DOCSLIB.ORG

Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SECTION 7 CONSULTATION BIOLOGICAL OPINION on the Revised Forest Plan for the Flathead National Forest TAILS Number: 06E11000-2016-F-0370 FS Agency: U.S. Forest Service Flathead National Forest Kalispell, Montana Consultation Conducted by: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Montana Ecological Services Office Kalispell, Montana NOVEMBER 22, 2017 FNF Revised Forest Plan Biological Opinion: Chapter 1 06E11000-2016-F-0370 Chapter I. Introduction Table of Contents A. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 1 B. CONSULTATION HISTORY ............................................................................................. 2 C. ORGANIZATION OF THIS BIOLOGICAL OPINION ................................................. 6 D. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ............................................................. 6 1. Description of the Project Area............................................................................................ 6 2. Species in the Project Area .................................................................................................. 6 3. Description of the Proposed Action ..................................................................................... 8 Purpose of the Proposed Action .............................................................................................. 8 Development of the Revised Forest Plan .............................................................................. 10 Programmatic Nature of the Revised Forest Plan ................................................................. 10 Management Areas ............................................................................................................... 11 Components of the Revised Forest Plan ............................................................................... 15 Direction of the Revised Forest Plan .................................................................................... 18 4. Implementing the Proposed Action (Revised Forest Plan) ................................................ 21 Project/Activity Consistency with the Revised Forest Plan ................................................. 21 Projects or Activities Not Consistent with the Revised Forest Plan ..................................... 22 Monitoring Program.............................................................................................................. 22 E. SUMMARY OF PLAN ELEMENTS FOR FEDERALLY LISTED SPECIES ........... 23 1. Bull Trout and Bull Trout Critical Habitat ........................................................................ 23 2. Grizzly Bear ....................................................................................................................... 24 3. Canada Lynx and Canada Lynx Critical Habitat ............................................................... 26 F. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 28 I-i FNF Revised Forest Plan Biological Opinion: Chapter 1 06E11000-2016-F-0370 A. INTRODUCTION The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has prepared this biological opinion on the effects of the USDA Forest Service (USFS) revised Land and Resource Management Plan (Revised Forest Plan or Revised Plan) for the Flathead National Forest (FNF) on the listed species identified (Table I-1), in accordance with the Endangered Species Act, as amended (ESA), (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). For ease of discussion throughout this document, the Flathead National Forest will be referred to as the FNF or the Forest when referencing the single administrative unit, the staff that administers the unit, or the National Forest System (NFS) lands within the unit. The USFS submitted an aquatic and terrestrial Biological Assessment (BA) documenting that the Revised Forest Plan is likely to adversely affect three listed species: grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis), Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) and bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), as well as designated critical habitat for Canada lynx and bull trout. Further, the BA determined that the Revised Forest Plan is not likely to adversely affect water howelia (Howellia aquatilis) and will have no effect on Spalding’s Campion (Silene spaldingii). The BA also determined that the Revised Plan may affect, but is not likely to jeopardize wolverine (Gulo gulo luscus). The Final BA and letter requesting formal consultation under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) was received by the Service on March 17, 2017. As described in this biological opinion, and based on the BA and other information collected during the consultation process, the Service has concluded that the Revised Forest Plan, as proposed, is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of grizzly bears, Canada lynx, and bull trout, or adversely modify designated critical habitat of Canada lynx and bull trout. This biological opinion does not provide an analysis for effects of specific actions. Rather, the effects analysis is a broad-scale examination of the types of projects and activities conducted under the Revised Forest Plan that could potentially occur in listed species habitat and result in effects on listed species. This broad-scale analysis will then be used to determine the potential for the Revised Plan direction to jeopardize the affected populations of listed species. The FNF retains its responsibility under the ESA to consult on future projects (conducted under the Revised Forest Plan) that may affect listed species regardless of the project’s consistency with the proposed action considered in this biological opinion. Future projects and their potential to adversely affect a listed species, or critical habitat, will be analyzed at the project level and a separate jeopardy/adverse modification determination will be made at that time. This biological opinion is based on information provided in the FNF’s BA (USFS 2017) for the proposed action, the draft Revised Plan (USFS 2016a) and related draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (USFS 2016), personal communications with researchers and experts, and scientific literature, unpublished reports, field investigations, and other sources of information cited herein. I-1 FNF Revised Forest Plan Biological Opinion: Chapter 1 06E11000-2016-F-0370 Table I-1. Federally designated species on the Flathead National Forest. Common Scientific Name ESA Designated Critical Habitat? Name Status Grizzly bear Ursus arctos horribilis Threatened No Canada lynx Lynx canadensis Threatened Yes, (79 FR 54782, Sept. 12, 2014) Bull trout Salvelinus confluentus Threatened Yes, (75 FR 63898, Oct. 18, 2010) Spalding’s champion (or Silene spaldingii Threatened No “catchfly”) Water howellia Howellia aquatils Threatened No Wolverine Gulo gulo luscus Proposed N/A Meltwater lednian Lednia tumana Candidate N/A stonefly Whitebark pine Pinus albicaulis Candidate N/A Endangered - Any species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Threatened - Any species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Candidate - Those taxa for which the Service has sufficient information on biological status and threats to propose to designate them as threatened or endangered. We encourage their consideration in environmental planning and partnerships, however, none of the substantive or procedural provisions of the Act apply to candidate species. Proposed - Once a species is proposed, a year-long review period commences at the end of which the Service will make a final listing determination. ESA regulation 50 C.F.R. 402.10(a) states: “Each Federal Agency shall confer with the Secretary on any agency action which is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any species proposed to be listed.” Conferencing is not required for anything less than a jeopardy call, but conferencing or concurrence may be requested by the action agency. Candidate - A species for which the Service has sufficient information on the biological status and threats to propose them as endangered or threatened under the ESA, but for which development of a proposed listing is precluded by other higher priority activities. Critical Habitat - The specific area (i) within the geographic area occupied by a listed species, at the time it is listed, on which are found those physical or biological features (I) essential to conserve the species and (ii) that may require special management considerations or protection: and (iii) specific areas outside the geographic area occupied by the species at the time it is listed upon determination that such areas are essential to conserve the species. B. CONSULTATION HISTORY The history of ESA section 7 consultation on the proposed action is summarized chronologically in Table I-2. A complete record of this consultation is on file at the Service’s Montana Ecological Services Office in Helena, Montana. The consultation summary below includes meetings between the FNF and Service, but some events were attended by other agencies as well. FNF-specific communications between individual FNF staff and the Service are also I-2 FNF Revised Forest Plan Biological Opinion: Chapter 1 06E11000-2016-F-0370 indicated in the table. For the purposes of the consultation process, separate BAs were prepared for terrestrial and aquatic species then combined prior to
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bigfork North/South EA
    Environmental Assessment & Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation For Bigfork North & South STPP 52-1(18) 27 Control No. 4035 Prepared for: Montana Department of Transportation June 2004 Environmental Assessment & Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation For Bigfork North and South STPP 52-1(18) 27 Control No. 4035 This document is prepared in conformance with the Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) requirements and contains the information required for an Environmental Assessment under the provisions of ARM 18.2.237(2) and 18.2.239. It is also prepared in conformance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements for an Environmental Assessment under 23 CFR 771.119. Submitted Pursuant to 42 USC 4332(2)(c) 49 U.S.C. 303 & Sections 2-3-104, 75-1-201 M.C.A. By the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration And the Montana Department of Transportation Submitted by: Date: Montana Department of Transportation Environmental Services Reviewed and Approved for Distribution: Date: Federal Highway Administration One may contact the following people for additional information regarding this document: Jean A. Riley, P.E. Craig Genzlinger Engineering Section Supervisor Missoula Operations Engineer Environmental Services Bureau Montana Division Montana Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration 2701 Prospect Avenue 2880 Skyway Drive PO Box 201001 Helena, Montana 59602 Helena, MT 59620-1001 Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................ES-1
    [Show full text]
  • Appraisal Report Of
    APPRAISAL REPORT OF: A 78.30 ACRE TRACT – AS IF VACANT AT MONTANA HIGHWAY 83 CONDON, MONTANA PREPARED FOR: Ms. Emily Cooper, Land Sections Supervisor State of Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation Trust Land Management Division P.O. Box 201601 Helena, Montana 59620-1601 MARKET VALUE AS OF: April 12, 2017 PREPARED BY: Elliott M. Clark, MAI & Christopher D. Clark Clark Real Estate Appraisal 704-C East 13th Street, #509 Whitefish, Montana 59937 (406) 862-8151 704-C East 13th Street, #509 Whitefish, Montana 59937 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL May 11, 2017 Ms. Emily Cooper, Land Sections Supervisor State of Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation Trust Land Management Division P.O. Box 201601 Helena, Montana 59620-1601 Re: Appraisal Report of Real Property Identified as Swan Valley Retreat, Condon, Montana (As If Vacant) Dear Ms. Cooper: In compliance with your request Elliott M. Clark, MAI and Christopher D. Clark with Clark Real Estate Appraisal viewed the above referenced property on April 12, 2017 accompanied by Mr. Claude Cassidy, Ms. Emily Cooper, and Ms. Chloe Katsilas all with the Montana DNRC. We reviewed applicable information regarding zoning, and researched and analyzed trends in real estate activity in the immediate and greater subject market area. The property viewing, reviews, and analyses were made in order to prepare the attached appraisal report in a summary format. We were requested by the client to provide an opinion of value for the subject property As If Vacant. For that reason, the value concluded in this report is based upon the Hypothetical Condition that the property was vacant as of the report effective date.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Registration Form
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No. 1024-0018 expiration date 03/31/2022 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin, How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form. If any item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. 1. Name of Property Historic name: Stark House__________________________________ Name of related multiple property listing: ____N/A___________________________________________________ (Enter "N/A" if property is not part of a multiple property listing ____________________________________________________________________________ 2. Location Street & number: _4945 Lindbergh Lake Road _________________________ City or town: _Condon___________ State: __MT__________ County: Missoula ____ Not For Publication: Vicinity: X ____________________________________________________________________________ 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this X nomination ___ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic
    [Show full text]
  • Swan Valley-Condon Comprehensive Plan Amendment
    $5.50 Swan Valley-Condon Comprehensive Plan Amendment Missoula County, Montana Adopted by the Missoula County Commissioners December 18, 1996 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Michael Kennedy Barbara Evans Fern Hart MISSOULA CONSOLIDATED PLANNING BOARD Ginny Cass Janene Caywood Helen Cipolato John Fletcher Bonnie Gee Troy Kurth Tom Maclay John Spangler Gerald Stone Sam Warren SWAN VALLEY COMMUNITY CLUB COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMMITTEE Gloria Bush Al Cluck Chris Goodman Michelle Holmes, Recorder Sue Holmes Marita Kirchhofer Len Kobylenski Mike Lake Rolle Matthew Zoe Mohesky, County Planning resource, Office of Planning & Grants Tom Parker Jerry Sorensen, Manager, Land Use Planning, Plum Creek Timber Company Alan “Pete” Taylor, Facilitator Acknowledgments - i SWAN VALLEY-CONDON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STATEMENT OF PURPOSE This plan, prepared by a committee, and approved by the residents of the Swan Valley establishes community objectives and goals to be used by the Missoula County Office of Planning and Grants and the Board of County Commissioners in guiding future growth in the Swan Valley. The plan includes appendices and references numerous studies that are available at the Swan Valley Community Library. The Swan Valley Community Club will serve as the liaison between the community, agencies and the County Commissioners on land use issues. ii - Statement of Purpose SWAN VALLEY-CONDON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Swan Valley Geographic Area
    Flathead National Forest Forest Plan Swan Valley Geographic Area General overview The Swan Valley geographic area encompasses the entire Swan River basin and also extends north into the eastern portion of the Flathead River valley and west to encompass a portion of the east shore of Flathead Lake. The Flathead Indian Reservation borders the geographic area to the west, following the shore of Flathead Lake and the Mission Mountains divide. The divide between the Swan River and Clearwater River basins forms the southern border, shared by the Lolo National Forest. The peaks of the Swan Range form the eastern border. The Flathead River valley in the northern portion of the geographic area is mostly non-NFS land. A substantial portion (approximately 28 percent) of the Swan River watershed is also non-NFS land, about half of which is the approximately 61,000-acre Swan River State Forest. Acres in the Swan Valley in private ownership were much higher prior to 2010, when the Forest Service acquired approximately 45,000 acres of Plum Creek Timber Company lands through the Montana Legacy Project. Portions of the Swan Lake Ranger District are within this geographic area. The Swan River watershed is characterized by a wide valley bottom of flat to rolling, gently sloped terrain that is bordered on both sides by rugged mountains jutting up steeply from the valley floor. Elevation ranges from about 3,000 feet at the mouth of the Swan River on the shores of Flathead Lake to over 8,000 feet on the highest peaks of the Swan Range and Mission Mountains.
    [Show full text]
  • Flathead National Forest Land Management Plan
    United States Department of Agriculture Flathead National Forest Land Management Plan Flathead, Lake, Lewis and Clark, Lincoln, Missoula, and Powell Counties, Montana Forest Service Northern Region November 2018 “. for the greatest good of the greatest number for the longest time.” —Gifford Pinchot, founding Chief of the Forest Service, 1905 Cover (images described clockwise from upper left): • South Fork of the Flathead River, Spotted Bear Ranger District • Forwarder working on the Paint Emery Resource Management Project, Hungry Horse- Glacier View Ranger District • Two hikers • Snowmobiler • View from trail to Pentagon Cabin in the Bob Marshall Wilderness (photo by Peter Borgesen) • Fireweed • White-tailed deer (photo by John Littlefield) Flathead National Forest Land Management Plan Flathead, Lake, Lewis and Clark, Lincoln, Missoula, and Powell Counties, Montana Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service Responsible official: Chip Weber, Forest Supervisor Flathead National Forest 650 Wolfpack Way Kalispell, MT 59901 406-758-5204 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
    [Show full text]
  • Staff Report
    FLATHEAD COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING OFFICE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REPORT (#FCU-21-05) JEWEL BASIN HOLDINGS, LLC MAY 13, 2021 I. GENERAL INFORMATION A. Project Description This is a report to the Flathead County Board of Adjustment regarding a request from Jeremy Prather on behalf of Jewel Basin Holdings, LLC for a conditional use permit for a ‘Hotel, motel’ on the subject property located at 241 Sportsman Lane in Bigfork, MT. The property is located within the Bigfork Zoning District and is zoned ‘B-3 Community Business’. B. Application Personnel 1. Owner 2. Applicant Jewel Basin Holdings, LLC Jeremy Prather 835 E 23rd Street 835 23rd Street Houston, TX 77009 Houston, TX 77009 C. Process Overview 1. Land Use Advisory Committee/Council The proposed land use is located within the advisory area of the Bigfork Land Use Advisory Committee (BLUAC). The BLUAC will conduct a public hearing on the proposed conditional use permit on May 27, 2021 at 4:00 P.M. at Bethany Lutheran Church, located at 8559 Highway 35, Bigfork, MT 59911. A recommendation from the BLUAC will be forwarded to the Flathead County Board of Adjustment for their consideration. 2. Board of Adjustment The Flathead County Board of Adjustment will conduct a public hearing on the proposed conditional use permit on June 1, 2021, at 6:00 P.M. in the Second Floor Conference Room of the South Campus Building located at 40 11th Street West in Kalispell, MT. Documents pertaining to this file are available for public inspection in the Flathead County Planning and Zoning Office, located on the second floor of the South Campus Building.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Trout in Swan Lake, Montana: a Summary of the Efforts of the Swan Valley Bull Trout Working Group 2005-2017
    Lake Trout in Swan Lake, Montana: A Summary of the Efforts of the Swan Valley Bull Trout Working Group 2005-2017 Prepared by: Wade Fredenberg Fisheries Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Leo Rosenthal Fisheries Biologist, Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks May 1, 2018 Photo credit: Joel Sartore for National Geographic with Wade Fredenberg Table of Contents List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................. 3 List of Figures ................................................................................................................................................ 4 Introduction and Background ...................................................................................................................... 5 Study Area ....................................................................................................................................... 5 History of the Swan Lake Fishery .................................................................................................... 9 Formation & Activities of the Swan Valley Bull Trout Working Group - 2005-Present ......................... 12 Initiation of Gill Net Sampling and Sonic Tagging Research 2006-2007 ...................................... 13 Lake Trout Depletion and Associated Research 2008 .................................................................. 13 Three-year Suppression Experiment 2009-2011 .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Seeley Lake Community Council
    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Residents of the Plan Area Seeley Lake Community Council (past and current) Sam Bolton Jay Kolbe Ron Cox Addrien Marx Carol Evans Mary Ann Morin George Frasca Val Natale Jack Greenwood Gary Pelletier Jon Haufler Cheryl Thompson Walt Hill Diane Weatherman Steve Johnson Natalie Wiseheart Missoula Consolidated Planning Board (at time of review) Don MacArthur (chair) Heidi Kendall Jennifer Clary John DiBari Tim Ibey Jonathon Haber Jerry Petasek Don Latham Jerry O’Connell Tim Skufca Kelly Durbin Missoula Board of County Commissioners Michele Landquist Jean Curtiss Bill Carey State and Federal Agencies and Large Landowners including: Seeley Lake Ranger District, Lolo National Forest, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Montana Department of Fish Wildlife and Parks, Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, Plum Creek Timber Company Missoula County Office of Rural Initiatives Missoula County Departments Numerous Other Plan Participants Seeley Lake Regional Plan-Adopted October 20, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction ………………………………………………………..1 . Chapter 2: History and Culture………………………………………………..6 Chapter 3: Natural Resources………………………………………………...12 Chapter 4: Economy…………………………………………………………….33 Chapter 5: Population and Housing………………………………………….38 Chapter 6: Community Services and Facilities…………………………....44 Chapter 7: Land Use…………………………………………………………….56 Chapter 8: Plan Implementation………………………………………………83 Maps 1. Plan Area Boundaries 2. Land Ownership 2A. Land Ownership with Montana Legacy Lands 2B. Land Ownership with Conservation Easements 3. Agricultural Soils 4. Steep Slopes 5. Wildland Urban Interface 6. Floodplain 7. Existing Zoning Districts 8. Water District and Sewer District 9. Fire Districts 10. School Districts 11. County Parks 11A. Recreation Sites 12. Land Use Designations-Plan Area 12A. Land Use Designations-North Seeley 12B.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Vehicle Collisions and Habitat Connectivity Along Montana
    ANIMAL-VEHICLE COLLISIONS AND HABITAT CONNECTIVITY ALONG MONTANA HIGHWAY 83 IN THE SEELEY SWAN VALLEY, MONTANA: A RECONNAISSANCE FHWA/MT-06-002/8177 Final Report prepared for THE STATE OF MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION in cooperation with THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION February 2006 prepared by Marcel P. Huijser, Ph.D. Kari E. Gunson Carla Abrams Western Transportation Institute Montana State University RESEARCH PROGRAMS You are free to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work; make derivative works; make commercial use of the work under the condition that you give the original author and sponsor credit. For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. Any of these conditions can be waived if you get permission from the sponsor. Your fair use and other rights are in no way affected by the above. Animal-Vehicle Collisions and Habitat Connectivity along Montana Highway 83 in the Seeley-Swan Valley, Montana: a Reconnaissance by Marcel P. Huijser, Ph.D., Research Ecologist, Kari E. Gunson, M.Sc., Research Ecologist and GIS specialist & Carla Abrams, M.Sc., Field Technician Western Transportation Institute College of Engineering, Montana State University PO Box 174250, Bozeman, MT 59717-4250 A report prepared for the MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Montana Department of Transportation PO Box 201001, 2701 Prospect Ave. Helena, MT 59620-1001 in cooperation with the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION February 2006 Animal-Vehicle Collisions and Habitat Connectivity along MT 83 Documentation Page TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Swan Valley Plan
    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Michael Kennedy Barbara Evans Fern Hart MISSOULA CONSOLIDATED PLANNING BOARD Ginny Cass Janene Caywood Helen Cipolato John Fletcher Bonnie Gee Troy Kurth Tom Maclay John Spangler Gerald Stone Sam Warren SWAN VALLEY COMMUNITY CLUB COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMMITTEE Gloria Bush Al Cluck Chris Goodman Michelle Holmes, Recorder Sue Holmes Marita Kirchhofer Len Kobylenski Mike Lake Rolle Matthew Zoe Mohesky, County Planning resource, Office of Planning & Grants Tom Parker Jerry Sorensen, Manager, Land Use Planning, Plum Creek Timber Company Alan “Pete” Taylor, Facilitator Acknowledgments - i SWAN VALLEY-CONDON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STATEMENT OF PURPOSE This plan, prepared by a committee, and approved by the residents of the Swan Valley establishes community objectives and goals to be used by the Missoula County Office of Planning and Grants and the Board of County Commissioners in guiding future growth in the Swan Valley. The plan includes appendices and references numerous studies that are available at the Swan Valley Community Library. The Swan Valley Community Club will serve as the liaison between the community, agencies and the County Commissioners on land use issues. ii - Statement of Purpose SWAN VALLEY-CONDON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................................................................................................... i STATEMENT OF PURPOSE ............................................................................................... ii TABLE OF CONTENTS
    [Show full text]
  • Tra Veler Ser Vices
    TRAVELER SERVICES TRAVELER 88 VISITMT.COM TRAVELER SERVICES www.visitmt.com/travelerservices · 800.847.4868 You’re ready to come to Montana, but you’re wondering—is there really a train there? Will the national parks be open? Are there buses to the ski hills? Use these Traveler Services to show up prepared, informed and practically passing for a local. GETTING HERE It’s easiest to explore Montana by car, so if you aren’t already driving here, make plans to rent a vehicle once you arrive. Fly into larger towns or roll in aboard Amtrak’s Empire Builder (traversing the northern half of the state), then drive a rental from wherever you land. If you plan on hitting backroads and gravel, or even just iffy weather, upgrade to four-wheel-drive for more traction. A high-clearance vehicle is necessary only for a few limited remote destinations like well-off-the-beaten-path trailheads. You can also tour the state via commercial bus lines, which travel to major cities and some smaller towns, or join private bus tours. AIR TRAVEL Direct flights (some seasonal) are available from Seattle, San Francisco, SERVICES TRAVELER Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Denver, Minneapolis/St. Paul, Newark, Chicago, Portland and Atlanta. Go to visitmt.com/transportation/air_service for a list of IMPORTANT NUMBERS airports and carriers. Weather Reports Western Montana 406.721.3939 RAIL TRAVEL Amtrak’s Empire Builder runs across northern Montana from Wolf Point Central Montana 406.453.5469 through Havre, Glacier National Park and on to Libby. Bonus: there’s a glass-topped Northeast Montana 406.228.9625 viewing car.
    [Show full text]