DOCSLIB.ORG

BONNER COUNTY, SANDPOINT, IDAHO 5-3-2016 11:09:35 AM No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
BONNER COUNTY, SANDPOINT, IDAHO 5-3-2016 11:09:35 AM No Instrument# 888461 BONNER COUNTY, SANDPOINT, IDAHO 5-3-2016 11:09:35 AM No. ofPages-20 Recorded for; BOCC MICHAEL WROSEDALE Fee: 0.00 Ex-Officio Recorder Deputy Indexto; COUNTY ORDINANCES "C 1907 Bonner County ORDINANCE NO. STgZ Title 3, Public Waters, Amendment Bonner County Revised Code May 3, 2016 ORDINANCE NO. 5X2^ Title 3, Public Waters, Amendment Bonner County Revised Code AN ORDINANCE OF BONNER COUNTY, IDAHO, SETTING FORTH ITS AUTHORITY; AMENDING TITLE 3, BONNER COUNTY REVISED CODE, BY AMENDING CHAPTERS 1 THROUGH 7, BY EXPANDING AND CONSOLIDATING THE DEFINITIONS SECTION TO INCLUDE DEFINITIONS FOR BRIDGE, COME BACK BAY, FACILITY, MOORING, MOORING BUOY, MOTORBOAT, NO WAKE, PADDLEBOARDING, PEND OREILLE RIVER, STANDUP PADDLEBOARDING, WATERSKIING, AND WATERWAYS, BY ADDING A NEW SECTION FOR NO WAKE ZONES FOR RIVERS, BY CLARIFYING RESTRICTED ZONES, BY UPDATING THE PENALTIES PROVISIONS AND ADOPTING INFRACTION PENALTY SCHEDULE A, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Bonner County, Idaho, have adopted standards identified in Title 3 of Bonner County Revised Code consistent with their powers established under Title 31 of Idaho code and by the authority granted to Bonner County pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-7031; and WHEREAS, the Bonner County Commissioners desire to amend Title 3, Chapters 1 through 7; and WHEREAS, the Bonner County Commissioners desire to amend and expand the definitions set forth in Bonner County Revised Code 3-102 to promote uniform enforcement ofTitle 3; and WHEREAS, the Bonner County Commissioners desire to update the penalties provisions to reflect the maximum penalty allowed under state code, to allow for graduated infraction penalties based upon severity ofthe offense, and to adopt an infraction penalty schedule which shall be reviewed and adopted yearly; and NOW, THEREFORE BEITORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Bonner County, Idaho, that the following be and is hereby adopted as an ordinance of Bonner County: SECTION I: Authority This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to the authority granted in Title 31 ofthe Idaho Code. SECTION II: Bonner County Revised Code, Title 3, Chapters 1 through 7, are amended as follows: 3-100: AUTHORITY: This chapter shall be known as the BONNERCOUNTY PUBLIC WATERS ORDINANCE. By authority granted to Bonner County pursuant to Idaho Code sections 67-7013(7) and 67-7031 et seq., the board of county commissioners of Bonner County hereby enact this chapter as follows. (Ord. 406,5-30-2001) 3-101: PROTECTION OF THE PUBLIC: It is necessary for the protection of the health, safety and welfare ofthe general public, and for the protection of public and private property, to regulate the operation of watercraft and swimming on the public waters of the state of Idaho situated in Bonner County, Idaho, but outside the municipal boundaries of the various incorporated cities within said county. The board of commissioners specifically find that it is necessary for the protection ofthe health, safety and welfare ofthe general public to adopt and enforce rules and regulations governing all county owned or controlled parks and waterways facilities, including all property directly owned by Bonner County or under its sole control as a public easement, or under a cooperative agreement on public lands with other public agencies, such as the Idaho department of lands, Idaho department offish and game. United States bureau of land management. United States forest service. United States corps of engineers and the city ofSandpoint. (Ord. 406,5-30-2001) 3-102: DEFINITIONS: For the purpose ofthis Title, the following definitions shall be applicable: ADULT SUPERVISION: Having a person age eighteen (18) or over on or in a vessel and in a position to supervise. BRIDGE: A structure spanning and providing passage over a body of water. COME BACK BAY: A body of water from the bridge over Fry Creek upstream to the headwaters. FACILITY: Any park, boat launch facility, dock or other waterways property owned, operated, managed or maintained by Bonner County. MARINE EVENT: A regatta, race, marine event, tournament or exhibition on any waters within Bonner County authorized by the sheriff ofthe county. MOORING: Parking a vessel in the water. MOORING BUOY: An offshore floating buoy anchored to the bottom that serves as a mooring point to secure a vessel. MOTORBOAT: Any vessel propelled by motor whether or not such machinery is the principal source of propulsion. MOTOR DRIVEN WATERCRAFT: Any boat or vehicle of any type, which is propelled by any type of motor or engine. NEGLIGENT OPERATION: Operating any vessel on the waters of the state of Idaho in a careless or heedless manner so as to be indifferent to any person or property of other persons, or at a rate ofspeed greater than will permit him in the exercise of reasonable care to bring the vessel to a stop within the assured clear distance ahead. NIGHT: One hour after sunset until one hour before sunrise. NO SWIMMING ZONE:A designated area where the swimming shall not be allowed. A "no swimming 2 zone" also precludes the useoffloat tubes andother nonmotorized devices notdesigned or modified to be used asa means oftransportation on the water, such as inflatable airmattresses, single inner tubes, and beach and water toys. NO WAKE: The act of operating any vessel whereby the visibletract of turbulence is not more than six inches (6") or the speed isnot morethan five miles per hour(5 m.p.h.). NO WAKE ZONE: Adesignated area wherethe operationof watercraft must be accomplished at not more than five (5) miles per hour, nor with more than a six inch (6") wake. OVERNIGHT: From one hour after sunset until one hour before sunrise. PADDLE BOARDING: Awater sport inwhich a person paddlesa longstreamlined board withtheir hands while lying or kneeling onthe paddleboard. Aderivation ofpaddle boarding is stand-up paddle boarding (SUP) in which a paddle isused to propel or guide the board. Apaddle board isclassified as a vessel. PEND OREILLE RIVER: The bodyof water from the railroad bridge at Sandpointdownstream to the Idaho-Washington border. PERSONAL WATERCRAFT: Awatercraft, powered bya waterjet pump, which canbe operated by persons sitting, standing or kneeling. POSTED WATERS: An area which isa portion of the waters of Bonner County, Idaho, marked with regulatory markers in compliance with Idaho Code section 67-7031 and IDAPA 26.66.21, to regulate the actions of watercraft and persons in such marked portions of the waters. PUBLIC WATERS: Any river, lake or other body of water within Bonner County, Idaho, other than those which are entirelyprivately owned, regardless of navigability. SHORELINE: The line ofdemarcation betweenwaterand land at the timeinquestion without regard to property lines or high or low water lines or marks. STAND-UP PADDLE BOARD (SUP): Avessel similar to a surfboard which isusually propelled on the surface of the water with a paddle. Astand-up paddle board isclassified as a vessel. VESSEL: Every description ofwatercraft, including a seaplane on the water, used or capable of being used as a means oftransportation on water, butdoes not include float houses, diver's aids operatedand designed primarily to propel a diver below, or modified to be used asa means oftransportation on the water, such as inflatable air mattress, single innertubes, and beach and water toys. For purposes of Title 3, vessel, motorboat, motor driven craft and watercraft are synonymous. WAKE: The visible trackof turbulence created by watercraft moving through the water. (Ord. 406, 5-30- 2001) WATER SKIING: Waterskiing or skiing shall include knee boarding, wake boarding, wake surfing, wake skating or any other type oftowedrecreational activity. This isnot intended to define the towing ofa vessel or other objects at no wake, WATERWAYS: Any river, lakeor other bodyof water within BonnerCounty, Idaho. 3-103: BASIC RULE: A. Itshall be unlawful foranyperson to operate anytypeofvessel or watercraft on the public waters within Bonner County, Idaho, in a negligent manner not having due regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing, or any rateofspeed greaterthanstated herein, or will permit, in the exercise of reasonable care,to bring saidwatercraftto a stop within the assuredcleardistance ahead. (Ord. 406,5- 30-2001) B. A violation of this section shall constitute an infraction. 3-104: ADULT SUPERVISION AND AGE RESTRICTIONS: A. Itshall be unlawful to operate, or to allow the operation of a motordriven watercraftbya person under the age often (10), except under direct adult supervision. B. Itshall be unlawful to operate, or to allowsomeone to operate, a motor driven watercraft when the operator is between the ages of ten (10)to fourteen (14), without adult supervision unless the vessel is powered by a motor rated at ten (10) horsepower or less. C. The age restrictions providedfor in this section shallapplyto the operation of personal watercraft. (Ord. 406, 5-30-2001) D. A violation ofthis section shall constitute an infraction. 3-105: DISTANCES FOR NO WAKE ZONES ON LAKES AND THE PEND OREILLERIVER: Specific distances set for no wake zones: A. Withintwo hundred feet (200')from any shoreline, dock, pier, bridge,other structure, or any person in the water, shall be no wake. B. Withinfiftyfeet (50') of any other vessel shall be no wake. (Ord.406,5-30-2001) C. A violation of this section shall constitute an infraction. 3-106: SPEED LIMITS ON SPECIFIED WATERS: Specific speed limitsfor allthe publicwaterways within BonnerCounty, Idaho, except the Clark Fork River from the mouth ofthe river to the dam, Johnson Creek and Priest River from the mouth of the river upstream to the Outlet Bay, are as follows: A. Within one hundred feet (100') of any other vessel, the speed shall be reasonable and prudent, but not in excess of fifteen (15) miles per hour. B. At night, where the speed is not otherwise restricted, the speed limit shall not exceed twenty five (25) miles per hour.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Selkirk Mountains Grizzly Bear Recovery Area 2015 Research and Monitoring Progress Report
    SELKIRK MOUNTAINS GRIZZLY BEAR RECOVERY AREA 2015 RESEARCH AND MONITORING PROGRESS REPORT PREPARED BY WAYNE F. KASWORM, ALEX WELANDER, THOMAS G. RADANDT, JUSTIN E. TEISBERG, WAYNE L. WAKKINEN, MICHAEL PROCTOR, AND CHRISTOPHER SERVHEEN 2016 UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE GRIZZLY BEAR RECOVERY COORDINATOR'S OFFICE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA, MAIN HALL ROOM 309 MISSOULA, MONTANA 59812 (406) 243-4903 1 Abstract: Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) captured and monitored a radio collared sample of grizzly bears in the SMGBRZ from 1983 until 2002 to determine distribution, home ranges, cause specific mortality, reproductive rates, and population trend. This effort was suspended in 2003 due to funding constraints and management decisions. In cooperation with IDFG and the Panhandle National Forest (USFS) this effort was reinitiated during 2012 with personnel from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). During 2013 the program was expanded with funding from IDFG, USFS, several sources in British Columbia (BC), and USFWS. This cooperative research and monitoring effort was expanded to involve Idaho Department of Lands, the Kalispel Tribe, the Kootenai Tribe of Idaho, and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife in 2014 Numbers of females with cubs in the Selkirk Mountains grizzly bear recovery zone (SMGBRZ) varied from 0–4 per year and averaged 1.5 per year from 2010–15. Human caused mortality averaged 1.7 bears per year and 0.7 females per year. Ten human caused mortalities during 2010-15 include 4 females (all BC) and 6 males (one US and five BC). Human caused mortalities during 2010-15 were four adult females (one vehicle collision and three under investigation), one adult male (management), and four subadult males (two management, one mistaken identity, and one self-defense).
    [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]
  • SECTION 16 – Table of Contents
    SECTION 16 – Table of Contents 16 Pend Oreille Subbasin Assessment – Terrestrial ............................................ 2 16.1 Focal Habitats: Current Distribution, Limiting Factors, and Condition ........................... 2 16.2 Wildlife of the Pend Oreille Subbasin ............................................................................ 12 16.3 Summary of Terrestrial Resource Limiting Factors ....................................................... 21 16.4 Interpretation and Synthesis............................................................................................ 24 16-1 16 Pend Oreille Subbasin Assessment – Terrestrial 16.1 Focal Habitats: Current Distribution, Limiting Factors, and Condition Vegetation in the Pend Oreille Subbasin is dominated by interior mixed conifer forest, with montane mixed conifer and lodgepole forests in the high elevations and small areas of montane coniferous wetlands and alpine habitats. Timber management is the primary land use in the Subbasin on National Forest System, BLM, Idaho Department of Lands, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Tribal, and private timberlands. Agriculture, grazing, and urban and rural residential development are other land uses. The largest urban areas within the Subbasin include Newport, Cusick, and Metaline, Washington, and Sandpoint, Priest River, and Clark Fork, Idaho. Figure 13.2 (Section 13) shows the current distribution of wildlife-habitat types in the Pend Oreille Subbasin based on IBIS (2003). Table 16.1 presents the acres of habitats by
    [Show full text]
  • EXPERIENCES of a PACKER in WASHINGTON TERRITORY MINING CAMPS DURING the SIXTIES (Concluded from Vol
    EXPERIENCES OF A PACKER IN WASHINGTON TERRITORY MINING CAMPS DURING THE SIXTIES (Concluded from Vol. XIX., page 293). Well, that morning when Patterson reached the barber shop he found Pinkham in the barber shop getting shaved; Patterson just walked over to the barber chair, drew out a big dragoon six shooter and placing it against Pinkhams ear shot him through the head. After he was shot Pinkham jumped up and ran to the front door, and fell there dead. I was right there at the time and saw him lying there in a pool of blood. Patterson "gave himself up," and his crowd being in control of things he was later acquitted by a packed or intimidated jury. Patterson was a bad man, he had killed a sea captain in Portland, and murdered a number of men in "self defense." When a bad man wanted to commit murder with impunity he picked a quarrel with his vic­ tim and killed "in self defense." In going from Walla Walla to the Kootenay mining district we traveled over the Mullan Road to the crossing of the Touchet River, the site of the present town of Prescott; thence to the Snake River, which we crossed sometimes at Silcott's or Lyons Ferry and sometimes at Texas Ferry. We struck the Mullan Road again at Rock Creek and followed it to the crossing of the Spokane River, or Herrin's Bridge, as the place was then called. This bridge was located near the Idaho line, about a half mile above the place where Col.
    [Show full text]
  • DAVID THOMPSON's JOURNEYS in IDAHO in September of the Year
    DAVID THOMPSON'S JOURNEYS IN IDAHO In September of the year 1809 just two white men were en­ joying life, health and the pursuit of happiness, or, to express it in one word of six letters, "living" in the wide area of country between the Pacific Ocean and the Rocky Mountains and the 42d and 49th parallels of north latitude, now embraced within the boundaries of Washington, Oregon and Idaho; and those two men were David Thompson, an Englishman of Welch descent, and Finan McDonald, a full-blood Scotchman. This statement is based upon our pres­ ent knowledge of that period. Many students of the history of the Columbia River Basin are hardly yet alive to the important contri­ butions made to the early geographic knowledge of the northerly half of this great interior basin by David Thompson, the path­ finder for the North-West Company (fur traders) during the years 1807-1812, inclusive. More than one hundred years elapsed before his name even became known to many people in this region. In volumes VIII, IX, and X of this Quarterly the writer contributed a series of studies and annotations under the title "David Thompson's Journeys in the Spokane Country." He is now in a position to com­ pliment that series with another, and, through the courtesy of Mr. J. B. Tyrrell, to present a transcript of the survey notes written by Mr. Thompson in daily journals while within the boundary lines of the present state of Idaho. Lewis and Clark, in 1805-1806 passed across Idaho by way of the Lolo trail, a road commonly used by the Indians but never yet made of practical use for white men.
    [Show full text]
  • Rangifer Tarandus Caribou) in BRITISH COLUMBIA
    THE EARLY HISTORY OF WOODLAND CARIBOU (Rangifer tarandus caribou) IN BRITISH COLUMBIA by David J. Spalding Wildlife Bulletin No. B-100 March 2000 THE EARLY HISTORY OF WOODLAND CARIBOU (Rangifer tarandus caribou) IN BRITISH COLUMBIA by David J. Spalding Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks Wildlife Branch Victoria BC Wildlife Bulletin No. B-100 March 2000 “Wildlife Bulletins frequently contain preliminary data, so conclusions based on these may be sub- ject to change. Bulletins receive some review and may be cited in publications. Copies may be obtained, depending upon supply, from the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Wildlife Branch, P.O. Box 9374 Stn Prov Gov, Victoria, BC V8W 9M4.” © Province of British Columbia 2000 Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data Spalding, D. J. The early history of woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in British Columbia (Wildlife bulletin ; no. B-100) Includes bibliographical references : p. 60 ISBN 0-7726-4167-6 1. Woodland caribou - British Columbia. 2. Woodland caribou - Habitat - British Columbia. I. British Columbia. Wildlife Branch. II. Title. III. Series: Wildlife bulletin (British Columbia. Wildlife Branch) ; no. B-100 QL737.U55S62 2000 333.95’9658’09711 C00-960085-X Citation: Spalding, D.J. 2000. The Early History of Woodland Caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in British Columbia. B.C. Minist. Environ., Lands and Parks, Wildl. Branch, Victoria, BC. Wildl. Bull. No. 100. 61pp. ii DISCLAIMER The views expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the B.C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks. In cases where a Wildlife Bulletin is also a species’ status report, it may contain a recommended status for the species by the author.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 15 21 1 20 21 Amanda Wilson, Infrastructure & Development
    1 15 21 1 20 21 City Amanda Wilson, Infrastructure & Development Services Manager 1123 Lake Street, Sandpoint, Idaho 208.263.3411 | [email protected] Amanda Wilson Little Sandcreek Watershed Management Plan Consider adopting the proposed Watershed Management Plan, as referenced by City Code 7-16. Purpose of the plan is to document conditions, establish goals, define actions, and provide best practices for various types of activities within the Watershed. ✔ To be included in FY22 proposed budget. See staff report for further explanation. Various Yes - 30 day notice Yes; included in Plan. ✔ ✔ CITY OF SANDPOINT AGENDA REPORT DATE: January 15, 2021 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: Amanda Wilson, Infrastructure and Development Services Manager SUBJECT: Little Sand Creek Watershed Management Plan DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND: The Little Sand Creek Watershed consists of approximately 7,800 acres lying northwest of Sandpoint, Idaho, in Townships 57 and 58 North, Ranges 2 and 3 West. The City of Sandpoint began acquiring property within the Watershed in 1918 and currently owns 4,161 acres of the Watershed. Little Sand Creek serves as a regional source for drinking water by way of the City-owned intake system. Therefore, the City has a vested interest and responsibility to protect the Watershed in a manner that ensures water quality. In accordance with the adopted 2018-2020 Strategic Plan, the City engaged Reeve Sherwood Consulting and Point Environmental to critically review needs and define solutions and resource requirements within the watershed. Over the course of approximately one year, the City’s contracted professionals collected data, evaluated existing documents and historical information, performed assessments of field conditions, and engaged multiple stakeholders to identify goals and priorities, establish policy, and provide specific recommendations.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Pend Oreille “State of the Lake”
    Lake Pend Oreille “State of the Lake” Ponderay Events Center April 4th, 2019 Acknowledgments • Funding: Avista Corporation, Bonneville Power Administration • Hickey Bros. Research, LLC • Numerous agencies and cooperators • Anglers and other public supporters Public Outreach Tools https://idfg.idaho.gov Public Outreach Tools https://idfg.idaho.gov/region/panhandle Public Outreach Tools www.facebook.com Fishing Rules and Fish Management Plan • New fishing rules (2019-2021) • NEW: Clark Fork River mouth defined • New Fish Management Plan (2019-2024) Lake Pend Oreille Fishery Background • Diverse, multi-species fishery • 13 sport fish species caught (2014-15 survey) • 7 coldwater, 3 coolwater, 3 warmwater • 200,000 hours of angler effort (2014) • $13 million economic value (2012) Angler Creel Survey: 2014-15 Traditional LPO Fishery • Bull Trout – native (ESA listed) • Westslope Cutthroat Trout - native • Kokanee – established in 1930s – Historically supported most popular fishery in Idaho – Primary prey source for predators • Gerrard Rainbow Trout – introduced in 1941 1949 world-record bull trout, 32 lbs. 1947 world-record rainbow, 37 lbs. 2010 derby-winning rainbow, 25 lbs. Fishery Decline - Factors • Bull Trout and Westslope Cutthroat Trout – Tributary habitat loss/degradation – Introduced species • Kokanee decline started in late-1960s – Spawning habitat loss – Hydropower operations – Introduced species • Trophy Rainbow Trout and Bull Trout fishery – Low kokanee abundance Fishery Recovery Goals Restore kokanee population that Restore consistent trophy Rainbow supports consistent harvest fishery and Trout fishery trophy Rainbow Trout fishery Maintain/enhance Bull Trout population Maintain/enhance Westslope Cutthroat and restore harvest opportunity Trout population Non-Traditional Fishing Opportunity • Numerous non-native species are established • Most appear compatible with traditional fishery – Smallmouth Bass, Largemouth Bass, Panfish, Brown Trout, Lake Whitefish, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Res-Pratt1983 Pend Oreille Trout and Char Life History Study
    Volume 054 Article 05 PEND OREILLE TROUT AND CHAR LIFE HISTORY STUDY IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME in cooperation with LAKE PEND OREILLE IDAHO CLUB Karen 1. Pratt May 1984 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT ....................................................1 INTRODUCTION ................................................ 2 OBJECTIVES ..................................................6 RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................6 METHODS ..................................................... 8 Fish Distribution ....................................... 8 Rearing Areas ......................................8 Spawning Areas .....................................9 Bull Trout .................................... 9 Rainbow and Cutthroat Trout .................. 10 Creel Census ..........................................10 Fish Population Structure .............................10 Age and Growth ....................................10 Age Composition ...................................11 RESULTS ....................................................12 Fish Distribution .....................................12 Rearing Areas .....................................12 Spawning Areas ....................................18 Bull Trout ...................................18 Rainbow and Cutthroat Trout ..................18 Creel Census ..........................................31 Fish Population Structure .............................41 Age and Growth ....................................41 Rainbow Trout ................................41 Bull Trout
    [Show full text]
  • Peatlands on National Forests of the Northern Rocky Mountains: Ecology and Conservation
    United States Department Peatlands on National Forests of of Agriculture Forest Service the Northern Rocky Mountains: Rocky Mountain Ecology and Conservation Research Station General Technical Report Steve W. Chadde RMRS-GTR-11 J. Stephen Shelly July 1998 Robert J. Bursik Robert K. Moseley Angela G. Evenden Maria Mantas Fred Rabe Bonnie Heidel The Authors Acknowledgments Steve W. Chadde is an Ecological Consultant in Calu- The authors thank a number of reviewers for sharing met, MI. At the time of this research project he was their expertise and comments in the preparation of this Ecologist with the USDA Forest Service’s Northern Region report. In Montana, support for the project was provided Natural Areas Program. by the Natural Areas Program of the Northern Region/ Rocky Mountain Research Station, U.S. Department of J. Stephen Shelly is a Regional Botanist with the USDA Agriculture, Forest Service. Dan Svoboda (Beaverhead- Forest Service’s Northern Region Headquarter’s Office Deerlodge National Forest) and Dean Sirucek (Flathead in Missoula, MT. National Forest) contributed portions of the soils and Robert J. Bursik is Botanical Consultant in Amery, WI. geology chapters. Louis Kuennen and Dan Leavell At the time of this research he was a Botanist with the (Kootenai National Forest) guided the authors to sev- Idaho Department of Fish and Game’s Conservation eral interesting peatlands. Mark Shapley, hydrologist, Data Center in Boise, ID. Helena, MT, volunteered his time and provided insights Robert K. Moseley is Plant Ecologist and Director for the into the hydrology and water chemistry of several rich Idaho Department of Fish and Game’s Conservation fens.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Plan
    Pacific Region Partners for Fish and Wildlife and Coastal Program Strategic Plan ____________________________________________________________________________________ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service July 2007 Table of Contents Executive Summary..............................................................................................................................1 Introduction........................................................................................................................................2 How to Use This Plan ...............................................................................................................3 Summary of Stakeholder Input .................................................................................................3 Overview of Region..................................................................................................................4 Ecological Diversity......................................................................................................5 Land Ownership Patterns..............................................................................................7 Threats.......................................................................................................................................7 Pacific Northwest..........................................................................................................7 Pacific Islands...............................................................................................................8 Region
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 31. Columbia Headwaters Recovery Unit—Clark Fork River Basin Critical Habitat Unit
    Bull Trout Final Critical Habitat Justification: Rationale for Why Habitat is Essential, and Documentation of Occupancy Chapter 31. Columbia Headwaters Recovery Unit—Clark Fork River Basin Critical Habitat Unit 31.1. Priest Lakes Critical Habitat Subunit ........................................................................... 827 31.2. Lake Pend Oreille Critical Habitat Subunit .................................................................. 835 31.3. Lower Clark Fork River Critical Habitat Subunit ........................................................ 847 31.4. Middle Clark Fork River Critical Habitat Subunit ....................................................... 855 31.5. Upper Clark Fork River Critical Habitat Subunit ........................................................ 861 31.6. Bitterroot River Critical Habitat Subunit ..................................................................... 865 31.7. Rock Creek Critical Habitat Subunit ............................................................................ 873 31.8. Blackfoot River Critical Habitat Subunit ..................................................................... 877 31.9. Clearwater River and Lakes Critical Habitat Subunit .................................................. 881 31.10. Flathead Lake, Flathead River, and Headwater Lakes Critical Habitat Subunit .......... 887 31.11. Swan River Critical Habitat Subunit ............................................................................ 903 31.12. South Fork Flathead and Hungry Horse Reservoir Critical
    [Show full text]