DOCSLIB.ORG

United States Department of the Interior

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
United States Department of the Interior United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office - Spokane 11103 East Montgomery Drive Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 January 30, 2018 Erin Chipps Environmental Protections Specialist Western Federal Lands Highway Division 610 E. Fifth Street Vancouver, WA 98661 Subject: Idaho Panhandle National Forests Roads and Bridges Repair Project—Bonner County, Idaho—Biological Opinion In Reply Refer to: 01EIFW00-2018-F-0035 Dear Ms. Chipps: Enclosed are the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (Service) Biological Opinion (Opinion) and concurrence with the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) determinations of effect on species listed under the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended, for the proposed Idaho Panhandle National Forests (IPNF) Roads and Bridges Repair Project in Bonner County, Idaho. In a letter received by the Service on December 1, 2017, the FHWA requested formal consultation on the determination under section 7 of the Act that the proposed project is likely to adversely affect bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus). The FHWA determined that the proposed project is not likely to adversely affect Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis), and grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) and bull trout critical habitat, and requested our concurrence with these determinations. The enclosed Opinion and concurrence are based primarily on our review of the proposed action as described in your December 2017 Biological Assessment (Assessment) and additional emails, as well as the anticipated effects of the action on listed species, and were prepared in accordance with section 7 of the Act. Our Opinion concludes that the proposed project will not jeopardize the survival and recovery of bull trout. A complete record of this consultation is on file at this office. Clean Water Act Requirement Language: This Opinion is also intended to address section 7 consultation requirements for the issuance of any project-related permits required under section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Use of this letter and Biological Opinion to document that the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has fulfilled its responsibilities under section 7 of the Act is contingent upon the following conditions: 1. The action considered by the Corps in their 404 permitting process must be consistent with the proposed project as described in the Assessment such that no detectable difference in the effects of the action on listed species will occur. Erin Chipps, Environmental Protections Specialist 01EIFW00-2018-F-0035 Western Federal Lands Highway Division Idaho Panhandle National Forests Roads and Bridges Repair Project 2. Any terms applied to the 404 permit must also be consistent with conservation measures and terms and conditions as described in the Assessment and addressed in this letter and Biological Opinion. Thank you for your continued interest in the conservation of threatened and endangered species. Please contact Megan Kosterman at (509) 893-8013 if you have questions concerning this Opinion. Sincerely, For Gregory M. Hughes State Supervisor Enclosure cc: IDFG (Siitari) 2 BIOLOGICAL OPINION FOR THE IDAHO PANHANDLE NATIONAL FORESTS ROADS AND BRIDGES REPAIR PROJECT 01EIFW00-2018-F-0035 U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE IDAHO FISH AND WILDLIFE OFFICE SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON _____________________________________ For Gregory M. Hughes State Supervisor Date __________________________________ Erin Chipps, Environmental Protections Specialist 01EIFW00-2018-F-0035 Western Federal Lands Highway Division Idaho Panhandle National Forests Roads and Bridges Repair Project Table of Contents 1. BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 Consultation History .............................................................................................................. 7 1.3 Concurrences ......................................................................................................................... 8 1.3.1 Bull Trout Critical Habitat ............................................................................................... 8 1.3.2 Canada Lynx .................................................................................................................... 8 1.3.3 Grizzly Bear ..................................................................................................................... 9 2. BIOLOGICAL OPINION ........................................................................................................ 10 2.1 Description of the Proposed Action .................................................................................... 10 2.1.1 Action Area .................................................................................................................... 10 2.1.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................................................. 12 2.2 Analytical Framework for the Jeopardy Determination ...................................................... 17 2.2.1 Jeopardy Determination ................................................................................................. 17 2.3 Status of the Species ............................................................................................................ 18 2.3.1 Listing Status .................................................................................................................. 18 2.3.2 Reasons for Listing and Emerging Threats ..................................................................... 19 2.3.3 Species Description ......................................................................................................... 20 2.3.4 Life History................................................................................................................. 21 2.3.5 Population Dynamics ...................................................................................................... 22 2.3.6 Status and Distribution .................................................................................................... 25 2.3.7 Conservation Needs ........................................................................................................ 30 2.4 Environmental Baseline of the Action Area ........................................................................ 32 2.4.1 Status of Bull Trout in the Action Area ......................................................................... 32 2.4.2 Factors Affecting Bull Trout in the Action Area ............................................................ 39 2.5 Effects of the Proposed Action ............................................................................................ 40 2.6 Cumulative Effects .............................................................................................................. 45 2.7 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 45 2.8 Incidental Take Statement ................................................................................................... 46 2.8.1 Form and Amount or Extent of Take Anticipated ......................................................... 47 2.8.2 Effect of the Take ........................................................................................................... 47 2.8.3 Reasonable and Prudent Measures ................................................................................. 48 2.8.4 Terms and Conditions .................................................................................................... 48 5 Erin Chipps, Environmental Protections Specialist 01EIFW00-2018-F-0035 Western Federal Lands Highway Division Idaho Panhandle National Forests Roads and Bridges Repair Project 2.8.5 Reporting and Monitoring Requirement ........................................................................ 48 2.9 Conservation Recommendations ......................................................................................... 48 2.10 Reinitiation Notice ............................................................................................................. 49 3. LITERATURE CITED ............................................................................................................ 50 3.1 Published Literature ............................................................................................................. 50 3.2 In Litteris References .......................................................................................................... 58 3.3 Personal Communications ................................................................................................... 58 List of Tables Table 1. Redd counts within the Lightning Creek drainage, Idaho from 1983 through 2017. Surveys are conducted annually by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. ............................ 37 Table 2. Tributary monitoring results by stream, abundance, and density estimates sampled in 2012 (IDFG 2013)......................................................................................................................... 38 List of Figures Figure 1. Map showing the locations of the Lightning Creek repairs. Red denotes the location of the repair actions (FHWA 2017, p. 5)..........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Introduction to Short-Season Gardening in Idaho by Stephen L
    SHORT-SEASON, HIGH-ALTITUDE GARDENING BULLETIN 857 Introduction to short-season gardening in Idaho by Stephen L. Love, Kathy Noble, and Stuart Parkinson INTRODUCTION Many of us who garden in Idaho face the challenges brought on by lack of summer warmth, spring and fall frost, extreme winter cold, or desiccation from frequent wind. Growing beautiful and productive plants in the high CONTENTS desert or mountain regions of Idaho requires unique approaches and an attention to detail that are rarely discussed in popular garden guides. INTRODUCTION . 1 DEFINING THE SHORT-SEASON, HIGH-ALTITUDE This publication introduces the Short-Season/High-Altitude Gardening series ZONE . 1 specifically designed to provide effective, comprehensive ideas for gardening IDAHO’S THREE SHORT-SEASON CLIMATES . 2 where Idaho’s unique combination of extreme climate, weather, geology, and NUANCES OF MICROCLIMATE . 4 Rural vs. Urban . 4 geography presents obstacles to successful gardening. Subsequent publications Slope and Aspect . 4 provide details on managing specific kinds of plants in the short-season garden. Local Weather Patterns . 4 DEFINING THE SHORT-SEASON, HIGH-ALTITUDE ZONE The Short-Season/High-Altitude Gardening series is for gardeners living within Idaho’s harshest climates, specifically those rated USDA hardiness YOU ARE A SHORT-SEASON, HIGH-ALTITUDE GARDENER IF: zone 4 or colder, situated at an elevation above 4,500 feet, or with a frost- free period of fewer than 110 days. Although many locales throughout the You live in Idaho at an elevation above 4,500 feet, OR state experience these conditions, they are most common in the upper Snake Your USDA hardiness zone is 4 or lower, OR River Valley, the southeastern and southern highlands, the high deserts north You have a frost-free growing season of 110 days or less of the Snake River, the central mountains, and the coldest valley and moun- tain locations in the northern panhandle.
    [Show full text]
  • Acknowledgments
    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors wish to acknowledge the Mike Stimak, Bureau of Land Management, following individuals for their contributions Coeur d'Alene, Idaho - Photo Interpretation Team to selected sections of this document: Leader (Idaho) Liz Hill, USDA Forest Service, Kalispell, Montana Pat Bourgeron, The Nature Conservancy, Boulder, - Photo Interpretation Technical Advice Colorado - Potential Vegetation Settings John Lane, USDA Forest Service, Billings, Paul Hessburg, USDA Forest Service, Wenatchee, Montana - GIS Work Washington - Drainage Basin Settings- Subsampling Gary Raines, U.S. Geological Survey, Reno, Nevada - GIS Work Hope Humphries, The Nature Conservancy, Boulder, Colorado - Vegetation Response to Jim Barber, USDA Forest Service, Dillon, Climate Change Montana - GIS Work Sue Ferguson, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Jim Menakis, USDA Forest Service, Missoula, Seattle, Washington - Climatology Montana - GIS Work Peggy Polichio, USDA Forest Service, Coeur The following individuals and groups also d'Alene, Idaho - Logistical Support provided important assistance to the John Caratti, Heritage Program, Helena, Montana development of information contained in - Data Analysis this document: Tim McGarvey, Heritage Program, Helena, Judy Tripp, USDA Forest Service, Missoula, Montana - Data Analysis Montana - Editorial Assistance Mary Manning, USDA Forest Service, Missoula, Cathy Maynard, USDA Forest Service, Helena, Montana - Data Analysis Montana - GIS Coordination Mick Quinn, Contractor, Missoula, Montana - NRIS, State Library, Helena,
    [Show full text]
  • Greater Sandpoint Greenprint Final Report
    Greater Sandpoint Greenprint Final Report Greater Sandpoint Greenprint Final Report The Trust for Public Land March Printed on 100% recycled paper. © 2016 The Trust for Public Land. The Trust for Public Land creates parks and protects land for people, ensuring healthy, livable communities for generations to come. tpl.org Table of contents Preface ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Executive summary .................................................................................................................. 5 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 6 2. Study area ....................................................................................................................... 9 3. Community engagement ........................................................................................... 12 4. Mapping conservation values .................................................................................... 15 5. Greater Sandpoint Greenprint action plan .............................................................. 26 6. Profiles in conservation ............................................................................................... 28 7. Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 30 Appendix A: Participants Lists .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Biking the Idaho Panhandle on the Rails to Trails Trip Guide Biking the Idaho Pan Handle
    Biking the Idaho Panhandle on the Rails to Trails Trip Guide Biking the Idaho Pan Handle Oregon River Experiences office: 503-563-1500 email: [email protected] web site: www.oregonriver.com Idaho Panhandle Rails To Trails Bicycling The Trail of the Coeur d’Alenes is one of the most spectacular trails in the western United States. This trail along with the Centennial and Hiawatha Trails make for an area full of geology and mining history. The 73-mile Trail of the Coeur d’Alenes paved trail spans the Idaho panhandle between Mullan and Plummer. It was created through a unique partnership between the Coeur d’Alene Tribe, Union Pacific Railroad, the U. S. Government, and the State of Idaho. The trail meanders through the historic Silver Valley, along the Coeur d’Alene River past scenic Lake Coeur d’Alene and through rolling farmlands to Plummer. Twenty developed trailheads provide entry points, and there are twenty scenic waysides along the route with tables to stop for a picnic or a short rest. The Hiawatha trail, is the crown jewel of our nation’s Rails to Trails routes. This special day takes you through nine train tunnels and across seven trestles with views of the towering Bitterroot Mountains. Enjoy a day cycling around and exploring the lake side town of Coeur d’Alenes on the historic North Idaho Centennial trail. This trail meanders along the waterfront and takes in the history of the town. Local History Silver was discovered in the area in 1884 and soon a rail line was constructed to support the growing mining, timber, and supply industries.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization of Ecoregions of Idaho
    1 0 . C o l u m b i a P l a t e a u 1 3 . C e n t r a l B a s i n a n d R a n g e Ecoregion 10 is an arid grassland and sagebrush steppe that is surrounded by moister, predominantly forested, mountainous ecoregions. It is Ecoregion 13 is internally-drained and composed of north-trending, fault-block ranges and intervening, drier basins. It is vast and includes parts underlain by thick basalt. In the east, where precipitation is greater, deep loess soils have been extensively cultivated for wheat. of Nevada, Utah, California, and Idaho. In Idaho, sagebrush grassland, saltbush–greasewood, mountain brush, and woodland occur; forests are absent unlike in the cooler, wetter, more rugged Ecoregion 19. Grazing is widespread. Cropland is less common than in Ecoregions 12 and 80. Ecoregions of Idaho The unforested hills and plateaus of the Dissected Loess Uplands ecoregion are cut by the canyons of Ecoregion 10l and are disjunct. 10f Pure grasslands dominate lower elevations. Mountain brush grows on higher, moister sites. Grazing and farming have eliminated The arid Shadscale-Dominated Saline Basins ecoregion is nearly flat, internally-drained, and has light-colored alkaline soils that are Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and America into 15 ecological regions. Level II divides the continent into 52 regions Literature Cited: much of the original plant cover. Nevertheless, Ecoregion 10f is not as suited to farming as Ecoregions 10h and 10j because it has thinner soils.
    [Show full text]
  • Title Text Here Two Native Gardens with Pollinator Signs on the Idaho
    Two Native Gardens with Pollinator Signs Titleon the text Idaho here Panhandle National Forests 2009 Accomplishments This project prepared and planted >40 species of plants native to North Idaho, Montana and eastern Washington in gardens at two offices of the Coeur d’Alene River Ranger District. One is home to plants which grow best in full sun; the other garden has partial shade. More than a dozen boy scouts prepared the garden plots by removing old junipers planted several years ago to border the district’s public parking lot. Now those spaces are full of native plants. Seedlings of native species were purchased from four native nurseries. Several species were grown from seed by volunteers including a master gardener. Some plants were transplanted from the national forest to the gardens. Over 200 volunteer hours were contributed to this project, most by youth ages 14-17. Two scouts made and installed custom plant identification signs from native materials. One will finish constructing the sign frames and install both 30” x 36” pollinator signs this fall at district offices in Figure 1. Pollinator sign at Fernan Ranger Station Coeur d’Alene and Smelterville. Gerry Queener donated 9 original pollinator photos, all taken in northern Idaho, to Year Awarded: initial award in 2009 illustrate the signs. Graphic artist Grady Myers designed Project completion: 2009 original artwork for the “pollinators” titles on the signs. The Report number: 1 of 1 WREN Foundation wrote a grant proposal to Red Willow Research (Twin Falls, ID.), which contributed an additional Expenditures (through 10/2009): $1,000 grant that funded one of our pollinator signs and one FY09 funding $3,500, expended $3,5000, $0 remaining for a popular BLM trail through a mature ponderosa pine .Total FS funding $3,500, total expended $3,500; forest east of Coeur d’Alene, Idaho.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Community Health Assessment
    COMMUNITY HEALTH ASSESSMENT Panhandle Health District 2018 Healthy People in Healthy Communities Community Health Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS DESCRIPTION OF PANHANDLE HEALTH DISTRICT .............................................................. 2 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................. 3 PROCESS ......................................................................................................................... 4 COMMUNITY HEALTH ASSESSMENT PARTNERS ................................................... 5 LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR ................................................................................... 7 KEY FINDINGS ................................................................................................................. 8 COMMUNITY THEMES & STRENGTHS ASSESSMENT .......................................... 10 BACKGROUND & DEMOGRAPHICS .......................................................................... 11 TOP CHALLENGES ....................................................................................................... 12 COMMUNITY HEALTH PROBLEMS ........................................................................... 12 COMMUNITY HEALTH BEHAVIOR ............................................................................. 13 TOP PERSONAL HEALTH CHALLENGES ................................................................ 15 COMMUNITY HEALTH STATUS .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Idaho Panhandle National Forests Outreach Announcement for Temporary Natural Resources Management Positions
    Idaho Panhandle National Forests Outreach Announcement for Temporary Natural Resources Management Positions The Idaho Panhandle National Forests (IPNF) will soon begin filling multiple temporary seasonal positions in our natural resource management program. Openings are available at the GS-2, GS-3, GS- 4, GS-5, GS-6 and GS-7 levels. These are SEASONAL TEMPORARY natural resource related positions with a maximum six month tour schedule (Not to exceed 1039 hrs.). The anticipated start date for these positions is mid-April to early June, 2015. Employees who are students generally work through mid to late August, while others may work as late as October. The Idaho Panhandle has specific announcement numbers for each position, which will be advertised on USA Jobs for seven days opening February 3th and closing February 9th. Applications for these temporary positions will only be accepted during that seven day period. To apply for these temporary jobs you will need to go through USAJOBS at http://www.usajobs.gov/, create a profile and set up your resume. Please make sure you select all of the locations you are interested in (e.g. Bonners Ferry, Sandpoint, Nordman, Coeur d’Alene, Smelterville, Avery and St. Maries). Applicants should read the vacancy announcement for specific information about the job requirements and follow the instructions on how to apply. The IPNF is located in the northern panhandle of Idaho, as well as northeastern Washington and a portion of northwestern Montana. As such, the IPNF is a diverse landscape, with plant communities ranging from dry forests and grasslands to inland rainforests and subalpine habitats.
    [Show full text]
  • Overview Report: Ldaho Panhandle Oral History Study
    Overview Report: ldaho Panhandle Oral History Study 10/79 OVERVIEW REPORT: IDAHO PANHANDLE NATIONAL FORESTS ORAL HISTORY STUDY U.S. Departrnent of Agriculture Forest Service BOX 310, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho Contract Nurnber 53-0281-9-110 Our Project Nurnber ESI-1426 Soil Systems, Inc. 223 Pete Ellis Drive, Suite 14 Bloornington, Indiana 47401 Archaeological & Ecological Surveys Earth Systems Division Environmental Impact Studies Geotechnical Research & Development 223 Pete Ellis Drive, Suite 14 Land Application Evaluations Bloomington, Indiana 47401 Natural Resource Planning Phone (812) 334-0303 October 10, 1979 U.S. Forest Service Idaho Panhandle National Forests Box 310 Coeur d'Alene, ID 83814 Attention: Don Krarner and Clyde Blake Subject: Overview Report: Idaho Panhandle National Forests Oral History Study Contract Nurnber 53-0281-9-110 OUR PROJECT NUMBER ESI-1426 Gentlemen: The Earth Systems Division of SSI is pleased to subrnit the following Overview Report detailing the nature and locations of all known oral history collections and studies conducted in the area of Idaho Panhandle National Forests north of the Clearwater River. This report contains a description of all sources consulted, their availability, an analysis of each collection and a listing of pertinent interview inforrnation from each source. Following the descriptions of the specific sources, a general conclusion section describes and recornrnends future research activities which could be conducted in the Panhandle Forests area. In addition to the interview lists, the appendix of the report contains the itinerary list of the Project Historian frorn SSI and a list of possible inforrnants to be interviewed during a later stage of the project.
    [Show full text]
  • Palouse Subbasin Management Plan
    Palouse Subbasin Management Plan FINAL DRAFT ~ May 2004 Project Lead: Palouse-Rock Lake Conservation District Trevor Cook, Project Manager PO Box 438 St. John WA 99171 (509) 648-3680 Prepared by: Shelly Gilmore Resource Planning Unlimited, Inc. 1406 East F Street Moscow, ID 83843 Palouse Subbasin Management Plan FINAL DRAFT ~ May 2004 Project Lead: Palouse-Rock Lake Conservation District Trevor Cook, Project Manager PO Box 438 St. John WA 99171 (509) 648-3680 Prepared by: Shelly Gilmore Resource Planning Unlimited, Inc. 1406 East F Street Moscow, ID 83843 Palouse Subbasin Management Plan: Table of Contents i. Introduction i 1. Assessment 1.1 The Palouse Subbasin Of The Past 1-1 1.2 The Present Day Palouse Subbasin 1-2 1.2.1 General Description 1-2 1.2.2 Land Use and Land Ownership 1-3 1.2.3 Jurisdictional Authorities 1-4 1.2.4 Water Resources 1-7 1.2.5 Water Quality 1-9 1.3 Anthropogenic Disturbances 1-13 1.4 Wildlife and Fish Resources 1-14 1.4.1 Historic Habitats 1-14 1.4.2 Current Habitat Types 1-15 1.4.3 Wildlife Resources 1-30 1.4.4 Palouse Subbasin Fauna and Responses to Habitat Changes 1-43 1.4.5 Focal Species 1-50 1.4.6 Fish Resources 1-64 1.4.7 Fish Habitat 1-72 1.5 Limiting Factors 1-75 1.5.1 Agricultural Conversion 1-79 1.5.2 Exotic Vegetation Encroachment 1-86 1.5.3 Timber Harvest 1-88 1.5.4 Fire Suppression 1-88 1.5.5 Urban Development 1-89 1.5.6 Hydropower Development 1-92 1.5.7 Other Limiting Factors 1-92 2.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Idaho Fire Restrictions Plan
    IDAHO FIRE RESTRICTIONS PLAN 2021 IDAHO FIRE RESTRICTIONS PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION, SIGNATURES, PURPOSE, AND AUTHORITY 1 AREA DETERMINATION 2 PROCESS FOR FIRE RESTRICTIONS 2 INITIATION 2 IMPLEMENTATION 3 RESCISSION 3 PROCESS FOR CLOSURES & INFORMATION SHARING 4 APPENDIX 1: AUTHORITIES 5 APPENDIX 2: ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 6 APPENDIX 3: AREA BOUNDARIES IN NARRATIVE FORMAT 8 APPENDIX 4: STAGE I AND STAGE II FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS 12 (FAQS) APPENDIX 5: STAGE I AND STAGE II RESTRICTIONS & VOLUNTARY MEASURES FOR IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF LANDS LOGGING OPERATIONS 19 APPENDIX 6: DEFINITIONS 23 APPENDIX 7: AREA FIRE RESTRICTIONS COORDINATORS 24 APPENDIX 8: MAP OF IDAHO FIRE RESTRICTIONS AREAS 25 APPENDIX 9: FIRE RESTRICTIONS AREA PLANS AND MAPS BOISE 26 CENTRAL IDAHO 37 COEUR D’ALENE 40 EASTERN IDAHO 46 GRANGEVILLE 54 PAYETTE 60 SOUTH CENTRAL 69 WILDERNESS 77 APPENDIX 10: NEWS RELEASE, EXEMPTION, AND RESTRCTION ORDER 82 TEMPLETES APPENDIX 11: STAGE II EXEMPTIONS FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES AND RAILROADS 93 APPENDIX 12: FIRE RESTRICTION AREA CRITERIA EVALUATION FORM 99 Introduction The Idaho Fire Restrictions Plan is an interagency document that outlines interagency coordination efforts regarding fire restrictions and closures. An interagency approach for initiating restrictions or closures helps provide consistency among the land management partners, while defining the restriction boundaries so they are easily distinguishable to the public. Each restrictions area is encouraged to recruit any affected agency or landowner into restriction conversations whenever possible. Signatures All agencies signatory to the Idaho Statewide Annual Operating Plan are encumbered into Idaho’s Fire Restriction Plan. A unique signature page for this plan is not necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Strategy for Idaho Panhandle Peatlands 2004
    Conservation Strategy for Idaho Panhandle Peatlands Idaho Conservation Data Center Idaho Department of Fish and Game PO Box 25 Compiled by: Boise, Idaho Juanita Lichthardt 83707 2004 Report prepared for the Idaho Panhandle National Forests EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Peatlands are rare in the Panhandle region of Idaho and adjacent northeastern Washington. They are disjunct by more than 1,000 kilometers from the largely unbroken peatlands occurring at boreal latitudes in North America. As elsewhere, Panhandle peatlands are characterized by species adapted to the unique suite of conditions associated with these habitats. Nearly ten percent of the plant species of conservation concern in Idaho consists of disjunct boreal species found in these peatlands. Due to the rarity and sensitive nature of peatlands in northern Idaho we propose a comprehensive conservation strategy that will protect and maintain them and the ecological factors responsible for their occurrence and persistence. We review pertinent literature; identify significant peatlands of the Panhandle region; discuss the ecology of these sites, their important physical and biotic features, current and potential threats; recommend conservation designations and management prescriptions; and outline public education, research, and monitoring needs. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This conservation strategy for Panhandle peatlands is the product of a history of collaboration between the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Conservation Data Center (IDCDC) and the U.S. Forest Service. Numerous inventory and monitoring projects have been supported by the Idaho Panhandle National Forests (IPNF), and paleoecological research by the Intermountain Research Station. The original Conservation Strategy, upon which this document is based, would not have been possible without the expertise and tireless fieldwork of Rob Bursik, formerly of the IDCDC.
    [Show full text]