DOCSLIB.ORG

Flathead-Stillwater Watershed Restoration Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Flathead-Stillwater Watershed Restoration Plan Flathead-Stillwater Watershed Restoration Plan August 2017 Prepared by: Sarah Bowman, BSWC Member Flathead Conservation District 133 Interstate Lane Kalispell, MT 59901 406-752-4220 www.flatheadcd.org Acknowledgements Thank you to the following people for editing this document and providing development guidance: Valerie Kurth – Flathead Conservation District Dean Sirucek – Flathead Conservation District Eric Trum – Department of Environmental Quality Ethan Kunard – Madison Conservation District Samantha Tappenbeck – Soil and Water Conservation Districts of Montana Jessica Makus – Soil and Water Conservation Districts of Montana Ann McCauley – Soil and Water Conservation Districts of Montana Elena Evans – Soil and Water Conservation Districts of Montana Lori Curtis – Whitefish Lake Institute Additional thanks to the Flathead Basin Commission for writing section 4.3.2 on Wastewater Management. Lastly, a big thank you goes out to every organization within the Flathead‐Stillwater watershed who provided input throughout the entire process. Table of Contents List of Acronyms………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. vii Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. viii Section 1: Introduction 1.1 What is a Watershed Restoration Plan?....................................................................... 1 1.2 What is an Impaired Stream and What is a TMDL?...................................................... 2 1.3 What is the Purpose of the WRP?................................................................................. 3 1.4 Who is the Flathead Conservation District?.................................................................. 4 1.5 Who else is involved?.................................................................................................... 4 Section 2: Identifying the Watershed and its Impaired Waters………………………………………………….8 Section 3: Identifying Causes and Sources of NPS Pollution and Other Threats 3.1 Sediment Causes and Sources………………………………………………………………………………… 15 3.2 Temperature Causes and Sources…………………………………………………………………………… 16 3.3 Nutrient Causes and Sources………………………………………………………………………………….. 17 3.4 Non‐Pollutant Impairments……………………………………………………………………………………. 19 3.5 Other Water Quality Pollutants and Threats………………………………………………………….. 20 3.6 Permitted Point Sources of Pollution………………………………………………………………………. 21 3.7 Streams of Concern Pollution Causes and Sources………………………………………………….. 22 Section 4: Identifying Nonpoint Source Management Measures and Estimated Reductions 4.1 Estimated Reductions in Sediment, Nutrient, and Temperature Loading………………… 23 4.2 BMPs for NPS Pollution Reduction………………………………………………………………………….. 25 4.3 Conservation Management Measures to Address Non‐Listed Watershed Pollutants 4.3.1 AIS Management Measures……………………………………………………………………. 26 4.3.2 Wastewater Management……………………………………………………………………… 27 4.3.3 Protection of Healthy, Functioning Riparian Areas, Wetlands, and Floodplains……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 29 4.3.4 Noxious Weed Management………………………………………………………………….. 30 4.3.5 Channel Migration………………………………………………………………………………….. 31 Section 5: Identifying Technical and Financial Assistance Needed 5.1 Technical Partners…………………………………………………………………………………………………..32 5.2 Financial Assistance……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 33 Section 6: Developing an Information and Education Component…………………………………………..34 Section 7: Identifying and Implementing Restoration Projects 7.1 Implementation Plan……………………………………………………………………………………………… 36 7.2 NPS Management Problems, Project Histories, and Recommended Solutions by Stream 7.2.1 Ashley Creek…………………………………………………………………………………………… 38 7.2.2. Coal Creek……………………………………………………………………………………………… 41 7.2.3 Flathead River………………………………………………………………………………………… 45 iii 7.2.4 Haskill Creek…………………………………………………………………………………………… 48 7.2.5 Krause Creek………………………………………………………………………………………….. 51 7.2.6 Logan Creek……………………………………………………………………………………………. 55 7.2.7 Sheppard Creek……………………………………………………………………………………….57 7.2.8 Spring Creek…………………………………………………………………………………………… 59 7.2.9 Stillwater River……………………………………………………………………………………….. 60 7.2.10 Stoner Creek………………………………………………………………………………………….63 7.2.11 Lower Swan River…………………………………………………………………………………. 64 7.2.12 Swift Creek…………………………………………………………………………………………… 65 7.2.13 Trumbull Creek…………………………………………………………………………………….. 66 7.2.14 Whitefish River and Tributaries (Cow and Walker Creeks)……………………. 68 7.3 Implementation Schedule………………………………………………………………………………………. 71 Section 8: Evaluating Progress and Success 8.1 Criteria and Milestones for Measuring Progress…………………………………………………….. 75 8.2 Identifying a Monitoring Plan………………………………………………………………………………….80 Section 9: References………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 81 Section 10: Appendices……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 84 Appendix A: 319 Funded Projects Since 2002…………………………………………………………………………… 85 Appendix B: Best Management Practices…………………………………………………………………………………. 87 Appendix C: Action items from the 2016 Flathead Basin AIS Strategic Prevention Plan……………. 93 Appendix D: GIS Map of Potential Project Areas Based off of Aerial Analysis…………………………… 95 Appendix E: Example Landowner Letter…………………………………………………………………………………… 97 Appendix F: Example Community Input Meeting Agenda………………………………………………………… 98 Appendix G: Temperature Sampling Sites on Ashley Creek & Whitefish River…………………………..99 Appendix H: Examples of Streambank Restoration Techniques……………………………………………… 101 iv Tables and Figures Tables Table 1. Organizations committed to watershed restoration within the Flathead‐Stillwater watershed………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5 Table 2. Impairments and impaired uses of waterbodies in the Flathead‐Stillwater watershed on Montana DEQ’s list of impaired waters and additional streams of concern……………………………… 10 Table 3. Waterbodies in the Flathead‐Stillwater and Flathead Lake watersheds with pollutant impairments on the 2014 (and 2016) 303(d) list not addressed in this document……………………..20 Table 4. Estimate of nutrient load reductions from NPS pollution and natural backgrounds……. 23 Table 5. Estimate of temperature load reductions from NPS pollution…………………………………….. 23 Table 6. Estimate of sediment load reductions form NPS pollution………………………………………….. 24 Table 6.A. Potential project costs based on local contractor estimates……………………………………. 33 Table 7. Criteria for project prioritization…………………………………………………………………………………. 37 Table 8. Schedule of proposed or current projects within the Flathead‐Stillwater watershed….. 71 Table 9. Criteria indicators to measure progress toward meeting water quality targets…………… 75 Table 10. Short‐ and Long‐term milestones for determining progress in achieving water quality standards…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 77 Table 11. Possible monitoring techniques that could be used to measure effectiveness of projects and programs that address NPS pollution issues…………………………………………………………………………….. 80 Figures Figure 1. Montana DEQ’s Adaptive Water Quality Management process…………………………………… 2 Figure 2. The Crown of the Continent ecosystem………………………………………………………………………..3 Figure 3. Flathead watershed and subwatersheds……………………………………………………………………… 8 Figure 4. Locations of DEQ listed streams and other streams of concern…………………………………….9 Figure 5. Primary land cover of the Flathead‐Stillwater watershed……………………………………………11 Figure 6. Population density in persons/sq. mile in the Flathead‐Stillwater watershed……………. 12 Figure 7. Close‐up of Kalispell and surrounding area population density………………………………….. 13 Figure 8. Close‐up of Whitefish and Columbia Falls population density……………………………………. 14 Figure 9. Examples of BMPs to be used across the watershed to promote NPS pollution reduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..25 Figure 10. Riparian vegetation provides shade to the stream which helps keep temperatures cooler………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….25 Figure 11. Current locations of AIS Plant Species as of 2016…………………………………………………….. 26 Figure 12. Current locations of AIS Mollusk Species as of 2016………………………………………………… 26 Figure 13. Cover of the Flathead Basin AIS Prevention Strategy 2010………………………………………. 27 Figure 14. Leaking septic system in a residential yard………………………………………………………………. 27 Figure 15. River to Lake Initiative map of critical lands protected…………………………………………….. 29 Figure 15.A. Examples of educational activities………………………………………………………………………… 34 Figure 16. General Implementation Plan………………………………………………………………………………….. 36 Figure 17. Ashley Creek with three separate segments……………………………………………………………..38 Figure 18. Wetlands along Ashley Creek…………………………………………………………………………………… 39 Figure 19. Livestock fence installed along the ½ mile stream property to keep cows and other livestock out of the riparian area……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..39 Figure 20. Volunteers planting willow stakes into the ground with water jet stinger……………….. 40 v Figure 21. Small fenced area with bark mulch that provides weed protection and green tubes to eliminate vole damage……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 40 Figure 22. Coal Creek……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 41 Figure 23. Common stream bank condition in Coal Creek………………………………………………………… 42 Figure 24. Riparian zone burn from the Moose Fire (2001) in lower Coal Creek……………………….. 42 Figure 25. Coal Creek existing travel infrastructure (2016)……………………………………………………….. 43 Figure 26. Mainstem Flathead River…………………………………………………………………………………………. 45 Figure 27. Example of effect of fluctuating water technique
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Guide to Rural Living in Northwest Montana
    A guide to rural living in northwest Montana Lincoln Conservation District PO Box 2170 949 US Highway 93 North Eureka, Montana 59917-2170 Phone (406) 297-2233 • Fax (406) 296-7188 www.lincolncd.org Provided by: [email protected] Lincoln Conservation District Lincoln County Area Map British Columbia West Northwest Kootenai Ten Peak Lakes )"92 !( !( Eureka Rexford Tob Scenic Scenic ac c o R Area Area ive Yaak r £93 # Koocanusa Bridge [ )"508 # D i c k e y Fortine L a k e # # Sylvanite Trego # Stryker - W < Y ¬37 -- a « Bo )"567 L h n a n i e t rs k a Fer e r R y k f - i v i e s e h r - K - > o o c [£2 a n u )"36 n s te a Koo ai River Troy !( Idaho Libby Dam !( C Libby a F i b s i h n e r e F R 56 t i «¬ s M i h v e e r B u l l o r R L a k e u i Ross n v e t r Creek a R i o - n a Cedars M s d T H W w [£2 i y l 2 d 0 e 0 r - n - > e s #Happy's Inn s T h o m p s o n alispell--> I L a k e s -K Legend # Unincorporated Towns !( Incorporated Towns Rivers/Streams Highways/Roads 5 0 5 10 15 20 Miles Lincoln County Introduction Welcome to Lincoln County . 3 Rural Living Handbook Lincoln County Facts .
    [Show full text]
  • Libby, Montana
    NORTHWEST GEOLOGY The Journal of The Tobacco Root Geological Society Volume 35, 2006 31st Annual Field Conference Libby, Montana August 3-6, 2006 Published by The Tobacco Root Geological Society, Inc. P.O. Box 2734 Missoula, Montana 59806 http://trgs.org Edited by: Richard I. Gibson and Robert C. Thomas Cover: Miners, Snowshoe Gulch, 1897. From Mrs. Sam Ratekin and Spokane Statesman-Review, 1959. Above: Cross section based on gravity modeling. From M.D. Kleinkopf, Geophysical Interpretations of the Libby Thrust Belt, U.S.G.S. Prof. Paper 1546, 1997. The Tobacco Root Geological Society, Inc. P.O. Box 2734 Missoula, Montana 59806 Officers, 2006: President: Larry Smith, Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology, Butte Vice-President: James Sears, Dept. of Geology, Univ. of Montana, Missoula Secretary-Treasurer: George Furniss, MT Dept. of Environmental Quality, Helena Corresponding Secretary: Emily Geraghty, Dept. of Geology, Univ. of Montana, Missoula Webmaster: Dick Gibson Board of Directors, 2006: Richard B. Berg, Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology, Butte, MT Bruce E. Cox, Stillwater Mining Co., Nye, MT Marie Marshall Garsjo, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Ft. Worth, TX Richard I. Gibson, Gibson Consulting, Butte, MT Larry Johnson, Consultant, Missoula, MT Robert C. Thomas, Dept. of Environmental Sciences, U. of Montana-Western, Dillon, MT Conference Organizers, Libby Field Conference: Bruce E. Cox, Stillwater Mining Co., Nye, MT Marie Marshall Garsjo, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Ft. Worth, TX Ann Marie Gooden, Libby, MT ISSN: 0096-7769 © 2006 The Tobacco Root Geological Society, Inc. http://trgs.org ii NORTHWEST GEOLOGY The Journal of The Tobacco Root Geological Society Volume 35, 2006 Libby Field Conference Table of Contents Author Page Title Montana DEQ 1 Libby District Historical Mine Narrative Art Montana 11 The Rainy Creek alkaline ultramafic igneous complex near Libby, MT Montana DEQ 17 Rainy Creek Historical Mine Narrative Derek L.
    [Show full text]
  • Sediment Characteristics and Transport in the Kootenai River White Sturgeon Critical Habitat Near Bonners Ferry, Idaho
    Prepared in cooperation with the Kootenai Tribe of Idaho Sediment Characteristics and Transport in the Kootenai River White Sturgeon Critical Habitat near Bonners Ferry, Idaho Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5228 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover: Kootenai River below Moyie River at river kilometer 257.41 looking upstream towards the left bank. (Photograph taken by Robert J. Kasun, Wildland Hydrology, May 2008) Sediment Characteristics and Transport in the Kootenai River White Sturgeon Critical Habitat near Bonners Ferry, Idaho By Ryan L. Fosness and Marshall L. Williams Prepared in cooperation with the Kootenai Tribe of Idaho Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5228 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2009 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Fosness, R.L., and Williams, M.L., 2009, Sediment characteristics and transport in the Kootenai River white sturgeon critical habitat near Bonners Ferry, Idaho: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Biological Opinion
    Endangered Species Act - Section 7 Consultation FINAL BIOLOGICAL OPINION on the Effects to Bull Trout and Bull Trout Critical Habitat From the Implementation of Proposed Actions Associated with the Plan of Operations for the Montanore Minerals Corporation Copper/Silver Mine As proposed by the U.S. Forest Service, Kootenai National Forest Completed by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Montana Ecological Services Office March 31, 2014 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................ 6 I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 7 Project Background ................................................................................................................................ 9 II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ........................................................................... 11 A. Proposed Action (Mining Activities and Best Management Practices) ................................... 11 Resource Evaluation Phase (approximately two years in duration) ................................................... 11 Construction (three to four years in duration) and Operation Phase (approximately 16 to 20 years in duration) ................................................................................................................................ 12 Libby Plant Site and Adits ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Koocanusa and Kootenai River Basin Bull Trout Monitoring Report
    LAKE KOOCANUSA AND KOOTENAI RIVER BASIN BULL TROUT MONITORING REPORT Prepared by: Mike Hensler Jim Dunnigan Neil Benson DJ Report No Element SBAS Project No. 3140 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………………..…...iii LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………………….…...v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………………………………vii INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………..……1 DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA..……………………..………………………………………...2 Kootenai River Drainage…………………………………………………………………….2 Libby Dam and Lake Koocanusa……………………………………………………….……4 Fish Species………………………………………………………………………………….5 STREAM ELECTROFISHING/JUVENILE BULL TROUT ABUNDANCE ESTIMATES………………………………………………………………………………..………6 Grave Creek………………………………………………………………………………….9 West Fork Quartz Creek……………………………………………………………………10 Pipe Creek………………………………………………………………………………….10 West Fisher Creek………………………………………………………………………….11 Bear Creek………………………………………………………………………………….11 O’Brien Creek……………………………………………………………………..…………12 Keeler Creek………………………………………………………………………………..13 STREAMBED CORING…………………………………………………………………………….14 SUBSTRATE SCORING……………………………………………………………………………18 BULL TROUT REDD COUNTS…………………………………………………………………..21 Grave Creek……………………………………………………………………………….23 Wigwam Drainage……………………………………………………………….………...25 Quartz Creek……………………………………………………………………….………26 Pipe Creek………………………………………………………………………….……….27 Bear Creek…………………………………………………….……………………………28 O’Brien Creek………………………………………………….…………………………..29 West Fisher Creek…………………………………………….…………………………....30 Keeler Creek…………………………………………………….………………………….31 i RADIO TELEMETRY
    [Show full text]
  • 3140 Bull Trout Report 2012
    Fisheries Division Federal Aid Job Progress Report Montana Statewide Fisheries Management Federal Aid Project Number: F-113 July 1, 2012 – June 30, 2013 Project Title: Montana Statewide Fisheries Management Job Title: (3140 LAKE KOOCANUSA AND KOOTENAI RIVER BASIN BULL TROUT MONITORING REPORT) Abstract: We conducted juvenile bull trout population estimates within reference reaches on index creeks. Juvenile estimates for many of the streams including O’Brien Creek, Bear Creek and Callahan Creek have decreased dramatically since survey began. Substrate scores and substrate coring data are presented. Bull trout redd counts in Grave Creek and the Wigwam River significantly increased between 1995 and 2005 but exhibited decreases since, likely in part due to re-opened bull trout harvest fishery in 2004. Bull trout redds in Grave Creek peaked in 2003 and have since decreased significantly. Bull trout redd counts in tributaries downstream of Libby Dam including Quartz, Pipe, Bear, and O’Brien creeks, and the West Fisher River have been variable over the past several years, and appear to track with bull trout populations in the Lake Koocanusa (DeHaan and Adams {2011} determined greater than 50 percent of bull trout residing below Libby Dam were entrained). Prior to redd counts in 2007 and 2008, bull trout redd counts in Keeler Creek exhibited a positive trend since monitoring began. Since 2005, there appears to be a negative trend that is substantially different from a stable population. Growing northern pike population in Bull Lake is a concern. We continued monitoring fish populations within the reservoir using spring and fall gill netting and present the results for bull trout and kokanee.
    [Show full text]
  • Ch1 Overview
    5 HUC/UNIT CLASSIFICATION 5.1 Aquatic Systems 5.1.1 Methods To help us classify 6th field HUCs within the subbasin according to the degree to which each area has been modified and its potential for restoration, we used a spreadsheet tool called Qualitative Habitat Assessment (QHA). Dr. Chip McConnaha of Mobrand Biometrics and Drew Parkin, a private consultant contracted at the time with the Northwest Power and Conservation Council, designed and built QHA specifically in response to requests from the Kootenai and Flathead Subbasin Coordinators. Developed principally for resident salmonids in stream environments, QHA provides a means of capturing, in a systematic For a more detailed description and consistent way, aquatic-habitat information. It is a mechanism for objectively of QHA and how it works, go and transparently combining opinions from multiple scientists (in our case twenty to Appendix 85. biologists and hydrologists). Dr. Paul Anders and Dr. McConnaha, also constructed a lacustrine or lake version of QHA, called LQHA. It works like the stream version, but uses habitat attributes appropriate to lentic environments. QHA habitat attribute scores We used LQHA to assess selected lakes (table 5.1) within the subbasin (lakes that are in Appendices 32 and 33. the Technical Team could foresee doing BPA-related management actions on in the future). Both tools use a hypothesis developed by our Technical Team to characterize the relationship between a fish population and its habitat. Both provide an indication of the relative restoration and protection value for each Appendix 7 is an electronic HUC-6 or lake with respect to a focal species.
    [Show full text]
  • Flathead and Lincoln Counties Montana
    USE ON IRRIGATED AREAS and Part ll: MAPS SHOWING IRRIGAlED ArEAs IN COLORS DESIGNATING THe SOURCES OF SUPPLY lItIJifMilCl ",,,J "lACO/" fJo""tJ. .., M."Ir""G • nnw., SlIATE ENGINEER'S 4fFJtE WATER RE SOURCE S SURVEY FLATHEAD AND LINCOLN COUNTIES MONTANA Part I History of Land and Water Use on I rrigated Areas MONTANA < ~ I , I • Published by STATE ENGINEER'S OFFICE Helena, Montana June, 1965 STATE ENGINEER'S OFFICE Everett V. Darlinton .......___ .................. __ .... ____ .............. __ .......... State Engineer Director of \Vater Hesoun:es, Ground and Surface "Vater Hans L. Bille_______ _______ ___ __________________________ ______________ __________ Assistant State Engineer Water Hesources Survey and Publication of County Heports Miller J-Jansen ___________________________________________________________________ _________ Deputy State Engineer CO-OPERATING AGENCIES STATE WATER CONSERVATION BOARD Governor Tim M_ Babcock.. __ _______ _ ______ ___ __________ __ ______ Chairman C. J-I. HaymondO _________ __ ___ . ____ . ___ ______ .Vi ce Chairman and Secretary Everett V. Darlinton ___ _ _______ ___ ____ . _____ ___ __ _____ __ _____ M ember H . J. SawteIL. ____ __ _ ________ ... _______ __ . _____ Member Wi lbur White. __ _ ___ .____ ... ______ Member A. D. McDermott __________ . __ _ ........... ___ .. Director Donald D. Sullivan.___ ___ _ __________ Acting Chief Engineer °Hetired from Board on January 8, 1965 MONTANA STATE AGRICULTURAL EXPERlMENT STATION C. C. Bowman, ] rrigation Engineer and Consultant, Bozeman ~ 3 REPOR T ER PRTG. a SUPPLY co . June, 1965 Honorable Tim M. Bahcock Governor of Montana Capitol Building Helena, Montana Dear Governor Babcock: Submitted herewith is a consolidated report on the \Vater Resources Survey of Flathead and Lincoln CO llnties, Montana.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 30. Columbia Headwaters Recovery Unit— Kootenai River Basin Critical Habitat Unit
    Bull Trout Final Critical Habitat Justification: Rationale for Why Habitat is Essential, and Documentation of Occupancy Chapter 30. Columbia Headwaters Recovery Unit— Kootenai River Basin Critical Habitat Unit 30.1. Kootenai River Critical Habitat Subunit ...................................................................... 815 30.2. Lake Koocanusa Critical Habitat Subunit .................................................................... 821 813 Bull Trout Final Critical Habitat Justification Chapter 30 U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service September 2010 Chapter 30. Kootenai River Basin Critical Habitat Unit The Kootenai River Basin CHU is essential for maintaining bull trout distribution within this unique geographic region of the Columbia Headwaters RU. This CHU is a uniquely configured transboundary watershed, flowing in a horseshoe pattern that both originates (eastern or upstream arm) and ends (at Kootenay Lake) in British Columbia. This CHU is essential to bull trout recovery because it contains the strongest adfluvial core area population across the range of the species (10,000 + adults in Lake Koocanusa) and also supports the single largest spawning run of adult bull trout (3,000–5,000 adults annually) in the Wigwam River, British Columbia. These high population levels produce a harvestable surplus, allowing closely regulated angler utilization in Lake Koocanusa and provide numerous opportunities for research and evaluation of a high-density (i.e., recovered) bull trout population. The core area populations (Lake Koocanusa, Kootenai River, Bull Lake) represent working models for creating and sustaining bull trout recovery opportunities in other heavily managed watersheds (see Appendix 1 for more detailed information). The Kootenai River Basin CHU is located in the northwestern corner of Montana and the northeastern tip of the Idaho panhandle and includes the Kootenai River watershed upstream and downstream of Libby Dam.
    [Show full text]
  • Miller West Fisher Northern Region
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Miller West Fisher Northern Region August 2017 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Kootenai National Forest Libby Ranger District Lincoln County, Montana In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Prenience of the Kutenai Indians: a Preliminary Delineation of Cross-Culturally Comparative Traits
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1968 The Prenience of the Kutenai Indians: A Preliminary Delineation of Cross-Culturally Comparative Traits Roger P. Tro 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 Tro, Roger P., "The Prenience of the Kutenai Indians: A Preliminary Delineation of Cross-Culturally Comparative Traits" (1968). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 9344. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/9344 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]. THE PROVENIENCE OF THE KUTENAI INDIANS: A PRELIMINARY DELINEATION OF CROSS-CULTURALLY COMPARATIVE TRAITS by Roger P. Tro B.A., University of Montana, 1R6? Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA 1968 Approved by: '■cc- C , Chairman, Board o^Examiners Dearu/Graduate School June b, 1 9 6 8 Dale UMI Number: EP72656 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
    [Show full text]
  • The Following File Is Part of the Grover Heinrichs Mining Collection
    CONTACT INFORMATION Mining Records Curator Arizona Geological Survey 416 W. Congress St., Suite 100 Tucson, Arizona 85701 602-771-1601 http://www.azgs.az.gov [email protected] The following file is part of the Grover Heinrichs Mining Collection ACCESS STATEMENT These digitized collections are accessible for purposes of education and research. We have indicated what we know about copyright and rights of privacy, publicity, or trademark. Due to the nature of archival collections, we are not always able to identify this information. We are eager to hear from any rights owners, so that we may obtain accurate information. Upon request, we will remove material from public view while we address a rights issue. CONSTRAINTS STATEMENT The Arizona Geological Survey does not claim to control all rights for all materials in its collection. These rights include, but are not limited to: copyright, privacy rights, and cultural protection rights. The User hereby assumes all responsibility for obtaining any rights to use the material in excess of “fair use.” The Survey makes no intellectual property claims to the products created by individual authors in the manuscript collections, except when the author deeded those rights to the Survey or when those authors were employed by the State of Arizona and created intellectual products as a function of their official duties. The Survey does maintain property rights to the physical and digital representations of the works. QUALITY STATEMENT The Arizona Geological Survey is not responsible for the accuracy of the records, information, or opinions that may be contained in the files. The Survey collects, catalogs, and archives data on mineral properties regardless of its views of the veracity or accuracy of those data.
    [Show full text]