DOCSLIB.ORG

Canyonlands East Travel Management Plan and Environmental Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Canyonlands East Travel Management Plan and Environmental Assessment BLM United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-ID-B000-2011-0002-EA Bruneau Field Office Canyonlands East Travel Management Plan and Environmental Assessment U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Boise District Bruneau Field Office 3948 Development Ave. Boise, ID 83705 CANYONLANDS EAST TRAVEL MANAGEMENT PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Prepared for U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Boise District Bruneau Field Office 3948 Development Avenue Boise, Idaho 83705 Prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants 3033 North Central Avenue, Suite 145 Phoenix, Arizona 85012 www.swca.com SWCA Project No. 33720.02 November 2016 CONTENTS Acronyms and Abbreviations ..................................................................................................................... vii 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 DOCUMENT STRUCTURE ....................................................................................................... 1 1.2 BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE ACTION ........................................................................ 2 1.3.1 Purpose................................................................................................................................ 2 1.3.2 Need .................................................................................................................................... 5 1.4 DECISION TO BE MADE .......................................................................................................... 5 1.5 CONFORMANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAND USE PLANS AND REGULATIONS .......... 5 1.5.1 Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009................................................................ 5 1.5.2 Idaho and Southwestern Montana Greater Sage-Grouse Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment ........................................................................................... 5 1.5.3 Bruneau Management Framework Plan .............................................................................. 6 1.5.4 Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic River Final Management Plan ..................................................................................................................................... 6 1.6 RELATIONSHIP TO STATUTES, REGULATIONS, OR OTHER PLANS ............................. 6 1.7 SCOPING AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT .............................................................................. 9 1.7.1 Route Inventory and Evaluation ......................................................................................... 9 1.7.2 Travel Management Planning ............................................................................................. 9 1.8 IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES ................................................................................................ 10 2. PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................. 13 2.1 TRAVEL MANAGEMENT PLANNING DESIGNATIONS ................................................... 13 2.1.1 Route Types ...................................................................................................................... 13 2.1.2 Designation Types ............................................................................................................ 14 2.2 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE.................................................................................................. 14 2.3 ACTION ALTERNATIVES ...................................................................................................... 17 2.3.1 Criteria and Actions Common to All Alternatives............................................................ 17 2.3.1.1 Adaptive Management ......................................................................................... 17 2.3.1.2 Monitoring ........................................................................................................... 18 2.3.1.3 Desired Future Conditions and Route Management Objectives .......................... 18 2.3.1.4 Application of Minimization Criteria .................................................................. 22 2.3.1.5 Signage, Education and Enforcement .................................................................. 22 2.3.1.6 Maintenance and Rehabilitation .......................................................................... 23 2.3.1.7 OHV Management ............................................................................................... 24 2.3.1.8 Criteria for Alternatives Development................................................................. 25 2.3.2 Alternative B ..................................................................................................................... 26 2.3.2.1 Route Management Objectives ............................................................................ 26 2.3.3 Alternative C ..................................................................................................................... 26 2.3.3.1 Route Management Objectives ............................................................................ 26 2.3.4 Alternative D ..................................................................................................................... 29 2.3.4.1 Route Management Objectives ............................................................................ 29 2.4 SUMMARY OF ROUTE MILEAGE FOR ALL ALTERNATIVES ........................................ 33 2.5 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS BY ALTERNATIVE .................................................................... 33 November 2016 i Canyonlands East Travel Management Plan Environmental Assessment 2.6 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT NOT ANALYZED IN DETAIL .............................. 33 3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ......................................................................................................... 45 3.1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 45 3.1.1 General Setting ................................................................................................................. 45 3.1.2 Resources Considered in this Analysis ............................................................................. 45 3.2 AFFECTED RESOURCES AND VALUES ............................................................................. 47 3.2.1 Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................ 47 3.2.2 Soils and Hydrology ......................................................................................................... 49 3.2.2.1 Soils ..................................................................................................................... 49 3.2.2.2 Hydrology ............................................................................................................ 51 3.2.3 Fire and Fuels Management .............................................................................................. 53 3.2.4 Vegetation ......................................................................................................................... 54 3.2.4.1 Threatened and Endangered Species ................................................................... 55 3.2.4.2 BLM Special Status Species ................................................................................ 55 3.2.4.3 Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants .................................................................... 57 3.2.5 Wildlife ............................................................................................................................. 58 3.2.5.1 Threatened and Endangered Species ................................................................... 59 3.2.5.2 Migratory Birds.................................................................................................... 59 3.2.5.3 BLM Special Status Species ................................................................................ 59 3.2.5.4 Big Game ............................................................................................................. 63 3.2.5.5 Fisheries ............................................................................................................... 63 3.2.5.6 Bats ...................................................................................................................... 64 3.2.6 Recreation and Social Values ........................................................................................... 64 3.2.6.1 The Existing Route System .................................................................................. 65 3.2.6.2 Designated Recreation Sites ................................................................................ 65 3.2.6.3 Recreation Opportunity Spectrum ....................................................................... 65 3.2.6.4 Hunting and Trapping .......................................................................................... 66 3.2.6.5 Social Values ....................................................................................................... 66 3.2.7 Visual Resources ..............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Track of the Yellowstone Hot Spot: Volcanism, Faulting, and Uplift
    Geological Society of America Memoir 179 1992 Chapter 1 The track of the Yellowstone hot spot: Volcanism, faulting, and uplift Kenneth L. Pierce and Lisa A. Morgan US. Geological Survey, MS 913, Box 25046, Federal Center, Denver, Colorado 80225 ABSTRACT The track of the Yellowstone hot spot is represented by a systematic northeast-trending linear belt of silicic, caldera-forming volcanism that arrived at Yel- lowstone 2 Ma, was near American Falls, Idaho about 10 Ma, and started about 16 Ma near the Nevada-Oregon-Idaho border. From 16 to 10 Ma, particularly 16 to 14 Ma, volcanism was widely dispersed around the inferred hot-spot track in a region that now forms a moderately high volcanic plateau. From 10 to 2 Ma, silicic volcanism migrated N54OE toward Yellowstone at about 3 cm/year, leaving in its wake the topographic and structural depression of the eastern Snake River Plain (SRP). This <lo-Ma hot-spot track has the same rate and direction as that predicted by motion of the North American plate over a thermal plume fixed in the mantle. The eastern SRP is a linear, mountain- bounded, 90-km-wide trench almost entirely(?) floored by calderas that are thinly cov- ered by basalt flows. The current hot-spot position at Yellowstone is spatially related to active faulting and uplift. Basin-and-range faults in the Yellowstone-SRP region are classified into six types based on both recency of offset and height of the associated bedrock escarpment. The distribution of these fault types permits definition of three adjoining belts of faults and a pattern of waxing, culminating, and waning fault activity.
    [Show full text]
  • Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.Xml
    G:\COMP\PARKS\WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS ACT.XML WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS ACT [Public Law 90–542; Approved October 2, 1968] [As Amended Through P.L. 116–9, Enacted March 12, 2019] øCurrency: This publication is a compilation of the text of Public Law 90–542. It was last amended by the public law listed in the As Amended Through note above and below at the bottom of each page of the pdf version and reflects current law through the date of the enactment of the public law listed at https:// www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/comps/¿ øNote: While this publication does not represent an official version of any Federal statute, substantial efforts have been made to ensure the accuracy of its contents. The official version of Federal law is found in the United States Statutes at Large and in the United States Code. The legal effect to be given to the Statutes at Large and the United States Code is established by statute (1 U.S.C. 112, 204).¿ AN ACT To provide a National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That ø16 U.S.C. 1271¿ (a) this Act may be cited as the ‘‘Wild and Scenic Rivers Act’’. (b) It is hereby declared to be the policy of the United States that certain selected rivers of the Nation which, with their imme- diate environments, possess outstandingly remarkable scenic rec- reational, geologic fish and wildlife, historic, cultural or other simi- lar values, shall be preserved in free-flowing condition, and that they and their immediate environments shall be protected for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations.
    [Show full text]
  • Resolved by the Senate and House Of
    906 PUBLIC LAW 90-541-0CT. I, 1968 [82 STAT. Public Law 90-541 October 1, 1968 JOINT RESOLUTION [H.J. Res, 1461] Making continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1969, and for other purposes. Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatimes of tlie United Continuing ap­ propriations, States of America in Congress assernbled, That clause (c) of section 1969. 102 of the joint resolution of June 29, 1968 (Public Law 90-366), is Ante, p. 475. hereby further amended by striking out "September 30, 1968" and inserting in lieu thereof "October 12, 1968". Approved October 1, 1968. Public Law 90-542 October 2, 1968 AN ACT ------[S. 119] To proYide for a Xational Wild and Scenic Rivers System, and for other purPoses. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Wild and Scenic United States of America in Congress assembled, That (a) this Act Rivers Act. may be cited as the "vVild and Scenic Rivers Act". (b) It is hereby declared to be the policy of the United States that certain selected rivers of the Nation which, with their immediate environments, possess outstandin~ly remarkable scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural, or other similar values, shall be preserved in free-flowing condition, and that they and their immediate environments shall be protected for the benefit and enjoy­ ment of l?resent and future generations. The Congress declares that the established national policy of dam and other construction at appro­ priate sections of the rivers of the United States needs to be com­ plemented by a policy that would preserve other selected rivers or sections thereof m their free-flowing condition to protect the water quality of such rivers and to fulfill other vital national conservation purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement of Mike Pool Acting Deputy Director for Operations Bureau of Land Management U.S
    Statement of Mike Pool Acting Deputy Director for Operations Bureau of Land Management U.S. Department of the Interior Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining S. 1167, Owyhee Wilderness Areas Boundary Modifications Act April 21, 2016 Thank you for inviting the Department of the Interior to testify on S. 1167, the Owyhee Wilderness Areas Boundary Modifications Act. This bill would modify the boundaries of the Pole Creek, Owyhee River, and North Fork Owyhee Wilderness Areas; authorize the use of motorized vehicles for livestock monitoring, herding, and gathering in six wilderness areas in Idaho; and require the Secretary of the Interior to submit a report describing livestock grazing management activities that were authorized in these six areas prior to their designation as wilderness in 2009. The BLM acknowledges the dedicated efforts of stakeholders to collaborate on issues concerning wilderness management in this region of Idaho. Generally, the BLM supports stakeholder-driven efforts to refine management boundaries, provided those solutions further the purposes of the original enabling legislation and represent a balanced approach to enhancing manageability. The Administration, however, strongly opposes S. 1167, because of broad management changes that would lift essential protections from wilderness areas. In particular, we oppose provisions for the use of motorized vehicles in wilderness areas because the language undermines the longstanding definition and spirit of wilderness
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1464 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1132
    § 1132 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION Page 1464 Department and agency having jurisdiction of, and reports submitted to Congress regard- thereover immediately before its inclusion in ing pending additions, eliminations, or modi- the National Wilderness Preservation System fications. Maps, legal descriptions, and regula- unless otherwise provided by Act of Congress. tions pertaining to wilderness areas within No appropriation shall be available for the pay- their respective jurisdictions also shall be ment of expenses or salaries for the administra- available to the public in the offices of re- tion of the National Wilderness Preservation gional foresters, national forest supervisors, System as a separate unit nor shall any appro- priations be available for additional personnel and forest rangers. stated as being required solely for the purpose of managing or administering areas solely because (b) Review by Secretary of Agriculture of classi- they are included within the National Wilder- fications as primitive areas; Presidential rec- ness Preservation System. ommendations to Congress; approval of Con- (c) ‘‘Wilderness’’ defined gress; size of primitive areas; Gore Range-Ea- A wilderness, in contrast with those areas gles Nest Primitive Area, Colorado where man and his own works dominate the The Secretary of Agriculture shall, within ten landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where years after September 3, 1964, review, as to its the earth and its community of life are un- suitability or nonsuitability for preservation as trammeled by man, where man himself is a visi- wilderness, each area in the national forests tor who does not remain. An area of wilderness classified on September 3, 1964 by the Secretary is further defined to mean in this chapter an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its of Agriculture or the Chief of the Forest Service primeval character and influence, without per- as ‘‘primitive’’ and report his findings to the manent improvements or human habitation, President.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1517 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1131 (Pub. L
    Page 1517 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1131 (Pub. L. 88–363, § 10, July 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 301.) Sec. 1132. Extent of System. § 1110. Liability 1133. Use of wilderness areas. 1134. State and private lands within wilderness (a) United States areas. The United States Government shall not be 1135. Gifts, bequests, and contributions. liable for any act or omission of the Commission 1136. Annual reports to Congress. or of any person employed by, or assigned or de- § 1131. National Wilderness Preservation System tailed to, the Commission. (a) Establishment; Congressional declaration of (b) Payment; exemption of property from attach- policy; wilderness areas; administration for ment, execution, etc. public use and enjoyment, protection, preser- Any liability of the Commission shall be met vation, and gathering and dissemination of from funds of the Commission to the extent that information; provisions for designation as it is not covered by insurance, or otherwise. wilderness areas Property belonging to the Commission shall be In order to assure that an increasing popu- exempt from attachment, execution, or other lation, accompanied by expanding settlement process for satisfaction of claims, debts, or judg- and growing mechanization, does not occupy ments. and modify all areas within the United States (c) Individual members of Commission and its possessions, leaving no lands designated No liability of the Commission shall be im- for preservation and protection in their natural puted to any member of the Commission solely condition, it is hereby declared to be the policy on the basis that he occupies the position of of the Congress to secure for the American peo- member of the Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • National Geographic's National Conservation Lands 15Th
    P ow ear Pt. Barr d B 5 ay Bellingham Ross Lake E ison Bay Harr PACIFIC NORT S HWES Cape Flattery t San Juan T N ra Islands AT i I LisburneCape N o t SAN JUAN ISLANDS ONAL S r t h S l o p e of CE P Ju N IC a NATIONAL MONUMENT T e F N 9058 ft KMt. Isto Cape Alava n R CANADA KCopper Butte n 61 m d A l . lvill 27 e a L B o e F I d F U.S. C u L 7135 ft t M o Central Arctic c o d R a 2175 m O K h i r l g Management o e r k k e O E Priest o a e 2 C Area G t d O 101 i L. e r K N l . A n S P S R l 95 as K i e r E a 93 Ma o ot Central Arctic a i p z a L i e l b Management KGlacier Pk. Lake E a 97 b W IS A 15 ue Mt. Olympus K l N r Area STEESE 10541 ft D S Chelan m o CANADA 7965 ft i 89 Cape Prince NATIONAL 3213 m C 2 u uk 2428 m 2 u n k Franklin D. l L Lake Elwell d CONSERVATION U.S. s A of Wales u r R R Roosevelt o K oy AREA Y Bureau of Land Management e C h K u L lle N I ei h AT 191 Seward k Lake 2 Or s ION IC TRAIL 2 o A d R 395 Pen i A O L.
    [Show full text]
  • County Geology and Hazard Maps of Idaho
    Boundary 59 60 Bonner 41 Kootenai 37 33 Benewah Shoshone 36 35 Latah Clearwater 38 39 45 Nez Perce Index to Sources of Lewis Geologic Mapping Idaho 82 26 40 44 See Map Sources on next page for complete references. 43 18 34 51 52 2 13 75 17 54 50 81 Lemhi 8 23 65 Adams 61 7 Valley 13 78 15 76 Washington 29 83 77 Fremont 85 57 46 Custer Clark 9 85 10 47 Payette Boise 4 Gem 27 30 79 Jefferson Madison Teton 28 Canyon Butte 31 68 6 21 71 63 Ada Camas 70 Bonneville 72 20 Blaine 32 Elmore Bingham 5 19 76 56 66 Gooding Lincoln 84 1 48 67 55 Caribou 12 Jerome Minidoka 24 Power Bannock 62 64 Owyhee 25 49 53 11 Bear 73 Lake 16 Twin 76 Oneida 80 Cassia Franklin Falls 22 58 69 Published by the Idaho Geological Survey, version . Available at www.idahogeology.org. Funded in part by the Idaho Bureau of Homeland Security under Task Order FY-2010-001. Map Sources Number Reference Armstrong, R.L., J.F. Smith, Jr., H.R. Covington, and P.L. Williams, 1978, Preliminary geologic map of the 1 west half of the Pocatello 1° by 2° quadrangle, Idaho: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 78-833, scale 1:250,000. Blake, D.E., 1991, Geology of the western Idaho suture zone in the Salmon River gorge, west-central Idaho: 2 Washington State University Ph.D. dissertation, 329 p. 3 Bond, J.G., 1978, Geologic map of Idaho: Idaho Geological Survey Geologic Map 1, scale 1:500,000.
    [Show full text]
  • Owyhee Land Exchange
    Owyhee Land Exchange Owyhee Canyonlands Reasons for the Land Exchange Between the State of Idaho Wilderness and Bureau of Land Management As a result of the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness designation, there are rules and reg- The Owyhee Canyonlands ulations that affect the management, use, and occupancy of wilderness areas. Specifi- Wilderness Areas are part of cally, the wilderness areas shall be managed in accordance with the Wilderness Act of September 3, 1964 (“Act”), which generally prohibits commercial enterprise and per- the 109 million acre Nation- manent roads. However, there are private and state owned inholdings, within the wil- al Wilderness Preservation derness, that do not fall under the same restrictions. As such, transitioning state own- System. This System of ership out of the wilderness areas aligns with the Act’s purpose and intent. lands provides clean air, wa- The state’s goals are: ter, and habitat critical for To reduce management risk, cost, and restrictions faced by the Endowments by rare and endangered plants disposing of lands within sage grouse habitat and within the wilderness areas. and animals. To secure legal access to State Endowment Trust lands. The United States Congress To reduce management costs by consolidating State Endowment Trust lands. designated six wilderness areas in Owyhee County: Both IDL and BLM will acquire lands better suited to their missions and objectives. 1. Big Jacks Creek Wilder- ness Area, 2. Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness Area, 3. Little Jacks Creek Wilder- ness Area, 4. North Fork Owyhee Wil- derness Area, 5. Owyhee River Wilderness Area, and 6. Pole Creek Wilderness Area.
    [Show full text]
  • Mineral Resources of the Owyhee River Canyon and Deep Creek-Owyhee River Wilderness Study Areas, Owyhee County, Idaho
    Mineral Resources of the Owyhee River Canyon and Deep Creek-Owyhee River Wilderness Study Areas, Owyhee County, Idaho U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1719-D Chapter D Mineral Resources of the Owyhee River Canyon and Deep Creek-Owyhee River Wilderness Study Areas, Owyhee County, Idaho By MICHAEL G. SAWLIN, HARLEY D. KING, JAMES D. HOFFMAN, and DOLORES M. KULIK U.S. Geological Survey PETER N. GABBY, DONALD O. CAPSTICK, . and ALAN R. BUEHLER U.S. Bureau of Mines U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1719 MINERAL RESOURCES OF WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS OWYHEE RIVER REGION, IDAHO AND NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL MODEL, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1987 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center, Box 25425 Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Mineral resources of the Owyhee River Canyon and the Deep Creek-Owyhee River Wilderness Study areas, Owyhee County, Idaho U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1719-D Bibliography included. Supt. of Docs. No. I 19.3: 1719-D 1. Mines and mineral resources Idaho Owyhee River Canyon Wilderness. 2. Geology Idaho Owyhee River Canyon Wilderness. 3. Mines and mineral resources Idaho Deep Creek-Owyhee River Wilderness. 4. Geology Idaho Deep Creek-Owyhee River Wilderness. 5. Owyhee River Canyon Wilderness (Idaho). 6. Deep Creek-Owyhee River Wilderness (Idaho). I. Sawlan, Michael G. II. Series. QE75.B9 No. 1719-D 557.3 s 86-600393 [TN24.I2] [553'.09796'21] STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS Bureau of Land Management Wilderness Study Areas The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Public Law 94-579, October 21, 1976) requires the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1480 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1113 (Pub
    § 1113 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION Page 1480 (Pub. L. 88–363, § 13, July 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 301.) ment of expenses or salaries for the administra- tion of the National Wilderness Preservation § 1113. Authorization of appropriations System as a separate unit nor shall any appro- There are hereby authorized to be appro- priations be available for additional personnel priated to the Department of the Interior with- stated as being required solely for the purpose of out fiscal year limitation such sums as may be managing or administering areas solely because necessary for the purposes of this chapter and they are included within the National Wilder- the agreement with the Government of Canada ness Preservation System. signed January 22, 1964, article 11 of which pro- (c) ‘‘Wilderness’’ defined vides that the Governments of the United States A wilderness, in contrast with those areas and Canada shall share equally the costs of de- where man and his own works dominate the veloping and the annual cost of operating and landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where maintaining the Roosevelt Campobello Inter- the earth and its community of life are un- national Park. trammeled by man, where man himself is a visi- (Pub. L. 88–363, § 14, July 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 301.) tor who does not remain. An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in this chapter an CHAPTER 23—NATIONAL WILDERNESS area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its PRESERVATION SYSTEM primeval character and influence, without per- manent improvements or human habitation, Sec. which is protected and managed so as to pre- 1131.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 ICTWS Meeting Program
    2020 Idaho chapter of the wildlife society “BALANCING IDAHO’S POPULATION GROWTH WITH WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NEEDS” 9-12 March 2020 Best Western University Inn Moscow, Idaho 2020 Conference Sponsors We wish to thank all of the organizations and businesses for sponsoring the 2020 Conference. Some of our sponsors did not make it into this program in time for print and we would like to extend our gratitude for helping to make this conference possible! Silver Sponsors ($500-$1,199) Bronze Sponsors ($100-$499) 2020 Associated Meetings Idaho Bat Working Group Idaho Partners in Amphibian and Reptile Conservation Page 1 Best Western University Inn Floor Plan Free Parking On Site Page 2 Table of Contents Meeting Introduction and Host City…………………... Pg. 4 Registration and Logistics……………………………… Pg. 5 Meeting Donors and Contributors…………………….. Pg. 6-7 Program at a Glance…………………………………… Pg. 8-9 Special Awards...……………………………………….. Pg. 9 Attendee and Presenter Information………………….. Pg. 10 Workshops and Special Sessions…………………………... Pg. 11-13 Plenary Session & Speaker Biographies……….………. Pg. 14-15 Scientific Program……………………………………… Pg. 16-24 Additional Information……………………………………. Pg. 25 Leadership Resources and Opportunities………………….. Pg. 26 Page 3 Meeting Introduction and Host City Meeting Introduction The Idaho Chapter of The Wildlife Society annual meeting is 9-12 March 2020 in Moscow, Idaho. This year’s conference offers a diverse scientific program with a plenary session, special sessions, symposium, contributed oral and poster presentations, social, banquet, student activities, and the annual business meeting. Host City — Moscow, Idaho Welcome to Moscow! With about 24,000 residents, Moscow is the largest city and county seat of Latah County. Moscow is located in north-central Idaho between Moscow Mountain and the rolling hills of the Palouse, and sits at an elevation of 2,579 ft (786 m) above sea level.
    [Show full text]