DOCSLIB.ORG

Grizzly Bear Management Plan for Western Montana

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Grizzly Bear Management Plan for Western Montana GRIZZLY BEAR MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR WESTERN MONTANA DRAFT PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 2006‐2016 With input from the Montana Grizzly Bear Working Groups and other interested parties June 2006 GRIZZLY BEAR MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR WESTERN MONTANA DRAFT PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 2006‐2016 Prepared by: Arnold R. Dood, Shirley J. Atkinson and Vanna J. Boccadori Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks 1400 S 19th Ave, Bozeman, Montana With input from the Montana Grizzly Bear Working Groups and other interested parties June 2006 For further information, please contact: Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks P. O. Box 200701 Helena, MT 596200‐0701 (406) 444‐3186 Suggested Citation: Dood, A. R., Atkinson, S. J. and V. J. Boccadori (2006) Grizzly Bear Management Plan for Western Montana: draft programmatic environmental impact statement 2006‐2016. Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Helena, Montana. 143 pp. Front Cover: Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos). Sketch drawn by Clint E. Chapman. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many people participated in the development of this plan. Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP) would like to express gratitude to all those who committed their time and energy to ensure our program was adequate to meet the needs of bears and the people who live with them. FWP would like to recognize the following individuals who assisted in the document process and preparation: Margaret Morelli, Joan Buhl, Julie VanWinkle, and Tom Palmer. Special recognition is due to the following individuals and organizations for their assistance through participation in our workshops. By recognizing their participation, we are by no means implying that they support the plan in part or in its entirety. Their openness and willingness to contribute have, however, made this a better plan. These meetings were productive because of the skill of our facilitator, Virginia Tribe, and we thank her as well. Individuals Wendy Adams Pete Howard Monty Sullins Steve Anderson David Hulslander Bob Summerfield Mike Bader David Hurtt Bernie A. Swift John & Nina Baucus Minette Johnson Russell Swindall Jay Bodner Charles Jonkel Tim Tew Louie Bouma Jerry Kaiser John Vore Joseph Brady Craig Kendall Joe Waldner Arlie Burk Peter J Klinesoser Bob Wiesner Larry Campbell David Kleinsasser Jr. Louisa Willcox Linda Cardenas David Kleinsasser Sr. Noel Williams Theresa Conner Jonathan Langhor Bill Wilson Aubyn Curtiss Paul A. Leimback Seth Wilson George A. Curtis Cliff and Sandra Linster Peter Wurz Kim Davitt Elizabeth Maclay Lane Yeager Larry & Anne Dellwo Melody Martinsen Frank Duval Paul McKenzie Organizations Jeff Forte Bill Meadows American Wildlands Dave Gaillard Jim Mershon Montana Stockgrowers Megan Gill Sterling Miller Montana Wilderness Association Kraig Glaser Arlene Montgomery Natural Resources Defense Council Heidi Godwin Brian Peck Yaak Valley Forest Council Mark Good Bill Peebles Plum Creek Timber John Grove John Peebles Harvey Hackett Mark Ratledge Agencies Keith Hammer Staff of Congressman Denny Rehberg Bureau of Land Management Larry Handegard Allen Rowley Bureau of Indian Affairs Rebecca Harrison Tim Rubbert Flathead National Forest Cesar Hernandez Chris Servheen Montana Department of Agriculture Ben Hofer Jerry C. Shively US Fish and Wildlife Service Jay Hofer Jim Shockley US Forest Service Joe Hofer Gayle Sitter USGS Biological Resources Division Ben Hoge Charles W. Spoon Blackfeet Tribe Mike Hoggan Henning Stabins Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes Additional educational materials were graciously provided by Chuck Bartelbaugh and the Center for Wildlife Information and Defenders of Wildlife. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………………………….. vi LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………………………… vii LIST OF APPENDICES……………………………………………………………………………… vii 1. INTRODUCTION...………………………………………………………...….………………….. 1 Vision Statement …………………………………………………………………………………. 1 Background to State Plan………………………………………………………………………… 1 Process for Plan Development…………………………………………………………………... 2 Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Goals for the Grizzly Bear…………………….….....…... 2 Purpose and Need…………………………………………………………………….…….……. 3 History of Bears and Bear Biology in Western Montana…………..……………….......…….. 5 Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission Policy……………………………...……….. 7 2. DESCRIPTION OF GRIZZLY BEAR MANAGEMENT AREA FOR WESTERN MONTANA …………………………………………………………………………………...…... 8 General Description………………………………………………………………………………. 8 Size and Human Population……………………………………………………………….……. 10 Land Ownership………………………………………………………………………………….. 11 Special Management Areas……………..………………………………………………..….. 12 Agricultural Industry………………………………………………………………………..…… 12 Mineral Industry………………...…...……………………………………………………….…... 14 Timber Industry………………………………………………………………………………….. 14 Recreational Opportunities……………………………………………………………………… 15 3. SUMMARY OF GRIZZLY BEAR BIOLOGY……………...………………………………..…... 16 Physical Characteristics ………………………...……………………………………………….. 16 Social Organization and Behavior……………………………………………………….……… 16 Habitat Requirements ……….……………………………………………………………….….. 17 Food……………………………………...……………………………………………….……. 18 Cover…………………………………...……………………………………………………… 18 Denning………………………………...……………………………………………………… 19 Home Range…………………………...……………………………………………...………. 19 Natality…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 20 Natural Mortality…………………………………………………………………………………. 21 Human‐Caused Mortality………………………...……………………………………………... 21 Density…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 24 Status in the NCDE………………………………….……………………………………………. 24 Status in the CYE…………………………………….…………………………………………… 26 4. ISSUES AND ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFIED AND CONSIDERED ………………….……. 29 A. CONFLICT MANAGEMENT………………………………………………………………... 30 Human Safety……………………………………………………………………………………... 31 Strategies to minimize human‐grizzly conflict………………….……………………... 32 Inform and Educate…………….……………….…………….……………..……….. 32 Attractant Food Storage Rules and Regulations…...…..……….…………………. 33 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT.) Page Bear Repellents and Deterrents……..…….…………….…………………………... 34 Aversive Conditioning…….…………...………………….…………………………. 34 Management Control………………...…………………….………………….……... 34 Livestock Conflict...………………………………..……………………………………………... 35 Property Damage…………………………………………………………….…………..……….. 37 Conflict Management Guidelines…………………………….…………………………………. 38 Response Actions…………………………………….……..………………………………... 38 Grizzly Bear‐Human Interaction Risk Management Protocols…….….…….…….……. 39 Rapid Response Protocols………………………………………………..…………………. 39 Criteria for Conflict Grizzly Bear Determination and Control…………..……………… 40 Disposition Criteria for Bears Removed in Management Actions……..….……..……... 41 Conflict Monitoring Protocol……………………….………………..……………………... 41 Alternatives Considered………………………………………………………………………… 41 B. HABITAT MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT………………………………………... 42 Habitat Security and Motorized Access………………………………………………………... 43 Food Sources………………………………………………………………………………………. 44 Private Land Development……………………………………………………………………… 45 Trails……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 45 Habitat Monitoring Guidelines…………………………………………………………………. 47 Habitat Management Guidelines ………………………………………………………………. 47 Habitat Guidelines for Grizzly Bears Currently in place in Western Montana……….. 49 Alternatives Considered…………………………………………………………………………. 49 C. POPULATION MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT………………………………….. 49 Monitoring Framework………………………………………………………………………….. 50 Population Size and Distribution…………………………………………………………… 50 Population Trend Monitoring…...…………………………………………………………... 51 Population Monitoring Guidelines……………………………………………………………... 51 Population Management Guidelines…………………………………………………………… 52 Future Distribution……………………………………………………………………………….. 54 Alternatives Considered…………………………………………………………………………. 56 D. HARVEST MANAGEMENT………………………………………………………………… 56 Harvest Management Guidelines…………………..…………………………………………… 58 Alternatives Considered…………………………………………………………………………. 60 E. ENFORCEMENT………………………………………………………………………………. 60 Alternatives Considered…………………………………………………………………………. 62 F. EDUCATION AND PUBLIC OUTREACH…….…………………………………………… 62 Alternatives Considered…………………………………………………………………………. 65 G. FUTURE RESEARCH…………………………………………………………………………. 65 H. COSTS AND FUNDING……………………………………………………………………... 66 Alternatives Considered…………………………………………………………………………. 68 I. EXPANDED LOCAL INVOLVEMENT……………………………………………………… 68 v TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT.) Page 5. ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES FOR FUTURE MANAGEMENT BY AREA……....……... 70 Cabinet‐Yaak Recovery Zone and Surrounding Areas……….……………………..………… 70 Alternative 1. Continue Existing Program………………………………………………….. 71 Alternative 2. Accelerated Recovery – FWPs preferred alternative…………………..….. 71 Alternative 3. Endangered Status…………....………………………………………………. 72 Northern Continental Divide Recovery Zone and Surrounding Areas……………………… 73 Alternative 1. Continue Existing Program – FWPs preferred alternative…………….…. 74 Alternative 2. Accelerated Recovery…………………………..…………………………….. 74 Alternative 3. Reduce Recovery Efforts……………………………………………………... 75 Bitterroot Recovery Zone and Surrounding Area………………….…………………………... 75 Alternative 1. Preparatory Planning – FWPs preferred alternative……..………...…….. 77 Alternative 2. No Action………………………………...……………………………………. 77 Alternative 3. Accelerated Recovery Through Reintroduction……………..…….……… 78 Short Term and Long Term Impacts………..……………..………………….…………………. 78 Cumulative Impacts………………………………………………………………………………. 80 Mitigation…………………………………………………………………………………………... 81 Irreversible and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Distribution and Population Characteristics of Mule Deer Along
    Distribution and population characteristics of mule deer along the East Front, northcentral Montana by Wayne Frederick Kasworm A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Fish and Wildlife Management Montana State University © Copyright by Wayne Frederick Kasworm (1981) Abstract: This study was conducted from June 1979 to September 1980 on the Rocky Mountain East Front of northcentral Montana. It was the first phase of a 2 part investigation designed to provide quantitative baseline information on mule deer seasonal distribution, movements, population status and trend, and habitat usage on a representative portion of the East Front subject to oil and gas development. Areas used by deer during average and severe winters remained relatively constant during the last 3 years. Deer displayed a high degree of fidelity to seasonal ranges. On this basis, 6 essentially independent populations were delineated by winter range origin. Movement to summer home ranges appeared rapid and direct via distinct migration corridors. Summer distribution indicated that 3 subpopulations could be delineated for each winter range. Mean summer home range size for females was larger in 1979 (7.2 km^2) than 1980 (2.7 km^2). Fall transitional ranges were identified. The pattern of transitional range use appeared to concentrate deer from 1 of the 3 subpopulations during hunting season. Age distribution of a sample of 69 deer indicated an adult population structure of 26% males and 74% females. Poor representation of the 1 1/2, 2 1/2, and 6 1/2-year-old age-classes was noted.
    [Show full text]
  • Rocky Mountain Front Conservation Area Expansion
    Land Protection Plan Rocky Mountain Front Conservation Area Expansion February 2011 Prepared by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Benton Lake National Wildlife Refuge Complex 922 Bootlegger Trail Great Falls, Montana 59404-6133 406 / 727 7400 http://www.fws.gov/bentonlake and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 6, Division of Refuge Planning P. O. Box 25486 DFC Denver, Colorado 80225 303 / 236 4378 303 / 236 4792 fax http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/planning/lpp.htm CITATION U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Land Protection Plan, Rocky Mountain Front Conservation Area. Lakewood, Colorado: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Mountain-Prairie Region. 70p. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service policy, a land protection plan has been prepared to analyze the effects of expanding the Rocky Mountain Front Conservation Area in western Montana. ■ The Rocky Mountain Front Conservation Area Expansion Land Protection Plan describes the priorities for acquiring up to an additional 125,000 acres in conservation easements within an expanded project boundary of 918,600 acres. Note: Information contained in the maps within this document is approximate and does not represent a legal survey. Ownership information may not be complete Contents Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................................................. iii 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Research Natural Areas on National Forest System Lands in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Utah, and Western Wyoming: a Guidebook for Scientists, Managers, and Educators
    USDA United States Department of Agriculture Research Natural Areas on Forest Service National Forest System Lands Rocky Mountain Research Station in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, General Technical Report RMRS-CTR-69 Utah, and Western Wyoming: February 2001 A Guidebook for Scientists, Managers, and E'ducators Angela G. Evenden Melinda Moeur J. Stephen Shelly Shannon F. Kimball Charles A. Wellner Abstract Evenden, Angela G.; Moeur, Melinda; Shelly, J. Stephen; Kimball, Shannon F.; Wellner, Charles A. 2001. Research Natural Areas on National Forest System Lands in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Utah, and Western Wyoming: A Guidebook for Scientists, Managers, and Educators. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-69. Ogden, UT: U.S. Departmentof Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 84 p. This guidebook is intended to familiarize land resource managers, scientists, educators, and others with Research Natural Areas (RNAs) managed by the USDA Forest Service in the Northern Rocky Mountains and lntermountain West. This guidebook facilitates broader recognitionand use of these valuable natural areas by describing the RNA network, past and current research and monitoring, management, and how to use RNAs. About The Authors Angela G. Evenden is biological inventory and monitoring project leader with the National Park Service -NorthernColorado Plateau Network in Moab, UT. She was formerly the Natural Areas Program Manager for the Rocky Mountain Research Station, Northern Region and lntermountain Region of the USDA Forest Service. Melinda Moeur is Research Forester with the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain ResearchStation in Moscow, ID, and one of four Research Natural Areas Coordinators from the Rocky Mountain Research Station. J. Stephen Shelly is Regional Botanist and Research Natural Areas Coordinator with the USDA Forest Service, Northern Region Headquarters Office in Missoula, MT.
    [Show full text]
  • Denudation History and Internal Structure of the Front Range and Wet Mountains, Colorado, Based on Apatite-Fission-Track Thermoc
    NEW MEXICO BUREAU OF GEOLOGY & MINERAL RESOURCES, BULLETIN 160, 2004 41 Denudation history and internal structure of the Front Range and Wet Mountains, Colorado, based on apatite­fission­track thermochronology 1 2 1Department of Earth and Environmental Science, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, Socorro, NM 87801Shari A. Kelley and Charles E. Chapin 2New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, Socorro, NM 87801 Abstract An apatite fission­track (AFT) partial annealing zone (PAZ) that developed during Late Cretaceous time provides a structural datum for addressing questions concerning the timing and magnitude of denudation, as well as the structural style of Laramide deformation, in the Front Range and Wet Mountains of Colorado. AFT cooling ages are also used to estimate the magnitude and sense of dis­ placement across faults and to differentiate between exhumation and fault­generated topography. AFT ages at low elevationX along the eastern margin of the southern Front Range between Golden and Colorado Springs are from 100 to 270 Ma, and the mean track lengths are short (10–12.5 µm). Old AFT ages (> 100 Ma) are also found along the western margin of the Front Range along the Elkhorn thrust fault. In contrast AFT ages of 45–75 Ma and relatively long mean track lengths (12.5–14 µm) are common in the interior of the range. The AFT ages generally decrease across northwest­trending faults toward the center of the range. The base of a fossil PAZ, which separates AFT cooling ages of 45– 70 Ma at low elevations from AFT ages > 100 Ma at higher elevations, is exposed on the south side of Pikes Peak, on Mt.
    [Show full text]
  • Heart Rate During Hyperphagia Differs Between Two Bear Species
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Brage INN Physiology Heart rate during hyperphagia differs royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsbl between two bear species Boris Fuchs1,†, Koji Yamazaki2,†, Alina L. Evans1, Toshio Tsubota3, Shinsuke Koike4,5, Tomoko Naganuma5 and Jon M. Arnemo1,6 Research 1Department of Forestry and Wildlife Management, Faculty of Applied Ecology and Agricultural Sciences, Cite this article: Fuchs B, Yamazaki K, Evans Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, Campus Evenstad, 2418 Elverum, Norway 2Department of Forest Science, Tokyo University of Agriculture, 1-1-1 Sakuragaoka, Setagaya-Ku, Tokyo, Japan AL, Tsubota T, Koike S, Naganuma T, Arnemo 3Department of Environmental Veterinary Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Hokkaido University, Kita18, JM. 2019 Heart rate during hyperphagia differs Nishi9, Kita-Ku, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan between two bear species. Biol. Lett. 15: 4Institute of Global Innovation Research, and 5United Graduate School of Agricultural Science, Tokyo University 20180681. of Agriculture and Technology, 3-5-8 Saiwai, Fuchu-city, Tokyo, Japan 6Department of Wildlife, Fish and Environmental Studies, Faculty of Forest Sciences, Swedish University of http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2018.0681 Agricultural Sciences, 901 83, Umea˚, Sweden BF, 0000-0003-3412-3490; ALE, 0000-0003-0513-4887 Received: 28 September 2018 Hyperphagia is a critical part of the yearly cycle of bears when they gain fat reserves before entering hibernation. We used heart rate as a proxy to com- Accepted: 17 December 2018 pare the metabolic rate between the Asian black bear (Ursus thibetanus)in Japan and the Eurasian brown bear (Ursus arctos) in Sweden from summer into hibernation.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of the Rocky Mountain Foreland Basin: Combined Structural
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2007 DEVELOPMENT OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN FORELAND BASIN: COMBINED STRUCTURAL, MINERALOGICAL, AND GEOCHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF BASIN EVOLUTION, ROCKY MOUNTAIN THRUST FRONT, NORTHWEST MONTANA Emily Geraghty Ward 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 Ward, Emily Geraghty, "DEVELOPMENT OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN FORELAND BASIN: COMBINED STRUCTURAL, MINERALOGICAL, AND GEOCHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF BASIN EVOLUTION, ROCKY MOUNTAIN THRUST FRONT, NORTHWEST MONTANA" (2007). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 1234. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/1234 This Dissertation 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]. DEVELOPMENT OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN FORELAND BASIN: COMBINED STRUCTURAL, MINERALOGICAL, AND GEOCHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF BASIN EVOLUTION ROCKY MOUNTAIN THRUST FRONT, NORTHWEST MONTANA By Emily M. Geraghty Ward B.A., Whitman College, Walla Walla, WA, 1999 M.S., Washington State University, Pullman, WA, 2002 Dissertation presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Geology The University of Montana Missoula, MT Spring 2007 Approved by: Dr. David A. Strobel, Dean Graduate School James W. Sears, Chair Department of Geosciences Julia A. Baldwin Department of Geosciences Marc S. Hendrix Department of Geosciences Steven D.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Hydrology, Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado
    Bibliography and Index of Geology and Hydrology, Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado By FELICIE CHRONIC and JOHN CHRONIC GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1306 Bibliographic citations for more than 1,800 indexed reports, theses, and open-file releases concerning one of the Nation's most rapidly growing areas UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1974 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY V. E. McKelvey, Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. 74-600045 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D. C. 20402- Price $1.15 (paper cover) Stock Number 2401-02545 PREFACE This bibliography is intended for persons wishing geological information about the Front Range Urban Corridor. It was compiled at the University of Colorado, funded by the U.S. Geological Survey, and is based primarily on references in the Petroleum Research Microfilm Library of the Rocky Mountain Region. Extensive use was made also of U.S. Geological Survey and American Geological Institute bibliographies, as well as those of the Colorado Geological Survey. Most of the material listed was published or completed before July 1, 1972; references to some later articles, as well as to a few which were not found in the first search, are appended at the end of the alphabetical listing. This bibliography may include more references than some users feel are warranted, but the authors felt that the greatest value to the user would result from a comprehensive rather than a selective listing. Hence, we decided to include the most significant synthesizing articles and books in order to give a broad picture of the geology of the Front Range Urban Corridor, and to include also some articles which deal with geology of areas adjacent to, and probably pertinent to, the corridor.
    [Show full text]
  • Home-Range and Habitat Selection by Adult Cougars in Southern California
    HOME-RANGE AND HABITAT SELECTION BY ADULT COUGARS IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BRETT G. DICKSON,1,2School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, USA PAUL BEIER, School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, USA Abstract:Understanding the impact of habitat fragmentation, roads, and other anthropogenic influences on cougars (Puma concolor) requires quantitative assessment of habitat selection at multiple scales. We calculated annu- al and multiyear home ranges using a fixed-kernel (FK) estimator of home range for 13adult female and 2adult male radiotagged cougars that were monitored October 1986through December 1992in the Santa Ana Mountain Range of southern California, USA. Using compositional analysis, we assessed diurnal use of vegetation types and areas near roads at 2orders of selection (second- and third-order; Johnson 1980). Mean annual and multiyear 85% FK home ranges for males were larger than those reported by previous studies in California. Mean wet-season 85% FK home ranges were significantly larger than those of the dry season. At both scales of selection and across sea- sons, cougars preferred riparian habitats and avoided human-dominated habitats. Grasslands were the most avoid- ed natural vegetation type at both scales of selection. Although cougar home ranges tended to be located away from high- and low-speed 2-lane paved roads (second-order avoidance), cougars did not avoid roads within their home range, especially when roads were in preferred riparian areas. Protection of habitat mosaics that include unroaded riparian areas is critical to the conservation of this cougar population. JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT 6640):1235–1245 Key words:California, compositional analysis, cougar, fixed-kernel home range, habitat selection, home range, Puma concolor, riparian, roads, scale, vegetation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rocky Mountain Front, Southwestern USA
    The Rocky Mountain Front, southwestern USA Charles E. Chapin, Shari A. Kelley, and Steven M. Cather New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, Socorro, New Mexico 87801, USA ABSTRACT northeast-trending faults cross the Front thrust in southwest Wyoming and northern Range–Denver Basin boundary. However, Utah. A remarkable attribute of the RMF is The Rocky Mountain Front (RMF) trends several features changed from south to north that it maintained its position through multi- north-south near long 105°W for ~1500 km across the CMB. (1) The axis of the Denver ple orogenies and changes in orientation from near the U.S.-Mexico border to south- Basin was defl ected ~60 km to the north- and strength of tectonic stresses. During the ern Wyoming. This long, straight, persistent east. (2) The trend of the RMF changed from Laramide orogeny, the RMF marked a tec- structural boundary originated between 1.4 north–northwest to north. (3) Structural tonic boundary beyond which major contrac- and 1.1 Ga in the Mesoproterozoic. It cuts style of the Front Range–Denver Basin mar- tional partitioning of the Cordilleran fore- the 1.4 Ga Granite-Rhyolite Province and gin changed from northeast-vergent thrusts land was unable to penetrate. However, the was intruded by the shallow-level alkaline to northeast-dipping, high-angle reverse nature of the lithospheric fl aw that underlies granitic batholith of Pikes Peak (1.09 Ga) faults. (4) Early Laramide uplift north of the RMF is an unanswered question. in central Colorado.
    [Show full text]
  • Montana's Rocky Mountain Front
    A Research Paper by Montana’s Rocky Mountain Front September 2012 Montana’s Rocky Mountain Front September 2012 PUBLISHED ONLINE: http://headwaterseconomics.org ABOUT HEADWATERS ECONOMICS Headwaters Economics is an independent, nonprofit research group whose mission is to improve community development and land management decisions in the West. CONTACT INFORMATION Chris Mehl | [email protected] | 406-570-8937 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Headwaters Economics completed this report at the request of The Coalition to Protect the Rocky Mountain Front. P.O. Box 7059 Bozeman, MT 59771 http://headwaterseconomics.org Cover Photos: Jerry Dylan TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... 1 II. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 3 III. THE LAND, PEOPLE, AND BROADER ECONOMY .................................................................. 4 The Land ................................................................................................................................................... 4 The People ................................................................................................................................................ 6 The Broader Economy .............................................................................................................................. 9 A Closer Look at Teton County .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Book of Abstracts
    Human-bear coexistence in human dominated and politically fragmented landscapes. BOOK OF ABSTRACTS Ljubljana, Slovenia 16 - 21 September 2018 Conference Venue: The Grand Hotel Union www.lifewithbears.eu #lifewithbears Book of Abstracts available #26thIBAconference @www.lifewithbears.eu 1 Published by: University of Ljubljana Cover design and layout: Anja Nič Editor: Aleksandra Majić Skrbinšek Edition: e-book Ljubljana, 2018 Suggested citation: Majić Skrbinšek A. (Ed.), 2018, Human-bear coexistence in human dominated and politically fragmented landscapes. Abstract book of the 26th International conference on Bear Research and Management, 16- 21 September, Ljubljana, Slovenia. ISBN 978-961-6410-52-6 (pdf) COBISS.SI-ID: 296548096 2 SCIENTIFIC PROGRAM COMMITTEE 26TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON BEAR RESEARCH MANAGEMENT “Human-bear coexistence in human dominated and politically fragmented landscapes.” Ljubljana, 16 - 21 September 2018 Conference Venue: The Grand Hotel Union Coordinator: Aleksandra Majić Skrbinšek, University of Ljubljana, Biotechnical Faculty, Biology Department, Ljubljana, Slovenia Members: Alexandros A. Karamanlidis, ARCTUROS, Civil Society for the Protection and Management of Wildlife and the Natural Environment, Aetos, Greece & Rewilding Europe, Nijmegen, The Netherlands Anja Molinari Jobin, Italian Lynx Project, Tarvisio, Italy Claudio Groff, Servizio Foreste e Fauna – Provincia Autonoma di Trento, Italy Đuro Huber, Biology Department, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zagreb, Croatia Frank T. van Manen, U.S. Geological Survey, Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center, Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team, Bozeman, Montana, USA Ivan Kos, University of Ljubljana, Biotechnical Faculty, Biology Department, Ljubljana, Slovenia Georg Rauer, Research Institute of Wildlife Ecology, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Austria Klemen Jerina, University of Ljubljana, Biotechnical Faculty, Forestry Department, Ljubljana, Slovenia Marta De Barba, Univ.
    [Show full text]
  • Developing Methods for Measuring National Distributions and Densities of Wild
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.30.193078; this version posted July 31, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-ND 4.0 International license. Developing methods for measuring national distributions and densities of wild mammals using camera traps: A Kosovo study Sarah E. Beatham1*, Alastair I. Ward1,2, David Fouracre1, Jeton Muhaxhiri3, Michael Sallmann4, Besim Zogu5, Valdet Gjinovci6, Anthony J. Wilsmore3, Graham C. Smith1 1 National Wildlife Management Centre, APHA, Sand Hutton, York, YO41 1LZ, United Kingdom 2 School of Environmental Sciences, University of Hull, Hull, HU6 7RX, United Kingdom 3 Veterinary Epidemiology and Economics Research Unit (VEERU) & PAN Livestock Services Ltd., University of Reading, School of Agriculture, Policy and Development, Reading, RG6 6AR, United Kingdom 4 Department of Veterinary Affairs and Consumer Protection of the Odenwald County, Scheffelstrasse 11, D- 64385 Reichelsheim, Hesse, Germany 5 Kosovo Forest Agency, Ernest Koliqi Street, 10000 Prishtina, Republic of Kosovo 6 Food and Veterinary Agency, Industrial Zone, 10000 Prishtina, Republic of Kosovo *Corresponding author: [email protected], orcid.org/0000-0001-8300-8953 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.30.193078; this version posted July 31, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-ND 4.0 International license.
    [Show full text]