DOCSLIB.ORG

Montana State University Research Paper

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Montana State University Research Paper DESIGNING AND ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DENIL FISHWAYS USING HYDRAULIC MODELING-BASED APPROACHES by Nolan Chalmers Platt A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Civil Engineering MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY Bozeman, Montana April 2019 ©COPYRIGHT by Nolan Platt 2019 All Rights Reserved ii DEDICATION To Megan and the 404, much love to the community. To Alan and Joan, for valuing education and making it all possible. To Ben, this project would not be what it was without him. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................1 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................4 The Big Hole and Grayling ..............................................................................................4 Hydraulic Modeling Applied to Fish Passage .................................................................7 3. MODELING UPSTREAM ARCTIC GRAYLING PASSAGE THROUGH DENIL FISHWAYS IN THE BIG HOLE VALLEY, MONTANA .............................13 Contributions of Authors and Co-Authors.....................................................................13 Manuscript Information .................................................................................................14 Introduction ....................................................................................................................15 Methods..........................................................................................................................21 Study Area and S ites ..............................................................................................21 Data Collection ......................................................................................................24 Hydraulic Modeling ...............................................................................................29 Passage Index Application .....................................................................................32 Results ............................................................................................................................35 Hydraulic Models...................................................................................................35 Operating Condition...............................................................................................37 Passage Windows...................................................................................................37 Disc uss io n ......................................................................................................................40 Known Passage Conditions....................................................................................40 Unknown Passage Conditions................................................................................41 Biological Consideration .......................................................................................42 Hydraulic Models...................................................................................................47 Model Application .................................................................................................49 Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................51 Disclosure Statement .....................................................................................................52 Funding ..........................................................................................................................52 References .....................................................................................................................52 Appendix .......................................................................................................................59 4. HYDRAULIC DESIGN OF DENIL FISHWAYS AT PIN-AND-PLANK IRRIGATION DIVERSIONS: A TECHNICAL REPORT ..........................................81 Contributions of Authors and Co-Authors.....................................................................81 Manuscript Information .................................................................................................82 Summary ........................................................................................................................83 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED Design Scenario .............................................................................................................87 Step 1: Define Design Criteria .......................................................................................88 Step 2: Collect Pertinent Data ........................................................................................94 Step 3: Construct Hydraulic Model ...............................................................................99 Step 4: Determine Downstream Invert Elevation ........................................................102 Step 5: Check Minimum-Slope Depth Requirements..................................................103 Step 6: Determine Upstream Invert Elevation .............................................................105 Step 7: Final Design C heck..........................................................................................107 Fishway Operation and Maintenance...........................................................................107 Definitions and Abbreviations .....................................................................................108 Disclaimer ....................................................................................................................109 References ....................................................................................................................110 Appendices...................................................................................................................112 Appendix 1 ...........................................................................................................112 Hydraulic Design Process Example: Steel Creek Diversion .......................112 Hydraulic Design Process Example: Big Hole River Diversion .................116 Appendix 2 ...........................................................................................................122 Appendix 3 ...........................................................................................................123 5. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................124 REFERENCES CITED....................................................................................................126 v LIST OF TABLES Tab le Page 3.1 Passage index ..................................................................................................34 3.2 Hydraulic model calibration results ................................................................36 3.3 Passage windows ............................................................................................38 4.1 Design criteria .................................................................................................89 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 3.1 Study area map................................................................................................22 3.2 Swa mp Creek site photo .................................................................................24 3.3 Plan view site schematic .................................................................................26 3.4 Graphical representation of passage condition of Site 28, 2018.....................39 4.1 Design process flow chart ...............................................................................86 4.2 Denil schematics .............................................................................................92 4.3 Site schematic .................................................................................................97 4.4 Step 4 visual summary ..................................................................................103 vii ABSTRACT Man-made, instream structures can pose barriers to fish movement. Fish move about river systems to reach habitats associated with various stages of their life histories. If access to required habitat is blocked, it can cause detrimental effects to fish populations. Removing barriers to fish movement is often socio-economically infeasible so fishways are used to promote fish passage around barriers. Denil fishways consist of a chute for water to flow through and baffles to slow water velocities; they are a relatively cheap solution for promoting upstream fish passage over low-head barriers. The Big Hole River basin is home to the last fluvia l population of Arctic Grayling in the continental United States. Per an agreement between landowners and several government organizations, Denil fishways were installed at irrigation diversions in the Big Hole Valley to provide fish volitional routes to navigate irrigation diversions. Eleven Denil fishways at irrigation diversions were evaluated for their effectiveness at passing grayling by using hydraulic modeling techniques coupled with biologic data. Hydrologic data was applied to hydraulic models to estimate water surface elevations about the Denils over time. A passage index was developed which inferred passage efficiency of the fishway based on depths at the upstream and downstream
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Big Hole River Fluvial Arctic Grayling
    FLUVIAL ARCTIC GRAYLING MONITORING REPORT 2003 James Magee and Peter Lamothe Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks Dillon, Montana Submitted To: Fluvial Arctic Grayling Workgroup And Beaverhead National Forest Bureau of Land Management Montana Chapter, American Fisheries Society Montana Council, Trout Unlimited Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service June 2004 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The following individuals and organizations contributed valuable assistance to the project in 2003. Scott Lula, Greg Gibbons, Zachary Byram, Tracy Elam, Tim Mosolf, and Dick Oswald of Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks (FWP), provided able field assistance. Ken Staigmiller (FWP) collected samples for disease testing. Ken McDonald (FWP), provided administrative support, chaired the Fluvial Arctic Grayling Workgroup, reviewed progress reports and assisted funding efforts. Bob Snyder provided support as Native Species Coordinator. Dick Oswald (FWP) provided technical advice and expertise. Bruce Rich (FWP) provided direction as regional fisheries supervisor. Jim Brammer, Dennis Havig, Dan Downing, and Chris Riley (USFS) assisted with funding, provided housing for FWP technicians, and assisted with fieldwork. Bill Krise, and Ron Zitzow, Matt Toner, and the staff of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Bozeman Fish Technology Center maintained the brood reserve stock and transported grayling to the upper Ruby River. Jack Boyce, Mark Kornick and Jim Drissell, and crew of Big Springs Hatchery assisted with egg takes at Axolotl and Green Hollow II brood lakes, and transported eyed grayling eggs for RSI use in the upper Ruby River and to Bluewater State Fish Hatchery for rearing reaches. Gary Shaver, Bob Braund, and Dave Ellis from Bluewater State Hatchery raised and transported grayling to the Ruby River and the Missouri Headwaters restoration reaches.
    [Show full text]
  • Likely to Have Habitat Within Iras That ALLOW Road
    Item 3a - Sensitive Species National Master List By Region and Species Group Not likely to have habitat within IRAs Not likely to have Federal Likely to have habitat that DO NOT ALLOW habitat within IRAs Candidate within IRAs that DO Likely to have habitat road (re)construction that ALLOW road Forest Service Species Under NOT ALLOW road within IRAs that ALLOW but could be (re)construction but Species Scientific Name Common Name Species Group Region ESA (re)construction? road (re)construction? affected? could be affected? Bufo boreas boreas Boreal Western Toad Amphibian 1 No Yes Yes No No Plethodon vandykei idahoensis Coeur D'Alene Salamander Amphibian 1 No Yes Yes No No Rana pipiens Northern Leopard Frog Amphibian 1 No Yes Yes No No Accipiter gentilis Northern Goshawk Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Ammodramus bairdii Baird's Sparrow Bird 1 No No Yes No No Anthus spragueii Sprague's Pipit Bird 1 No No Yes No No Centrocercus urophasianus Sage Grouse Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Cygnus buccinator Trumpeter Swan Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Falco peregrinus anatum American Peregrine Falcon Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Gavia immer Common Loon Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Histrionicus histrionicus Harlequin Duck Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Lanius ludovicianus Loggerhead Shrike Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Oreortyx pictus Mountain Quail Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Otus flammeolus Flammulated Owl Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Picoides albolarvatus White-Headed Woodpecker Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Picoides arcticus Black-Backed Woodpecker Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Speotyto cunicularia Burrowing
    [Show full text]
  • Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Montana Arctic
    Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Montana Arctic Grayling Restoration August 2007 1 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING among: MONTANA FISH, WILDLIFE & PARKS (FWP) U.S. BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT (BLM) U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE (USFWS) U.S. FOREST SERVICE (USFS) MONTANA COUNCIL TROUT UNLIMITED (TU) MONTANA CHAPTER AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY (AFS) YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK (YNP) MONTANA ARCTIC GRAYLING RECOVERY PROGRAM (AGRP) USDA NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION SERVICE (NRCS) MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION (DNRC) concerning MONTANA ARCTIC GRAYLING RESTORATION BACKGROUND Montana’s Arctic grayling Thymallus arcticus is a unique native species that comprises an important component of Montana’s history and natural heritage. Fluvial (river dwelling) Arctic grayling were once widespread in the Missouri River drainage, but currently wild grayling persist only in the Big Hole River, representing approximately 4% of their native range in Montana. Native lacustrine/adfluvial populations historically distributed in the Red Rock drainage and possibly the Big Hole drainage have also been reduced in abundance and distribution. Arctic grayling have a long history of being petitioned for listing under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Most recently (in April 2007) the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) determined that listing of Arctic grayling in Montana under ESA was not warranted because it does not constitute a distinct population segment as defined by the ESA. On May 15th 2007, the Center for Biological Diversity announced its 60-day Intent to Sue the USFWS regarding the recent grayling decision. The Montana Arctic Grayling Recovery Program (AGRP) was formed in 1987 following declines in the Big Hole River Arctic grayling population, and over concerns for the Red Rock population.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Fish Conservation
    Yellowstone SScience Native Fish Conservation @ JOSH UDESEN Native Trout on the Rise he waters of Yellowstone National Park are among the most pristine on Earth. Here at the headwaters of the Missouri and Snake rivers, the park’s incredibly productive streams and lakes support an abundance of fish. Following the last Tglacial period 8,000-10,000 years ago, 12 species/subspecies of fish recolonized the park. These fish, including the iconic cutthroat trout, adapted and evolved to become specialists in the Yellowstone environment, underpinning a natural food web that includes magnificent animals: ospreys, bald eagles, river otters, black bears, and grizzly bears all feed upon cutthroat trout. When the park was established in 1872, early naturalists noted that about half of the waters were fishless, mostly because of waterfalls which precluded upstream movement of recolonizing fishes. Later, during a period of increasing popularity of the Yellowstone sport fishery, the newly established U.S. Fish Commission began to extensively stock the park’s waters with non-natives, including brown, brook, rainbow, and lake trout. Done more than a century ago as an attempt to increase an- gling opportunities, these actions had unintended consequences. Non-native fish caused serious negative impacts on native fish populations in some watersheds, and altered the parks natural ecology, particularly at Yellowstone Lake. It took a great deal of effort over many decades to alter our native fisheries. It will take a great deal more work to restore them. As Aldo Leopold once said, “A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic com- munity.
    [Show full text]
  • Population Viability of Arctic Grayling in the Gibbon River, Yellowstone National Park
    North American Journal of Fisheries Management 30:1582–1590, 2010 [Article] Ó Copyright by the American Fisheries Society 2010 DOI: 10.1577/M10-083.1 Population Viability of Arctic Grayling in the Gibbon River, Yellowstone National Park 1 AMBER C. STEED* Montana Cooperative Fishery Research Unit and Department of Ecology, Montana State University, Post Office Box 173460, Bozeman, Montana 59717, USA ALEXANDER V. ZALE U.S. Geological Survey, Montana Cooperative Fishery Research Unit, and Department of Ecology, Montana State University, Post Office Box 173460, Bozeman, Montana 59717, USA TODD M. KOEL Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences Program, Yellowstone Center for Resources, Post Office Box 168, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming 82190, USA STEVEN T. KALINOWSKI Department of Ecology, Montana State University, Post Office Box 172460, Bozeman, Montana 59717, USA Abstract.—The fluvial Arctic grayling Thymallus arcticus is restricted to less than 5% of its native range in the contiguous United States and was relisted as a category 3 candidate species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act in 2010. Although fluvial Arctic grayling of the lower Gibbon River, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, were considered to have been extirpated by 1935, anglers and biologists have continued to report catching low numbers of Arctic grayling in the river. Our goal was to determine whether a viable population of fluvial Arctic grayling persisted in the Gibbon River or whether the fish caught in the river were downstream emigrants from lacustrine populations in headwater lakes. We addressed this goal by determining relative abundances, sources, and evidence for successful spawning of Arctic grayling in the Gibbon River.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 14 CSKT Sensitive Species and Heritage Program Ranks for Species in the Flathead Subbasin
    Appendix 14 CSKT Sensitive Species and Heritage Program Ranks for Species in the Flathead Subbasin Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) Sensitive Terrestrial Species List The tribes and state classify 39 terrestrial, vertebrate wildlife species in the subbasin as sensitive (table xx). All are considered sensitive due to low populations, threats to their habitats, or highly restricted distributions. These species do not necessarily have legal protection but are considered sensitive to human activities and attention to their habitat and population needs may be warranted during the planning of resource management activities. The status of many of these species is not known because there have been few population or habitat studies. Table 1. CSKT sensitive terrestrial species Amphibians Boreal toad Tailed frog Birds Common loon Common tern American white pelican Forster’s tern Black-crowned night-heron Black tern White-faced ibis Yellow-billed cuckoo Trumpeter swan Flammulated owl Harlequin duck Burrowing owl Bald eagle Great gray owl Northern goshawk Boreal owl Ferruginous hawk Black swift Peregrine falcon Black-backed woodpecker Columbian sharp-tailed grouse Loggerhead shrike Black-necked stilt Baird’s sparrow Franklin’s gull Le conte’s sparrow Caspian tern Mammals Townsend’s big-eared bat Woodland caribou Northern bog lemming Wolverine Gray wolf Fisher Grizzly bear River Otter Lynx Montana Natural Heritage Program Ranks Species have been evaluated and ranked on the basis of their global (range-wide) status, and their Montana-wide status, using the standardized ranking system of the Natural Heritage Network (NatureServe 2003). Species on the list may be common elsewhere but rare in Montana because they are on the margin of their range.
    [Show full text]
  • 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List Astragalus Hamiltonii
    Vol. 76 Wednesday, No. 36 February 23, 2011 Part IV Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition To List Astragalus hamiltonii, Penstemon flowersii, Eriogonum soredium, Lepidium ostleri, and Trifolium friscanum as Endangered or Threatened; Rule VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10166 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FWS–R6–ES–2010–0087. Supporting endangered or threatened. The petition documentation we used in preparing included the five plant species Fish and Wildlife Service this finding is available for public addressed in this finding. The petition inspection, by appointment, during incorporated all analysis, references, 50 CFR Part 17 normal business hours at the U.S. Fish and documentation provided by Docket No. [FWS–R6–ES–2010–0087; MO and Wildlife Service, Utah Ecological NatureServe in its online database at 92210–0–008] Services Field Office, 2369 West Orton http://www.natureserve.org/. The Circle, Suite 50, West Valley City, UT document clearly identified itself as a Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 84119. Please submit any new petition and included the petitioners’ and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a information, materials, comments, or identification information, as required Petition To List Astragalus hamiltonii, questions concerning this finding to the in 50 CFR 424.14(a). We sent a letter to Penstemon flowersii, Eriogonum above address.
    [Show full text]
  • An Evaluation of the Reintroduction of Fluvial Arctic Grayling Into the Upper
    An evaluation of the reintroduction of fluvial Arctic grayling into the upper Ruby River by Bradley William Liermann A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Biological Sciences Montana State University © Copyright by Bradley William Liermann (2001) Abstract: This study was conducted to assess the survival, movement and growth of fluvial Arctic grayling reintroduced into the upper Ruby River as part of a program to reestablish populations within their native range in Montana. Numbers and ages of fish planted were 29,808 age 0 in 1997, 9,804 age 1 in 1998, and 7,349 age 1 in 1999, distributed among three areas over a 20.2 km reach. Of the 9,804 age 1 fish planted in 1998, 3,750 were given wire tags while all age 1 fish reintroduced in 1999 were given wire tags. Wire tagging locations were varied by planting section to assess post-stocking movement. Electrofishing mark-recapture surveys were conducted at four primary sites and one pass catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) surveys at six secondary sites in September and October each year and at three primary sites the following April. Recaptured grayling were tested for the presence of wire tags, counted, measured, and weighed, and normative brown and rainbow trout were counted. Movements of recaptured fish were assessed by comparing capture and release sites through wire tag recaptures, by operating a weir trap located about 13 km below the lowest planting site, and by a survey of angler catches. Habitat parameters were measured at seven of the same primary and secondary survey sites in 1998 and 1999, including length, wetted width, and average depth of pools, runs, and riffles.
    [Show full text]
  • Montana Statewide Fisheries Management Program and Guide
    2019-2027 Montana Statewide Fisheries Management Program and Guide THE OUTSIDE IS IN US ALL d>K&KEdEd^ ^ddt/&/^,Z/^DE'DEdWZK'ZDE'h/WZd/͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘ ϰ /EdZKhd/KEEWhZWK^͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘͘ ϰ DKEdE͛^&/^,Z/^Z^KhZ^͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙ ϱ &/^,Z/^DE'DEdWZK'ZD͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙ ϭϭ Yhd/,/ddWZK'ZD͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘ ϯϯ tdZZZd/KEE^^WZK'ZD͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘ ϰϱ Yhd//Es^/s^W/^WZK'ZD͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙ ϱϮ ^ddt/&/^,Z/^DE'DEdWZK'ZDE'h/WZd//͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙ ϱϲ <KKdE/Z/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙ ϱϵ ^Khd,&KZ<&>d,Z/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙ ϳϵ ^tEZ/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘͘ ϴϱ &>d,Z/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘ ϵϱ hWWZ>Z<&KZ<Z/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙ ϭϬϱ >Z<&KZ<Z/sZ&>/EdͬZK<Z/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙ ϭϭϯ ><&KKdZ/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘͘ ϭϮϵ /ddZZKKdZ/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘ ϭϰϬ D/>>Z<&KZ<Z/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘ ϭϰϵ >KtZ>Z<&KZ<Z/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘͘ ϭϱϵ ZZK<Z/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘ ϭϳϲ ZhzZ/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘ ϭϴϰ sZ,Z/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘ ϭϵϬ /',K>Z/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙ ϭϵϱ Kh>ZZ/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘͘ ϮϬϯ :&&Z^KEZ/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘͘ ϮϬϳ D/^KEZ/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘ ϮϭϮ '>>d/EZ/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘ Ϯϭϴ hWWZD/^^KhZ/Z/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙ ϮϮϰ D/^^KhZ/Z/sZʹZKZEZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘ Ϯϯϲ 2 ^D/d,Z/sZZ/E'͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͙͘
    [Show full text]
  • Montana's State Wildlife Action Plan 2015
    MONTANA’S STATE WILDLIFE ACTION PLAN MONTANA FISH, WILDLIFE & PARKS 2015 The mission of Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP) is to provide for the stewardship of the fish, wildlife, parks, and recreational resources of Montana, while contributing to the quality of life for present and future generations. To carry out its mission, FWP strives to provide and support fiscally responsible programs that conserve, enhance, and protect Montana’s 1) aquatic ecotypes, habitats, and species; 2) terrestrial ecotypes, habitats, and species; and 3) important cultural and recreational resources. This document should be cited as Montana’s State Wildlife Action Plan. 2015. Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, 1420 East Sixth Avenue, Helena, MT 59620. 441 pp. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Montana’s first State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP), the Comprehensive Fish and Wildlife Conservation Strategy (CFWCS), was approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2006. Since then, many conservation partners have used the plan to support their conservation work and to seek additional funding to continue their work. For Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP), State Wildlife Grant (SWG) dollars have helped implement the strategy by supporting conservation efforts for many different species and habitats. This revision details implemented actions since 2006 (Appendix C). This SWAP identifies community types, Focal Areas, and species in Montana with significant issues that warrant conservation attention. The plan is not meant to be an FWP plan, but a plan to guide conservation throughout Montana. One hundred and twenty-eight Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) are identified in this revision. Forty-seven of these are identified as being in most critical conservation need.
    [Show full text]
  • The Last Best Fish: Will Conservation and Consensus Save Montana's Arctic Grayling?
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2008 The Last Best Fish: will conservation and consensus save Montana's Arctic grayling? Jonathan M. Stumpf 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 Stumpf, Jonathan M., "The Last Best Fish: will conservation and consensus save Montana's Arctic grayling?" (2008). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 1035. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/1035 This Professional Paper 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]. THE LAST BEST FISH: WILL CONSERVATION AND CONSENSUS SAVE MONTANA’S ARCTIC GRAYLING? By JONATHAN MICHAEL STUMPF Bachelor of Science, Music Business, University of Colorado‐Denver, Denver, CO, 2004 Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Journalism, Print The University of Montana Missoula, MT December 2008 Approved by: Perry Brown, Associate Provost for Graduate Education Graduate School Clemens P. Work, Chair School of Journalism Keith Graham, Committee Member School of Journalism Greg Twigg, Committee Member Media Arts Table of Contents 1. CHAPTER ONE…………………………………………………………………...page 1 The Last Best Fish: Will conservation and consensus save Montana’s Arctic grayling? 2. CHAPTER TWO…………………………………………………………………page 17 Mike Bias – The Diplomat 3.
    [Show full text]
  • The Population Genetics of Arctic Grayling (Thymallus Arcticus) of Montana
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1986 The population genetics of Arctic grayling (Thymallus arcticus) of Montana Rebecca Jane Everett 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 Everett, Rebecca Jane, "The population genetics of Arctic grayling (Thymallus arcticus) of Montana" (1986). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 7261. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/7261 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COPYRIGHT ACT OF 1976 Th is is an unpublished manuscript in which copyright sub ­ s is t s . Any further r e p r in t in g of it s contents must be approved BY THE AUTHOR. Ma n sfield L ibrary Un iv e r s it y of Montana o a t f : 1986 The population genetics of Arctic grayling (Thymallus arcticus) of Montana by Rebecca Jane Everett B.S., University of California, Davis 1976 Presented in partial fulfillm ent of the requirements fo r the degree of Master of Arts University of Montana, Missoula 1986 Approved by: Chairman, Board of Examiners Dean, Graduate School I t l ______ Date UMI Number: EP38062 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
    [Show full text]