 9.96 2000 1999 103 -12 12.99 1998 103 -27 15.09 1997 -35 10.14 Sand 1996 104 -38 12.49 Creek 1995 105 -21 14.57 1994 103 -44 11.06 1993 94 -23 19.20 Temperature F Inches Annual Year High Low Precipitation 2001 2000 1999 105 -20 13.21 1998 101 -40 14.72 1997 104 -32 9.64 Jordan 1996 104 -40 15.45 1995 109 -23 9.53 1994 100 -37 11.65 1993 96 -30 21.04 Temperature F Inches Annual Year Hish Precipitation 2001 98 -21 12.70 2000 102 -24 14.21 1999 100 -14 14.28 1998 101 -32 14.82 1997 100 -28 15.61 1996 101 -34 10.00 1995 110 -14 11.19 1994 99 -29 9.30 1993 96 -25 19.31 The year began with the Fort Peck Reservoir at 2226.0 MSL.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Private Land/Public Wildlife Advisory Council
    Private Land/Public Wildlife Advisory Council Report and Recommendations Presented to Governor Steve Bullock and the 63rd Legislature January 2013 Council Members (2011-2012) In December, 2011, Governor Brian Schweitzer appointed 7 Council members to terms ending June 30, 2013: Kathy Hadley, Council Chairwoman 1016 East Side Road Deer Lodge, MT 59722; Joe Cohenour 2610 Colt East Helena, MT 59635 Jack Billingsley PO Box 768 Glasgow, MT 59230 Chris King PO Box 187 Winnett, MT 59087 Mike Penfold 3552 Prestwick, Billings, MT 5910 Alex Nixon PO Box 72 Roberts, MT 59070 Bob Ream, FWP Commissioner 521 Clark Street Helena, MT 59601 NOTE: During this period, the size of the Council was reduced from 15 members to 7 members, with no legislators appointed to serve on the Council during this cycle. 2 CONTENTS Page # Council Charge & Activities ……………………………………….. 4-5 Hunting Access Enhancement Program Report ……………………7-26 o Block Management Program Report………………………(11-21) o Access Public Lands Program Report………………………(23-24) o Special Access Projects Report……………………………..(25-26) Fishing Access Enhancement Program Report …………………….27-31 APPENDIX I (Hunter-Landowner Stewardship Project Survey Report…………33-38 3 COUNCIL CHARGE/PURPOSE In 1995, a review committee (Private Land/Public Wildlife Council) was established in statute to make recommendations to the Governor regarding issues related to private land and public wildlife. The Council’s statutory charge is articulated in Montana Code Annotated (MCA) 87-1- 269 as follows: “Report Required - review committee. (1) The governor shall appoint a committee of persons interested in issues related to hunters, anglers, landowners, and outfitters, including but not limited to the hunting access enhancement program, the fishing access enhancement program, landowner-hunter relations, outfitting industry issues, and other issues related to private lands and public wildlife.
    [Show full text]
  • Montana Bighorn Sheep Conservation Strategy
    Montana Bighorn Sheep Conservation Strategy January 2010 Wildlife Division • Helena, MT 59624 406.444.2612 Montana Bighorn Sheep Conservation Strategy 2010 Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks Wildlife Division 1420 East Sixth Avenue Helena, Montana 59620 For more information, visit: fwp.mt.gov Copyright ©2010, by State of Montana. All rights reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables ........................................................................................................ vi List of Figures ..................................................................................................... vii Contributors ...................................................................................................... viii Acknowledgments .................................................................................................1 Executive Summary ...............................................................................................2 Mission of FWP ...............................................................................................4 Statewide Objectives ........................................................................................4 Process for Changing Population Objectives and Regulation Packages .............5 Initial Public Participation ................................................................................5 Chapter 1: Background Information for Bighorn Sheep Conservation Strategy .....8 Wild Sheep in North America ...............................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting Abstracts
    MONTANA CHAPTER OF THE WILDLIFE SOCIETY 53ND ANNUAL MEETING, 2016 Wildlife Restoration Celebrating Conservation Success and Facing Future Challenges February 23-26, 2016 Missoula, Montana Mark Ruby, President 2016-17 Montana Chapter of The Wildlife Society Introduction This year's theme was Wildlife Restoration: Celebrating Conservation Success and Facing Future Challenges. The subject is one of the most challenging aspects of wildlife management. The focus is intentionally broad, as the success of conservation and management of our wildlife species is dependent on the synergy of many political, ecological, biological and social components that play a role in species conservation. There are many future challenges facing Montana’s wildlife species such as a growing human population or a changing climate. To help build future solutions, we can keep an eye on past successes. We should do this not only to draw important lessons on science, management or policy from our peers or predecessors, but also to remind ourselves how much the future can benefit from the hard work of those that came before us. The perspective from the past is an important one. We get to celebrate the conservation success of the agency biologists, university researchers and leaders that worked together to incorporate sound scientific management of wildlife to restore Montana’s game populations in the early 1900s. Today we have a healthy population of wolves, compared to 30 years ago when managers questioned their presence at all. As we look to future challenges, our annual conference is a great forum to share experiences, collaborate and better define and learn how and where we can manage Montana’s wildlife for future generations.
    [Show full text]
  • Valley County Long Range Plan 2020
    2020 Valley County Long Range Plan MONTANA NRCS GLASGOW FIELD OFFICE CUMBER, TRACY - NRCS, GLASGOW, MT In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD- 3027, found online at How to File a Program Discrimination Complaint and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: 1 Contents SECTION I INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Investigations of Glacial Lake Musselshell
    EXTENT AND TIMING OF LAURENTIDE GLACIAL LAKE MUSSELSHELL, CENTRAL MONTANA by Nicole Kristina Davis A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Earth Sciences MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY Bozeman, Montana July 2004 © COPYRIGHT by Nicole Kristina Davis 2004 All Rights Reserved ii APPROVAL of a thesis submitted by Nicole Kristina Davis This thesis has been read by each member of the thesis committee and has been found to be satisfactory regarding content, English usage, format, citations, bibliographic style, and consistency, and is ready for submission to the College of Graduate Studies. Dr. William W. Locke Approved for the Department of Earth Sciences Dr. David R. Lageson Approved for the College of Graduate Studies Dr. Bruce McLeod iii STATEMENT OF PERMISSION TO USE In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a master’s degree at Montana State University, I agree that the Library shall make it available to borrowers under rules of the Library. If I have indicated my intention to copyright this thesis by including a copyright notice page, copying is allowable only for scholarly purposes, consistent with “fair use” as prescribed in the U.S. Copyright Law. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this thesis in whole or in parts may be granted only by the copyright holder. Nicole K. Davis July 15, 2004 iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis would not have been possible without the support, advice and patience of a great number of people. Roger Colton, Dave Fullerton, and Bill Johnson from the US Geological Survey were especially helpful and provided materials and information that were central to the project.
    [Show full text]
  • Private Land/Public Wildlife Advisory Council
    Private Land/Public Wildlife Advisory Council Report and Recommendations Presented to Governor Brian Schweitzer and the 62nd Legislature January 2011 Private Land/Public Wildlife Council – Member List – (2009 - 2011) Land Tawney, Chair Jack Rich 720 Strand Ave PO Box 495 Missoula, MT 59801 Seeley Lake, MT 59868 Joe Cohenour Mike Penfold 2610 Colt 3552 Prestwick East Helena, MT 596335 Billings, MT 59101 Jack Billingsley Wagner Harmon PO Box 768 6368 DH 1 Drive Glasgow, MT 59230 Bainville, MT 59212 Chris King Representative Jeff Welborn PO Box 187 245 Clarks Lookout Road Winnett, MT 59087 Dillon, MT 59725 Rick Miller Senator Steve Gallus 420 Alder Court 2319 Harvard Ave Colstrip, MT 59323 Butte, MT 59701 Kathy Hadley FWP Commissioner Ron Moody 1016 East Side Road 109 Bach Ave Deer Lodge, MT 59722 Lewistown, MT 59047 Brett Todd Lindsay Giem Siedensticker 664 HWY 10 East 1923 MT HWY 41 S Big Timber, MT 59011 Twin Bridges, MT 59457 Dick Iversen Box 522 Culbertson, MT 59218 2 CONTENTS Page # • List of Council Members – (2009 - 2011)…………………………… 1 • Council Charge & Activities ……………………………………….. 4-5 • Hunting Access Enhancement Program Report ……………………7-24 o Block Management Program Report………………………(11-21) o Access Public Lands Program Report………………………(23-24) o Special Access Projects Report……………………………..(25-26) • Fishing Access Enhancement Program Report …………………….27-30 • Draft Council Recommendation (NOT ADOPTED)..addendum #1…..31 • I-161 & Related Information…………………………addendum #2…..37 3 COUNCIL CHARGE/PURPOSE In 1995, a review committee (Private Land/Public Wildlife Council) was established in statute to make recommendations to the Governor regarding issues related to private land and public wildlife.
    [Show full text]
  • Phillips County Long Range Plan 2019
    1 Contents SECTION I: INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 4 VISION: .......................................................................................................................................................... 4 MISSION: ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 PURPOSE: ...................................................................................................................................................... 4 Active NRCS Partners In Natural Resources: ................................................................................................. 4 High Potential To Become An Active NRCS Partners In Natural Resources: ................................................. 5 SECTION II: NATURAL RESOURCE INVENTORY ............................................................................................. 6 GENERAL INFORMATION .............................................................................................................................. 6 PEOPLE .......................................................................................................................................................... 6 CLIMATE ........................................................................................................................................................ 7 AGRICULTURE ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Oil and Gas Prospects of Central and Eastern Montana
    UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA BULLETIN BUREAU OF MINES AND METALLURGY SERIES NO. 4 GEOLOGY AND OIL AND GAS PROSPECTS OF CENTRAL AND EASTERN MONTANA BY C. H. CLAPP ARTHUR BEVAN G. S. LAMBERT STATE SCHOOL OF MINES BUTTE, MONTANA June, 1921 UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA BULLETIN BUREAU OF MINES AND METALLURGY SERIES NO. 4 GEOLOGY AND OIL AND GAS PROSPECTS OF CENTRAL AND EASTERN MONTANA BY___ C. H. CLAPP ARTHUR BEVAN G. S. LAMBERT STATE SCHOOL OF MINES BUTTE, MONTANA June, 1921 STATE BUREAU OF MINES AND METALLURGY CLAPP, CHARLES H. Director and Geologist PhD., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1919 ADAMI, ARTHUR E. Mining Engineer E. M. Montana State School of Mines, 1907 LAMBERT, GERALD S. Assistant Geologist B. S. School of Mines and Engineering, Univ. of Utah, 1919 BEVAN, ARTHUR C. Assistant Geologist B. S. Ohio Wesleyan University, 1912. PUBLICATIONS No. 1. The Montana State Bureau of Mines and Metallurgy (an ex- planation of its purpose and operation). No. 2. Directory of Montana Metal and Coal Mines. No. 3. Mechanical Ore Sampling in Montana (by H. B. Pulsifer). No. 4. Geology and Oil and Gas Prospects of Central and Eastern Montana (with a geologic map).. (By C. H. Clapp, Arthur Bevan and G. S. Lambert.) CONTENTS. PART I. By C. H. CLAPP. Page. Introduction 8 Region and field work Authorship and acknowledgments 9 Bibliography 10 Surface features 16 General geology . 18 PART II. Stratigraphy- Cretaceous and Tertiary(?) continental formations. By C. H Clapp 25 Fort Union formation 26 Lance formation 29 Mesozoic and- Paleozoic systems. By Arthur Bevan— The Mesozoic 34 Cretaceous system • 36 Montana group 37 Bearpaw shale 38 Judith River formation 41 Claggett formation 46 Eagle and Virgelle sandstones 49 Two Medicine formation 52 Livingston formation 33 Colorado formation' 54 Comanchean system 57 Kootenai formation 57 Morrison formation 60 Jurassic system 62 Ellis formation 62 Triassie system 65 Chugwater formation 65 Correlation of the Mesozoic 65 Page.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendixes, Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan And
    Glossary accessible: Pertaining to physical access to areas baseline: A set of critical observations, data, or infor- and activities for people of different abilities, mation used for comparison or a control. especially those with physical impairments. BCR: Bird conservation region. active management: The direct manipulation of hab- biological control: The use of organisms or viruses to itats or wildlife populations to achieve specific control invasive plants or other pests. objectives. Actions could include planting food biological diversity, also biodiversity: The variety of plots, managing water levels, prescribed grazing life and its processes including the variety of liv- or fire, or wildlife relocations. ing organisms, the genetic differences among adaptive resource management: The rigorous appli- them, and the communities and ecosystems in cation of management, research, and monitoring which they occur (The Fish and Wildlife Service to gain information and experience necessary to Manual, 052 FW 1.12B). The National Wildlife assess and change management activities; a pro- Refuge System’s focus is on indigenous species, cess that uses feedback from research, monitor- biotic communities, and ecological processes. ing, and evaluation of management actions to biological integrity: Biotic composition, structure, support or change objectives and strategies at and function at genetic, organism, and community all planning levels; a process in which policy deci- levels. sions are carried out within a framework of sci- biotic: Pertaining to life or living organisms; caused, entifically driven experiments to test predictions produced by, or comprising living organisms. and assumptions inherent in management plan. BLM: See Bureau of Land Management. Analysis of results helps managers determine Bureau of Land Management (BLM): A Federal agency whether current management should continue that was established in 1946 through consolida- as is or whether it should be modified to achieve tion of the General Land Office and U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Membership in the Montana Chapter of the Wildlife Society
    Montana Chapter of The Wildlife Society 54th Annual Conference Wildlife Restoration: Celebrating Conservation Success and Facing Future Challenges February 23rd – February 26th Missoula, Montana Holiday Inn Downtown 1 Table of Contents About The Wildlife Society and the Montana Chapter .................................................................................................... 3 2015 - 2016 MONTANA TWS CHAPTER OFFICERS ................................................................................................................... 4 2015 - 2016 MONTANA TWS COMMITTEE CHAIRS ................................................................................................................. 4 Greetings and Welcome to the 54th Annual Conference of the Montana Chapter of the Wildlife Society (MT TWS) ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................................................. 5 Conference Logo Artist ....................................................................................................................................................... 6 Nominees for Executive Board Officers 2016 ..................................................................................................................... 7 Presidential Candidate ...................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4, Affected Environment
    4 — Affected Environment This chapter describes the characteristics and re- dismissed from further consideration because there sources of the refuge and how existing or past man- would be no effects, or effects would be negligible or agement or influences have affected these resources. not detectable, as discussed below. It specifically addresses the physical environment, biological environment, special land designations, MOOSE recreational opportunities, cultural and paleontolog- Moose have occasionally been observed on the ref- ical resources including a history of human use on uge, often young dispersing bulls from central Mon- the site, and the socioeconomic environment. Ser- tana mountain ranges or southern Canada. Although vice data and other information, both published and there are substantial willow communities in the Mis- unpublished, was used to quantify what is known souri River floodplain, the area is generally not con- about refuge resources. Additionally, other sources sidered suitable moose habitat. Nonetheless, in were used including data and information from other recent years moose appear to be expanding their agencies or other scientific studies. range in portions of eastern Montana and in many _____________________________________________________________________________ places in the North Dakota prairies, and could poten- tially extend their range onto the refuge, but cur- 4.1 Topics Not rently they are not a common species on the refuge. Analyzed Further BLACK BEAR The affected environment describes those portions A few black bear sightings have been reported on of the natural and human environment that could be the refuge over the years, but none have become affected by implementing any of the management established residents and the Missouri River Breaks alternatives.
    [Show full text]
  • Hunter Access and Elk in the Missouri Breaks
    Fall Elk Distribution in the Missouri River Breaks Authors: Scott Thompson, Drew Henry, Mark Sullivan, Kelly Proffitt and Justin Gude February 2016 1 Summary Increasing harvest of adult female elk is the primary management tool for curtailing elk population growth and reducing elk populations. However, this tool is not effective when elk are located on private properties that restrict hunter access to elk during the hunting season. The purpose of this project was to evaluate the effects of hunter access and other landscape factors on elk distribution during the archery and rifle hunting seasons in the Missouri River Breaks Elk Management Unit (EMU). We GPS collared and collected location information from 45 adult female elk for 2 years in 2 adjacent populations within this EMU: the Missouri River Breaks (MRB) population in hunting district (HD) 621 and the Larb Hills population in HD 622/631. We categorized hunter access into 3 categories: freely accessible to hunters, restricted hunter access, and no hunter access. To quantify the effects of hunter access and other factors on elk selection of home ranges and elk selection of locations within their home range, we conducted a resource selection modeling exercise. In our resource selection models, we first treated the individual elk-year as the sampling unit to estimate individual-level selection coefficients and second, we pooled data from all individuals to estimate population-level selection coefficients. The MRB archery and rifle season elk population ranges were 97% accessible to hunters. A total of 2% of the ranges allowed no public hunter access and 1% restricted hunter access.
    [Show full text]