DOCSLIB.ORG

Stream Ecological Integrity at Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument Rocky Mountain Inventory & Monitoring Network 2007-2010 Stream Monitoring Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Stream Ecological Integrity at Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument Rocky Mountain Inventory & Monitoring Network 2007-2010 Stream Monitoring Report National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Stream Ecological Integrity at Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument Rocky Mountain Inventory & Monitoring Network 2007-2010 Stream Monitoring Report Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/ROMN/NRTR—2014/882 ON THIS PAGE The Little Bighorn River, LIBI in May 2009 Photograph by: B. Schweiger, ROMN ON THE COVER Melena Stichman (NPS, LIBI) and Rosie Fewings (NPS, ROMN) collect water samples while Alex Cahlander-Mooers (NPS, ROMN) measures stream flow in the Little Bighorn River, LIBI during a August 2009 sample event Photograph by: B. Schweiger, ROMN Stream Ecological Integrity at Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument Rocky Mountain Inventory & Monitoring Network 2007-2010 Stream Monitoring Report Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/ROMN/NRTR—2014/882 Authors E. William Schweiger,1 Laura O’Gan,1 Donna Shorrock,1 and Mike Britten1 With contributions from: Phil Kaufmann,2 Jason Smith,3 Eric Mason,3 Isabel Ashton,4 Laura Atkinson,1 and Kristin Long1 1Rocky Mountain Network National Park Service Fort Collins, Colorado 2Office of Research and Development Western Ecology Division U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Corvallis, Oregon 3Grant-Kohrs Ranch National Historic Site National Park Service Deer Lodge, Montana 4Rocky Mountain National Park National Park Service Estes Park, Colorado Editor Nina Chambers Northern Rockies Conservation Cooperative Jackson, Wyoming June 2014 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Technical Report Series is used to disseminate results of scientific studies in the physical, biological, and social sciences for both the advancement of science and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series provides contributors with a forum for displaying comprehensive data that are often deleted from journals because of page limitations contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management applicability. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received formal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data, and whose background and expertise put them on par technically and scientifically with the authors of the information. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. This report is available from theRocky Mountain Network website (http://www.nature.nps. gov/im/units/romn), and the Natural Resource Publications Management Web site (http:// www.nature.nps.gov/publications/nrpm/) on the Internet. To receive this report in a format optimized for screen readers, please email [email protected]. Please cite this publication as: Schweiger, E. W., L. O’Gan, D. Shorrock, and M. Britten. 2014. Stream ecological integrity at Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument: Rocky Mountain Inventory & Monitoring Network 2007-2010 stream monitoring report. Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/ ROMN/NRTR—2014/882. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. NPS 381/124877, June 2014 ii Stream Ecological Integrity at Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument Contents Page Figures vii Tables ix Appendices xi Executive Summary . xiii LIBI SEI Summary Condition Table xv Acknowledgements xix Introduction . 1 The National Park Service Inventory and Monitoring Program 1 Purpose of Report 1 Stream Ecological Integrity: Synthetic Index to General Condition 2 The Stream Resource at Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument 3 Why Monitor the Little Bighorn River? 6 Current Importance of the Little Bighorn to LIBI and the Hardin Area 6 Historical Role of the Little Bighorn River 6 Ecological Monitoring Considerations 6 Regulatory Considerations 7 Interpreting ROMN Stream Ecological Integrity Monitoring Data 8 Legal/Regulatory Status of the Little Bighorn River at LIBI 8 Climate Change 9 Aquatic and Riparian Invasive Species 9 Monitoring Objectives 10 Methods . 13 Sample Design 13 Sample Events 13 Field Data 14 Site Layout 15 Auxiliary Data 15 Water Physiochemistry and Streamflow 15 Biological 17 Habitat 17 Analyses . 19 Status 19 Water and Sediment Physiochemistry 19 Physical Habitat 20 Contents iii Contents (continued) Page Habitat Metrics 20 Hydrology: Stream Flow 20 Biology 21 Trend 21 Water Physiochemistry 22 Assessment: Reference Condition, Assessment Points, and Interpretation 22 Reference Condition 23 Assessment Points 24 ROMN Assessment Process at LIBI 26 Summary 29 Quality Assurance and Quality Control 29 Signal to Noise Ratio 30 Results and Discussion . 31 Sample Sites and Events 31 Water and Sediment Physiochemistry 31 Summary 31 Measures, Criteria, and Assessment Points 32 Quality Assurance and Quality Control 35 In Situ Parameters 35 Major Constituents 36 Nutrients 37 Metals in Water 38 Metals in Sediment 38 Special Case: Water Temperature 39 Select Trends in Water Physiochemistry 42 Physical Habitat 44 Summary 44 Habitat Metrics and Assessment Points 45 Quality Assurance and Quality Control 48 Habitat Volume 48 Habitat Complexity 49 Cover for River Biota 50 Substrate 51 Relative Bed Stability 54 iv Stream Ecological Integrity at Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument Contents (continued) Page Floodplain Interaction 55 Hydrologic Regime (Habitat-Based) 56 Riparian Vegetation Cover 57 Human Disturbance 58 Hydrology: Stream Flow 62 Biology 64 Summary 64 Biological Metrics and Assessment Points 65 Quality Assurance and Quality Control 65 Macroinvertebrates 65 Periphyton (Diatoms) 70 Aquatic Invasive Species 74 Confidence 77 Summary and Conclusions . .77 Water Physiochemistry 78 Habitat 78 Biology 78 Management Implications of SEI Results 79 Understanding Climate Change 79 Future Work 80 Literature Cited . .81 Contents v Figures Page Figure 1. Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument in relation to other parks in the ROMN 2 Figure 2. Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument showing the SEI sample site locations The green squares show each transect location sampled during a full sample event and the red star gives the location of sentinel sample events Inset shows the Little Bighorn River watershed including the USGS stream gauge (blue triangle) about 22 km river miles north of the Monument 4 Figure 3. Oblique view (looking North) of the Little Bighorn River at Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument (only the Custer Battlefield unit is shown in in the larger image) Background imagery is early fall 2010 (courtesy Google Earth) The small town of Crow Agency, MT is shown in the background of the larger image The green squares show each transect location sampled during a full sample event and the red star gives the location of where sentinel sample events occur The inset map shows the USGS gauge near Hardin and both units of the Monument Stream flow is from the foreground of the image 5 Figure 4. The Little Bighorn River in the Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument during the fall of 2007 The top of the SEI sample reach begins on the left side of this image and extends around the large bend for 1 2 kilometers Stream flow is from the left side of the image 5 Figure 5. Map of the battle of the Little Bighorn in the Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument showing the importance of the river in the battle dynamics Map courtesy of the Roberston (2011) 7 Figure 6. ROMN SEI non-wadeable sample reach in oblique profile Stream flow is from the top to bottom of the figure Sub-sample locations, riparian plot, and thalweg profile are all shown Inset picture shows select details for shoreline sampling 16 Figure 7. MT DEQ, EPA, and STAR monitoring sites in the Northwestern Great Plains ecoregion within Montana as used in comparison to select ROMN SEI results for LIBI Sites are classified as reference, degraded or unknown (by the programs responsible for each site) with green showing reference sites, red degraded sites, and orange unknown (“test”) sites Inset shows all sites across the state with symbology based on the source program of each site Note that additional sites in the ecoregion but outside of Montana are not shown here were used for select habitat and chemistry parameters 18 Figure 8. Mean daily stream temperature in 2009-2010 (green dots) for the SEI logger at the LIBI site Red dots indicate instantaneous temperature at the USGS station in Hardin Discharge in cubic feet per second (light blue line) at the USGS station near Hardin is shown for context Note that given the available data the time interval shown (not a true water year) on this figure differs those on Figure 9 40 Figure 9. Stream temperature
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Teacher’S Guide Teacher’S Guide Little Bighorn National Monument
    LITTLE BIGHORN NATIONAL MONUMENT TEACHER’S GUIDE TEACHER’S GUIDE LITTLE BIGHORN NATIONAL MONUMENT INTRODUCTION The purpose of this Teacher’s Guide is to provide teachers grades K-12 information and activities concerning Plains Indian Life-ways, the events surrounding the Battle of the Little Bighorn, the Personalities involved and the Impact of the Battle. The information provided can be modified to fit most ages. Unit One: PERSONALITIES Unit Two: PLAINS INDIAN LIFE-WAYS Unit Three: CLASH OF CULTURES Unit Four: THE CAMPAIGN OF 1876 Unit Five: BATTLE OF THE LITTLE BIGHORN Unit Six: IMPACT OF THE BATTLE In 1879 the land where The Battle of the Little Bighorn occurred was designated Custer Battlefield National Cemetery in order to protect the bodies of the men buried on the field of battle. With this designation, the land fell under the control of the United States War Department. It would remain under their control until 1940, when the land was turned over to the National Park Service. Custer Battlefield National Monument was established by Congress in 1946. The name was changed to Little Bighorn National Monument in 1991. This area was once the homeland of the Crow Indians who by the 1870s had been displaced by the Lakota and Cheyenne. The park consists of 765 acres on the east boundary of the Little Bighorn River: the larger north- ern section is known as Custer Battlefield, the smaller Reno-Benteen Battlefield is located on the bluffs over-looking the river five miles to the south. The park lies within the Crow Indian Reservation in southeastern Montana, one mile east of I-90.
    [Show full text]
  • Battle of the Greasy Grass
    The Military Campaign of 1876 After the discovery of gold in the Black Hills following Custer’s 1875 Expedition, the US tried to buy the land from the Sioux, but they would not sell their sacred Paha Sapa. The government issued a decree requiring all non-reservation Indians to report to the agencies by Jan. 1, 1876. Because of this decree, in November of 1875, . Hunkpapa Lakota Headman and Holy Man SITTING BULL sent out a call to gather together all of the Sioux, Cheyenne, and Arapaho at the Chalk Buttes at the end of the Moon When Geese Return to discuss what to do about the incursion of whites into the land granted them in the United States treaties. Sun Dance Sitting Bull decides to hold a Sun Dance to gather the leaders to decide what to do about the white invaders and unite the people in the sacred ceremony. Sitting Bull sacrifices 100 pieces of flesh and has a vision of Long Knives Falling from the Sky. General George Crook, General Alfred Terry, and Colonel John Gibbon Led the Campaign to move all Indians to reservations, defeating those who resisted. Battle of the Rosebud Or, Battle Where the Woman Saved Her Brother On June 17, 1876, Sioux and Cheyenne forces led by Crazy Horse spotted General Crook, his 1,050 soldiers, and 260 Crow and Shoshone scouts, defeating them and eliminating them from the campaign. Three Army Expeditions General Crook would be coming from the south from Fort Fetterman in Wyoming Territory Col Gibbon would arrive from the west from Fort Ellis in Montana Territory General Terry would travel from the east from Fort Abraham Lincoln in Dakota Territory.
    [Show full text]
  • OUT HERE, WE HAVE a STORY to TELL. This Map Will Lead You on a Historic Journey Following the Movements of Lt
    OUT HERE, WE HAVE A STORY TO TELL. This map will lead you on a historic journey following the movements of Lt. Col. Custer and the 7th Calvary during the days, weeks and months leading up to, and immediately following, the renowned Battle of Little Bighorn were filled with skirmishes, political maneuvering and emotional intensity – for both sides. Despite their resounding victory, the Plains Indians’ way of life was drastically, immediately and forever changed. Glendive Stories of great heroism and reticent defeat continue to reverberate through MAKOSHIKA STATE PARK 253 the generations. Yet the mystique remains today. We invite you to follow the Wibaux Trail to The Little Bighorn, to stand where the warriors and the soldiers stood, 94 to feel the prairie sun on your face and to hear their stories in the wind. 34 Miles to Theodore Terry Roosevelt Fallon National Park 87 12 Melstone Ingomar 94 PIROGUE Ismay ISLAND 12 12 Plevna Harlowton 1 Miles City Baker Roundup 12 89 12 59 191 Hysham 12 4 10 2 12 14 13 11 9 3 94 Rosebud Lavina Forsyth 15 332 447 16 R MEDICINE E ER 39 IV ROCKS IV R R 5 E NE U STATE PARK Broadview 87 STO 17 G OW Custer ON L T NORTH DAKOTA YE L 94 6 59 Ekalaka CUSTER GALLATIN NF 18 7 332 R E 191 IV LAKE Colstrip R MONTANA 19 Huntley R 89 Big Timber ELMO E D Billings W 447 O 90 384 8 P CUSTER Reed Point GALLATIN Bozeman Laurel PICTOGRAPH Little Bighorn Battlefield NATIONAL 90 CAVES Hardin 20 447 FOREST Columbus National Monument Ashland Crow 212 Olive Livingston 90 Lame Deer WA Agency RRIO SOUTH DAKOTA R TRA 212 IL 313 Busby
    [Show full text]
  • CUSTER BATTLEFIELD National Monument Montana (Now Little Bighorn Battlefield)
    CUSTER BATTLEFIELD National Monument Montana (now Little Bighorn Battlefield) by Robert M. Utley National Park Service Historical Handbook Series No. 1 Washington, D.C. 1969 Contents a. A CUSTER PROFILE b. CUSTER'S LAST STAND 1. Campaign of 1876 2. Indian Movements 3. Plan of Action 4. March to the Little Bighorn 5. Reno Attacks 6. The Annihilation of Custer 7. Reno Besieged 8. Rescue 9. Collapse of the Sioux 10. Custer Battlefield Today 11. Campaign Maps c. APPENDIXES I. Officers of the 7th Cavalry at the Battle of the Little Bighorn II. Low Dog's Account of the Battle III. Gall's Account of the Battle IV. A Participant's Account of Major Reno's Battle d. CUSTER'S LAST CAMPAIGN: A PHOTOGRAPHIC ESSAY e. THE ART AND THE ARTIST f. ADMINISTRATION For additional information, visit the Web site for Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument or view their Official National Park Handbook (#132): Historical Handbook Number One 1969 The publication of this handbook was made possible by a grant from the Custer Battlefield Historical and Museum Association, Inc. This publication is one of a series of handbooks describing the historical and archeological areas in the National Park System administered by the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Price lists of Park Service publications sold by the Government Printing Office may be obtained from the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D.C. 20402. The National Park System, of which Custer Battlefield National Monument is a unit, is dedicated to conserving the scenic, scientific, and historic heritage of the United States for the benefit and enjoyment of its people.
    [Show full text]
  • Teacher's Guide
    TEACHER’S GUIDE About The Mission Mission 3: “A Cheyenne Odyssey” The mission focuses on the transformation of Northern Cheyenne life on the Great Plains from 1866 to 1876. The game is divided into five parts, plus a prologue that offers historical background, and an epilogue that extends the story into the twenty-first century. Students playing the game assume the role of Little Fox, a twelve- year-old Northern Cheyenne boy. As the game opens, Little Fox is growing up with his band around the Powder River Basin (in present-day southeastern Montana and northeastern Wyoming). Little Fox’s daily life is determined by the needs and traditions of his family and community. His everyday life, however, is soon impacted by the encroachment of United States military expeditions, railroad builders, and white settlers. As Little Fox grows older, the Northern Cheyenne way of life changes dramatically, as the tribe adapts to the United States’ expansion into the West. When students are reading a traditional text, such as the chapter of a book or a magazine article, they are all are presented with the same information. However, as students play “A Cheyenne Odyssey,” their experiences may differ slightly based on the choices they make and their behavior as Little Fox. As students make their way through the mission, they receive “badges” signifying the characteristics, values, and skills of their particular version of “Little Fox.” In the Prologue, a tribal elder, speaking in the Northern Cheyenne language, shares some of the early history of the Cheyenne. The elder tells the Cheyenne creation story before describing that the Cheyenne did not always live on the Great Plains, but rather grew crops and lived in woodlands prior to coming west.
    [Show full text]
  • Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument Riparian Forest
    ! ! ! ! ! ! LITTLE BIGHORN BATTLEFIELD NATIONAL MONUMENT RIPARIAN FOREST DEMOGRAPHY:! ! HYDROCLIMATIC TREE-ESTABLISHMENT CONDITIONS AND A SEARCH FOR “WITNESS” TREES! ! ! ! ! ! Final Report to the National Park Service! Submitted 1 September 2012! Revised 23 October 2012! ! Permit No: LIBI-2011-SCI-0002! NPS Study No: LIBI-00016! NPS Agreement No: P11AG00089! Rocky Mountains CESU Agreement No: H1200-09-0004! ! ! By: 1Gregory T. Pederson*, 2Stephen T. Gray, 3Mark Lesser, and 1Leslie Allen! ! ! 1U.S. Geological Survey, Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center, 2327 University Way (Suite 2), Bozeman, MT, 59715 2U.S. Geological Survey, Alaska Climate Science Center, 4210 University Drive, Anchorage, AK 99508 3University of Wyoming, Department of Botany, Laramie, WY 82079 * To whom correspondence should be addressed: [email protected] (406) 994-7390 !"##!$%&"'()*+%&,##!$-"$.%/)##)+0)).%.$1)'*,2(3% ABSTRACT! A dendroecological analysis of riparian area cottonwoods (Populus deltoides) along the Little Bighorn River at the Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument (LIBI) in southeastern Montana was conducted to (1) describe the age structure of the gallery forests, targeting in particular trees that may have been alive during the battle in 1876; (2) identify potential hydroclimatic factors (e.g. floods, drought) that may have influenced establishment and development of the stands; and (3) indentify cottonwoods and other trees with potentially dateable fire scars. Of particular interest for this study was the sampling of a lone cottonwood at Medicine Tail Coulee since it may be the same tree documented on the 1876 Kill Eagle map demarcating the point where the Cheyenne drove Custer back. Although there were no riparian area trees definitively dated back to the year of the battle, uncertainty related to tree age at coring height suggests a good number of trees were probably seedlings or saplings.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality Condition of Perennial Streams and Rivers in the Bighorn and Yellowstone Basins
    1 Water Quality Condition of Perennial Streams and Rivers in the Bighorn and Yellowstone Basins Water Quality Condition of Perennial Streams and Rivers in the Bighorn and Yellowstone Basins Results of the 2010 Bighorn/Yellowstone Probabilistic Survey Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality – Water Quality Division Document #14-0586, July 2014 2 Water Quality Condition of Perennial Streams and Rivers in the Bighorn and Yellowstone Basins Water Quality Condition of Perennial Streams and Rivers in the Bighorn and Yellowstone Basins Results of the 2010 Bighorn/Yellowstone Probabilistic Survey By Eric G. Hargett and Jeremy R. ZumBerge Document #14-0586 July 2014 Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality Water Quality Division – Watershed Protection Program 122 W. 25th St., Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002 i Water Quality Condition of Perennial Streams and Rivers in the Bighorn and Yellowstone Basins Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................................ 3 PROBABILISTIC SURVEYS AND WYOMING’S INTEGRATED REPORT ..................................................................... 4 STUDY AREA ........................................................................................................................................................................ 5
    [Show full text]
  • Custer Battlefield
    Custer Battlefield Custer Battlefield National Monument, in south­ Reno, with orders from Custer to cross the river and attack, advanced down the Little Bighorn NATIONAL MONUMENT • MONTANA eastern Montana, memorializes one of the last armed efforts of the Northern Plains Indians to Valley and struck the upper end of the camp. resist the westward march of the white man's Outflanked by the defending warriors, he re­ civilization. Here on June 25-26, 1876, in the treated in disorder to the river and took up de­ valley of the Little Bighorn River, over 260 sol­ fensive positions on the bluffs beyond. Here he diers and attached personnel of the U.S. Army was soon joined by Benteen, who had hurried met defeat and death at the hands of several forward under written orders from Custer to thousand Sioux and Cheyenne warriors. Among "Come on; Big village, be quick, bring packs." the dead were Lt. Col. George A. Custer and Hearing heavy gunfire from the north, Reno and every member of his immediate command of Benteen assumed that Custer was engaged and about 225 men. Although the Indians won this set out to join him. An advance company under battle, they lost the war against the white man, Capt. Thomas B. Weir marched a mile or so who finally ended their independent, nomadic downstream to a high hill,from which the Custer way of life. battlefield was visible. By this time, however, the firing had stopped. When the rest of the command arrived on the hill it was attacked The conflict between the white man and Indian by a large force of Indians, and Reno ordered a had begun with the arrival of the first settlers withdrawal to the original position on the bluffs from Europe and continued relentlessly for overlooking the Little Bighorn.
    [Show full text]
  • Chief Gall and Chief John Grass: Cultural Mediators Or Sellouts?
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2001 Chief Gall and Chief John Grass: Cultural mediators or sellouts? James R. Frank The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Frank, James R., "Chief Gall and Chief John Grass: Cultural mediators or sellouts?" (2001). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 5378. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/5378 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Maureen and Mike MANSFIELD LIBRARY The University of Montana Permission is granted by the author to reproduce this material in its entirety, provided that this material is used for scholarly purposes and is properly cited in published works and reports. **Please check "Yes" or "No" and provide signature** Yes, I grant permission No, I do not grant permission Author’s Signature: ^ p (v\NgA Date: cS^OQ ( Any copying for commercial purposes or financial gain may be undertaken only with the author’s explicit consent. 8/98 Chief Gall and Chief John Grass: Cultural Mediators or Sellouts? by Janies R. Frank, Jr. B.Sc. North Dakota State University, 1995 presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts July 2001 Approved by: Dean, Graduate School 1 - 2 3 -o < Date UMI Number: EP40842 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
    [Show full text]
  • Crow MR&I Draft EA
    Municipal, Rural, and Industrial Water System Crow Reservation, Montana Draft Environmental Assessment June 2016 This page intentionally left blank. Mission Statements The Department of the Interior protects and manages the Nation’s natural resources and cultural heritage; provides scientific and other information about those resources; and honors its trust responsibilities or special commitments to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. The mission of the Bureau of Indian Affairs is to enhance the quality of life, to promote economic opportunity, and to carry out the responsibility to protect and improve the trust assets of American Indians, Indian tribes, and Alaska Natives. This page intentionally left blank. Table of Contents 1.0 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION .................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Authority .......................................................................................................................... 1-2 1.3 Purpose of the Proposed Action ...................................................................................... 1-2 1.4 Need for the Proposed Action ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Investigating the Oxbows and Testing Metal Detector Efficiency at Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument, Montana
    Investigating the Oxbows and Testing Metal Detector Efficiency at Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument, Montana By Douglas D. Scott Report completed in partial compliance with Purchase Order R1380109202 Lincoln, Nebraska September 2010 Executive Summary The oxbow inventory found no archeological materials predating the late nineteenth century in any of the three oxbows within the Custer battlefield area. All late nineteenth and early twentieth century artifacts were found on relatively stable landforms near the mouths of ravines or just below the steep slopes of the main battlefield. Dense vegetation prevented intensive metal detecting of the actual oxbows, but where opportunistic sampling did occur only artifacts dating to the mid to late twentieth century were found, and those usually buried between 25 and 30cm. The river bank was also visually inspected where it was accessible and visible. No culturally deposited soil strata were observed. The soil depositional sequence observed in the river bank appeared to be water laid deposits. This suggests that modern sedimentation associated with periodic modern flooding of the floodplain has scoured out the 1876 period surface or buried the 1876 era level well beyond the potential level of metal detecting capability of either VLF or PI metal detectors. A preliminary assessment of various historic maps was conducted to determine which may be the most reliable in depicting the 1876 river channel. The method involved georeferencing the historic maps to the modern topographic and aerial photography and establishing a root mean square error calculation. This objective analysis was coupled with a subjective analysis of the river channel and terrain features depicted on the subject map.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix D WILD and SCENIC RIVERS
    Appendix D BIGHORN NATIONAL FOREST Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Revised Land and Resource Management Plan Wild and Scenic Rivers Table of Contents D......................................................................................................................................D-1 Introduction ............................................................................................................D-1 Basis in Wild and Scenic Rivers Act......................................................................D-1 Assessment Process................................................................................................D-1 Eligibility.......................................................................................................D-2 Classification .................................................................................................D-4 Suitability.......................................................................................................D-4 Alternatives....................................................................................................D-6 Little Bighorn River....................................................................................................D-7 Description.....................................................................................................D-7 Eligibility.......................................................................................................D-7 Classification .................................................................................................D-7
    [Show full text]