PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Dam Maintenance Activities

Bureau of Indian Affairs and Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes Flathead Indian Reservation, Montana

February 2021

Assembled by:

1055 Mount Avenue Missoula, MT 59801

This Environmental Assessment becomes a federal document when evaluated, signed and dated by the responsible Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Official.

Responsible BIA Official Date TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1 PROPOSAL PURPOSE AND NEED ...... 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 BACKGROUND AND EXISTING FACILITIES ...... 2 1.2 PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ...... 14 1.3 NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION ...... 14 CHAPTER 2 ALTERNATIVES ...... 15 2.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 15 2.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...... 15 2.2 THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE/PROPOSED ACTION ...... 15 2.3 SELECTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ...... 17 CHAPTER 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ...... 18 3.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 18 3.1 LAND RESOURCES ...... 18 3.1.1 Topography ...... 18 3.1.2 Soils ...... 18 3.1.3 Geology, Mineral and Paleontological Resources ...... 18 3.2 WATER RESOURCES ...... 18 3.2.1 Floodplains ...... 18 3.2.2 Wetlands ...... 19 3.2.3 Water Quality ...... 19 3.2.4 Water Quantity ...... 20 3.2.5 Water Use ...... 21 3.2.6 Water Rights ...... 21 3.2.7 Irrigation ...... 21 3.3 AIR QUALITY ...... 21 3.4 LIVING RESOURCES ...... 22 3.4.1 Wildlife ...... 22 3.4.2 Vegetation...... 26 3.4.3 Ecosystems and Biological Communities ...... 30 3.4.4 Agriculture...... 31 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ...... 31 3.5.1 Historic and Archeological Resources ...... 31 3.5.2 Cultural, Sacred and Traditional Cultural Properties ...... 32 3.6 SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS ...... 32 3.6.1 Employment and Income ...... 32 3.6.2 Demographic Trends ...... 32 3.6.3 Lifestyle and Cultural Values ...... 32 3.6.4 Community Infrastructure ...... 33 3.6.5 Environmental Justice ...... 33

i 3.7 RESOURCE USE PATTERNS ...... 33 3.7.1 Hunting, Fishing, Gathering ...... 33 3.7.2 Timber Harvesting ...... 34 3.7.3 Agriculture...... 34 3.7.4 Mineral Extraction ...... 34 3.7.5 Recreation ...... 34 3.7.6 Transportation Networks ...... 34 3.7.7 Land Use Plans ...... 34 3.7.8 Energy ...... 35 3.8 OTHER VALUES ...... 35 3.8.1 Wilderness Areas ...... 35 3.8.2 Wild and Scenic Rivers ...... 35 3.8.3 Noise and Light ...... 35 3.8.4 Visual ...... 35 3.8.5 Public Health and Safety ...... 35 3.8.6 Climate Change ...... 36 3.8.7 Indian Trust Assets ...... 36 3.8.8 Hazardous Materials ...... 36 CHAPTER 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ...... 37 4.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 37 4.1 LAND RESOURCES ...... 37 4.1.1 Topography and Soils ...... 37 4.1.2 Geology, Mineral and Paleontological Resources ...... 38 4.1.3 Conclusion ...... 38 4.2 WATER RESOURCES ...... 38 4.2.1 Conclusion ...... 39 4.3 AIR QUALITY ...... 39 4.3.1 Conclusion ...... 39 4.4 LIVING RESOURCES ...... 39 4.4.1 Wildlife ...... 39 4.4.2 Conclusion ...... 43 4.4.3 Vegetation...... 44 4.4.4 Conclusion ...... 45 4.5 ECOSYSTEMS AND BIOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES ...... 45 4.6 AGRICULTURE ...... 45 4.7 CULTURAL RESOURCES ...... 45 4.8 SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS ...... 46 4.9 RESOURCE USE PATTERNS ...... 46 4.9.1 Conclusion ...... 46 4.10 OTHER VALUES ...... 46

ii 4.10.1 Noise ...... 46 4.10.2 Visual ...... 46 4.10.3 Public Health and Safety ...... 47 4.10.4 Hazardous Materials ...... 47 4.10.5 Conclusion ...... 48 CHAPTER 5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ...... 49 5.0 IMPACT CATEGORIES ...... 49 5.0.1 Proposed Action ...... 49 5.0.2 Planned CSKT Projects ...... 51 5.0.3 Montana Department of Transportation Projects ...... 51 5.1 CONCLUSION ...... 52 CHAPTER 6 MITIGATION ...... 53 CHAPTER 7 CONSULTATION ...... 54 CHAPTER 8 LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS ...... 56 CHAPTER 9 LITERATURE CITED ...... 58 CHAPTER 10 APPENDICES ...... 62

LIST OF TABLES Table 1. HUC-10 Watersheds within Project Area ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 2. USFWS Listed Wildlife Species for the Flathead Indian Reservation ...... 233 Table 3. USFWS Listed Plant Species for the Flathead Indian Reservation ...... 28 Table 4. Level IV Ecoregions within the Project Area ...... 30 Table 5. Soil Map Unit Farmland Classifications ...... 31 Table 6. Regionally Significant Reconstruction Projects in the Missoula District ...... 51 Table 7. CSKT Tribal Transportation Program Projects ...... 54 2 Table 8. Environmental Laws That May Require Consultation or Permitting ...... 544 Table 9. CSKT IDT Team ...... 56 Table 10. Non-CSKT employees for Inclusion in IDT ...... 56

APPENDICES Appendix A Figures Appendix B Dams Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs) Appendix C Supporting Documentation Appendix D Correspondence

iii CHAPTER 1

PROPOSAL PURPOSE AND NEED

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) owns and operates fifteen dams and 30 Early Warning System (EWS) facilities within the Flathead Indian Reservation and Flathead, Lake, and Missoula Counties, Montana. The CSKT are proposing to continue current operations and maintenance of these dams under a new over-arching Dam Maintenance Activities Program. A PEA has been drafted in order to form a collective document to address all routine maintenance activities required for the continued operation of these dams and EWS facilities. The following is a list of all dams and EWS systems to be included in the PEA for the Dam Maintenance Activities Project.

• Little Bitterroot Dam (2 EWS) • Kicking Horse Dam (2 EWS) • Hubbart Dam (2 EWS) • McDonald Dam (1 EWS) • Upper Dry Fork Dam (2 EWS) • Mission Dam (2 EWS) • Lower Dry Fork Dam (1 EWS) • Tabor Dam (3 EWS) • Pablo Dam (2 EWS) • Jocko Dam (2 EWS) • Hell Roaring Dam • Black Lake Dam (1 EWS) • Twin (Turtle) Dam (2 EWS) • Perma (1 EWS) • Crow Dam (3 EWS) • Arlee (1 EWS) • Ninepipe Dam (3 EWS)

Specific information for each of the fifteen dams are provided in the subsequent sections of this document. Additionally, Figures in Appendix A include the location of each dam and the limits of the proposed maintenance activities (Limits of Maintenance) covered in this PEA. This PEA identifies the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed maintenance actions recommended for the fifteen dams and thirty EWS facilities. It also demonstrates how identified impacts can be eliminated or minimized and provides the context for public involvement and comment.

The results of the Categorical Exclusion Exception Review (CEER) for the Dam Maintenance Activities indicated that an Environmental Assessment (EA) would be required for the proposed programmatic maintenance activities. Since the proposed activities cover a large geographic area and similar activities are proposed for each dam location, a Programmatic EA (PEA) has been drafted for the Dam Maintenance Activities Project. A PEA evaluates the effects of a proposed federal action on the surrounding environment and is prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA regulations (40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 1500 – 1508), and the Department of Interior (DOI) NEPA regulations (43 CFR Part 46). Part 516 of Department Manual (DM) Chapter 10 and Part 59 of Indian Affairs Manual (IAM) 3 describe federal actions that trigger the requirement for EAs and Environmental Impact Statements (EISs). The Indian Affairs NEPA Guidebook (Part 59 IAM 3-H) (Guidebook) provides detailed guidance on the preparation of Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) environmental compliance documents (BIA 2012). The Guidebook

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 1 was utilized for preparation of this PEA for the Dam Maintenance Activities Project. Additionally, the CEQ Effective Use of Programmatic NEPA Reviews was utilized in preparation of this document (CEQ 2014).

1.1 BACKGROUND AND EXISTING FACILITIES

The following information for each dam and associated structures was provided by CSKT Safety of Dams department for the purpose of this report. The descriptions originate from the most current Comprehensive Review Report or Periodic Review Report for each dam.

Little Bitterroot Dam Little Bitterroot Dam is located approximately 2 miles southwest of Marion in Flathead County, outside of the Flathead Indian Reservation. The dam was originally constructed on the shore line of a natural lake in 1916-1917 and then enlarged in 1918, which enabled the lake's operating level to be raised by 3 feet. The reservoir serves as the origin for the Little Bitterroot River. Water stored in the reservoir is used for supplemental irrigation storage, by providing releases for storage in Hubbart Reservoir located downstream. Reservoir capacity is 26,400 acre-feet at maximum operating elevation (El.) 3,906.48 feet.

Little Bitterroot Dam is an 800-foot-long earth-fill embankment with an S-shaped crest alignment and maximum height of 17 feet. The upstream face is sloped at 3H:1V (horizontal:vertical), except for the upper three feet which is a hand-placed rock wall sloped at 1H:3V. The downstream face is sloped at 2H:1V. The dam crest is 31 feet wide and covered with a paved roadway. Slope protection on the upstream face consists of hand-placed rock on a bedding of gravel. The downstream face is covered with grass.

There is a combined service spillway and outlet works for the dam that is located near the maximum section of the dam. The service spillway/outlet works is a reinforced concrete structure consisting of an intake structure containing sloping metal trash-racks, regulating gates controlled by manual hoists, discharge conduits, and then an outfall transition section. The service spillway is a siphon overflow which is located above the outlet works gates and which will discharge into the outfall conduit when the reservoir reaches an assigned elevation.

The emergency spillway consists of a 61-foot-long corrugated metal pipe (CMP) located within the left end of the dam. The CMP has an elliptical shape and has approximate dimensions of 7 feet wide by 5 feet high. Downstream from the CMP, a trapezoidal discharge channel carries flow into the outlet works channel.

The Limits of Maintenance area (Appendix A, Figure 3) is approximately 14 acres and includes all dam and outlet structures, access to the dam structures on Bitterroot Lane, one EWS at the gatehouse, and one EWS downstream of the dam.

Hubbart Dam Hubbart Dam is located at the south end of the Hubbart Reservoir, approximately 13 miles south- southwest of Marion, in Flathead County, outside of the Flathead Indian Reservation. Hubbart Dam is a variable-radius, concrete arch dam that was constructed in 1923 on the Little Bitterroot

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 2 River. Little Bitterroot Dam and Reservoir are located about 15 miles upstream from Hubbart Dam. Hubbart Reservoir impounds approximately 12,000 acre-feet at normal reservoir water surface elevation 3,219; the primary use of the stored water is irrigation.

The spillway is a 265-foot-long uncontrolled overflow section located near the center of the dam. The spillway crest is at El. 3,219 feet, and the discharge capacity is 5,000 ft3/s at reservoir water surface elevation 3,222.5 feet (dam crest). There is no stilling basin for the spillway; spillway discharges impinge on the foundation rock near the toe of the dam before returning to the stream channel.

The outlet works is located at the right side of the dam. Water from the reservoir enters a trash- racked intake structure at the base of the dam, then flows to the right through a concrete conduit that runs along the base of the dam for about 62 feet to a concrete transition structure. Within the transition structure, the water is redirected, and enters two steel pressure conduits that pass through the dam. Releases through the outlet works are controlled by two manually-operated cast iron emergency slide gates mounted on the upstream dam face, and by two jet-flow regulating gates in a gate control structure constructed at the downstream toe of the dam.

The Limits of Maintenance area (Appendix A, Figure 4) is approximately 77 acres and includes all dam and outlet structures, one EWS at the Gatehouse, one EWS downstream of the dam, and access to the dam and EWS sites on Moore Ranch Road and an a gated, unnamed, unimproved road.

Upper Dry Fork Dam Upper Dry Fork Dam is located approximately 6 miles southwest of Niarada in Sanders County, within the Flathead Indian Reservation. Upper Dry Fork Dam is a homogeneous earth embankment structure, designed with a rockfill toe section, on Dry Fork Creek. The dam was constructed in 1940 by the BIA. Upper Dry Fork Reservoir stores approximately 2,815 acre-feet of water at reservoir water surface elevation 2,928.5 feet; the stored water is released for irrigation, and the reservoir provides recreational opportunities.

The dam embankment has a crest length of about 2,000 feet, a crest width of 20 feet, a structural height of approximately 40 feet, a hydraulic height of approximately 29 feet, and a crest elevation of approximately 2,935 feet. The upstream dam face slopes at 3H:1V between the crest and elevation 2,927.5, then at 4H:1V between elevation 2,927.5 feet and the reservoir floor. The downstream face of the dam slopes at approximately 2H:1V. The upstream dam face is protected by an 18-inch-thick layer of gravel-sized slope protection.

Two dike embankments were constructed in a low area in the reservoir rim just upstream from the left abutment of the main dam embankment, with their axes oriented approximately perpendicular to the main dam. The upstream dike is commonly known as the East Dike; the downstream dike, commonly known as the Parallel Dike. The dikes are about 300 feet apart, and each dike is approximately 1,000 feet long.

The spillway is located at the right abutment of the dam, and consists of an uncontrolled, 80-foot- wide excavated channel with a crest elevation of approximately 2,928.7 feet.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 3

The outlet works is located near the middle of the main dam embankment. Water is drawn into a trash-racked, flared concrete intake structure, then enters a conduit transition section. Within the transition, the conduit cross section changes to a corrugated metal pipe (CMP) encased within a trapezoidal concrete section. The encased CMP conduit with concrete collars continues downstream for 86 feet to a concrete gate chamber and access tower that supports two manually operated slide gates in tandem. The slide gates discharge into a 102-foot-long downstream conduit with one concrete cutoff collar that has the same cross section as the upstream conduit. Outlet works releases exit the downstream conduit into a 10-foot-long terminal structure and energy dissipater with invert elevation 2,897.57 feet.

Instrumentation at Upper Dry Fork Dam consists of piezometers at the dam and East Dike installed in 1990.

The Limits of Maintenance area (Appendix A, Figure 5) is approximately 308 acres and includes all dam and outlet structures, an EWS at the gatehouse, an EWS on the Camas Canal, and a portion of Upper Reservoir Road and Dry Fork Reservoir Road for access to dam and outlet structures.

Lower Dry Fork Dam Lower Dry Fork Dam is located approximately 8 miles south-southwest of Niarada in Sanders County, within the Flathead Indian Reservation. Lower Dry Fork Dam is an earth fill embankment located on Dry Fork Creek that was constructed in 1921 by the U.S. Reclamation Service (Bureau of Reclamation). Lower Dry Fork Reservoir (also known as Lonepine Reservoir) stores approximately 4,200 acre-feet of water at reservoir water surface elevation 2,858 feet. The reservoir provides irrigation water to the Camas C Canal and to Dry Fork Creek.

The dam was originally constructed to a structural height of about 23 feet and was raised in 1933- 34 to a structural height of about 29.5 feet. The embankment was modified by Stage 1 and Stage 2 Modifications completed in 2014 to include an upstream face slope of 3H: 1 V, a 20-foot-wide, approximate 3,000-foot-long, crest at elevation 2,863.5 (2 feet higher than the previous crest), a downstream face slope of 2-l/2V:1H from the crest to elevation 2,846.0 feet, a 70-foot wide berm sloping from top elevation 2,646.0 feet at the upstream end to top elevation 2,844.8 feet at the downstream end, and 2-1 /2H: 1 V downstream face slope to the downstream toe.

A 1,400-foot-long, 15-foot-high dike is located in the northwest area of the reservoir. The dike has a crest length of 1,400 feet and a crest width of approximately 15 feet at elevation 2,863.5 feet. The upstream and downstream faces are sloped at 3:1 (H:V). The dike has riprap slope protection on the upstream and downstream faces. A concrete outlet works structure with releases controlled by a slide gate is located in the center of the dike. The dike impounds approximately 100 acre- feet of the reservoir and is used to manage a wetlands area in the northwest part of the reservoir.

The spillway is located at the left abutment of the dam, and consists of an uncontrolled, 1,000- foot-wide natural depression with a crest elevation of 2,858 feet and an effective crest length of approximately 600 feet.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 4 The outlet works consists of an intake structure containing an electrically-operated emergency gate and regulating gate, a 205-foot-long steel-lined concrete conduit through the embankment, a concrete impact basin energy dissipater, and riprap-lined discharge channel.

Instrumentation includes porous-tube piezometers in the embankment and downstream of the dam, Toe Drain Outfalls seepage areas, and embankment measurement points.

The Limits of Maintenance area (Appendix A, Figure 6) is approximately 373 acres and includes all dam, dikes, and spillway structures, one EWS at the gatehouse, and access along Managhan Road, Cluzen Road, and Far West Road.

Pablo Dam The Pablo Dam is located within the Flathead Indian Reservation, approximately 3 miles north- northwest of Pablo in Lake County. Pablo Dam is a homogeneous earth embankment structure that was originally constructed in 1912, and then was raised twice – once in 1918 and again in 1932. Pablo Dam was constructed by the Reclamation Service (now Bureau of Reclamation) for the U.S. Indian Service (now BIA) as part of the Flathead Irrigation and Power Project, Montana, to impound water for irrigation and recreation. The dam originally consisted of three separate embankments: North Pablo Dam, Middle Pablo Dam, and South Pablo Dam. The North Pablo Dam was abandoned soon after construction due to groundwater problems in the town of Polson, located approximately 5 miles north of the dam. The original South Pablo Dam is now called the Main Pablo Dam (main dam), and the original Middle Pablo Dam is now called the North Dike (dike).

The dam impounds Pablo Reservoir, which is an off-stream reservoir that receives water from the Pablo Feeder Canal at the left end of the dike. The storage capacity of Pablo Reservoir is 28,400 acre-feet with the reservoir at elevation 3,211 feet and the reservoir water surface is 1,600 acres. Water is released to the Pablo “A” Canal downstream for irrigation.

The main dam is 10,550 feet long and 43 feet high, with a crest width of 20 feet and a crest at elevation 3,220 feet. The upstream face slopes at 3H:1V (horizontal:vertical), and is protected by a zone of riprap. The downstream face slopes at 2H:1V, and is protected by grassy vegetation. The dike is at the left end of the main dam, and has a crest length of 5,850 feet, a crest width of approximately 20 feet, and a crest elevation 3,217 feet (3 feet lower than the main dam). The dike is approximately 5 feet high; the upstream and downstream dike faces slope at 2H:1V, and both are covered with brushy vegetation and grass.

There is no spillway at Pablo Dam. The original low-level outlet works was demolished and replaced between 2004 and 2005 and is located near the middle of the main dam. The outlet works consists of the following components: a concrete intake tower containing two emergency slide gates and two regulating slide gates; two steel-lined concrete conduits that extend 190 feet from the intake tower to the concrete discharge portal and apron. Discharge then enters the Pablo “A” Canal.

There are currently 14 seepage monitoring instruments, 24 porous-tube piezometers, 7 well points, and 32 embankment measurement points at Pablo Dam.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 5

The Limits of Maintenance area (Appendix A, Figure 7) is approximately 2,100 acres and includes all dam, dike, inlet, and outlet structures, all instrumentation, one EWS at the gatehouse, one EWS downstream of the dam, access from Skyline Drive and North Reservoir Road, and unimproved roads along the dam face and north of the Pablo Reservoir.

Twin (Turtle) Dam The Twin (Turtle) Dam is located approximately 4 miles southeast of Polson in Lake County, within the Flathead Indian Reservation. Twin (Turtle) Lake Dam is an off-stream storage dam constructed in 1931-32 by the U.S. Indian Irrigation Service (now the BIA) to provide additional storage in the existing lake. The reservoir is used primarily for irrigation.

Twin (Turtle) Dam consists of a dam and a dike along the rim of a glacial lakebed. The embankment on the southwest side of the reservoir is called the dam and the embankment in the vicinity of the outlet works structure is called the dike. The dam and dike are believed to be homogeneous embankments that were constructed from materials found in the immediate vicinity of the dam. The upstream and downstream faces of the dam slope at approximately 4.5H:1V (horizontal:vertical) and at 2H:1V, respectively. There is an approximately 8-foot-wide bench on the downstream face of the dam near elevation 3,089. The upstream face of the dike slopes at approximately 4.5H:1V, and the downstream face slopes at approximately 3.5H:1V to elevation 3,083.6 feet and then slopes at 20H:1V.

Twin (Turtle) Lake Dam does not have a spillway. There is a 12-inch-diameter pipe that runs through the dike approximately 200 feet to the right of the outlet works. The invert of the pipe intake is positioned at the right abutment. This is a conveyance pipe for an abandoned irrigation ditch (Secretarial Ditch).

There is a low-level outlet for the dam that is located through the dike. The outlet works consists of a reinforced concrete intake structure with a sill at elevation 3,061 feet; a concrete upstream conduit; a rectangular reinforced concrete gate shaft containing a slide gate; a downstream conduit consisting of 40 feet of concrete pipe followed by 340 feet of smaller-diameter concrete pipe; and a reinforced concrete outfall structure with a stilling pool.

The Limits of Maintenance area (Appendix A, Figure 8) is approximately 141 acres and includes all dam, dike and outlet structures, one EWS at the gatehouse, one EWS downstream of the dam, and portions of Turtle Lake Loop, Dupuis Road, and Turtle Lake Road.

Hell Roaring Dam Hell Roaring Dam is located approximately 7 miles east-northeast of Polson in Lake County, within the Flathead Indian Reservation. Hell Roaring Dam is an embankment structure located on Hell Roaring Creek. The original rock filled timber crib dam was constructed between 1914 and 1916. In 1964, Hell Roaring Dam was modified by buttressing the original dam with earth-fill slopes on the upstream and downstream faces. The inlet works structure and pipes were not modified at this time. Including buttressing, the dam was approximately 30 feet high with 1.5:1 (horizontal:vertical) upstream and downstream slopes. The dam crest, at approximate elevation

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 6 3,720 feet, was 313 feet long with an average width of 16 feet. The reservoir had a capacity of approximately 40 acre-feet.

During a closed-circuit television (CCTV) inspection in 2007, the outlet works conduit was observed to have experienced deterioration, cross-sectional deformation and severe leakage at one joint. This information was included in a Comprehensive Dam Review that included other dam safety issues. The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) evaluated these issues and prepared an Alternative Solutions Study recommending that the dam be breached. In 2011, the following construction activities occurred: removal of the original rock filled timber cribbing and outlet works; excavation of the earthen embankment to lower the dam crest; and, placement of geotextile and riprap on the existing embankment slopes. The new reservoir capacity is approximately 15 acre- feet at elevation 3709.0 feet.

Although Hell Roaring Dam is not currently functioning as a dam, it has been included in this report upon future reinstallation of the dam components. Reinstallation of dam components will not be covered by this PEA but future maintenance activities would be covered. The Limits of Maintenance area (Appendix A, Figure 9) is approximately 12 acres and includes any current dam and outlet structures, any future dam and outlet structures, and a portion of Hell Roaring Road.

The information for Hell Roaring Dam comes from a final report prepared by the Bureau of Reclamation following the completion of the breach construction.

Crow Dam The Crow Dam is a homogeneous earthfill embankment structure on Crow Creek within the Flathead Indian Reservation, approximately 7 miles southwest of the town of Ronan. It was completed in 1933. The Lower Crow Reservoir, impounded by the dam, stores 10,350 acre-feet of water, which is primarily used for irrigation. The reservoir is currently restricted to reservoir water surface elevation 2,825.0 due to the deteriorated condition of the spillway and outlet works.

The dam is approximately 99 feet high, with a crest width of 20 feet, a crest length of approximately 900 feet, and crest elevation 2,882.5 feet. The upstream face of the embankment originally sloped at 3H:1V (horizontal to vertical) for its entire height was later modified with a buttress consisting of a zone of coarse gravelly “pervious material” at the top of which is a 15- foot-wide landing at elevation 2,850.0; the buttress slopes at 4H:1V between elevation 2850 and the reservoir floor.

The spillway is located at the right abutment. The crest is a 180-foot-long concrete side channel overflow section with crest elevation 2877.0 feet on its left wall; the side channel is trapezoidal with variable invert width and invert elevation. The trapezoidal side-channel transitions to a 210- foot-long, 13-foot-diameter horseshoe-shaped, concrete-lined tunnel. Immediately upstream from the tunnel entrance portal, two manually operated slide gates are installed within an intake through the top of the left side-channel wall. The lower portion of the spillway, downstream of the concreted-lined tunnel, was replaced in 2019. The upper portion of the existing spillway, consisting of the concrete-lined tunnel and side channel overflow section, are anticipated to be replaced in 2020-2021 with a rectangular shaped spillway and piano key weir inlet structure.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 7 Outlet works releases are controlled by a butterfly guard valve and two cylinder regulating gates installed in a vertical concrete tower. The butterfly valve is installed immediately upstream from the cylinder gate tower and releases water to an annular space within the cylinder gate tower that surrounds the interior shaft of the tower. Design is underway for a new outlet works.

Instrumentation includes porous tube piezometers on the upstream dam face near the crest and the downstream dam face.

The Limits of Maintenance area (Appendix A, Figure 10a and Figure 10b) for Crow Dam is approximately 230 acres that includes all dam, spillway, and outlet structures, one EWS at the gatehouse, one EWS upstream of the reservoir, one EWS downstream of the dam, Crow Dam Road, and road access to all structures.

Ninepipe Dam Ninepipe Dam is located within the Flathead Indian Reservation in Lake County, approximately 2 miles northeast of Charlo. Ninepipe Dam is a homogeneous, puddled core, earth-fill dam located off-stream. The dam, in combination with four dikes along the reservoir rim, impounds a reservoir with a surface area of approximately 1,586 acres and contains 14,870 acre-feet at reservoir water surface elevation 3,010.0. The reservoir is fed principally by the Ninepipe Feeder Canal. Principal benefits of the reservoir include irrigation storage and recreation. The reservoir also serves as a National Wildlife Refuge. The drainage area above the dam is about 5.3 square miles, which includes Kicking Horse Reservoir.

Dike No. 1 is approximately 7 feet in height and 935 feet in length, Dike No. 2 is approximately 7 feet in height and 957 feet in length, Dike No. 3 is approximately 12.5 feet in height and 6,700 feet in length, and Dike No. 4 is approximately 9 feet in height and 1,500 feet in length. Dike Nos. 1, 2, and 3 are about 12 feet wide at the crest. Dike No. 4 is about 20 feet wide at the crest. Dike No. 3 has a 3H:1V riprapped upstream slope, and Dike Nos. 1, 2, and 4 have 2H:1V riprapped upstream slopes; all dikes have 2H:1V grass-covered downstream slopes.

The only release facility at the dam is the outlet works within the central portion of the dam. There is no spillway due to the controlled inflow and off-stream location of the reservoir. The outlet works is located within the central portion of the dam. It consists of an intake structure, a 53.5-foot-long triple-barrel concrete upstream conduit, with each barrel measuring 3 feet high by 4 feet wide, a vertical gate shaft that houses three high-pressure slide gates, and an 89-foot-long triple-barrel downstream concrete conduit containing three 3-foot-square barrels.

Seepage monitoring at Ninepipe Dam consists of a single V-notch weir, which is located about 40 feet to the right of the Post B/C Canal just downstream of the toe of the dam. Ninepipe Dam has a single drill hole containing two porous tube piezometers.

The Limits of Maintenance area (Appendix A, Figure 11) is approximately 972 acres and includes all dam, dike, and outlet structures, one EWS at the gatehouse, two EWS’s downstream, and access along Olsen Road, Ninepipe Road, and State Highway 212.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 8 Kicking Horse Dam Kicking Horse Dam is located within the Flathead Indian Reservation in Lake County, approximately 5 miles south of Ronan. Kicking Horse Dam, Dikes, and Reservoir is an off-stream storage facility that is fed by the Kicking Horse Feeder Canal, which diverts from Post Creek southeast of the reservoir and discharges into the reservoir at the left abutment. The reservoir is also fed by the South Crow Feeder Canal, which diverts from South Crow Creek at the reservoir inlet. The dam was constructed in 1930 by the BIA as part of the Flathead Irrigation and Power Project, now the Flathead Indian Irrigation Project (FIIP), to impound water for irrigation and recreation. The storage capacity of the reservoir is 9,200 acre-feet at elevation 3,063.

The dam is a homogeneous earth-fill structure, with a crest length of 5,243 feet at elevation 3,068.9, a crest width of 14 feet and a maximum height of 30.4 feet. The upstream face of the dam has a slope of 3H:1V (horizontal:vertical) that is protected with riprap on a gravel bedding layer, and the downstream face has a slope of 2H:1V that is protected with natural vegetation. In addition to the dam, there is also a dike on the west side of the reservoir and a dike at the north end of the reservoir. The west dike is 450 feet long and the north dike is 1,700 feet long. Both dikes have an approximate crest elevation of 3,066 feet, a crest width of 10 feet, a 3H:1V upstream slope, and a 2H:1V downstream slope. There is riprap protection on the upstream face of both dikes.

There is no spillway for the dam; the only discharge feature for the dam is a low-level outlet works located near the maximum section of the dam that discharges into the Ninepipe Feeder Canal. The outlet works consists of a 19.75-foot-long, trash-racked intake structure with the sill at elevation 3,039.5 feet, a 35-foot-long, upstream conduit consisting of twin rectangular reinforced concrete conduits, two wet well shafts containing manually-operated regulating slide gates, an 89-foot-long downstream conduit consisting of twin reinforced concrete conduits, and an outfall structure and channel. The outlet works discharges into the Ninepipe Feeder Canal.

The instrumentation at Kicking Horse Dam consists of six seepage monitoring locations and 13 piezometers. The seepage monitoring locations include three seepage measurement pipes (SM- 1, SM-2, and SM-6) located along the downstream toe of the dam, and staff gages (SM-3, SM-4, and SM-5) located in three large depressions located near the downstream toe of the dam. Twelve of the piezometers are located in the embankment and foundation of the main dam and one piezometer is located in the west dike embankment.

The Limits of Maintenance area (Appendix A, Figure 12) is approximately 675 acres and includes all dam, inlet, and outlet structures, one EWS at the gatehouse, one EWS downstream of the dam, and the levee road along the south and west border of the Kicking Horse Reservoir.

McDonald Dam The McDonald Dam is located within the Flathead Indian Reservation in Lake County, approximately 9 miles east of Charlo. McDonald Dam is located on Post Creek and was originally constructed in 1920 to provide water storage for irrigation. The dam impounds a reservoir that has an active conservation storage capacity of 8,225 acre-feet. Water released from the dam flows into Post Creek and then into Pablo Feeder Canal about 1.8 miles downstream from the dam.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 9

The dam is a 1,495-foot-long embankment consisting of homogeneous earthfill, with a 22-foot- wide gravel-surfaced crest at elevation 3,604.0 feet (not including camber). Camber on the crest raises the crest elevation to a maximum of elevation 3,605.5 at the left side of the spillway, and elevation 3,605.0 feet to the right of the spillway. The maximum structural height of the dam is about 47 feet. The upstream and downstream faces of the dam are sloped at 3H:1V and 2H:1V, respectively. The upstream face is protected with successive layers of chimney filter, impervious earth-fill, geomembrane bedding, geotextile, geomembrane, geomembrane cover material, and 2 feet of riprap protection. Drain pipes were placed beneath the geotextile filter material and are placed within blanket drain material along the foundation contact to measurement weirs at the downstream toe of the dam. The measurement weir boxes also provide outfall for toe drains, which pass beneath the length of the upstream dam toe.

Release facilities at the dam consist of a spillway and outlet works. The spillway is located on the right portion of the embankment, and has a crest elevation of 3,592.5 feet, five hinged-crest gates with electric hoists, an inclined chute, a stilling basin, and a riprapped discharge channel. In the fully raised position, the spillway gates have an elevation of 3,598.0 ft.

The outlet works consists of a gate house and intake tower, two slide gates, a concrete-encased 300-foot-long steel discharge pipe, a stilling basin structure, and canal transition to Post Creek. The outlet works was constructed at the location of the original outlet works, and the original concrete conduit was used as an encasement for the new steel pipe. A bypass pipe is also embedded within the concrete annulus. A steel bridge connects the outlet works intake tower to the crest of the dam.

Instrumentation at the dam includes vibrating wire piezometers, embankment crest survey monuments, embankment measurement points, and drain outfall measuring weirs.

The Limits of Maintenance area (Appendix A, Figure 13) is approximately 150 acres and includes all dam and outlet structures, one EWS at the gatehouse, and access from McDonald Lake Road.

Mission Dam The Mission Dam is located within the Flathead Indian Reservation in Lake County, approximately 3 miles east of St. Ignatius. Mission Dam is a homogeneous earth embankment structure on Mission Creek that was constructed in 1935 by the U.S. Indian Irrigation Service. It stores approximately 7,000 acre-feet of water at reservoir water surface elevation 3,406; the stored water is released for irrigation, and the reservoir provides recreational opportunities.

The dam has a crest length of 1,848 feet, a crest width of 20 feet, a structural height of approximately 83 feet, and a crest elevation of 3,418.7 feet. The upstream and downstream faces of the dam have estimated slopes of 3H:1V and 2H:1V (horizontal:vertical), respectively. The upstream and downstream dam faces are protected by a layer of riprap.

The spillway is located at the left abutment of the dam and consists of an unlined inlet channel; an uncontrolled, 120-foot-wide (bottom width) concrete crest structure; an 880-foot-long concrete- lined chute; and a 50-foot-long submerged stilling basin.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 10

The outlet works is located near the right center portion of the embankment and consists of a trash-racked rectangular concrete intake structure; a 55-foot-long horseshoe-shaped upstream conduit; a butterfly guard valve; two cylinder regulating gates in a vertical concrete tower; a 40- foot-long “gooseneck” transition section below and downstream from the cylinder gate tower; a 251-foot-long horseshoe-shaped downstream conduit; and a 17-foot-long concrete terminal structure. A domestic water line was installed in the conduit at some time after original construction and reportedly remains operational at this time. The concrete gate tower is within the reservoir and is accessed by a steel truss footbridge that spans between the upstream dam crest and the concrete shelter constructed on top of the tower.

Instrumentation at Mission Dam consists of 14 groundwater monitoring piezometers.

The Limits of Maintenance area (Appendix A, Figure 14) is approximately 350 acres and includes all dam, spillway, and outlet structures, one EWS at the gatehouse, one EWS downstream of the dam, a portion of Mission Dam Road, and a portion of Forest Canal Maintenance road.

Tabor Dam The Tabor Dam is located within the Flathead Indian Reservation in Lake County on St. Mary’s Lake. Tabor Dam consists of two homogeneous earth-fill embankments separated by a raised section of natural glacial moraine on Dry Creek and is located approximately 9 miles southeast of St. Ignatius. The embankments were originally constructed to crest elevation 4,011 in 1930 to enlarge the natural St. Mary’s Lake, which was impounded by a glacial moraine. The original embankments were raised to their present crest elevation of 4,033 feet in 1940. St. Mary’s Lake has a live storage capacity of approximately 23,200 acre-feet of water at reservoir water surface elevation (and spillway crest elevation) 4,024.6 feet; the dead storage volume below the outlet works sill elevation 3,911.53 feet is approximately 4,400 acre-feet. In addition to flows from Dry Creek, St. Mary’s Lake receives water diverted from the Middle Fork of the Jocko River via a feeder canal that discharges into the reservoir at the southwest reservoir rim. Benefits from the dam and reservoir include irrigation and fishery enhancement.

The two homogeneous embankments, designated North Dam (right embankment) and South Dam (left embankment), are approximately 994 and 551 feet long, respectively, with crest elevation 4,033. The glacial moraine between North and South Dams is commonly referred to as the Central Dike. The Central Dike is approximately 1,060 feet long. The crest of the Central Dike section of the dam was either excavated or filled – depending on the variable top elevation of the original moraine – to a uniform crest elevation of 4,033 feet. North Dam is approximately 45 feet high; South Dam is approximately 53 feet high. The North and South Dam embankments have upstream face slopes of 3H:1V and downstream face slopes of 2H:1V; the upstream and downstream faces are protected by riprap. The upstream face of the Central Dike appears to have been shaped to match the upstream faces of the North and South Dams.

The spillway is located approximately 1,200 feet to the left of South Dam and consists of the following components: approach channel, crest structure, chute, and discharge channel.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 11 The outlet works is located near the middle of the North Dam and consists of an intake structure, upstream tunnel, gate tower, downstream tunnel, and discharge channel.

Instrumentation consists of eight porous stone piezometers, four observation wells, and seven weirs.

The Limits of Maintenance area (Appendix A, Figure 15) is approximately 330 acres and includes all dam, inlet, dike, and outlet structures, one EWS along the Central Dike, one EWS at the gatehouse, one EWS downstream of the dam, and access along a portion of St. Mary’s Lake Road.

Jocko Dam The Jocko Dam is located on the Jocko River within the Flathead Indian Reservation in Missoula County, approximately 16 miles east-northeast of Arlee. The dam was constructed in 1937 and impounds water for irrigation and recreation. The reservoir is fed primarily by releases from Black Lake Dam, located approximately 1.5 miles upstream on the Jocko River.

The lake at Jocko Dam is formed by a combination of a natural barrier consisting of glacial moraine and landslide debris, and a manmade dam on top of the natural barrier consisting of a homogeneous earth-fill embankment. The earth-fill embankment consists of a 2.5H:1V (horizontal:vertical) grass-covered upstream face, a 10-foot-wide bench at elevation 4,350.0, and a 2H:1V grass-covered downstream face. The graveled crest of the dam is at elevation 4,360.0 and is 310 feet long and 23 to 29 feet wide (previously reported to be 20 feet wide). The height of the manmade dam is approximately 20 feet.

Jocko Reservoir does not contain an emergency spillway. The outlet works is approximately 1,370 feet long and was constructed by tunneling through the natural glacial/landslide-deposited barrier. The outlet works has a trash-rack intake structure and a 3-foot-radius concrete-lined conduit upstream from the gate chamber. The conduit transitions to a 4-foot-diameter section at the gate chamber containing an emergency gate and a butterfly valve. The gate chamber is accessed through a gate tower located about 150 feet downstream from the intake structure. Only the regulating valve can be controlled from the outlet works control house. The emergency gate operator is located about 75 feet below the floor of the control house. Downstream from the gates, the conduit transitions back to the 3-foot-radius, horseshoe-shaped conduit. The conduit discharges into an excavated channel that directs water back into the Jocko River.

The Limits of Maintenance area (Appendix A, Figure 16) is approximately 122 acres and includes all dam and outlet structures, one EWS at the gatehouse, one EWS downstream of the dam, and a portion of Jocko Road for access.

Black Lake Dam The Black Lake Dam is located within the Flathead Indian Reservation in Missoula County, approximately 17 miles east-northeast of Arlee. Black Lake Dam is located on the Jocko River and was completed in 1967 as a replacement for Upper Jocko Dam, which failed on May 20, 1956. The reservoir has a storage capacity of approximately 5,200 acre-feet of active

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 12 conservation at reservoir water surface elevation 4,440. The reservoir is used for recreation and to supply irrigation water.

The embankment is a zoned earth-fill structure with a structural height of 75 feet, a crest length of approximately 530 feet, a crest width of 20 feet, and crest elevation 4,450 feet. The upstream face slopes at 3H:1V, with a 2-foot-thick layer of riprap slope protection. The downstream face slopes at 2.5H:1V; gravel- and cobble-sized material provides slope protection. In addition, there is a geomembrane liner and cover material beneath the reservoir, on the upstream face of the dam, along the right abutment, and along the north slope.

There is no constructed spillway at Black Lake Reservoir. However, a poorly defined natural saddle at the head of the reservoir, near the Placid Creek Feeder Canal where it enters the reservoir, would serve as a de facto spillway. The approximate elevation of the de facto spillway crest is 4,439 feet.

The outlet works consists of the original concrete box conduit through the embankment located at the maximum section of the dam, with the upstream invert of the conduit at elevation 4,393, and a new segment of reinforced concrete pipe that discharges to a baffled impact-type energy dissipator. Flow through the outlet works is controlled by an emergency gate valve and a regulating gate valve, both installed in a gate chamber at the bottom of a gate shaft that extends from the dam crest.

Instrumentation includes vibrating-wire and pneumatic piezometers under the geomembrane liner; porous-tube piezometers, observation wells, and seepage weirs to monitor pore pressures under the dam’s foundation and abutments.

The Limits of Maintenance area (Appendix A, Figure 17a and 17b) is approximately 135 acres and includes all dam, de facto spillway, and outlet structures, one EWS at the gatehouse, and a portion of Jocko Road for access.

Early Warning System (EWS) Locations According to the 2014 BIA Safety of Dams Program Handbook, the purpose of an EWS is to provide remote notification of potential hazardous flooding or other significant incidents at the dam which could lead to potential dam failure. The CSKT maintains 30 EWS sites across the Flathead Indian Reservation, Little Bitterroot Dam, and Hubbart Dam. The majority of EWS structures are located within the dam gatehouse or directly downstream of the dams. One EWS is located several miles upstream of Crow Dam and one EWS is located less than one mile downstream of Crow Dam. In addition, one EWS is located in Perma along the Flathead River and one EWS is located near Arlee in close proximity to the Jocko River. All EWS sites are identified in the Appendix A maps. A standard 100-foot radius around each site has been established as the typical maintenance area. Limited maintenance activities on roads used to access EWS sites is also included as part of this document.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 13 1.2 PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED ACTION

The purpose of the proposed action is to implement a program-wide document for routine maintenance activities at all fifteen of the reservation-owned reservoirs and thirty EWS sites. A Dams Maintenance Activities table has been assembled in order to list each potential maintenance activity and the appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) that should be considered with each activity. This document will streamline these maintenance activities that are needed for sustainable operation of the reservoir and dam structures and ensure good environmental stewardship.

1.3 NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION

The proposed action provides a systematic approach to BMPs for routine maintenance activities. The BMPs are needed for sustainable operation of the dams and EWS structures and ensure good environmental stewardship. Additionally, the proposed action would ensure that CSKT is in compliance with NEPA for all dam and EWS maintenance activities and would not need to complete individual NEPA assessments for each dam and EWS maintenance activity. The PEA approach to this project will also allow potential impacts to be evaluated for the maintenance activities collectively and allow for a cumulative impacts analysis.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 14 CHAPTER 2

ALTERNATIVES

2.0 INTRODUCTION

The two alternatives that are evaluated in this PEA are limited to the No Action Alternative and the Preferred Alternative/Proposed Action. The No Action Alternative and the Preferred Alternative are detailed below.

2.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Under the No Action Alternative, typical maintenance activities for dam and EWS locations would continue to follow individual dam Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) and/or Operations and Maintenance (O&M) manuals. Additionally, maintenance procedures would follow and may be changed by recommendation in each dams’ most current Comprehensive Review Report or Periodic Review Report. The No Action Alternative does not provide a streamline document that clearly states each maintenance activity and the associated BMPs that should be utilized with each activity. Maintenance at each dam and EWS structure would be an individual action with no clear Reservation-wide guidance for environmental stewardship. It is possible that under the No Action Alternative, some projects will not receive NEPA review and that cumulative effects may be difficult to assess. Additionally, agencies and the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) may not have the opportunity to review the potential impacts on a large scale.

2.2 THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE/PROPOSED ACTION Under the preferred alternative/proposed action, the Dams Maintenance Activities table created for this PEA would be utilized at every dam and EWS location as a guidance for Best Management Practices (BMPs) associated with each maintenance activity. Individual dam SOP and O&M manuals would still be utilized as well. In addition, the proposed action would ensure that CSKT follows NEPA for all dam and EWS maintenance activities and will not need to complete individual NEPA assessments for each dam and EWS structure. The proposed action would be able to address cumulative effects more readily and provide a consistent approach to geographically similar areas or similar project types. The proposed action will utilize the Dams Maintenance Activities BMPs table, located in Appendix B, at all dams and EWS stations and includes the following maintenance activities as part of the NEPA review:

Vegetative Maintenance Actions • Removal of beached root wads and drifting vegetation and debris from within the project area • Removal of fallen trees from within the project area • Removal of trees and their root system within the project area • Vegetation control via prescribed burn • Control of vegetation and repair of vegetation damage in embankment dams • Noxious weed control via chemical application • Reseeding or revegetating activities using various methods • Control of aquatic vegetation • Routine mowing using various methods

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 15 Geotechnical Investigation Actions • Geotechnical drilling for soil identification on and nearby dam structures • Soil test pits • Preparation of drill pad for geotechnical investigations

Instrumentation Maintenance Actions • Maintenance of Early Warning System (EWS) components • Relocation of EWS floats/instrumentation if necessary • Piezometer installation and maintenance • Weir boxes, flumes, and related components maintenance and clearing • Removal of algae, sediment, and debris from staff gauges, weir boxes, and miscellaneous outfall structures • Installation of survey monitoring points • Verification of voltage and amperage or replacement of electrical controls • Repair of electrical or instrumentation conduits

Access Maintenance Actions • Roadway grading and blading, including using dust abatement agent • Improvements or repairs to the dam access road • Maintenance activities for access to EWS locations • Surface overlay, chip-seal, crack-seal, pothole patching, and full-depth patching • Repair of vehicular traffic ruts on dam crest access road • Snow plowing and ice removal • Repair or replacement of cattle guards, fences, locks, gates, or other security features

Dam Component Maintenance Actions • Reestablishment of freeboard or camber in embankment dams • Repair of cracking in concrete dams or structures • Sealing of longitudinal or transverse cracks in embankment dams • Sealing of concrete joints • Repair of deteriorated or spalled concrete • Repair or replacement of gutters • Repair/Replacement of outlet pipes • Surfacing embankments • Repair of bent control stems and stem guides • Lubrication and maintenance of gates and valves • Repair, replacement, and maintenance of electric motor gate actuators and associated components, including but not limited to power sources • Exercise of outlet gate openings • Application or reapplication of coatings on gates, valves, and metal work • Cleaning of drain pipes, manholes, and outlets • Removal of sediment in dam spillway, outlet, exit channel, and other areas • Dredging activities of outfall channels • Removal of debris build up on trash rack and other areas

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 16 • Stockpiling of miscellaneous materials • Replacement of deteriorated or missing riprap • Control of dam seepage within the project area • Repair of low areas or depressions within project area • Repair of erosion damage, sloughs, gullies, sinkholes, and other eroded areas • Repair dam’s structural integrity from sliding of embankment dam material • Control of rodents and repair of rodent damage in embankment dams • Repair of dam surface from livestock and other wildlife trails/trampling

The Dams Maintenance Activities table includes a list of BMPs associated with each activity. This table is used as guidance for evaluating affected environments in this PEA.

2.3 SELECTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION

The No Action Alternative does not provide a streamlined document that clearly states each maintenance activity and the BMPs that should be utilized with each activity. Maintenance at each dam and EWS structure would be an individual action with no clear Tribal-wide guidance for environmental stewardship. The Proposed Action satisfies the need for a program-wide dam and EWS maintenance guidance document that follows NEPA regulations and suggests appropriate BMPs for each activity. The No Action Alternative would not satisfy the purpose and need of the project.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 17

CHAPTER 3

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

3.0 INTRODUCTION

This chapter analyzes each environmental category topic to establish baseline conditions within the Limits of Maintenance areas. The affected environment is defined as the ecological, cultural, social, aesthetic and economic conditions of the area that the proposed alternatives could potentially impact as identified in the Guidebook (BIA 2012).

3.1 LAND RESOURCES

3.1.1 Topography The Limits of Maintenance areas vary greatly in topography. Seven of the 15 dams and 17 EWS lie within the lower valley area with elevations ranging from approximately 2,875 feet above mean sea level (famsl) to 3,100 famsl. The remainder of the dams and EWS lie outside of the valley with elevations ranging between approximately 3,400 famsl and 4,828 famsl (USGS Topographic Maps). The Salish Mountains lie to the north and west of the majority of the dam and EWS locations and the Mission Mountains lie to the east. Additionally, Flathead Lake lies to the north of the majority of the dam and EWS locations, with the Flathead River flowing south toward Dixon.

Additionally, each dam location is depicted on the Appendix A figures and the associated named waterbodies and tributaries are identified on the maps. Many of the lower elevation dams provide outlet water directly into canals that traverse the valley for irrigation purposes.

3.1.2 Soils According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey, 90 soil map units occur within the 15 dam maintenance areas and 30 EWS maintenance areas (NRCS 2019). One Custom Soil Resource Report for the dam maintenance areas and one report for the EWS maintenance areas are provided in Appendix C.

3.1.3 Geology, Mineral and Paleontological Resources The geologic setting immediately surrounding the dam and EWS maintenance areas are comprised of Phanerozoic or pre-Cambrian material mapped as Alluvium, glacial lake deposits, Lower Missoula Group, Upper Missoula Group, Piegan Group, Upper Prichard or Appekunny Formation, and the Ravalli Group (GWIC 2019).

The presence of mineral and paleontological resources are not identified.

3.2 WATER RESOURCES

3.2.1 Floodplains Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, defines floodplains as: The lowland and relatively flat areas adjoining inland and coastal waters, including flood- prone areas of offshore islands, including at a minimum, that area subject to a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 18 The area, which is also called the base floodplain, is the area that would be inundated by the floodwaters of a 100-year flood event. Floodways are contained within floodplains. Floodplains store water during storm events or runoff and help dissipate energy associated with floodwaters. Executive Order 11988 directs federal agencies to “take action to reduce the risk of flood loss, to minimize the impact of floods on human safety, health, and welfare, and to restore and preserve the natural and beneficial values served by floodplains…”

Pablo Dam and associated EWS lie within FEMA FIRM panel 30047C0545C (effective 2/6/2013) and the majority of the Limits of Maintenance area lies within the 100-year floodplain.

Ninepipe Dam and associated EWS lie partially within an unmapped area and partially within FIRM panel 30047C1000C (effective 2/6/2013). A portion of the Limits of Maintenance area lies within the 100-year floodplain.

Mission Dam and associated EWS lie partially within an unmapped area and partially within FIRM panels 30047C1110C and 30047C1117C (effective 2/6/2013). Mission Reservoir lies within the 100-year floodplain and Mission Creek contains a mapped floodway and floodplain.

A Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood hazard analysis has not been completed or is not printed for rest of the dam maintenance area and EWS locations (FEMA 2019).

3.2.2 Wetlands Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands, defines wetlands as: Those areas that are inundated by surface or ground water with a frequency sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances does or would support, a prevalence of vegetative or aquatic life that requires saturated or seasonally saturated soil conditions for growth and reproduction. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas such as sloughs, potholes, wet meadows, river overflows, mudflats, and natural ponds.

Executive Order 11990 requires federal agencies to ensure their actions minimize the destruction, loss, or degradation of wetlands. It also assures the protection, preservation, and enhancement of the nation’s wetlands to the fullest extent practicable during the planning, construction, funding, and operation of transportation facilities and projects. Executive Order 11990, which applies to both jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional (i.e., isolated) wetlands, requires federal agencies to find: “(1) that there is no practicable alternative to such [new] construction, and (2) that the proposed action includes all practicable measures to minimize harm to wetlands which may result from such use.”

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) maintains the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) online mapper. An NWI map for each of the dam maintenance and EWS locations is included in Appendix C. A wetland delineation will not be completed for each of the dam or EWS maintenance areas as part of this PEA.

3.2.3 Water Quality The EPA Montana Water Quality Assessment Report was referenced for further information about the surface waters within the project area. The Little Bitterroot River from Hubbart Reservoir to the Flathead Indian Reservation boundary is listed as impaired from nutrients and sediment (EPA 2019). The rest of the waterways within the project area have not been assessed or have no data available on the website.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 19

The CSKT performs annual water quality monitoring at various locations within the Flathead Indian Reservation to collect typical parameters such as water temperature, pH, specific conductance, dissolved oxygen, and turbidity, etc. The vast majority of sampling locations between 2012 and 2016 occurred at or near the Flathead River and no data was provided for the reservoirs associated with this report.

The CSKT Surface Water Quality Standards and Antidegradation Policy states that waters on the Flathead Indian Reservation should be free of substances that adversely impact indigenous or intentionally introduced aquatic and wildlife communities (CSKT 2019).

A water quality monitoring program for Little Bitterroot Lake has recorded data from 1999 to 2018. Water & Environmental Technologies (WET) produced the Little Bitterroot Lake Water Quality Monitoring Program 2018 Annual Report (WET 2018). Overall, results of the ongoing monitoring show the overall water quality for the lake is good, with low concentrations of nutrients and chlorophyll-a. Additionally, no aquatic invasive mussels or plants were identified in 2018.

CSKT prepared the Surface Water Sampling for Pesticides, Pharmaceuticals and Contaminants of Emerging Concern over the 2015 through 2017 Period Flathead Indian Reservation, Montana report in January 2018. The report analyzed data from a 10-year period in addition to the 2015- 2017 time period. The most commonly detected pesticides were 2,4-D, DEET, Prometon, Glyphosate, and Diuron. The most commonly detected pharmaceutical compounds were Gabapentin, Metformin, Caffeine, Phenobarbital and Diclofenac. Overall, no one compound that was identified came close to exceeding water quality standard criterion or health-based screening levels. The most frequent positive detections occurred mainly near waste water treatment plant outfalls for Hot Springs and Ronan (CSKT 2018).

3.2.4 Water Quantity The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Watershed Boundary Dataset was accessed to obtain data for watersheds within the Dam Maintenance Activities Project areas. The following table provides information for which Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) each dam maintenance area falls within and the approximate area each watershed covers.

Table 1. HUC-10 Watersheds within Project Area HUC Code HUC Name Watershed Project Areas within HUC Size (square miles) 1701021201 Upper Little 249 Little Bitterroot Dam, Bitterroot River Hubbart Dam 1701021204 Lower Little 238 Upper Dry Fork Dam, Lower Bitterroot River Dry Fork Dam 1701020804 Finley Point 114 Hell Roaring Dam, Twin- Turtle Dam 1701021206 Flathead River- 284 Pablo Dam, Crow Dam, Pablo Reservoir Upstream Crow EWS, Downstream Crow EWS, Kicking Horse Dam (partial) 1701021205 Mission Creek 263 Ninepipe Dam, Kicking Horse Dam (partial),

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 20 HUC Code HUC Name Watershed Project Areas within HUC Size (square miles) McDonald Dam, Mission Dam, Tabor Dam 1701021207 Jocko River 383 Jocko Dam, Black Lake Dam, Arlee EWS 1701021208 Flathead River- 328 Perma EWS Camas Prairie Basin (USGS 2019)

The storage capacity of each reservoir related to the dams is explained in Section 1.1.

3.2.5 Water Use

The Flathead Indian Irrigation Project (FIIP) consists of twelve units that provide irrigation water to approximately 127,000 acres of agricultural land (Bureau of Recreation, 2001). All of the dams included in this PEA serve a function for the FIIP except for the Little Bitterroot Dam and Hell Roaring Dam. A map produced by ITRC of the irrigation units and canals created in 2017 is provided in Appendix C (ITRC 2017). The proper maintenance of the dam facilities is crucial for dam function and integrity to continue supplying water to irrigators on the Flathead Indian Reservation.

Additionally, some of the water stored in the reservoirs is used to supply instream water for aquatic and fisheries benefits.

3.2.6 Water Rights

Water rights on the Flathead Indian Reservation and for use by FIIP irrigators, have not been decreed by the Montana Water Court. However, the reserved and aboriginal water rights for the Tribes are set forth in the CSKT Water Rights Compact, which has been approved by the Montana Legislature (85-20-1901 MCA) and awaits approval by the U.S. Congress, the Tribes’, and the Montana Water Court.

3.2.7 Irrigation

According to the U.U. Bureau of Recreation (USBR), the Flathead Project (also known as the Flathead Indian Irrigation Project) supplies irrigation to approximately 127,000 acres of agricultural land (USBR 2001). The 15 CSKT dams evaluated in this report are essential to the water supply for the Reservation’s 1,300 miles of canal and lateral systems. Many of the waterways that are the primary water source for the irrigation system pass through these dams and associated reservoirs.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six criteria air pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O3) particulate matter (PM10), sulfur dioxide (SO2), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and lead (Pb).

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 21 Two cities within Lake County are EPA-regulated non-attainment areas: Polson and Ronan. These areas are classified as moderate non-attainment for PM-10 (US EPA 2019).

3.4 LIVING RESOURCES

The Montana Natural Heritage Program (MNHP) Montana Field Guide was referenced to obtain biological information about each dam maintenance and EWS maintenance area. The following is a list of the nine dominant ecological systems found within the project area (MNHP 2019a).

• Alpine-Montane Wet Meadow • Cultivated Crops • Emergent Marsh • Northern Rocky Mountain Lower Montane Riparian Woodland and Shrubland • Open Water • Rocky Mountain Dry-Mesic Montane Mixed Conifer Forest • Rocky Mountain Lower Montane, Foothill, and Valley Grassland • Rocky Mountain Mesic Montane Mixed Conifer Forest • Rocky Mountain Montane-Foothill Deciduous Shrubland • Rocky Mountain Subalpine Deciduous Shrubland

These MNHP ecological systems are used to complete the following sections regarding wildlife and vegetation.

3.4.1 Wildlife

Terrestrial White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), black bear (Ursus americanus), porcupine (Erethizon dorsatum), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), raccoon (Procyon lotor), long-tailed weasel (Mustela frenata), coyote (Canis latrans), red fox (Vulpes vulpes), deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), and meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus) are common mammals occupying habitats in the project area (Foresman 2012). According to the MNHP Species Snapshot for the Flathead Indian Reservation, 54 species of mammal can be found within the reservation boundaries (MNHP 2019b).

Several National Wildlife Refuges and Waterfowl Production Areas exist within and near the project areas, including Pablo National Wildlife Refuge, Crow Waterfowl Production Area, Duck Haven Waterfowl Production Area, Ninepipe National Wildlife Refuge, Sandsmark Waterfowl Production Area, and other smaller areas nearby. According to the MNHP Species Snapshot, 274 birds occur within the Flathead Indian Reservation. These areas are known to support a wide variety of species including many species of waterfowl and shorebirds, many of which could potentially occur within the project areas during peak times (breeding season and migration periods) (Lenard 2003).

The Flathead Indian Reservation is also home to 10 reptile species, 7 amphibian species, and 125 known invertebrate species (MNHP 2019b).

Aquatic According to the MNHP Species Snapshot, the Flathead Indian Reservation is home to 5 species of fish, three of which are considered Montana species of concern. However, it is likely that additional species of introduced fish occur in the reservoirs. Montana reservoirs support a variety

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 22 of both native and introduced coldwater, coolwater, and warmwater fishes. Most gamefishes in the reservoirs are introduced and include northern pike (Esox Lucius), rainbow trout (O. mykiss), brown trout (Salmo trutta), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), largemouth bass (M. salmoides), and yellow perch (Perca flavescens). Some reservoirs also support several non-game fishes such as native cyprinds and catostomids as well as introduced black bullheads (Ameiurus melas) and pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus).

Some of the reservoirs and rivers/creeks are productive fisheries, supporting moderate to high densities of salmonids, depending on location; some streams also support several native non- salmonid taxa (e.g., largescale sucker (Catostomus macrocheilus), longnose sucker (C. catostomus), northern pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus oregonensis), redside shiner (Richardsonius balteatus) and at least one species of sculpin (Cottus spp.)) (CSKT Fisheries 2017).

Threatened and Endangered The July 29, 2019 and June 10, 2020 USFWS list of Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Species on the Flathead Indian Reservation is provided in Appendix C (USFWS 2019a, 2020).

Table 2. USFWS Listed Wildlife Species for the Flathead Indian Reservation Common Name Scientific Name Status Range - Montana Bull Trout Salvelinus confluentus Threatened; Clark Fork, Flathead, Critical Habitat Kootenai, St. Mary, and Belly River Basins; cold water rivers and lakes Grizzly Bear Ursus arctos horribilis Threatened Resident, transient; Alpine/subalpine coniferous forest Canada Lynx Lynx canadensis Threatened Resident; western Montana – montane spruce/fir forests Yellow-billed Coccyzus americanus Threatened Population west of the cuckoo (western Continental Divide; riparian population) areas with cottonwoods and willows Wolverine Gulo gulo luscus Proposed High elevation alpine and boreal forests that are cold and receive enough winter precipitation to reliably maintain deep persistent snow late into the warm season Meltwater Lednian Lednia tumana Threatened High elevation meltwater Stonefly (Candidate in streams; Glacier National 2019) Park Whitebark Pine Pinus albicaulis Candidate Forested areas in central and western Montana, in high elevaltion, upper montane habitat near treeline. USFWS 2019a, 2020

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 23 In addition, the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) website was utilized for information on threatened and endangered species for Little Bitterroot Dam and Hubbart Dam since they are located outside the Reservation (USFWS 2019b). As such, CSKT Wildlife Management Program is not responsible for analyzing wildlife resource impacts for these locations. The USFWS was contacted in regard to threatened and endangered species consultation for these dam locations (Appendix D).

The CSKT Wildlife Biologist, Whisper Camel-Means, determined that the proposed project does not require a Biological Assessment to be completed. The Dams Maintenance Activities BMPs table was produced in order to provide suggested BMPs to mitigate any potential impacts or nuisances to threatened and endangered species. Additionally, specific activities will require consultation with the CSKT Wildlife Biologist prior to initiating work to ensure no impacts to sensitive species will occur.

The following species are listed as threatened or endangered on the Flathead Indian Reservation.

Canada Lynx (Lynx canadensis) The Canada lynx is a federally threatened species under the ESA. Canada lynx typically occur in mesic coniferous boreal, sub-boreal, and western montane forests that are subject to snowy winters and support a prey base of snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus) (Ruediger et al. 2000). Lynx are most likely to occur in areas that receive deep snow, for which the lynx is highly adapted. Snowshoe hares use forests with dense understories that provide cover from predators, forage, and protection during extreme weather conditions.

The year-round range of the Canada lynx is limited to the western portion of Montana and includes the Lake County area (MNHP 2019a). A shapefile of Canada Lynx designated critical habitat was downloaded and viewed. None of the Limits of Maintenance or EWS maintenance areas are located within designated critical habitat.

Yellow Billed Cuckoo (Coccyqus americanus) Yellow-billed Cuckoos are slender, long-tailed birds that manage to stay well hidden in deciduous woodlands. They usually sit stock still, even hunching their shoulders to conceal their crisp white underparts, as they hunt for large caterpillars. Bold white spots on the tail’s underside are often the most visible feature on a shaded perch. Fortunately, their drawn-out, knocking call is very distinctive. Yellow-billed Cuckoos are fairly common in the East but have become rare in the West in the last half-century. They live mainly among the canopies of deciduous trees; look for them in woodland patches with gaps and clearings. In the West, this species is rare and restricted to the cottonwood-dominated forests that line larger rivers running through arid country (Cornell 2015).

Wolverine (Gulo gulo luscus) The wolverine is currently proposed for listing under the ESA. Suitable habitat for the solitary wolverine includes alpine tundra and boreal/mountain forests, typically in large undisturbed wilderness areas at high elevation. Research indicates that preferred wolverine habitat be isolated, essentially roadless, and capable of supporting a diverse prey base (MNHP 2019a). Breeding can occur from April to October; however, wolverine breeding usually occurs during the summer months (MNHP 2019a).

Meltwater Lednian Stonefly (Lednia tumana) The Meltwater Lednian Stonefly is a small, dark species of extremely cold glacier-fed streams at high elevations in Glacier Park. Little else is known about its habits or ecology, except that the

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 24 adults have hatched by mid-summer (July-August) and are presumably mating during this time. (MNHP 2019a)

Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) The bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) is a federally threatened species under the ESA. In June of 1998, USFWS listed bull trout populations within the Columbia River drainage as threatened under the ESA. In 2010, USFWS issued a revised bull trout critical habitat designation in the coterminous U.S. including 19,729 miles of streams and a total of 488,251.7 acres of reservoirs and lakes located in Washington, Oregon, Nevada, Idaho, and Montana (UFSWS 2010). The bull trout is a native salmonid of western North America. Bull trout populations have been fragmented and undergone declines throughout much of their range, and are now extinct in California, where they were historically known to occur in the McCloud River (Bond 1992).

In Montana, bull trout are distributed in waters of the Columbia and Saskatchewan River drainages (Brown 1971). On the Flathead Indian Reservation, bull trout occur in Flathead Lake and its major tributaries above Kerr Dam, in the Jocko River, and in two glacial lakes that have been modified for use as irrigation storage reservoirs (St. Mary’s and McDonald); a third reservoir bull trout population in Mission Reservoir appears to have gone extinct. Rare occurrences of bull trout have also been documented in the Flathead River below Kerr Dam, and in Post and Mission creeks downstream of McDonald and Mission reservoirs, respectively. The Jocko River likely contains the only viable riverine bull trout population on the Reservation.

Bull trout exhibit three major life histories (resident, fluvial, and adfluvial), all of which are represented in populations on the Flathead Indian Reservation. Resident fish do not attain large sizes and complete their entire life cycle in small streams; fluvial fish grow to relatively large sizes and use small streams for spawning and early rearing but move to larger stream or river habitats for later rearing and adulthood. Adfluvial fish typically reach the largest sizes and reside in lake environments but use tributaries for spawning and early rearing.

In addition to displaying complex life histories, bull trout appear to have some of the most specific habitat requirements of the North American salmonids (Reiman and McItyre 1993). For example, bull trout are widely recognized as being among the most coldwater adapted of the salmonids. Consistent with this, Fraley and Sheppard (1989) rarely observed juvenile bull trout in streams having summer maximum temperatures above 15º C. This and other specific habitat requirements (e.g., strong association with undisturbed complex stream habitats) make bull trout particularly sensitive to habitat alterations.

Bull trout appear to be sensitive to changes in thermal regimes, migratory corridors, sediment levels, and habitat complexity, among others (Reiman and McItyre 1993). Land uses that change these parameters can fragment, reduce, or eliminate bull trout populations. For example, Baxter et al. (1999) found a negative relationship between bull trout redd counts (an index of adult abundance) and road densities in spawning tributaries of the Swan River.

Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) The grizzly bear is a federally threatened species under the ESA and is a state-listed species of concern; with a range that currently includes portions of western Montana. Historically, the grizzly bear was primarily a plains species that occurred in high densities throughout most of eastern Montana, but are currently restricted to more remote, forested areas. In Montana, grizzly bears utilize a wide variety of habitat types depending on seasons and local characteristics. These habitats include: meadows, seeps, riparian zones, mixed shrub fields, closed timber, open timber, side-hill parks, snow chutes, and alpine slab-rock (MNHP 2019a). Movements of grizzlies within

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 25 their home range are primarily dependent on the availability of food sources. Grizzly bears require large corridors of contiguous forested land for movement within their home range. Den sites typically occur at higher elevations that have a slope of 28 to 35 degrees, with an aspect that maintains deep snow (Foresman 2012).

Migratory Birds The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and Executive Order 13186 “Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds” provide protection for migratory bird species including protection of their nests and eggs. Under the MBTA, it us unlawful to pursue, hunt, take, capture or kill; attempt to take capture or kill; possess, offer to or sell, barter, purchase, deliver or cause to be shipped, exported, imported, transported, carried or received any migratory bird, part, nest, egg or product, manufactured or not. Direct disturbance of an occupied (with birds or eggs) nest is prohibited under the law. The destruction of unoccupied nests of eagles; colonial nesters such as cormorants, herons, and pelicans; and some ground/cavity nesters such as burrowing owls or bank swallows may be prohibited under the MBTA.

USFWS IPAC reports were generated for Lake County, Hubbart Dam area, and Little Bitterroot Dam area. These reports provided a list of migratory birds that could potentially be present within the project vicinity.

Bald and Golden Eagles The bald eagle was officially delisted from the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 2007. Although no longer protected under the ESA, the species remains protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the MBTA. While there is no formal process or requirements for consultation with the USFWS, under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, agencies and others are encouraged to follow the National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines, including the 1994 addendum. The guidelines advise landowners, land managers, and others who share public and private lands with eagles when and under what circumstances the protective provisions of the Act may apply to their activities. The Montana Guidelines should be followed to help prevent disturbing nesting eagles.

The CSKT Wildlife Biologist, Whisper Camel-Means was consulted about bald and golden eagles in the project areas and assisted in developing an extensive list of BMPs to follow regarding bald and golden eagles.

3.4.2 Vegetation

Terrestrial The MNHP was referenced to identify the major ecological systems present within the project areas. The 9 ecological systems were categorized under Forest and Woodland Systems, Shrubland, Steppe and Savanna Systems, Grassland Systems, Wetland and Riparian Systems, and Open Water.

Forest and Woodland Systems The dominant trees within these systems consisted of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), western larch (Larix occidentalis), grand fir (Abies grandis), ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), and western red cedar (Thuja plicata) (MNHP 2019).

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 26 Common shrubs include Rocky mountain maple (Acer glabrum), kinnikinnick (Arctostaphylos uva- ursi), common juniper (Juniperus communis), oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor), mallow ninebark (Physocarpus malvaceus), common snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), birch leaf spiraea (Spiraea betulifolia) mountain boxwood (Paxistima myrsinites), thinleaf alder (Alnus incana), bunchberry dogwood (Cornus canadensis), thimbleberrry (Rubus parviflorus), rusty leaf menziesia (Menziesia ferruginea), and mountain huckleberry (Vaccinium membranaceum) (MNHP 2019).

Grasses within the Forest and Woodland Systems are absent to minimal and may include bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), Columbia brome (Bromus vulgaris), blue wildrye (Elymus glaucus), pinegrass (Calamagrostis rubescens), Geyer’s sedge (Carex geyeri), and Ross’ sedge (Carex rossii) (MNHP 2019).

Shrubland, Steppe and Savanna Systems Within the Shrubland, Steppe and Savanna Systems, common ninebark (Physocarpus malvaceus), bittercherry (Prunus emarginata), common chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), rose (Rosa spp.), smooth sumac (Rhus glabra), Rocky Mountain maple, serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), and oceanspray are the most common dominant shrubs. Within the Subalpine Deciduous Shrubland, common shrubs include rusty leaf menziesia, black twinberry (Lonicera involucrata), alder buckthorn (Rhamnus alnifolia), prickly currant (Ribes lacustre), thimbleberry, sitka alder (Alnus viridis), cascade mountain ash (Sorbus scopulina), Sitka mountain ash (Sorbus sitchensis), and thinleaf huckleberry (Vaccinium membranaceum).

Common grasses within these ecological systems include Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis), rough fescue (Festuca campestris), pinegrass, Geyer’s sedge, prairie junegrass (Koeleria macrantha), and bluebunch wheatgrass. Herbaceous understory within the Subalpine Deciduous Shrubland can be sparse where there is dense shrub cover. Common forbs and ferns include beargrass (Xerophyllum tenax), fireweed (Chamerion angustifolium), and bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum).

Grassland Systems This system is dominated by cool-season perennial bunch grasses and forbs with sparse shrub cover. Rough fescue, Idaho fescue, bluebunch wheatgrass, and western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithii) are the dominant grass species.

Shrub cover is usually less than 10 percent and includes shrubby cinquefoil (Dasiphora fruticosa), Woods’ rose (Rosa woodsii), snowberry (Symphoricarpos species), common juniper, serviceberry, Douglas hawthorn (Crataegus douglasii), and common chokecherry (MNHP 2019).

Wetland and Riparian Systems Black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa) are the key indicator species for the Northern Rocky Mountain Lower Montane Riparian Woodland and Shrubland system. Other dominant trees may include boxelder maple (Acer negundo), narrowleaf cottonwood (Populus angustifolia), eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoides), Douglas-fir, peachleaf willow (Salix amygdaloides), or Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum). Dominant shrubs include Rocky Mountain maple, thinleaf alder, river birch (Betula occidentalis), red-oiser dogwood (Cornus sericea), hawthorne (Crataegus species), chokecherry, skunkbush sumac (Rhus trilobata), willows (Salix species), rose, silver buffaloberry (Shepherdia argentea), or snowberry.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 27 Shrub understory within the Northern Rocky Mountain Lower Montane Riparian Woodland and Shrubland system includes red-oiser dogwood, Rocky Mountain maple, thinleaf alder, devil’s club (Oplopanax horridus), and common snowberry.

The dominant grass species within the Northern Rocky Mountain Lower Montane Riparian Woodland and Shrubland system are bluejoint reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis), blue wildrye, and Bebb’s sedge (Carex bebbii). The Alpine-Montane Wet Meadow system is often dominated by grasses such as tufted hairgrass (Deschampsia cespitosa), small-head sedge (Carex illota), small-winged sedge (Carex microptera), black alpine sedge (Carex nigricans), Holm’s Rocky Mountain sedge (Carex scopulorum) shortstalk sedge (Carex podocarpa) and Payson’s sedge (Carex paysonis). Other species often present include Drummond’s rush (Juncus drummondii), Merten’s rush (Juncus mertensianus), arctic bluegrass (Poa arctica), and alpine bluegrass (Poa alpina). Dominant grasses within Emergent Marsh systems include western wheatgrass, Northwest Territory sedge (Carex utriculata), Nebraska sedge (Carex nebrascensis), broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia), and hardstem bulrush (Schoenoplectus acutus) (MNHP 2019).

Aquatic The dam maintenance activity project areas are all associated with reservoirs and tributaries. Additionally, the majority of the EWS maintenance areas are also associated with the same waterbodies. Floating-leaved hydrophytes may be present in wetter sites with longer inundation periods, including water lilies (Nymphaea species), yellow pondlily (Nuphar species), buttercup (Ranunculus species) and pondweed (Potamogeton species). Other floating species may be present in shallow water, such as duckweed, (Lemna species), and submergents such as common hornwort (Ceratophyllum demersum), horned pondweed (Zannichellia palustris), mare’s tail (Hippuris vulgaris) and water milfoil (Myriophyllum species) (MNHP 2019).

Threatened and Endangered The July 29, 2019 and June 10, 2020 USFWS List of Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Plant Species for the Flathead Indian Reservation is provided in Table 3 (USFWS 2019a, 2020).

Table 3. USFWS Listed Plant Species for the Flathead Indian Reservation Common Name Scientific Name Status Range – Montana Spalding’s Campion Silene spaldingii Threatened Upper Flathead River and Fisher River drainages; Tobacco Valley – open grasslands with rough fescue or bluebunch wheatgrass Water Howellia Howellia aquatilis Threatened Wetlands; Swan Valley, Lake and Missoula Counties Whitebark Pine Pinus albicaulis Candidate Forested areas in central and western Montana, in high- elevation, upper montane habitat near treeline (USFWS 2019a, 2020)

In addition, the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) website was utilized for information on threatened and endangered species for Little Bitterroot Dam and Hubbart Dam since they are located outside the Reservation (USFWS 2019b).

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 28 Spalding’s Campion (Silene splaldingii) Spalding’s campion is a federally threatened species under the ESA. Spalding’s campion occurs in open, mesic grasslands in the valleys and foothills usually with rough fescue, Nelson's needlegrass (Stipa nelsonii), Richardson's needlegrass (Stipa richardsonii), and Idaho fescue (MNHP 2019a). The species is occasionally associated with scattered ponderosa pine or broadleaf shrubs. Spalding’s campion typically occurs on northerly aspects and along draws and swales and exists in only a few locations in the northwest corner of Montana.

The Spalding’s Campion has a few documented occurrences on the Flathead Indian Reservation. Rusty Sydnor, CSKT Habitat Restoration Biologist, stated that the Spalding’s Campion “primarily occurs in the Niarada area (smaller populations are also found in the Hog Heaven range and on Wild Horse Island), typically in pockets of near‐pristine Palouse Prairie remnants dominated by native bunchgrass and forb species. Additionally, Spalding’s Catchfly populations in this area are typically situated in remote areas (often at higher elevations on steep, grassy hillsides) that have received very little historic disturbance from livestock grazing and other land use endeavors that have caused major disturbances to plant communities (i.e., dam/reservoir construction, housing developments, tillage agriculture, ATV/off‐road vehicle use).”

Water Howellia (Howellia aquatilis) Although water howellia at one time occurred over a large range throughout the northwestern United States, it is currently found in a limited number of locations in California, Oregon (possibly extirpated), Washington, Idaho and Montana. Water howellia is currently known from a total of six geographic regions: one in Idaho (Latah County), one in Montana (Lake and Missoula counties), one in California (Mendocino County) and three in Washington (Spokane, Clark and Pierce counties). Water howellia forms a minor component of the aquatic flora in a limited number of wetlands, ponds and sloughs in the Pacific Northwest. It likely provides habitat for aquatic animals in the locations where it is found. Habitat types consists of small depressional wetlands with consolidated bottoms which partially or completely dry up by the fall. Vegetation within individual wetlands is most commonly dominated by Carex vesicaria, Typha latifolia, Equisetum fluviatile, Eleocharis palustris and/or Sium suave. These wetlands include shallow, low-elevation glacial pothole ponds and former river oxbows with margins of deciduous trees and shrubs. These habitats are inundated by spring rains and snowmelt runoff and typically dry out by the end of the growing season. The plants tend to root in the shallow water at the edges of deeper ponds that are typically surrounded by deciduous trees (MNHP 2019a).

Whitebark Pine (Pinus albicaulis) Whitebark pine is a common component of subalpine forests and a dominant species of treeline habitats. It occurs in almost all major mountain ranges of western and central Montana. Populations of whitebark pine in Montana and across most of western North America have been severely impacted by past mountain pine beetle outbreaks and by the introduced pathogen, white pine blister rust. The results of which have been major declines in whitebark pine populations across large areas of its range. Additionally, negative impacts associated with encroachment and increased competition from other trees, primarily subalpine fir have occurred as a result of fire suppression in subalpine habitats. Whitebark pine is found in all major mountain ranges of central and western Montana at elevations between 5,900 and 9,300 feet.

Invasive The State of Montana maintains a Montana Noxious Weed List that includes 41 plant species of varying levels of priority (Montana Department of Agriculture 2019). Many of these noxious weeds are known to occur on the Flathead Indian Reservation, Lake County, and Flathead County. The

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 29 MNHP species snapshot report identified 15 plant species that are considered invasive or pest species (Appendix C). These species have been highlighted on the Montana Noxious Weed List and do not encompass all species that may be present within the Limits of Maintenance areas (Appendix C).

3.4.3 Ecosystems and Biological Communities The Dam Maintenance Activities Project is located in multiple Level IV ecoregions (Woods et al. 2002). Ecoregions are geological areas that share similarities in the type, quality, and quantity of environmental resources. Level IV ecoregions are utilized by federal and state agencies to assist in natural resource management.

Table 4. Level IV Ecoregions within the Project Area Ecoregion Ecoregion Name Description Areas Within Ecoregion Code 15a Grave Creek Range- Forested mountains with Mission Dam (partial), Nine Mile Divide elevations ranging from Tabor Dam (partial) 3,200 -6,500 feet 15b Camas Valley Treeless and in the rain Upper Dry Fork Dam, shadow of the Salish Lower Dry Fork Dam Mountains (partial) 15c Flathead Valley Largely treeless, foothill Pablo Dam, Twin-Turtle prairies; considerable Dam, Crow Dam, Ninepipe climatic diversity within Dam, Kicking Horse Dam, the valley McDonald Dam (partial), Mission Dam (partial), Upstream Crow EWS, Downstream Crow EWS, Arlee EWS 15e Flathead Hills and Semiarid to subhumid Lower Dry Fork Dam Mountains forest in the rain shadow (partial), Perma EWS of the Salish Mountains 15l Salish Mountains Forested with elevations Bitterroot Dam, Hubbart up to 7,000 feet and high Dam, Downstream precipitation Hubbart EWS 17x Rattlesnake-Blackfoot- Forested with more Jocko Dam (partial), Black South Swan-Northern precipitation than regions Lake Dam (partial) Garnet-Sapphire to the northwest and east Mountains of the Continental Divide 41c Western Canadian High, rugged, glaciated Hellroaring Dam, Rockies forested region with high McDonald Dam (partial), amounts of precipitation Tabor Dam (partial), Jocko affected by Pacific Dam (partial), Black Lake maritime air masses Dam (partial) (Woods et al. 2002)

The biological communities within the project areas were described in detail in Section 3.4 by utilizing the MNHP Montana Field Guide and the Species Snapshot for the Flathead Indian Reservation.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 30

3.4.4 Agriculture

The USDA-National Agricultural Statistics Service (NAAS) Montana Field Office produced a U.S. American Indian Agriculture at a Glance document in September 2014 that includes the Flathead Indian Reservation (USDA-NAAS 2014). A total of 942 farms and 811,789 acres of land were evaluated in 2014 on the Flathead Indian Reservation.

Livestock In 2014, the Flathead Indian Reservation contained 449 horse ranches and 482 cattle ranches with 103 and 106 of those ranches operated by American Indians, respectively. Approximately 52,000 acres of forage land were documented in 2014 (USDA-NAAS 2014).

Crops According to the 2014 USDA-NAAS report, 651 cropland farms were operated on the Flathead Indian Reservation, 105 of which were operated by American Indians. Of those 651 cropland farms, 13,082 acres were used for harvest of wheat for grain and 1,618 acres were used for harvest of barley for grain (USDA-NAAS 2014).

Prime and Unique Farmland According to the USDA NRCS Custom Soil Resource Reports for the dam maintenance areas and EWS maintenance areas, 90 soil map units are present within the project area (Appendix C). Figure 6 summarizes the farmland classifications within the project areas.

Table 5. Soil Map Unit Farmland Classifications Number of Soil Map Acreage within Project Farmland Classification Units Area Farmland of Local Importance 29 1,712.3 Farmland of Statewide Importance 9 161.0 Prime Farmland if Irrigated 11 361.9 All Areas are Prime Farmland 1 10.4 TOTAL 50 2,245.6 (NRCS 2019)

3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES

3.5.1 Historic and Archeological Resources The purpose of this section is to document compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) in accordance with 36 CFR Part 800, Protection of Historic Properties, §§ 800.2 and 800.3 for implementing Section 106 of the NHPA.

The NHPA requires that the lead agency, BIA, consult with the Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO). No potential historic or archeological resources within the Limits of Maintenance areas for the dams or EWS locations were identified by CSKT THPO. However, in order to assess each dam and EWS site on a case by case basis, CSKT SOD will coordinate with THPO annually to provide a list of maintenance activities for the year so THPO can provide their input. Additionally, since these areas have been highly manipulated from construction of the dams and EWS locations, it is unlikely any of these resources are present in these areas.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 31

3.5.2 Cultural, Sacred and Traditional Cultural Properties According to correspondence with the Tribal Historic Preservation Office, there are no known cultural, sacred, or traditional cultural properties within the maintenance areas. However, maintenance activities and locations will be evaluated on an annual basis between CSKT SOD and THPO.

3.6 SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS Socioeconomic impacts include extensive relocation of residents and community businesses, disruption of local traffic patterns, and the substantial loss in community tax base.

3.6.1 Employment and Income In Montana, approximately 32% to 36% of Native Americans earned income below the poverty line in 2010 (DOI 2014). CSKT Tribal government is the largest employer on the Flathead Reservation and employs approximately 1,200 people. Tribal government contributes $30 million to the local community through payroll and an additional $30 million to vendors (CSKT 2013b). The next largest employers are St. Luke Community Hospital, Salish Kootenai College, and St. Joseph Hospital (CSKT 2015b).

An American Community Survey 5-year estimate based on 2009 to 2013 data indicated that 30.8% of Native American families in Lake County were estimated to be below the poverty line compared to 10.2% of non-native families (CSKT 2015b).

The Montana Department of Labor and Industry (MTDLI) Research and Analysis Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages provides a breakdown of employment on the Reservation in 2018. Based on total wages, Utilities, Information, and Professional and Technical Services industries provide the highest average wages on the Flathead Indian Reservation. Additionally, the MTDLI 2018 data shows the unemployment rate on the Reservation was 4.6% in 2018 and the average annual wage was $35,939. Comparatively, the unemployment rate on the Reservation in 2015 was 5.4% and the average annual wage was $33,296. Additionally, several job training program opportunities exist on the Flathead Indian Reservations

3.6.2 Demographic Trends Census data from 2000 indicated that the population on the Reservation was 26,172 and that number increased to 28,359 in 2010 (CSKT 2015). According to CSKT (2013b), enrolled members totaled approximately 7,900 in 2013. The CSKT 2018 -2019 Annual Report (CSKT 2019) indicated a total of 8,078 enrolled members as of May 1, 2019.

3.6.3 Lifestyle and Cultural Values The Reservation, created by the Hellgate Treaty in 1855, is home to the Bitterroot Salish, the Pend d’Oreilles, and one band of Kootenai people, as well as non-Tribal members. Farms and ranches dominate the rural landscape of the project area and the Reservation as a whole.

The Vision and Mission statements provided in the CSKT 2018 – 2019 Annual Report (CSKT 2019) help to encapsulate lifestyle and cultural values in the project area.

Our Vision: Maintain Traditional Principles and Values The traditional values that served our people in the past are imbedded in the many ways we serve and invest in our people and communities, in the way we have regained and restored our homelands and natural resources, in the ways we have built a self-sufficient society and economy, in the ways we govern our

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 32 Reservation and represent ourselves to the rest of the world and in the ways we continue to preserve our right to determine our own destiny.

Our Mission: Be Guided by Traditional Principles and Values Our mission is to adopt traditional principles and values into all facets of tribal operations and services. We will invest in our people in a manner that ensures our ability to become a completely self-sufficient society and economy. And we will provide sound environmental stewardship to preserve, perpetuate, protect, and enhance natural resources and systems.

3.6.4 Community Infrastructure Community infrastructure is defined as a complex system of facilities, programs, and social networks aimed to improve people’s quality of life. The CSKT were the first to organize a Tribal government under the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 and the tribes are governed by a Tribal Council. The Tribal government offers a number of services to Tribal members and is the largest employer on the Reservation. The CSKT operates multiple educational programs and schools and provides college scholarships. Additionally, two major hospitals are located on the Reservation and the Tribal Health Department operates several medical clinics.

3.6.5 Environmental Justice FAA Order 1050.1E, § 16.2a Environmental Justice, defines environmental justice issues as an impact that would affect low income or minority populations at a disproportionately higher level than it would other populations segments. The CEQ defines a low-income population as “any readily identifiable group of low-income persons who live in geographic proximity, and, if circumstances warrant, geographically dispersed/transient persons (such as migrant workers or Native Americans) who will be similarly affected by a proposed program, policy, or activity.”

The NRCS maintains a list of Montana’s environmental justice communities (NRCS 2019). The Reservation is not identified as an environmental justice community on the list maintained by the NRCS.

3.7 RESOURCE USE PATTERNS 3.7.1 Hunting, Fishing, Gathering Executive Order 12962, Recreational Fisheries, states that: Federal agencies shall, to the extent permitted by law and where practicable, and in cooperation with States and Tribes, improve the quantity, function, sustainable productivity, and distribution of U.S. aquatic resources for increased recreational fishing opportunities by (b) identifying recreational fishing opportunities that are limited by water quality and habitat degradation and promoting restoration to support viable, healthy, and where feasible, self-sustaining fisheries.

The majority of the reservoirs associated with the dams included in this PEA provide recreational and subsistence fishing opportunities. Additionally, some of the project areas may also provide for hunting opportunities although, at present, the habitat is of poor quality for wildlife use due to the dominance of invasive weeds and cattle present within many of the project areas. The Black Lake and Jocko Lake area may provide higher quality habitat for game species but can be difficult to access later in the hunting season due to snow and ice cover on the roads. The Hubbard Reservoir and Little Bitterroot areas also provide hunting access and receive moderate to heavy hunting pressure.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 33 3.7.2 Timber Harvesting The Tribal Forestry Department generated approximately $2.9 million in revenue from harvesting 17.3 million board feet of timber in 2014 on Reservation lands (CSKT 2015). No harvestable timber is present within the project areas and no known timber operations are planned.

3.7.3 Agriculture The largest land use on the Reservation is agriculture. The majority of the 15 reservoirs evaluated in this PEA impound water for irrigation use. Vast rangelands provide grazing opportunities for cattle growers, and the Flathead Indian Irrigation Project provides water for crops and livestock across much of the Reservation (CSKT 2015).

3.7.4 Mineral Extraction Mineral extraction involves crushing and separating ore into valuable substances or waste by any of a variety of techniques. No mineral extraction has or is anticipated to occur within the project areas.

3.7.5 Recreation Many of the reservoirs within the project areas provide for various recreational opportunities such as fishing, boating, and bird-watching. These areas may also be used for mushroom gathering and light hiking. Recreation permits are required for people to recreate on Tribal lands if they are not enrolled members of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes. Recreational areas that attract visitors to the Reservation include the Mission Mountains Tribal Wilderness (the first Tribally-designated wilderness in the United States), Flathead Lake, the National Bison Range, the Ninepipe and Pablo Wildlife Refuges, Flathead River, and the Jocko River (CSKT 2015).

3.7.6 Transportation Networks Several roads are included in the proposed maintenance areas for the dam and EWS sites. These are listed in Section 1.1 and also identified in the Appendix A Figures. The majority of the roads along the dam face and are not used for public transportation but are typically used only by recreationists and dam facility workers.

The maintenance of the following roads was evaluated in the 2006 Proposed Road Maintenance, Environmental Assessment Checklist and Finding of No Significant Impact documents by CSKT and the BIA: Turtle Lake Loop, Sunrise Boulevard, McDonald Lake Road, Dry Fork Reservoir Boundary Road, Upper Dry Fork Road, St. Mary’s Lake Road, Mission Dam Road, and Hellroaring Road. Additionally, Categorical Exclusions tiered off the Environmental Assessment were completed in 2009 and 2018 for additional activities or roads.

Maintenance of roads on the dam face and directly related to other EWS and dam components will either be included under this PEA or the various NEPA documentation for Roads Maintenance mentioned above. No major construction activities are covered under this PEA.

3.7.7 Land Use Plans Information on land and resource use plans for the Reservation are found in multiple detailed documents, including the Flathead Reservation Comprehensive Resources Plan (1996), Land Use and Growth Projection Study (1996), and the U.S. Highway 93 Land Use and Growth Projection Study.

The majority of the project areas are tribally owned land bordered by privately owned land. The EWS located downstream of Bitterroot Dam is on property owned by Weyerhaeuser Company.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 34 The project area at Hubbart Dam and its associated EWS are also on Weyerhaeuser Company property. The proposed project will not result in any changes to land use.

3.7.8 Energy Electricity on the Reservation is provided by Mission Valley Power. Mission Valley Power is a federally-owned non-profit electric utility maintained by the CSKT (CKST 2015b) with energy supplied by Bonneville Power Administration and hydropower resources in the region. None of the dams in this PEA are utilized for hydroelectric use.

3.8 OTHER VALUES 3.8.1 Wilderness Areas A portion of the Tabor Dam maintenance area lies within the Mission Mountains Tribal Wilderness area. Additionally, Jocko Dam and Black Lake Dam maintenance areas lie close to the border of the Mission Mountains Tribal Wilderness. The Mission Mountains Tribal Wilderness area comprises approximately 92,000 acres and was the first Tribally-designated wilderness in the U.S. (CSKT 2015b).

3.8.2 Wild and Scenic Rivers The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, as amended, describes those river segments designated or eligible to be included in the Wild and Scenic Rivers System. River segments eligible for protection are those that are free flowing and have “outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural and other similar values.” River segments that appear to qualify for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic River System are listed on the Nationwide Rivers Inventory, compiled by the National Park Service of the U.S. Department of Interior. According to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System (2020), the only three rivers in Montana that are considered Wild and Scenic are specific reaches of the Flathead River, Missouri River, and East Rosebud Creek. None of these reaches occur within or downstream of the maintenance areas.

3.8.3 Noise and Light Noise and light emission consider the extent to which any noise and lighting associated with the undertaking would create an annoyance among people in the vicinity or interfere with their normal activities. The project area is surrounded by rural residences, farm and rangeland, and open space. No significant noise or light is generated by the current facilities or the surrounding areas.

3.8.4 Visual Visual or aesthetic effects deal more broadly with the extent that the undertaking contrasts with the existing environment, architecture, historic or cultural setting, or land use planning, and whether the jurisdictional agency considers this contrast objectionable. Most maintenance activities associated with the proposed project will occur within areas that already contain infrastructure or are already maintained.

3.8.5 Public Health and Safety Public health on the Reservation is provided by Tribal Health with multiple health centers across the Reservation that “are dedicated to helping every Tribal Health recipient receive high-quality health care grounded in our Tribal Values”. Public safety is provided by a number of different Tribal departments and involves coordination between both Tribal Police and local law enforcement and emergency services. The CSKT produced a Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan that profiles significant hazards to the community and identifies mitigation projects that can reduce those impacts (CSKT 2016). Due to the historical hazard potential of the dams located on the

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 35 Reservation, the BIA contracted with the CSKT in 1989 to create the Safety of Dams (SOD) Program to correct deficiencies that threaten the integrity of the dams.

3.8.6 Climate Change Climate data were obtained from the most central weather station to the project area. The Polson, Montana (246635) station maintains records for the period from July 1, 1906 to March 31, 2015 (Western Regional Climate Center 2019). The monthly average minimum temperature in the area during the period of record is 19.4 degrees Fahrenheit in January, and the average maximum temperature was 82.2 degrees Fahrenheit in July. The average annual precipitation for the area is 15.32 inches. An average of 27.4 inches of snow annually fell on the area throughout the years on record with the greatest accumulations occurring in January.

In the Climate Change Strategic Plan (CSKT 2013c), the CSKT acknowledge climate change and its potential impacts on the Reservation. The Climate Change Strategic Plan documents first- hand accounts of climate change and calls for a planning process that outlines keys areas for assessment as well as implementing preparedness actions.

3.8.7 Indian Trust Assets Indian Trust Assets are defined as legal interests in property held in trust by the U.S. government for tribes and individuals, or property protected under the U.S. law for tribes and individuals. Indian Trust Assets can include land, minerals, federally-reserved hunting and fishing rights, federally-reserved water rights, and in-stream flows (Indian Trust Policy issued July 2, 1993). These assets cannot be sold, leased, or otherwise encumbered without approval by the U.S.

The Principles for Managing Indian Trust Assets is provided in Part 303 of DM Chapter 2. The Indian Trust Asset Reform Act of 2016 §102: …reaffirms that the responsibility of the U.S. to Indian tribes includes a duty to promote tribal self-determination regarding governmental authority and economic development.

The dams and EWS locations lie on a variety of types of property, including Tribal Fee, Tribal Trust, and Federal owned property.

3.8.8 Hazardous Materials The National Priorities List (NPL) identifies areas with known releases, or the known threat of releases, of hazardous materials. NPL sites are more commonly referred to as Superfund sites and are managed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). None of the maintenance areas are located on or near an NPL site. No known hazardous waste sites occur within or in close proximity to the project areas (Montana DEQ 2019).

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 36 CHAPTER 4

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

4.0 INTRODUCTION

The CEQ Regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500 - 1508) define the impacts and effects that must be addressed and considered by Federal agencies in satisfying the requirements of the NEPA process. Two alternatives for the Dam Maintenance Activities Project have been proposed: No Action Alternative and Proposed Action (Chapter 2). Although the No Action Alternative does not address any of the existing issues or meet the Purpose and Need as explained in Chapter 2, CEQ and NEPA regulations require evaluation of a No Action Alternative. When compared with the Proposed Action, the No Action Alternative serves as a reference point or baseline.

This chapter analyzes each environmental category topic for each alternative. The environmental consequences of the identified alternatives are reviewed in accordance with Part 516 of the DM to ensure compliance with NEPA, Executive Orders 11514 and 13352, CEQ regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500 – 1508), and DOI regulations (43 CFR Part 46). This analysis includes direct and indirect effects. Direct effects are caused by the action and occur at the same time and place. Indirect effects are caused by the action and are later in time or farther removed in distance but are still reasonably foreseeable. Both direct and indirect effects may be short-term, long-term, irreversible and/or irretrievable.

4.1 LAND RESOURCES Land resources are defined as topography, soils, geology, mineral, and paleontological resources (Chapter 3.1).

4.1.1 Topography and Soils No Action Alternative The no action alternative would involve maintenance activities continuing as needed within the project areas. However, none of the maintenance actions include a set list of BMPs to abide by/consider. Therefore, minor impacts to topography and soils may be exacerbated by the lack of BMPs and cause additional impacts to these resources.

Proposed Action Direct Effects Minor changes to topography and soil may be necessary to implement certain maintenance activities. These changes are not considered significant. Additionally, under these maintenance activities, changes would be made to revert topography or soils to original designed grade or will be temporary in nature. All maintenance activities will follow the set BMPs assigned in the Dams Maintenance Activities BMPs table (Appendix B).

Indirect Effects The Proposed Action will safeguard irrigation water supply and may indirectly benefit soils classified as Prime Farmland by the NRCS. Land resources are not anticipated to be significantly impacted by indirect effects resulting from the Proposed Action.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 37 4.1.2 Geology, Mineral and Paleontological Resources Neither the no action nor the proposed action is anticipated to have any impact on geology, mineral and paleontological resources since all project areas have been previously disturbed.

4.1.3 Conclusion No significant impacts to land resources are anticipated as a result the Proposed Action. The proposed action will follow the Dam Maintenance Activities BMPs table to ensure all impacts are minimal.

4.2 WATER RESOURCES Water resources are defined as floodplains, wetlands, water quality, water quantity, water use, water rights, and irrigation (Chapter 3.2). Impacts to these resources have been evaluated collectively in the following paragraphs.

No Action Alternative The no action alternative would involve maintenance activities continuing as needed within the Maintenance Areas. However, none of the maintenance actions include a set list of BMPs to abide by/consider. Therefore, impacts to water resources may be greater because of a lack of established BMPs for each maintenance activity.

Proposed Action Direct Effects The removal of sediment in the dam inlet and outlet structures and dredging activities may have a direct impact to Waters of the U.S. and may require USACE notification under Nationwide Permit 3(b) – Maintenance. Additionally, if any maintenance activity is suspected to have any impact on a wetland or waterway, a separate effort will be conducted to evaluate the extent of impacts and USACE coordination and/or permitting will be completed as necessary.

The removal of sediment in the dam inlet and outlet structures, dredging activities, and relocation of EWS floats would result in a direct temporary impact to water quality directly adjacent to and potentially downstream of the activity. The BMPs in place for these maintenance activities would minimize the potential for impact to water quality outside of the Maintenance Areas. All impacts would be temporary during the maintenance activity and potentially for a short duration after until all sediment settles back in place. Water quality during these activities would be monitored within the Maintenance Area the work was occurring and potentially downstream if needed.

The Proposed Action may require lowering of the reservoir water levels or restricted pass through of water into adjacent waterbodies and tributaries during maintenance of some dam components. This will be evaluated on a case by case basis and is dependent on-site conditions at the time of the activity. All precautions will be taken to minimize impacts to water quantity provided to irrigation systems downstream. Effects would be minimal and temporary.

Maintenance activities intended to control dam seepage could have positive long-term impacts on irrigation water supply if seepage is slowed or stopped. This would provide a more efficient water supply for irrigation users since less water is lost to seepage.

Indirect Effects Prescribed burn activities and several dam component maintenance activities have the potential to indirectly effect water quality. BMPs have been established in order to reduce sediment or other material runoff during and after these activities. Depending on the severity of the prescribed burn,

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 38 areas will be monitored until vegetation begins reestablishing and the threat for erosion and sediment runoff have been greatly reduced.

4.2.1 Conclusion No significant impacts to water resources are anticipated as a result the Proposed Action. A separate effort to coordinate with the appropriate authorities will be pursued if an action is suspected to have any impact on Waters of the U.S. The proposed action will follow the Dam Maintenance Activities BMPs table to ensure all impacts are minimal.

4.3 AIR QUALITY Air quality within the affected environment is discussed in Chapter 3.3.

No Action Alternative The no action alternative would involve maintenance activities continuing as needed within the project areas. However, none of the maintenance actions include a set list of BMPs to abide by/consider. Therefore, minor impacts to air quality may be exacerbated by the lack of BMPs and cause additional impacts to these resources.

Proposed Action Direct Effects Project-related particulate matter (PM-10) emissions are expected to occur only during the large equipment maintenance activities. Proper and routine maintenance of all vehicles and other equipment will be implemented to ensure that air emissions are within the design standards of all construction equipment. Other measures, such as dust suppression methods to minimize airborne fugitive dust, will be implemented during certain maintenance activities. No significant impacts to air quality are anticipated as a result of the Proposed Action.

Temporary impacts to air quality due to smoke is anticipated during and after prescribed burning activities. Prescribed burning activities will only commence when proper environmental conditions are present to reduce prolonged smoke presence in the area.

Indirect Effects Air quality is not anticipated to be significantly impacted by indirect effects resulting from the Proposed Action.

4.3.1 Conclusion No significant impacts to air quality are anticipated as a result of the Proposed Action as long as the BMPs for dust and smoke producing maintenance activities are followed.

4.4 LIVING RESOURCES Living resources are defined as wildlife, vegetation, ecosystems and biological communities, and agriculture (Chapter 3.4).

4.4.1 Wildlife No Action Alternative The no action alternative would involve maintenance activities continuing as needed within the project areas. Effects on living resources would be similar to the proposed action. However, none of the maintenance actions include a set list of BMPs to abide by/consider. Therefore, minor impacts to wildlife may be exacerbated by the lack of BMPs and cause additional impacts to these resources. The No Action Alternative has a higher chance of impacting threatened and

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 39 endangered species and bald eagles within the project areas since there is no plan in place to communicate an annual maintenance plan between the CSKT SOD Department and the CSKT Wildlife and Fisheries Departments.

Additionally, the cumulative effects from maintenance activities at each location with the No Action alternative would likely not be evaluated.

Proposed Action Direct Effects The proposed action is not anticipated to have direct impacts on wildlife since all project areas have been previously disturbed and receive human interference on a regular basis.

Indirect Effects The proposed action has the potential to have indirect impacts on wildlife dispersal and movement while performing maintenance activities. These impacts would be temporary in nature and wildlife movement would go back to normal shortly after completion of the maintenance activities. Maintenance activities that involve lowering the reservoir water levels may have an indirect impact on fish and fish habitat in the reservoir during low water levels. However, fish would only be temporarily dispersed to an area away from the dam structure and could return once water levels come back up. Maintenance activities requiring reservoir water draw down would not occur during times of high water and irrigation use.

Threatened and Endangered Species The following details the potential impacts on threatened and endangered species that have the potential to occur within the project areas. The CSKT Wildlife Biologist, Whisper Camel-Means, in conjunction with comments from USFWS, determined that the proposed project does not require a Biological Assessment to be completed. This analysis is not an official effect determination; however, a similar methodology was used to analyze impacts to specific species and has informed minimization strategies to be used during maintenance activities.

Canada Lynx (Lynx canadensis) None of the Limits of Maintenance or EWS maintenance areas are located within designated critical habitat. Therefore, the potential for Canada Lynx presence within the project areas is low and none of the maintenance activities should have an impact on the Canada Lynx or their preferred habitat. A figure showing the critical habitat extent for the Canada Lynx is provided in Appendix A, Figure 20.

Yellow Billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) None of the dam locations are suspected to support the habitat requirements for the yellow billed cuckoo since the areas are typically kept clear of large clusters of trees. The EWS locations are mostly located in open areas as well. Maintenance activities for EWS locations in more wooded areas will not include large tree removal without prior CSKT Wildlife Biologist consultation.

Wolverine (Gulo gulo luscus) The majority of the Limits of Maintenance areas do not contain suitable habitat for the wolverine. The Black Lake Dam and Jocko Dam areas are the highest in elevation and have a chance to receive transient wolverines. However, none of the proposed maintenance activities should have any impact on the wolverine.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 40 Meltwater Lednian Stonefly (Lednia tumana) Suitable habitat does not occur within the maintenance areas, and this species is mostly found in Glacier National Park (MNHP 2016g). Therefore, the proposed project should have no impact on this species.

Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) Appendix A, Figure 20 identifies the designated bull trout critical habitat streams and lakes. The following locations are designated critical habitat within or adjacent to the Limits of Maintenance:

• McDonald Dam and EWS locations (Post Creek) • Mission Dam and EWS locations (Mission Creek) • Tabor Dam and EWS locations (Dry Lake Creek) • Arlee EWS (Jocko River) • Perma EWS (Flathead River)

Maintenance activities within these areas that have the potential to produce sediment have the potential to temporarily impact bull trout and bull trout critical habitat.

Minimization Strategies Specific BMPs have been established for maintenance activities occurring in or near known or suspected bull trout habitat. The following BMPs are outlined in the table provided in Appendix B.

Spawning and rearing areas: Middle Fork Jocko River and Lower and Upper Jocko Lakes (Jocko Dam, Black Lake Dam, and Black Lake Spillway), McDonald Lake and Post Creek (McDonald Dam), and Dry Creek (upstream of St. Mary’s Lake and Tabor Reservoir). • When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout spawning and rearing areas, perform sediment-producing activities from July 15 through August 31 when possible. • Check with CSKT Fisheries Department prior to initiating activities near potential Bull Trout waterways.

Foraging, migration, and overwintering habitat (FMO): Flathead River (EWS Perma), Mission Creek (Mission Dam), St. Mary’s Lake (Tabor Dam). All activities within 300 feet of a listed waterway must abide by the following BMPs: • When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout FMO areas, perform sediment-producing activities from July 1 through September 30 when possible. • Check with CSKT Fisheries Department prior to initiating activities near potential Bull Trout waterways.

Additional BMPs have been established in the table for individual maintenance activities to ensure there will be no adverse impacts on bull trout or their designated critical habitat.

Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) The USFS published a shapefile in 2002 of grizzly bear distribution areas and established recovery zones for the different grizzly bear ecosystems. The Figure 21 map located in Appendix A shows the grizzly bear distribution area and recovery zones in the vicinity of the Flathead Indian Reservation. The following Limits of Maintenance areas are located within grizzly bear recovery zones:

• McDonald Dam and EWS locations • Tabor Dam and EWS locations

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 41 • Black Lake Dam and EWS locations • Jocko Dam and EWS locations

The following Limits of Maintenance areas are located within or very close to grizzly bear distribution areas:

• McDonald Dam and EWS locations • Tabor Dam and EWS locations • Black Lake Dam and EWS locations • Jocko Dam and EWS locations • Mission Dam and EWS locations • Kicking Horse Dam and EWS locations • Ninepipe Dam and EWS locations • Hell Roaring Dam

Activities that have the potential to impact grizzly bear use include the removal of trees and their root systems, vegetation control via prescribed burn, noxious weed control via chemical application, and construction requiring significant ground moving or loud disturbance.

Minimization Strategies While no specific minimization measures have been identified for the Canada lynx or the wolverine, it is thought that some of the general grizzly bear minimization measures will also play a role in mitigation potential impacts to the Canada lynx and the wolverine. The following BMPs have been established within the Dam Maintenance Activities BMPs table:

• Conduct proposed activity during the summer (June 15 to September 15) or winter (November 15 – March 30) if possible. • Store all food, food related items, petroleum products, antifreeze, garbage, and personal hygiene items inside a closed, hard-sided vehicle or commercially manufactured bear resistant container. • No firearms allowed on the job site. • Immediately report sightings of grizzly bears or bear sign to the CSKT Wildlife Management Program or CSKT Fish & Game. • Removal of fallen trees within Grizzly Bear habitat outside of the June 15 to September 15 window will only take place when necessary in order to maintain dam functionality.

Migratory Birds and Eagles

No Action Alternative The no action alternative would involve maintenance activities continuing as needed within the project areas. Effects on migratory birds and eagles would be similar to the proposed action. However, none of the maintenance actions include a set list of BMPs to abide by/consider. Therefore, minor impacts to these resources may be exacerbated by the lack of BMPs and cause additional impacts to these resources.

Proposed Alternative Direct Effects The only proposed action maintenance activity with the potential to directly impact migratory birds or eagles would be activities involving removal of trees during active nesting seasons. Although many migratory birds and eagles have been known to utilize their same nests year after year,

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 42 weather events or other human activities often cause birds to have to nest in different locations. Therefore, the use of currently known nest locations may not be applicable in later years. In order to receive up-to-date information, CSKT SOD department will coordinate with CSKT Wildlife Department annually to provide a list of proposed maintenance activities and locations for the year.

Indirect Effects Maintenance activities associated with loud noise disturbance and use of hazardous materials have the potential for indirect effects on migratory birds and eagles. Loud noise disturbance could interrupt eagles nesting near the maintenance locations. Use of hazardous materials, specifically chemical application, have the potential to impact small prey species for eagles and raptors.

Minimization Strategies CSKT Wildlife Biologist, Whisper Camel-Means assisted in the compilation of maintenance activities BMPs associated with migratory birds and eagles.

For proposed dam maintenance actions within direct line of sight or within ½ mile from an active nest: • Recommended seasonal restrictions from approximately February 1st through August 15th for significant earth moving or loud disturbance activities. o Keep all heavy equipment at least ¼ mile away from nest sites at all times; if mechanized work needs to be within that distance, these activities are restricted between February 1 and August 15, unless the territory is documented as unoccupied during that breeding season. • Existing visual buffers within ¼ mile of nest sites should not be removed but enhanced if possible. • Distance buffers are intended to apply to activities near nest sites, concentrated foraging areas, and communal roost sites during the appropriate season of eagle use. • Hand crews can be within ¼ mile buffer in off-season, right up to base of nest tree, but must limit the visual changes to least amount possible, leaving historic perching/loafing trees (snags) within the buffer. • Avoid pesticides where bald eagles may scavenge. To reduce secondary poisoning limit the use of anti-coagulants and other pesticides and ensure all herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers are disposed of properly. All use of chemicals, including the application and handling, shall follow applicable state and federal laws. • Contact CSKT Wildlife Program Biologist for most recent information on potential impacts to active nest locations.

Additionally, a 2020 Eagle Best Management Practices document was received from Whisper Camel-Means and has been included in Appendix D. This document was derived from the Montana Bald Eagle Management Guidelines: An Addendum to Montana Bald Eagle Management Plan (2010) and guidelines used by the CSKT Wildlife Management Program for all activities on the Flathead Indian Reservation.

4.4.2 Conclusion USFWS Deputy Office Supervisor, Ben Conard, stated the BMPs outlined for the proposed maintenance activities should minimize potential effects on federally listed species (Appendix D). No significant impacts to wildlife are anticipated as a result of the Proposed Action as long as the BMPs for maintenance activities are followed. CSKT SOD Department should coordinate directly

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 43 with CSKT Wildlife or Fisheries Departments if any listed species are observed within the maintenance areas.

4.4.3 Vegetation

No Action Alternative The no action alternative would involve maintenance activities continuing as needed within the project areas. Effects on vegetation would be similar to the proposed action. However, none of the maintenance actions include a set list of BMPs to abide by/consider. Therefore, minor impacts to vegetation may be exacerbated by the lack of BMPs and cause additional impacts to these resources.

Proposed Action Direct Effects The proposed action would include maintenance activities that would have a direct impact on vegetation in the immediate area of the maintenance activity. These activities are listed in the Vegetation Maintenance Actions section of the BMPs Table provided in Appendix B. Prescribed burning will cause a longer-term temporary impact to vegetation but will ultimately have a positive impact on new vegetation growth. The majority of the Vegetation Maintenance Actions are beneficial for continuing proper function of the dams and EWS structures.

Maintenance activities associated with noxious weed control are included as part of this PEA. BMPs have been established to reduce impacts to other native plant species and wildlife in the area. All maintenance activities related to invasive species management should have a beneficial impact on control of these species.

Indirect Effects Other maintenance activities have the potential to impact vegetation as an indirect result of the activity, typically associated with ingress or egress of equipment or vehicles. However, all indirect impacts to vegetation should be minimal and temporary in nature.

Threatened and Endangered Species The following details the potential impacts on threatened and endangered plant species that have the potential to occur within the project areas. The CSKT Wildlife Biologist, Whisper Camel- Means, in conjunction with comments from USFWS, determined that the proposed project does not require a Biological Assessment to be completed. This analysis is not an official effect determination; however, a similar methodology was used to analyze impacts to specific species and has informed best management strategies to be used during maintenance activities.

Spalding’s Campion (Silene splaldingii) While habitat parameters for this species have the potential to be present within some of the higher elevation project areas, the previous disturbances from construction and ongoing maintenance of the dams and reservoirs makes it unlikely to be present within the Limits of Maintenance areas. Furthermore, no Spalding’s Campion species have been documented within these areas.

The Spalding’s Campion has a few documented occurrences on the Flathead Indian Reservation. Rusty Sydnor, CSKT Habitat Restoration Biologist, stated that “given that these project sites occur where dams exist, it is highly unlikely that Spalding’s Catchfly (if it was ever present in these areas to begin with) would occur now given the major land disturbance associated with the building of

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 44 these dams and reservoirs.”

Therefore, the proposed maintenance activities are not likely to impact any existing Spalding’s Campion populations.

Water Howellia (Howellia aquatilis) Water howellia is a hydrophytic plant restricted to depressional wetlands in the Swan Valley and is not likely to occur in the project areas. Howellia aquatilis has been located on the eastern border of the Flathead Indian Reservation and Lake County.

The proposed maintenance activities that have the potential to impact this species include control of aquatic vegetation, routine mowing (during the dry season), and a variety of the Instrumentation Maintenance Activities that occur in shallow wet areas. However, any impacts to this species would likely be temporary and occur during the dry season when the plant has become dormant for the season. Additionally, alterations/impacts to wetlands are not covered under this PEA and would require additional consultation with the appropriate agencies.

Whitebark Pine (Pinus albicaulis) The highest elevation area covered under this PEA occurs in the Black Lake Dam and Jocko Dam areas at around 4,800-5,000 feet. Therefore, the project areas do not contain suitable habitat conditions to support whitebark pine growth and no impacts to this species are anticipated.

4.4.4 Conclusion No significant impacts to vegetation are anticipated as a result of the Proposed Action as long as the BMPs for maintenance activities are followed. CSKT SOD Department should coordinate directly with CSKT Wildlife or Fisheries Departments if any listed species are observed within the maintenance areas.

4.5 ECOSYSTEMS AND BIOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES No impacts to ecosystems and biological communities are anticipated as part of the no action alternative or proposed action since these areas will only receive typical maintenance activities and no major construction activities. Additionally, the maintenance activities are small scale and would not result in a cumulative impact to larger communities.

4.6 AGRICULTURE Agricultural resources are defined as livestock, crops, and prime and unique farmland (Chapter 3.4). The no action alternative and the proposed action both have beneficial indirect impacts on agriculture on the Flathead Indian Reservation. The dams included in this PEA are directly related to the FIIP water supply, and maintenance of these dams are critical in continued delivery of irrigation water to farmers and ranchers.

4.7 CULTURAL RESOURCES Cultural resources are defined as historic and archaeological resources, cultural, sacred, and traditional cultural properties (Chapter 3.5). Since these areas have been highly manipulated from construction of the dams and EWS locations, it is unlikely any of these resources are present in these areas. Therefore, neither the no action alternative or the proposed action is anticipated to have any impact on cultural resources.

However, as part of the proposed action, CSKT SOD will consult with THPO annually by providing an annual maintenance activities plan. This will further reduce the potential for any impacts to cultural resources.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 45

4.8 SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS Socioeconomic conditions are defined as employment and income, demographic trends, lifestyle and cultural values, community infrastructure, and environmental justice (Chapter 3.6). The no action alternative and the proposed action are not anticipated to have any impact on socioeconomic conditions since the actions involve maintenance of existing structures.

4.9 RESOURCE USE PATTERNS Resource use patterns are defined as hunting, fishing, gathering, timber harvesting, agriculture, mineral extraction, recreation, transportation networks, land use plans, and energy (Chapter 3.7).

No Action Alternative The no action alternative is expected to have similar impacts on resource use patterns as the proposed action. No significant impacts are expected.

Proposed Action Direct Effects The proposed action involves several maintenance activities that could result in temporary closures of road access near the dams or EWS structures. This could impact fishing, hunting, and recreation activities temporarily. However, other access locations would likely still be available to recreationists and would not result in complete loss of access. Activities that have the potential for resource use pattern impacts include: access road maintenance activities, prescribed burning, and dam component maintenance actions that require large equipment access and staging along dam roads. Additionally, maintenance activities that would require temporary drawdown of a reservoir would temporarily remove or reduce opportunities for recreational fishing during maintenance. All impacts would be temporary in nature and are not considered significant.

Indirect Effects No indirect impacts to resource use patterns are anticipated as part of the proposed action.

4.9.1 Conclusion The Proposed Action will not result in significant impacts on resources use patterns.

4.10 OTHER VALUES Other values are defined as wilderness areas, wild and scenic rivers, noise and light, visual, public health and safety, climate change, Indian trust assets, and hazardous materials (Chapter 3.8). No impact to wilderness areas, wild and scenic river, climate changes, Indian trust assets are anticipated.

4.10.1 Noise The no action alternative and the proposed action would result in similar noise impacts. Some of the maintenance activities require the use of large equipment that will produce high levels of noise immediately around the activity area during its use. None of the activities are suspected to cause high enough levels of noise to impact any residential areas nearby. Additionally, all noise producing activities would be short term and temporary in nature.

4.10.2 Visual The no action alternative and the proposed action would result in similar visual impacts. All maintenance activities associated with the proposed project will occur within areas that already contain infrastructure or are already maintained. In addition, any maintenance activities that would

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 46 result in any aesthetic effects that would be considered undesirable would be temporary in nature. These types of activities would likely involve temporary removal or disturbance of vegetation and the areas would be reseeded after the maintenance activity was completed.

4.10.3 Public Health and Safety The no action alternative and the proposed action would result in similar impacts on public health and safety. No direct impacts are anticipated. The proposed action would result in beneficial indirect impacts on public health and safety by maintaining the dam and EWS structures to ensure long term function. The EWS structures are important for monitoring of water levels and rainfall and can provide early detection of flooding and other conditions that could result in dam failure.

4.10.4 Hazardous Materials

No Action Alternative The no action alternative would involve maintenance activities continuing as needed within the project areas. Use of hazardous materials would be similar to the proposed action. However, none of the maintenance actions include a set list of BMPs to abide by/consider. Therefore, impacts from improper handling of hazardous materials may be exacerbated by the lack of BMPs and cause additional impacts to resources.

Proposed Action Use of hazardous materials such as fuels and chemicals for control of noxious weeds will be used as part of the typical maintenance activities. These activities have the potential to directly and/or indirectly impact vegetation, wildlife, and water resources if any spills or improper handling occurs.

Minimization Strategies BMPs have been established in the Dam Maintenance Activities BMPs table to ensure proper use and handling of these materials: • Insure that contractors read and understand the BMPs and insure that BMPs are adhered to. • Read the Material Safety Data Sheet for the product and follow the instructions on the product’s label at all times. • Apply chemicals during appropriate weather conditions and during the optimum time for control of target pest or weed. • Know and comply with regulations governing the storage, handling, application, and disposal of hazardous substances. • Do not transport, handle, store, load, apply, or dispose of any hazardous substances or fertilizer in a manner as to pollute water supplies or waterways or cause damage to land, humans, plants, and animals. • Ensure that all waste fuels, lubricating fluids, and other chemicals are properly stored in containers to prevent unnecessary spills. • Develop a contingency plan for hazardous substance spills, including cleanup procedures and notification to appropriate CSKT personnel. • Hazardous materials should not be stored, and construction equipment should not be refueled within 100 feet of aquatic sites. • Inspect maintenance equipment regularly to ensure hydraulic, fuel, and lubrication systems are in good condition and free of leaks. • Promptly clean up any project related spills, litter, garbage, debris, etc.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 47

4.10.5 Conclusion No significant impacts to from the use of hazardous materials are anticipated as a result of the Proposed Action as long as the BMPs for maintenance activities are followed.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 48 CHAPTER 5

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

The CEQ Regulations (40 CFR §§1508.7) define a cumulative impact as the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonable foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non- Federal) or person undertakes can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time.

The basis for this analysis is the recognition that while the impacts of many actions may be individually small, the cumulative effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions on populations or resources can be considerable. NEPA requires that cumulative effects be evaluated along with the direct and indirect effects of the Proposed Action. The level of analysis and scope of cumulative effect assessment are typically commensurate with the potential impacts, resources affected, project scale, and other factors. As with direct and indirect effects, the No Action Alternative serves as the baseline against which to evaluate cumulative effects.

The focus of this cumulative impact analysis are those resources either directly or indirectly impacted by the Proposed Action. If the Proposed Action will not cause a direct or indirect impact on a resource, then it will not contribute to a cumulative impact on that resource. As detailed in Chapter 4, the following resources will not be impacted by the Proposed Action and therefore, would not contribute to cumulative impacts. • Cultural Resources • Socioeconomic Conditions

5.0 IMPACT CATEGORIES The analysis in Chapter 4 determined that the implementation of the Proposed Action would result in impacts in the categories below. These categories must be analyzed for their possible cumulative effect. • Land Resources • Water Resources • Air Quality • Living Resources • Resource Use Patterns • Other Values

The following analysis identifies past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions that could potentially contribute to cumulative impacts in resource categories above.

5.0.1 Proposed Action A number of the proposed maintenance activities have the potential to create cumulative impacts on resources in the following ways:

• Compounding impacts from repetition over time (Time) • Compounding impacts from the same activity occurring at the same time in multiple locations (Geographic).

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 49 Land Resources All impacts to land resources are temporary and small scale in nature and do not have the potential to create cumulative impacts over time or geographically.

Water Resources Maintenance activities involving chemical application have the potential for compounding impacts to water quality if the chemicals are improperly used over time.

All maintenance activities that have the potential to create sediment near water resources have the potential for cumulative impacts over time and geographically if multiple dams are being maintained within the same source. Sedimentation can attenuate in waterways over time if BMPs to reduce transportation of these sediments are not followed.

However, BMPs have been established to reduce the potential for impacts on water resources from chemical use and sediment producing activities. Therefore, while the potential for cumulative impacts exists, following the established BMPs greatly reduce the potential for these impacts to become significant.

Air Quality Dust producing maintenance activities and prescribed burning have the potential to create cumulative impacts on air quality over a geographic region.

Multiple dust producing activities occurring at once in one location can temporarily result in compromised air quality. However, BMPs have been established to suppress dust during maintenance by watering roads and areas of maintenance.

Prescribed burning has the potential to have cumulative impacts within a large geographic region if they occur during times of already poor air quality in the area. Additionally, performing multiple prescribed burns on the Reservation could result in poor air quality if conditions are not ideal. BMPs have been established to reduce the potential for these impacts and prescribed burns should follow existing CSKT Prescribed Burning protocols. Therefore, if air quality conditions are poor, burning should be postponed and not occur until air quality improves.

While the potential for cumulative impacts exists, following the established BMPs greatly reduce the potential for these impacts to become significant.

Living Resources Although many maintenance activities may cause temporary displacement or movement shifts in wildlife, there is low potential for these activities to cause cumulative impacts on living resources and their movement patterns.

The use of chemical application for the proposed action in combination with farmland chemical application has the potential to accumulate in the soils and water over time and impact living resources that rely on the vegetation and water resources. However, BMPs have been established to reduce the impacts on resources from use of chemicals. On a large scale, the amount of chemicals used for noxious weed control directly related to dam maintenance activities, are minimal compared to the volume of chemicals used for other unrelated activities. Therefore, the potential for cumulative impacts on living resources from the proposed action is low.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 50 Resource Use Patterns The proposed action has the potential for temporary impacts on hunting, fishing, and recreation during certain maintenance activities requiring temporary access closures. However, other opportunities are available for people to utilize in the area if there are any closures. Therefore, even if multiple closures exist at the same time, it is unlikely there will be any cumulative impacts on resource use patterns.

Other Values Impacts on other values such as noise, visual, public health and safety, and hazardous materials are discussed in Section 4.10. None of the impacts identified have the potential to create cumulative impacts over time or a geographic area.

5.0.2 Planned CSKT Projects

Requests for comments were sent to the CSKT IDT on March 4, 2020. In addition to describing the proposed project, the letters also inquired as to their knowledge of any other planned projects within the vicinity of the dam and EWS locations. None of the subject matter experts identified any other reasonably foreseeable actions near the project area.

The CSKT Division of Engineering & Water Resources Manager, Dan Lozar, was contacted for information on potential upcoming projects related to dam facilities on the Reservation. The following projects are in the 5-year plan and are contingent on available funding:

• Kicking Horse Dam Rehabilitation • Mission Dam Rehabilitation • Upper Dry Fork Rehabilitation • Tabor Dam Outlet Works Tunnel Lining Project

All of the above proposed projects are subject to NEPA review that will be initiated for each project individually if funding is secured. All the identified future projects are located within the dam maintenance areas evaluated in this PEA. However, once these future projects are completed, the typical dam maintenance activities will continue as necessary to maintain these structures and their intended function. Therefore, cumulative impacts are not anticipated related to the CSKT projects with the implementation of the Proposed Action.

5.0.3 Montana Department of Transportation Projects The draft Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan for 2020 to 2024 identifies anticipated projects within their districts as well as those that are part of the Tribal Transportation Program (MDT 2020). The project area is located within MDT’s Missoula District. Six regionally significant reconstruction projects were identified as reasonably foreseeable actions in the Missoula District (Table 7).

Table 6. Regionally Significant Reconstruction Projects in the Missoula District Project ID Project Location Letting Estimated Date Cost NH-MT 5-2(172)47 Ronan – North 2021 $12,500,000 NH 5-2(173)45 US 93 – Ronan (Urban) >2024 $25,600,000 NH 5-3(104)130 Mountainside to MP 133 >2024 $14,000,000 NH 15(131) KBP – US 93 to Airport Road >2024 $17,400,000 STPU 8105(21) Russell St – Dakota to Mount >2024 $41,600,000

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 51 Project ID Project Location Letting Estimated Date Cost NH 5-2(160)37 US-93 N-Post Creek Hill >2024 $22,200,000

The Tribal Transportation Program (TTP) provided Montana Tribes with $456 million in fiscal year 2016 and will provide an additional $10 million per year through fiscal year 2020 for projects that improve access to and within Tribal lands (MDT 2020). Five projects were identified as TTP- funded construction projects on the Reservation for fiscal years 2020 to 2021 (Table 8) (MDT 2020).

Table 7. CSKT Tribal Transportation Program Projects Project Name County Type of Work St. Mary’s Lake Road Bridge Lake Bridge Replacement (BIA 816) South Valley Creek Lake Reconstruction Homesites CSKT Transportation Multiple Planning Planning CSKT Transit Programs Multiple Transit CSKT Maintenance Program Multiple Maintenance

MDT and TTP projects are subject to review under NEPA to determine if significant environmental impacts are likely and identify mitigation measures for any identified adverse effects. There are no potential projects occurring within the proposed Limits of Maintenance areas. Given that there are no reasonably foreseeable actions or projects in the vicinity of the dams and EWS structures, there are no anticipated cumulative impacts related to MDT or TTP projects with the implementation of the Proposed Action.

5.1 CONCLUSION

None of the proposed maintenance activities will result in significant cumulative impacts as long as the established BMPs are followed.

Based on the review and findings of known ongoing, planned, and proposed projects in the surrounding area, it is concluded that the projects noted above would not cause any cumulative impacts in association with the Proposed Action. This conclusion was reached due that these projects either 1) do not affect lands in the immediate vicinity of the Proposed Action, and/or 2) the construction/implementation of the projects are occurring or have occurred on a different timeline than the proposed dam improvements, and/or 3) result in de minimis (so small as to be negligible or insignificant) emissions, and/or 4) the temporary nature of impacts associated with the construction activity, and/or 5) minimization measures and BMPs are proposed that result in no cumulative impacts.

Future Federal and State projects will be subject to review under NEPA to determine if significant environmental impacts are likely and identify mitigation measures for any identified adverse effects.

The CSKT ultimately have the ability to control many potential cumulative effects associated with dam maintenance activities and any new growth and development. This occurs through the land use planning process and/or associated regulations.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 52 CHAPTER 6

MITIGATION

Mitigation measures are defined in the CEQ Regulations (40 CFR 1508.20) and can include:

1) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. 2) Minimizing impact by limiting the degree of magnitude of the action and its implementation. 3) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment. 4) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action. 5) Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments.

“Measures or practices will only be termed mitigation measures if they have not been incorporated into the proposed action or alternatives. If mitigation measures are incorporated into the proposed action or alternatives, they are design elements, not mitigation measures. Design elements are those specific means, measures or practices that make up the proposed action and alternatives. Standard operating procedures, stipulations, and best management practices are usually considered design elements (43 CFR 46.130(b)).”

The Dams Maintenance Activities BMPs table defines all proposed maintenance activities and associated BMPs that should be followed for each activity. As long as these BMPs are abided by, there will be no significant impacts or significant cumulative impacts to resources analyzed in this document. Since BMPs are considered design elements and not mitigation measures, no mitigation measures are proposed for the Proposed Action.

If at any time a routine dam maintenance activity is discovered to have the potential to result in significant impacts to a resource, a separate NEPA documentation may be required for that specific activity. Furthermore, if any impacts to cultural resources or Waters of the U.S. are anticipated, separate documentation and coordination with SHPO, THPO, and/or the US Army Corps of Engineers may be required. Regulatory requirements for compliance with federal and tribal law for obtaining potential permits such as Federal CWA Section 404 Permit from USACE and CSKT ALCO Permit will be adhered to. Any permanent disturbance of wetlands will be mitigated in accordance to ALCO and USACE regulations.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 53 CHAPTER 7

CONSULTATION

As a project proposed by the CSKT within the boundaries or ownership of the Reservation, the primary regulatory jurisdiction of the project is that of the Tribes. All laws of the Tribes, including environmental laws and regulations, must comply with applicable federal law. In cases where the CSKT have not yet established or enacted laws, standards, or programs for protection and management of environmental resources, federal jurisdiction and permitting would apply.

Jurisdiction and permitting requirements anticipated for the proposed project are summarized in Table 9. The necessity of certain permits will be determined by the completion of annual proposed dam maintenance activities and locations. CSKT should coordinate annually with internal departments for THPO, Wildlife, and Fisheries resources to ensure no significant impacts will occur.

Table 8. Environmental Laws That May Require Consultation or Permitting Agency Statute Action Tribal civil regulatory jurisdiction over all other natural water courses and wetlands on the CSKT Shoreline Protection Aquatic Lands Conservation Reservation not including the Office Ordinance 87A south half of Flathead Lake. Required permit would be obtained prior to activity. Consultation with THPO Tribal Historic Preservation National Historic Preservation required – provide THPO with Office Act, Section 106 annual proposed maintenance activities and locations. Dredge or fill of navigable waters, including some wetlands, may require a permit. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Clean Water Act, Section 404 Exemption for wetlands formed within irrigation canals. Required permit would be obtained prior to activity. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit for U.S. Environmental Protection disturbance greater than one Clean Water Act, Section 402 Agency acre. Would be obtained by contractor prior to major construction activity. Endangered Species Act Informal consultation between Migratory Bird Treaty Act CSKT and USFWS indicated U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bald and Golden Eagle that formal consultation with Protection Act USFWS would not be required.

CSKT IDT and Agency Comments An initial project scoping meeting was held with the CSKT IDT on June 3, 2019 to receive early comments and/or concerns from IDT. A draft version of the Dams Maintenance Activities BMPs table was created along with figures of all dam and EWS locations. This information was sent along with a Request for Comment Letter to all IDT members on March 4, 2020. Comments were

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 54 received from CSKT Wildlife Biologist, Whisper Camel-Means. Another meeting was held virtually with the IDT on April 30, 2020 for any additional comments and the comment period was extended to ensure all comments would be incorporated into the preparation of the table and this document. Additional comments were received by Whisper Camel-Means and also by CKST Fisheries Biologist, Craig Barfoot. Their comments were incorporated into this PEA document.

The USFWS was contacted to discuss the Hubbart Dam and Little Bitterroot Dam and associated EWS since they are located outside of the Flathead Indian Reservation. The USFWS concurred with the BMPs established in the Dams Maintenance Activities BMPs table and it was determined by USFWS and CSKT Wildlife Biologist and no BA was needed for this project. This information is located in Appendix C – Correspondence.

Public Involvement The Draft Programmatic Environmental Assessment will be published and available for a public comment period once IDT review has been completed.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 55 CHAPTER 8

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS CSKT IDT Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes P.O. Box 278 Pablo, MT 59855 406-675-2700

Table 9. CSKT IDT Team Rich Janssen Natural Resources Department Head [email protected] Dan Lozar Division of Engineering & Water Resources [email protected] Scott Johnston Roads Program Manager [email protected] Greg Wilson Safety of Dams Coordinator [email protected] Seth Makepeace Supervisory Hydrologist [email protected] Tom McDonald Division of Fish, Wildlife & Recreation Manager [email protected] Les Evarts Fisheries Program Manager [email protected] Barry Hansen Fisheries Biologist [email protected] Craig Barfoot Fisheries Biologist [email protected] Dale Becker Wildlife Program Manager [email protected] Whisper Camel-Means Wildlife Biologist [email protected] Stacy Courville Wildlife Biologist [email protected] Art Soukkala Wildlife Biologist [email protected] Rusty Sydnor Habitat Restoration Botanist [email protected] Willie Keenan Division of Environmental Quality Manager [email protected] Tabitha Espinoza Wetlands Coordinator [email protected] Mary Price Staff Scientist [email protected] Chauncey Means Non-point Source Coordinator [email protected] Evan Smith Water Quality Regulator Compliance Officer [email protected] Dan Lipscomb Shoreline Protection Manager [email protected] Paula Webster Water Quality Program Manager [email protected] Randy Ashley Air Quality Program Manager [email protected] Pete Gillard GIS Manager [email protected] Carolee Wenderoth Tribal Lands Department Head [email protected] Mike Durglo Tribal Preservation Office Department Head [email protected] Kyle Felsman Tribal Preservation Officer [email protected] Tony Incashola, Jr. Tribal Forestry Department Head [email protected] Vernon Finley Kootenai Culture Committee Department Head [email protected] Tony Incashola Salish Pend Orielle Culture Committee Dept Head [email protected] Thompson Smith Salish Pend Orielle Culture Committee Historian [email protected]

Table 10. Non-CSKT employees for Inclusion in IDT Larry Nelson FIIP Manager [email protected] Shana Radford Superintendent of Flathead Agency [email protected]

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 56

Morrison-Maierle, Inc. Christine Pearcy Environmental Scientist Morrison-Maierle Inc. 2880 Technology Blvd W Bozeman, MT 59771 406-922-6846

Molly Davidson, PE Senior Water Resources Engineer Morrison-Maierle Inc. 1055 Mount Avenue Missoula, MT 59801 406-542-8880

Breanne Carr Environmental Scientist Morrison-Maierle Inc. 125 Schoolhouse Loop Kalispell, MT 59901 406-751-5854

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 57

CHAPTER 9

LITERATURE CITED

Baxter, C. V., C. A. Frissell, and F. R. Hauer. 1999. Geomorphology, logging roads, and the distribution of bull trout spawning in a forested river basin: implications for management and conservation. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 128:854‐867.

Bond, C. E. 1992. Notes on the nomenclature and distribution of the bull trout and effects of human activity on the species. Pages1‐4 in Howell, P. J. and D. V. Buchanan, editors. Proceedings of the Gearhart Mountain bull trout workshop. Oregon Chapter of the American Fisheries Society, Corvallis.

Brown, C. J. D. 1971. Fishes of Montana. Big Sky Books, Montana State University, Bozeman.

Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). 2012. Indian Affairs NEPA Guidebook, 59 IAM 3-H. Department of the Interior, BIA, Division of Environmental and Cultural Resources Management, Reston, Virginia. August 2012.

Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). 2014. Safety of Dams Program Handbook. Dam Safety, Security, and Emergency Management, 55IAM – H. Prepared by Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of Trust Services, Division of Water and Power Branch of Dam Safety, Security, and Emergency Management, Lakewood, Colorado. August 22, 2014.

Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT). 1996. Comprehensive Resources Plan Volumes I and II. Project Coordinators: Janet Camel and Doug Dupuis.

Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT). 2006. Proposed Road Maintenance, Environmental Assessment Checklist and Finding of No Significant Impact. CSKT and BIA.

Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT). 2019. Surface Water Quality Standards and Antidegradation Policy. Natural Resources Department, Environmental Protection Division, Water Quality Program. Effective April 2, 2019.

Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT). 2013b. Flathead Reservation Demographic and Economic Information. Revised October 2013. https://lmi.mt.gov/Portals/135/Publications/LMI- Pubs/LocalAreaProfiles/Reservation%20Profiles/RF13-Flathead.pdf

Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT). 2013c. Climate Change Strategic Plan. September 2013.

Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT). 2015b. Sustainable, Comprehensive Economic Development Plan/Strategy. December 2015.

Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT). 2016. Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan for the Flathead Reservation.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 58 Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT). 2019. Dam Descriptions from Safety of Dams and Roads Department.

Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT). 2019. 2018 – 2019 Annual Report. file:///C:/Users/bcarr/Downloads/2019-AnnualReport%20Final.pdf

Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) Fisheries Program, 2017b. Lower Crow Reservoir and Lower Crow Creek Fisheries.

Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT), 2018. Surface Water Sampling for Pesticides, Pharmaceuticals and Contaminants of Emerging Concern over the 2015 through 2017 Period Flathead Indian Reservation, Montana. January 2018.

Cornell Lab of Ornithology. 2015. Yellow‐billed Cuckoo. Available one at: https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Yellow‐billed_Cuckoo/id.

Department of the Interior (DOI). 2014. 2013 American Indian Population and Labor Force Report. Published January 16, 2014. https://www.bia.gov/cs/groups/public/documents/text/idc1-024782.pdf

Federal Register. 2016. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 40 CFR Part 130. Treatment of Indian Tribes in a Similar Manner as States for Purposes of Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act – Final Rule. Vol. 81, No. 186. September 26, 2016.

Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA). 2019. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home

Fraley, J., and B. Shepard. 1989. Life history, ecology and population status of migratory bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) in the Flathead Lake and River system, Montana. Northwest Science 63:133‐143.

Foresman, K. R. 2012. Mammals of Montana. Mountain Press Publishing Company. Missoula, MT.

Irrigation Training and Research Center (ITRC). 2017. Flathead Indian Irrigation Project – Modernization. Prepared for U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, Branch of Irrigation and Power. April 2017.

Lenard, S., J. Carlson, J. Ellis, C. Jones, and C. Tilly. 2003. P.D. Skaar’s Montana Bird Distribution. 6th Edition. Montana Audubon, Helena, Montana.

Maxell, B., L.K. Werner, P. Hendricks, D.L. Flath. 2003. Herpetology in Montana, Northwest Fauna Number 5. Society of Northwestern Vertebrate Biology. Olympia, WA.

Montana Bald Eagle Working Group. 2010. Montana Bald Eagle Management Guidelines: An Addendum to Montana Bald Eagle Management Plan, 1994, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Helena, Montana.

Montana Department of Commerce. 2012. Economic Contributions of Reservations to the State of Montana 2003-2009.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 59 https://ceic.mt.gov/Portals/192/Shared/docs/Resources/Reports/EconomicContributionsofRe servations.pdf

Montana Department of Labor and Industry (MTDLI). 2018. Local Profile of the Flathead Indian Reservation. Research and Analysis Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages for 2018. http://lmi.mt.gov/Local-Area-Profiles

Montana Department of Agriculture. 2019. 2019 Montana Noxious Weed List. https://agr.mt.gov/Weeds

Montana Department on Environmental Quality (DEQ). 2019. Mapping DEQ’s Data. http://svc.mt.gov/deq/wmadst/

Montana Department of Transportation (MDT). 2020. Statewide Transportation Improvement Program 2020 -2024. https://www.mdt.mt.gov/publications/docs/plans/stip/2020stip_draft.pdf

Montana Natural Heritage Program (MNHP). 2019a. Montana Field Guides. http://fieldguide.mt.gov/default.aspx

Montana Natural Heritage Program (MNHP). 2019b. Species Snapshot – Flathead Indian Reservation.

National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. 2020. Montana. https://www.rivers.gov/montana.php

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2019. Web Soil Survey. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx.

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2019. Montana’s Environmental Justice Communities. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/mt/about/civilrights/nrcs144p2_057864/

Reichel, Jim and Dennis Flath. 1995. Identification of Montana’s Amphibians and Reptiles. Montana Outdoors.

Reiman, B. E., and J. D. McIntrye. 1993. Demographic and habitat requirements for conservation of bull trout. U.S. Forest Service, General Technical Report INT‐308.

Ruediger, B., J. Claar, S. Gniadek, B. Holt, L. Lewis, S. Mighton, B. Naney, G. Patton, T. Rinaldi, J. Trick, A. Vandehey, F. Wahl, N. Warren, D. Wenger, and A. Williamson. 2000. Canada lynx conservation assessment and strategy, 2nd edition. USDA Forest Service, USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management, and USDI National Park Service. Forest Service Publication #R1‐00‐ 53. Missoula, MT. 142 pp.

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR). 2001. The Flathead Project. The Indian Projects by U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. 2001.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Agricultural Statistics Service (NAAS). 2014. U.S. American Indian Agriculture at a Glance. https://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/Montana/Publications/Charts_and_Graphs/A merican_Indian_Profile_2012.pdf

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 60 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2019. Montana Nonattainment / Maintenance Status for Each County by Year for All Criteria Pollutants. As of November 4, 2019. https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/anayo_mt.html.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2019. Montana Water Quality Assessment Report. Accessed December 2019. https://ofmpub.epa.gov/waters10/attains_state.control?p_state=MT

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2010. Federal Register 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for Bull Trout in the Coterminous United States; Final Rule. October 18, 2010.2016b. Ninepipe National Wildlife Refuge.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2019a. Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species for the Flathead Indian Reservation. July 29, 2019. https://www.fws.gov/montanafieldoffice/Endangered_Species/Listed_Species/Reservations/ Flathead_Reservation_sp_list.pdf

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2019b. Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC). https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2020. Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species for the Flathead Indian Reservation. June 10, 2020. https://www.fws.gov/montanafieldoffice/Endangered_Species/Listed_Species/Reservations/ Flathead_Reservation_sp_list.pdf

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2019. National Watershed Boundary Dataset. https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/national-geospatial-program/national- hydrography

Water & Environmental Technologies (WET). 2018. Little Bitterroot Lake Water Quality Monitoring Program 2018 Annual Report.

Western Regional Climate Center. 2019. Polson, Montana (246635). https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi- bin/cliMAIN.pl?mt6635

Woods, A.J., Omernik, J.M., Shelden, J., Comstock, J.A., and S.H. Azevedo. 2002. Ecoregions of Montana, 2nd Edition (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs). Map scale 1:1,500,000.

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 61

CHAPTER 10

APPENDICES

Dam Maintenance Activities – Programmatic Environmental Assessment Page | 62 Appendix A Figures

115°11'40"W 115°5'0"W 114°58'20"W 114°51'40"W 114°45'0"W 114°38'20"W 114°31'40"W 114°25'0"W 114°18'20"W 114°11'40"W 114°5'0"W 113°58'20"W 113°51'40"W 113°45'0"W 113°38'20"W 113°31'40"W 113°25'0"W 113°18'20"W 113°11'40"W

48°7'30"N Litte Bitterroot %, Dam 48°6'40"N

48°3'20"N / 48°2'30"N

48°0'0"N Hubbart Dam

%, 47°58'20"N 47°55'50"N 47°54'10"N 47°51'40"N

Upper Dry 47°50'0"N Fork Dam 47°47'30"N %, Hell Roaring Dam 47°45'50"N Lower Dry

47°43'20"N %, Fork Dam %,

Pablo Dam %, 47°41'40"N

47°39'10"N %, Twin-Turtle Dam 47°37'30"N 47°35'0"N Crow Dam

Kicking Horse Dam 47°33'20"N

47°30'50"N %,

%, %, McDonald Dam 47°29'10"N

47°26'40"N %, Ninepipe Dam 47°25'0"N 47°22'30"N

%, Tabor Dam 47°20'50"N 47°18'20"N LEGEND Mission Dam %, Black %, Dam Locations Lake Dam 47°16'40"N 47°14'10"N Flathead Indian Reservation %, %,

Jocko Dam 47°12'30"N 47°10'0"N

115°10'0"W 115°4'10"W 114°57'30"W 114°50'50"W 114°44'10"W 114°37'30"W 114°30'50"W 114°24'10"W 114°17'30"W 114°10'50"W 114°5'0"W 113°58'20"W 113°51'40"W 113°45'0"W 113°38'20"W 113°31'40"W 113°25'0"W 113°18'20"W 113°11'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 10 20 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Miles DATE: 10/22/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 TOPOGRAPHY MAP OF PROJECT VICINITY 1 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 1_Dams Maintenance PEA_Topo Map.mxd 115°30'0"W 115°22'30"W 115°15'0"W 115°7'30"W 115°0'0"W 114°52'30"W 114°45'0"W 114°37'30"W 114°30'0"W 114°22'30"W 114°15'0"W 114°7'30"W 114°0'0"W 113°52'30"W 113°45'0"W 113°37'30"W 113°30'0"W 113°21'40"W 113°13'20"W 113°5'50"W 112°58'20"W 48°11'40"N / 48°12'30"N Litte Bitterroot 48°6'40"N Dam (Fig. 3) 48°7'30"N

48°2'30"N Hubbart Dam 48°3'20"N (Fig. 4) Flathead

47°57'30"N Lake 47°58'20"N

Flathead

47°52'30"N Sanders 47°53'20"N

Upper Dry 47°47'30"N Fork Dam 47°48'20"N (Fig. 5) Hell Roaring Dam (Fig. 9)

47°42'30"N Pablo Dam 47°43'20"N Lower Dry (Fig. 7) Fork Dam (Fig. 6) Twin-Turtle Dam Lake (Fig. 8) 47°37'30"N Flathead 47°38'20"N Sanders Crow Dam Missoula Powell (Fig. 10) Kicking Horse Dam

47°32'30"N (Fig. 12) 47°33'20"N Crow Dam EWS (Fig. 18)

47°27'30"N Ninepipe Dam McDonald Dam 47°28'20"N (Fig. 11) (Fig. 13) 47°22'30"N 47°23'20"N Tabor Dam (Fig. 15) Mission Dam

47°17'30"N Perma EWS 47°18'20"N (Fig. 19) (Fig. 14) Black Lake Dam (Fig. 17a) 47°13'20"N 47°12'30"N

LEGEND Sanders Lake Black Lake Missoula Dam (Fig. 17b) 47°7'30"N Index Maps Arlee EWS Jocko Dam 47°8'20"N (Fig. 20) (Fig. 16) 47°3'20"N 115°22'30"W 115°14'10"W 115°6'40"W 115°0'0"W 114°52'30"W 114°45'0"W 114°37'30"W 114°30'0"W 114°22'30"W 114°14'10"W 114°6'40"W 114°0'0"W 113°52'30"W 113°45'0"W 113°37'30"W 113°30'0"W 113°22'30"W 113°14'10"W 113°6'40"W 112°59'10"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 12 24 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Miles DATE: 11/7/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 INDEX MAP OF DAM LOCATIONS 2 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 2_Dams Maintenance PEA_Index Map.mxd 114°41'40"W / Little Bitterroot Lake

!(

Little Bitterroot River

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance !( EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°41'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 400 800 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD FLATHEAD COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - LITTLE BITTERROOT DAM 3 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 3_Dams PEA_Bitterroot Map.mxd 114°44'10"W 114°43'20"W 114°42'30"W

Hubbart Reservoir 47°55'50"N / 47°55'50"N

!(

!(

Briggs Creek

Little Bitterrot River

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

47°55'0"N 114°44'10"W 114°43'20"W 114°42'30"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 800 1,600 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD FLATHEAD COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - HUBBART DAM 4 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 4_Dams PEA_Hubbart Map.mxd 114°41'40"W 114°40'50"W 114°40'0"W /

Upper Dry Fork Reservoir !(

Dry Fork Reservoir Rd 47°45'0"N 47°45'0"N

!(

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance Camas Canal

EWS Maintenance Areas Upper Reservoir Rd

!( EWS Locations

114°41'40"W 114°40'50"W 114°40'0"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 800 1,600 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 06/20/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - UPPER DRY FORK DAM 5 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 5_Dams PEA_Upper DF Map.mxd 114°40'50"W 114°40'0"W / 47°42'30"N 47°42'30"N

Dry Fork Reservoir

Camas Canal

!(

Dry Fork Creek

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

47°41'40"N !( EWS Locations 47°41'40"N

114°40'50"W 114°40'0"W 114°39'10"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 1,000 2,000 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - LOWER DRY FORK DAM 6 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 6_Dams PEA_Lower DF Map.mxd 114°10'50"W 114°10'0"W 114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W 47°39'10"N / 47°39'10"N

!( !( Canal 47°38'20"N 47°38'20"N Pablo Reservoir

LEGEND 47°37'30"N Limits of Maintenance 47°37'30"N

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°10'50"W 114°10'0"W 114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 1,600 3,200 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - PABLO DAM 7 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 7_Dams PEA_Pablo Dam Map.mxd 114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W /

!(

!(

Turtle Lake 47°40'0"N 47°40'0"N

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 800 1,600 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - TWIN-TURTLE DAM 8 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 8_Dams PEA_Twin Turtle Map.mxd 114°1'40"W / 47°42'30"N 47°42'30"N

Hell Roaring Hell Roaring Creek Reservoir

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

114°1'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 200 400 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - HELL ROARING DAM 9 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 9_Dams PEA_Hell Roaring Map.mxd 114°14'10"W 114°13'20"W /

Lower Crow Reservoir

!(

Crow Creek 47°30'0"N 47°30'0"N

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas !( !( EWS Locations

114°14'10"W 114°13'20"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 600 1,200 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - CROW DAM 10a M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 10a_Dams PEA_Crow Dam Map.mxd 114°15'0"W 114°14'10"W 114°13'20"W 114°12'30"W 114°11'40"W 114°10'50"W 114°10'0"W 114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W /

47°31'40"N !( !( 47°31'40"N

0 150 300 Feet 0 150 300 Feet 47°30'50"N 47°30'50"N

!( 47°30'0"N !( 47°30'0"N

!(

47°29'10"N LEGEND 47°29'10"N Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°15'0"W 114°14'10"W 114°13'20"W 114°12'30"W 114°11'40"W 114°10'50"W 114°10'0"W 114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 3,500 7,000 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - EWS FOR CROW DAM 10b M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 10b_Dams PEA_Crow EWS.mxd 114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W 114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W 47°27'30"N / 47°27'30"N !( !( !( !(

Kicking Horse Dam Maintenance Area !( 47°26'40"N 47°26'40"N Ninepipe Reservoir 47°25'50"N LEGEND 47°25'50"N

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W 114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 2,000 4,000 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - NINEPIPE DAM 11 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 11_Dams PEA_Ninepipe Dam Map.mxd 114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W 114°3'20"W 114°2'30"W / 47°28'20"N 47°28'20"N

Kicking Horse Reservoir 47°27'30"N 47°27'30"N

!(

!(

114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W 114°3'20"W 114°2'30"W 47°26'40"N

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 2,000 4,000 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - KICKING HORSE DAM 12 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 12_Dams PEA_Kicking Horse Dam Map.mxd 114°0'0"W 113°59'10"W /

Post Creek

!(

McDonald Lake

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°0'0"W 113°59'10"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 500 1,000 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - MCDONALD DAM 13 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 13_Dams PEA_McDonald Dam Map.mxd 114°1'40"W 114°0'50"W /

Mission Reservoir 47°19'10"N 47°19'10"N

!(

!(

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations Mission Creek

114°1'40"W 114°0'50"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 900 1,800 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - MISSION DAM 14 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 14_Dams PEA_Mission Dam Map.mxd 113°56'40"W 113°55'50"W 113°55'0"W

Dry Creek /

!(

!(

!( Saint Mary's Lake 47°15'50"N 47°15'50"N

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

113°56'40"W 113°55'50"W 113°55'0"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 1,100 2,200 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - TABOR DAM 15 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 15_Dams PEA_Tabor Dam Map.mxd 113°45'50"W /

Jocko Road !(

Middle Fork Jocko River

!(

Lower Jocko Lake

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

113°45'50"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 600 1,200 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD MISSOULA COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - JOCKO DAM 16 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 16_Dams PEA_Jocko Dam Map.mxd 113°44'10"W 113°43'20"W /

Middle Fork Jocko River

!( Black Lake

Lower Jocko Lake

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations 47°11'40"N 113°44'10"W 113°43'20"W 47°11'40"N

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 650 1,300 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD MISSOULA COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - BLACK LAKE DAM 17a M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 17a_Dams PEA_Black Lake Dam Map.mxd 113°41'40"W /

Upper Jocko Lake

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

113°41'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 200 400 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD MISSOULA COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - BLACK LAKE SPILLWAY 17b M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 17b_Dams PEA_Black Lake Spillway Map.mxd 114°38'20"W 114°37'30"W 114°36'40"W 114°35'50"W 114°35'0"W 114°34'10"W 114°33'20"W 114°32'30"W 114°31'40"W 114°30'50"W 114°30'0"W 114°29'10"W 114°28'20"W 114°27'30"W 114°26'40"W 47°25'50"N / 47°25'50"N 47°25'0"N

!( 47°25'0"N 47°24'10"N 47°24'10"N

0 250 500 Feet 47°23'20"N 47°23'20"N 47°22'30"N 47°22'30"N 47°21'40"N 47°21'40"N !(

LEGEND

47°20'50"N Limits of Maintenance 47°20'50"N EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°38'20"W 114°37'30"W 114°36'40"W 114°35'50"W 114°35'0"W 114°34'10"W 114°33'20"W 114°32'30"W 114°31'40"W 114°30'50"W 114°30'0"W 114°29'10"W 114°28'20"W 114°27'30"W 114°26'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 1 2 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Miles DATE: 11/4/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - EWS PERMA 18 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 19_Dams PEA_Perma EWS.mxd 114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W 114°3'20"W 114°2'30"W 114°1'40"W 114°0'50"W 114°0'0"W 113°59'10"W 113°58'20"W 113°57'30"W 113°56'40"W 113°55'50"W 113°55'0"W / 47°12'30"N 47°12'30"N

!( 47°11'40"N 47°11'40"N

0 250 500 Feet 47°10'50"N 47°10'50"N 47°10'0"N 47°10'0"N ARLEE

!( 47°9'10"N 47°9'10"N 47°8'20"N LEGEND 47°8'20"N

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

47°7'30"N !( EWS Locations 47°7'30"N

114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W 114°3'20"W 114°2'30"W 114°1'40"W 114°0'50"W 114°0'0"W 113°59'10"W 113°58'20"W 113°57'30"W 113°56'40"W 113°55'50"W 113°55'0"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 1 2 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Miles DATE: 11/4/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - EWS ARLEE 19 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 20_Dams PEA_Arlee EWS.mxd 115°11'40"W 115°5'0"W 114°58'20"W 114°51'40"W 114°45'0"W 114°38'20"W 114°31'40"W 114°25'0"W 114°18'20"W 114°11'40"W 114°5'0"W 113°58'20"W 113°51'40"W 113°45'0"W 113°38'20"W 113°31'40"W 113°25'0"W 113°18'20"W 113°11'40"W

48°6'40"N Litte Bitterroot %,!( Dam !( 48°5'50"N

48°2'30"N / 48°1'40"N Hubbart Dam 47°58'20"N

%,!( 47°57'30"N 47°54'10"N 47°53'20"N 47°50'0"N Upper Dry Fork Dam 47°49'10"N

%,!( 47°45'50"N !( Hell Roaring Dam Lower Dry 47°45'0"N %, %, Fork Dam !( 47°41'40"N !%,( Pablo Dam 47°40'50"N !%,(!( Twin-Turtle Dam 47°37'30"N 47°36'40"N Crow Dam 47°33'20"N Kicking Horse Dam 47°32'30"N !%,!( ( !( 47°29'10"N !%, McDonald Dam !(!( !%,( 47°28'20"N LEGEND %,!(

47°25'0"N Ninepipe Dam %, Dam Locations 47°24'10"N !( (! EWS Locations 47°20'50"N %,!( Bull Trout Critical Habitat - Streams !( Tabor Dam 47°20'0"N

!( 47°16'40"N Bull Trout Critical Habitat - Lakes EWS Perma Mission Dam %,!( Black

Lake Dam 47°15'50"N Canada Lynx Critical Habitat !(%,!( !%,( 47°12'30"N Flathead Indian Reservation Jocko Dam EWS Arlee 47°11'40"N !( 47°8'20"N 115°11'40"W 115°5'0"W 114°58'20"W 114°51'40"W 114°45'0"W 114°38'20"W 114°31'40"W 114°25'0"W 114°18'20"W 114°11'40"W 114°5'0"W 113°58'20"W 113°51'40"W 113°45'0"W 113°38'20"W 113°31'40"W 113°25'0"W 113°18'20"W 113°11'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 10 20 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Miles DATE: 8/12/20 THREATENED & ENDANGERED SPECIES COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 20 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 21_T_E CH Map.mxd DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITAT MAP 115°11'40"W 115°5'0"W 114°58'20"W 114°51'40"W 114°45'0"W 114°38'20"W 114°31'40"W 114°25'0"W 114°18'20"W 114°11'40"W 114°5'0"W 113°58'20"W 113°51'40"W 113°45'0"W 113°38'20"W 113°31'40"W 113°25'0"W 113°18'20"W 113°11'40"W

48°6'40"N %, Litte Bitterroot !(

Dam 48°5'50"N

48°2'30"N / 48°1'40"N Hubbart Dam 47°58'20"N

%,!( 47°57'30"N 47°54'10"N 47°53'20"N 47°50'0"N Upper Dry Fork Dam 47°49'10"N

%,!( 47°45'50"N !( Hell Roaring Dam Lower Dry 47°45'0"N %, %, Fork Dam !( 47°41'40"N !%,( Pablo Dam 47°40'50"N !%,(!( Twin-Turtle Dam 47°37'30"N 47°36'40"N Crow Dam 47°33'20"N Kicking Horse Dam 47°32'30"N !%,!( ( !( 47°29'10"N !%, McDonald Dam !(!( !%,( 47°28'20"N %,!(

47°25'0"N Ninepipe Dam LEGEND 47°24'10"N !( %, Dam Locations 47°20'50"N %,!( (! EWS Locations !( Tabor Dam 47°20'0"N

!( 47°16'40"N Grizzly Bear Recovery Zone EWS Perma Mission Dam %,!( Black

Lake Dam 47°15'50"N Grizzly Bear Distribution Area !(%,!( !%,( 47°12'30"N Flathead Indian Reservation Jocko Dam EWS Arlee 47°11'40"N !( 47°8'20"N 115°11'40"W 115°5'0"W 114°58'20"W 114°51'40"W 114°45'0"W 114°38'20"W 114°31'40"W 114°25'0"W 114°18'20"W 114°11'40"W 114°5'0"W 113°58'20"W 113°51'40"W 113°45'0"W 113°38'20"W 113°31'40"W 113°25'0"W 113°18'20"W 113°11'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 10 20 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Miles DATE: 8/12/20 THREATENED & ENDANGERED SPECIES COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 21 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 22_Grizzly Bear Map.mxd GRIZZLY BEAR MAP Appendix B Dams Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Best Management Practices for All Routine Dam Maintenance Activities

Assure that maintenance workers read and understand the BMPs and assure that BMPs are adhered to. Pages 1 and 2 of this guidance document outlines best management practices associated with threatened, endangered, and species of concern. The proceeding tables outlines BMP practices for a given dam maintenance action.

Grizzly Bear Habitat Dams located within Grizzly Bear habitat or corridors include: Hell Roaring Dam, Twin Turtle Dam, Kicking Horse Dam, McDonald Dam, Tabor Dam, Black Lake Dam, Jocko Dam, Mission Dam, Crow Dam, and Ninepipe Dam (as stated by CSKT Wildlife Management Program). • Conduct proposed activity during the summer (June 15 to September 15) or winter (November 15 – March 30) if possible. • Store all food, food related items, petroleum products, antifreeze, garbage, and personal hygiene items inside a closed, hard-sided vehicle or commercially manufactured bear resistant container. • No firearms allowed on the job site. • Immediately report sightings of grizzly bears or bear sign to the CSKT Wildlife Management Program or CSKT Fish & Game.

Bull Trout Waterways These include spawning and rearing areas: Middle Fork Jocko River and Lower and Upper Jocko Lakes (Jocko Dam, Black Lake Dam, and Black Lake Spillway), McDonald Lake and Post Creek (McDonald Dam), and Dry Creek (upstream of St. Mary’s Lake and Tabor Reservoir). • When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout spawning and rearing areas, perform sediment-producing activities from July 15 through August 31 when possible. • Check with CSKT Fisheries Department prior to initiating activities near potential Bull Trout waterways.

Foraging, migration, and overwintering habitat (FMO): Flathead River (EWS Perma), Mission Creek (Mission Dam), St. Mary’s Lake (Tabor Dam). All activities within 300 feet of a listed waterway must abide by the following BMPs: • When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout FMO areas, perform sediment-producing activities from July 1 through September 30 when possible. • Check with CSKT Fisheries Department prior to initiating activities near potential Bull Trout waterways.

Bald Eagle and Migratory Bird Nest Presence For proposed dam maintenance actions within direct line of sight or within ½ mile from an active nest: • Recommended seasonal restrictions from approximately February 1st through August 15th for significant earth moving or loud disturbance activities. o Keep all heavy equipment at least ¼ mile away from nest sites at all times; if mechanized work needs to be within that distance, these activities are restricted between February 1 and August 15, unless the territory is documented as unoccupied during that breeding season. • Existing visual buffers within ¼ mile of nest sites should not be removed but enhanced if possible. • Distance buffers are intended to apply to activities near nest sites, concentrated foraging areas, and communal roost sites during the appropriate season of eagle use.

Page 1

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

• Hand crews can be within ¼ mile buffer in off-season, right up to base of nest tree, but must limit the visual changes to least amount possible, leaving historic perching/loafing trees (snags) within the buffer. • Avoid pesticides where bald eagles may scavenge. To reduce secondary poisoning limit the use of anti-coagulants and other pesticides and ensure all herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers are disposed of properly. All use of chemicals, including the application and handling, shall follow applicable state and federal laws. • Contact CSKT Wildlife Program Biologist for most recent information on potential impacts to active nest locations.

Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices Vegetative Maintenance Actions Removal of beached root wads and drifting 1. Areas cleared of vegetation by maintenance, burning, spraying vegetation and debris from within the project 6, 8 or other activities will be seeded, when necessary, with an area approved weed- free seed mix. 2. Utilize sediment filter fence, erosion-control mats, weed free Removal of fallen trees from within the 6, 7, 8, 12 straw bales or other means to reduce erosion and delivery of project area sediment to streams or channels where necessary. Removal of trees and their root system 3. Adhere to product label instructions regarding application. 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14 within the project area 4. Apply chemicals during appropriate weather conditions and during the optimum time for control of target species. Vegetation control via prescribed burn 1, 2, 9, 10, 13, 14 5. Use EPA approved herbicide. 6. Avoid wetlands; Consult with IDT if wetland impacts are anticipated. Control of vegetation and repair of 2, 8, 9, 14 7. In accordance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, cutting or vegetation damage in embankment dams removal of trees or shrubs should take place between August Noxious weed control via chemical 16th and April 15th. 1, 3, 4, 5, 9, 13, 14 application 8. Minimize activities when soils appear excessively wet. 9. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout Reseeding or revegetating activities using 1, 2, 8, 9, 14 spawning and rearing areas, avoid conducting sediment- various methods producing activities from July 15 through August 31. 10. Follow burn condition recommendations in an established burn Control of aquatic vegetation 3, 4, 5 plan. 11. No trees with an active migratory bird or eagle nest present may be removed as part of this PEA. Coordination with the Routine mowing using various methods 8 proper authorities must be initiated prior to removal of trees Page 2

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices with inactive migratory bird or eagle nests to insure they are not occupied. 12. Removal of fallen trees within Grizzly Bear habitat outside of the June 15 to September 15 window will only take place when necessary in order to maintain dam functionality. 13. Check with CSKT Wildlife Program regarding the extent of project disturbance. 14. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout FMO areas, perform sediment-producing activities from July 1 through September 30 when possible. Geotechnical Investigation Actions Geotechnical drilling for soil identification on 1. If practicable, berm and cover stockpiles of sand, dirt or other 4, 5 and nearby dam structures construction material with tarps when rain is forecast or when Soil test pits they are not in use. 1, 2, 5 2. Prevent sediment from migrating offsite and protect storm drain Preparation of drill pad for geotechnical inlets, drainage courses and streams by installing and investigations maintaining appropriate BMPs (i.e. silt fences, gravel bags, fiber rolls, temporary swales, etc.). 3. Revegetate and/or control noxious weeds on drill pad/disturbed 2, 3, 4, 5 areas after use where necessary. 4. Plan and design skid trails, yard areas, and truck access roads to minimize stream crossings and avoid disturbing vegetated areas. 5. Minimize activities when soils appear excessively wet. Instrumentation Maintenance Actions Maintenance of Early Warning System 1. Avoid wetlands; Consult with IDT if wetland impacts are (EWS) components 3, 4 anticipated. 2. In accordance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, cutting or

removal of trees or shrubs should take place between August Relocation of EWS floats/instrumentation if 16th and April 15th. necessary 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9

Page 3

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices Piezometer installation and maintenance 3. Properly dispose of or store all leftover construction materials 1, 2, 3, 4 during and after activities. Weir boxes, flumes, and related components 4. Plan and design skid trails, yard areas, and truck access roads maintenance and clearing 4, 6 to minimize stream crossings and avoid disturbing vegetated areas. Removal of algae, sediment, and debris from 5. Haul excess materials to a stable site away from Stream staff gauges, weir boxes, and miscellaneous 5, 6, 8, 9 Management Zones. outfall structures Installation of survey monitoring points 6. Implement the action only to the extent necessary to provide 1, 2, 3, 4 adequate drainage and safety. Verification of voltage and amperage or 7. Visually monitor turbidity and minimize releases into adjoining replacement of electrical controls 3 waterways. 8. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout spawning and rearing areas, avoid conducting sediment- producing activities from July 15 through August 31. Repair of electrical or instrumentation 3 9. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout conduits FMO areas, perform sediment-producing activities from July 1 through September 30 when possible. Access Maintenance Actions 1. Implement the action only to the extent necessary to provide Roadway grading and blading, including adequate drainage and safety. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 14, 20, using dust abatement agent 2. Use water or a dust abatement agent, like magnesium chloride, 22 when necessary. 3. Avoid disturbing stable road surfaces. 4. Minimize activities when soils appear excessively wet. 5. Grade road surfaces only as often as necessary to maintain a Improvements or repairs to the dam access 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, stable running surface and to retain original drainage features. road 11, 14, 20, 22 6. Maintain road surface in a crowned or out-sloped condition. 7. Do not cut the toe of cut slopes or remove established vegetation except in ditches and high shoulder areas. 8. Roads ≤ 50 feet from stream, do not place any road material in Maintenance activities for access to EWS 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, a berm along either side of the road. locations 20, 22 9. If necessary, haul material off site.

Page 4

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices 10. Where berm removal or off-site disposal is not practicable, cut weep holes in the berms at a minimum of 100-foot intervals to Surface overlay, chip-seal, crack-seal, 2, 14, 21 relieve concentrated flows. pothole patching, and full-depth patching 11. Roads > 50 feet from stream, keep downhill side of road free from berms. 12. Maintain gates and associated safety devices in working condition. Replace as needed. Repair of vehicular traffic ruts on dam crest 1, 2, 4, 6, 14, 20, 22 13. Maintain fence free of weeds and woody vegetation. access road 14. Maintenance and repair must be performed in a timely manner to maintain the desired control or safety benefits they provide. 15. Inspect safety fence bi-annually. 16. Maintain safety signs and replace when signs are missing or no Snow plowing and ice removal 3, 14, 17, 18, 19 longer legible. 17. Open culverts and ditches restricted by snow or ice to allow proper drainage. 18. Side-casting of snow will be avoided where there is potential for snow or ice damming in adjacent stream channels. 19. Openings in snow berms will be provided and maintained as required for surface drainage. Avoid drainage outlets on erodible fills. Repair or replacement of cattle guards, 20. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout fences, locks, gates, or other security spawning and rearing areas, avoid conducting sediment- 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 features producing activities from July 15 through August 31. 21. Avoid paving and seal coating in wet weather or when rain is forecast, to prevent materials that have not cured from contacting stormwater runoff. 22. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout FMO areas, perform sediment-producing activities from July 1 through September 30 when possible. Dam Component Maintenance Actions

Page 5

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices 1. Draw reservoir level down when necessary. Reestablishment of freeboard or camber in 1, 2, 3 embankment dams 2. Inspect and repair based on engineer recommendation. 3. Properly dispose of or store all leftover materials during and Repair of cracking in concrete dams or after activities. 1, 2, 3 structures 4. Berm and cover stockpiles of sand, dirt or other construction material with tarps when rain is forecast or when they are not in Sealing of longitudinal or transverse cracks 1, 2, 3 use. in embankment dams 5. Prevent sediment from migrating offsite and protect storm drain inlets, drainage courses and streams by installing and Sealing of concrete joints 1, 2, 3 maintaining appropriate BMPs (i.e. silt fences, gravel bags, fiber rolls, temporary swales, etc.). 6. Implement the action only to the extent necessary to provide Repair of deteriorated or spalled concrete 1, 2, 3 adequate drainage and safety. 7. Reestablish normal slope. 8. Place bedding and competent riprap. Repair or replacement of gutters 1, 2, 3 9. When replacing or reinforcing riprap avoid narrowing or confining the stream channel; the design and implementation Repair/Replacement of outlet pipes 1, 2, 5, 11 must be mutually agreed upon by the engineers, hydrologists, and fish biologists. 10. When riprap is used the design and implementation must be Surfacing embankments 1, 2, 5, 11 mutually agreed upon by the engineers, hydrologists, and fish biologists. Repair of bent control stems and stem 11. Use sediment filter fence, weed-free straw bales or other 1, 2, 3 guides means to reduce delivery of sediment to streams or channels. 12. Haul excess materials to a stable site away from Stream Lubrication and maintenance of gates and Management Zones. 1, 2, 3 valves 13. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout Repair, replacement, and maintenance of spawning and rearing areas, avoid conducting sediment- electric motor gate actuators and associated producing activities from July 15 through August 31. 1, 2, 3 components, including but not limited to 14. Backfill existing rodent holes. power sources

Page 6

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices 15. Remove rodent habitat and repair damage. Exercise of outlet gate openings 2 16. Avoid wetlands; Consult with IDT if wetland impacts are anticipated. Application or reapplication of coatings on 17. Plan and design skid trails, yard areas, and truck access roads 1, 2, 3 gates, valves, and metal work to minimize stream crossings and avoid disturbing vegetated areas. Cleaning of drain pipes, manholes, and 5, 11, 13, 20, 21 18. Visually monitor turbidity and minimize releases into adjoining outlets waterways. 19. Significant reservoir water level drawdowns will only occur Removal of sediment in dam spillway, outlet, 1, 3, 5, 11, 13, 18, 19, 20, 21 during peak irrigation season if it is an emergency or if it does exit channel, and other areas not significantly impact the amount of water available for 5, 6, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 20, irrigation purposes. Dredging activities of outfall channels 21 20. Place dredged materials or excess sediment away from streams and wetlands. Removal of debris build up on trash rack and 21. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout 2, 3, 19 other areas FMO areas, perform sediment-producing activities from July 1 through September 30 when possible. Stockpiling of miscellaneous materials 5, 11, 12, 14

Replacement of deteriorated or missing 8, 9, 10, 19, 20 riprap

Control of dam seepage within the project 1, 2, 5, 11 area

Repair of low area or depressions within 6, 16, 18 project area

Repair of erosion damage, sloughs, gullies, 5, 7, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, sinkholes, and other eroded areas 21

Repair dam’s structural integrity from sliding 5, 11, 13, 21 of embankment dam material

Page 7

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices

Control of rodents and repair of rodent 14, 15 damage in embankment dams

Repair of dam surface from livestock and 5, 11, 13, 21 other wildlife trails/trampling • Insure that contractors read and understand the BMPs and insure that BMPs are adhered to. • Read the Material Safety Data Sheet for the product and follow the instructions on the product’s label at all times. • Apply chemicals during appropriate weather conditions and during the optimum time for control of target pest or weed. • Know and comply with regulations governing the storage, handling, application, and disposal of hazardous substances. • Do not transport, handle, store, load, apply, or dispose of any hazardous substances or fertilizer in a manner as to pollute water supplies or waterways or cause damage to land, General Maintenance Activities and humans, plants, and animals. Associated Hazardous Materials Handling • Ensure that all waste fuels, lubricating fluids, and other chemicals are properly stored in containers to prevent unnecessary spills. • Develop a contingency plan for hazardous substance spills, including cleanup procedures and notification to appropriate CSKT personnel. • Hazardous materials should not be stored, and construction equipment should not be refueled within 100 feet of aquatic sites. • Inspect maintenance equipment regularly to ensure hydraulic, fuel, and lubrication systems are in good condition and free of leaks. • Promptly clean up any project related spills, litter, garbage, debris, etc.

Page 8

Appendix C Supporting Documentation

• NRCS Soils Reports • USFWS NWI Maps • Flathead Indian Irrigation Project –Modernization • USFWS T&E Species List for Flathead Indian Reservation • MNHP Species Snapshot • Montana 2018 Noxious Weed List • USFWS IPaC Reports

United States A product of the National Custom Soil Resource Department of Cooperative Soil Survey, Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for States Department of Agriculture and other Flathead County Area and Federal agencies, State Natural agencies including the Part of Lincoln County, Resources Agricultural Experiment Montana, Flathead Indian Conservation Stations, and local Service participants Reservation Wilderness Area, Montana, Lake County Area, Montana, Missoula County Area, Montana, and Sanders and Parts of Lincoln and Flathead Counties, Montana Dams Maintenance Areas

October 30, 2019 Preface

Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require

2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

3 Contents

Preface...... 2 Soil Map...... 7 Soil Map...... 8 Legend...... 9 Map Unit Legend...... 11 Map Unit Descriptions...... 15 Flathead County Area and Part of Lincoln County, Montana...... 17 21F—Combest gravelly ashy silt loam, 35 to 60 percent slopes...... 17 22F—Winkler gravelly sandy loam, cool, 35 to 60 percent slopes...... 18 40D—Rumblecreek-Courville complex, dry, 4 to 15 percent slopes...... 19 41F—Courville, dry-Rumblecreek, dry-Lozeau, deep complex, 30 to 60 percent slopes...... 22 44D—Mitten gravelly ashy silt loam, dry, 8 to 15 percent slopes...... 24 211G—Combest-Sharrott-Rock outcrop complex, 40 to 85 percent slopes...... 26 222C—Pleasantvalley-Winfall, dry complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes...... 28 807A—McLangor-Barzee mucky peats, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 30 872E—Pashua-Pashua, deep complex, 8 to 30 percent slopes...... 32 941C—Trumancreek-Foyslake-Blackcreek complex, 0 to 12 percent slopes...... 34 W—Water...... 37 Flathead Indian Reservation Wilderness Area, Montana...... 38 NOTCOM—No Digital Data Available...... 38 Lake County Area, Montana...... 39 1—Aeric Haplaquepts, 1 to 3 percent slopes...... 39 6—Belton silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes...... 40 17—Bohnly silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 41 25—Connah cobbly silt loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes...... 43 27—Connah-Water complex, 2 to 4 percent slopes...... 44 28—Courville gravelly silt loam, 4 to 15 percent slopes...... 46 29—Courville gravelly silt loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes...... 47 30—Courville gravelly silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes...... 48 33—Courville gravelly silt loam, warm, 30 to 60 percent slopes...... 49 43—Dubay silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes...... 51 51—Finleypoint cobbly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes...... 52 52—Finleypoint gravelly loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes...... 53 59—Flott gravelly loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes...... 54 60—Flott gravelly loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes...... 56 61—Flott very gravelly loam, dry, 30 to 60 percent slopes...... 57 63—Gird silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 58 64—Gird silt loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes...... 60 67—Gird-Vincom silt loams, 8 to 15 percent slopes...... 61 80—Irvine silty clay, 15 to 60 percent slopes...... 64 81—Jocko gravelly loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes...... 65

4 Custom Soil Resource Report

84—Kerl loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes...... 67 90—Kingspoint gravelly loam, 4 to 15 percent slopes...... 68 92—Kingspoint very gravelly loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes...... 70 97—Lonepine-Vincom silt loams, 4 to 8 percent slopes...... 71 101—McCollum fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 73 102—McCollum fine sandy loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes...... 74 103—McCollum fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes...... 75 104—McCollum fine sandy loam, gravelly substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 76 105—McDonald cobbly silty clay loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes...... 78 106—McDonald cobbly silty clay loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes...... 79 107—McDonald cobbly silty clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes...... 81 116—Mollman gravelly loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes...... 82 119—Mollman very gravelly loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes...... 84 129—Pits, gravel...... 85 130—Polson silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 85 131—Polson silt loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes...... 87 132—Polson-Vincom silt loams, 4 to 8 percent slopes...... 88 133—Post silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 90 134—Post silty clay loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes...... 92 135—Post silty clay loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes...... 93 136—Post-Ronan-Water complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes...... 95 137—Post-Ronan-Water complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes...... 97 140—Rock outcrop-Rubble land complex...... 99 145—Round Butte silty clay loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes...... 99 151—Rumblecreek gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes...... 101 154—Sacheen fine sand, hummocky, 3 to 10 percent slopes...... 102 155—Sacheen loamy fine sand, 0 to 8 percent slopes...... 103 157—Selon fine sandy loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes...... 104 158—Selon fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes...... 105 159—Selon sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes...... 107 165—Truscreek silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 108 166—Truscreek-Polson silt loams, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 110 167—Truscreek-Polson silt loams, 2 to 4 percent slopes...... 112 170—Vincom silt loam, 15 to 60 percent slopes...... 114 174—Walstead gravelly loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 115 182—Winfall very gravelly loam, 4 to 15 percent slopes...... 117 183—Winfall very gravelly loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes...... 118 186—Winkler very gravelly loam, cool, 30 to 60 percent slopes...... 119 188—Xerofluvents, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 121 W—Water...... 122 Missoula County Area, Montana...... 123 113—Upsata gravelly fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes...... 123 119—Waldbillig-Holloway gravelly ashy silt loams, 30 to 60 percent slopes...... 124 Sanders and Parts of Lincoln and Flathead Counties, Montana...... 127 4A—Lamoose loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, moist...... 127 5B—Whitearth silt loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes...... 128 11A—Bolack silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 129 13A—Round Butte silty clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 131 13B—Round Butte silty clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes...... 132 14B—Belton silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes...... 134 18B—Dryfork silt loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes...... 135 20E—Winkler gravelly loam, 15 to 35 percent slopes...... 137

5 Custom Soil Resource Report

50E—Bigarm gravelly loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes...... 138 54E—Finleypoint gravelly loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes...... 140 57E—Minesinger stony loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes...... 141 91B—Biglake gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes...... 143 112A—Marklepass-Slickspots complex, 0 to 4 percent slopes...... 144 117E—Kerrdam-Dryfork-Vincom silt loams, 8 to 35 percent slopes...... 146 118B—Dryfork-Selow silt loams, 0 to 4 percent slopes...... 148 118D—Dryfork-Kerrdam silt loams, 4 to 15 percent slopes...... 151 123D—Yourame-Wildgen gravelly loams, 8 to 30 percent slopes...... 153 150E—Bigarm-Hogsby-Rock outcrop complex, 8 to 30 percent slopes... 155 218D—Dryfork-Selow silt loams, 4 to 15 percent slopes...... 157 DAM—Dam...... 159 W—Water...... 159 References...... 160

6 Soil Map

The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.

7 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 114° 50' 15'' W 15'' 50' 114° W 30'' 35' 113°

670000 680000 690000 700000 710000 720000 730000 740000 750000 48° 11' 47'' N 48° 11' 47'' N 5340000 5340000 5330000 5330000 5320000 5320000 5310000 5310000 5300000 5300000 5290000 5290000 5280000 5280000 5270000 5270000 5260000 5260000 5250000 5250000 5240000 5240000 5230000 5230000 5220000

47° 4' 54'' N 47° 4' 54'' N 5220000 670000 680000 690000 700000 710000 720000 730000 740000 750000

Map Scale: 1:603,000 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Meters N 0 5000 10000 20000 30000 114° 50' 15'' W 15'' 50' 114° W 30'' 35' 113° Feet 0 25000 50000 100000 150000 Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 11N WGS84 8 Custom Soil Resource Report

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION

Area of Interest (AOI) Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at scales Area of Interest (AOI) ranging from 1:20,000 to 1:24,000. Stony Spot Soils Very Stony Spot Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map Soil Map Unit Polygons measurements. Wet Spot Soil Map Unit Lines Other Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Map Unit Points Web Soil Survey URL: Special Line Features Special Point Features Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Water Features Blowout Streams and Canals Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator Borrow Pit projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts Transportation distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Clay Spot Rails Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more Closed Depression accurate calculations of distance or area are required. Interstate Highways Gravel Pit US Routes This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as Gravelly Spot of the version date(s) listed below. Major Roads Landfill Local Roads Soil Survey Area: Flathead County Area and Part of Lincoln Lava Flow Background County, Montana Survey Area Data: Version 14, Sep 16, 2019 Marsh or swamp Aerial Photography

Mine or Quarry Soil Survey Area: Flathead Indian Reservation Wilderness Area, Montana Miscellaneous Water Survey Area Data: Version 3, Sep 16, 2019 Perennial Water Soil Survey Area: Lake County Area, Montana Rock Outcrop Survey Area Data: Version 21, Sep 16, 2019 Saline Spot Soil Survey Area: Missoula County Area, Montana Sandy Spot Survey Area Data: Version 17, Sep 16, 2019 Severely Eroded Spot Soil Survey Area: Sanders and Parts of Lincoln and Flathead Sinkhole Counties, Montana Slide or Slip Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 16, 2019

Sodic Spot Your area of interest (AOI) includes more than one soil survey area. These survey areas may have been mapped at different scales, with a different land use in mind, at different times, or at different levels of detail. This may result in map unit symbols, soil

9 Custom Soil Resource Report

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION

properties, and interpretations that do not completely agree across soil survey area boundaries.

Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jan 1, 1999—Dec 31, 2003

The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

10 Custom Soil Resource Report

Map Unit Legend

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

21F Combest gravelly ashy silt 9.8 0.2% loam, 35 to 60 percent slopes 22F Winkler gravelly sandy loam, 14.1 0.2% cool, 35 to 60 percent slopes 40D Rumblecreek-Courville 21.2 0.4% complex, dry, 4 to 15 percent slopes 41F Courville, dry-Rumblecreek, 1.4 0.0% dry-Lozeau, deep complex, 30 to 60 percent slopes 44D Mitten gravelly ashy silt loam, 0.7 0.0% dry, 8 to 15 percent slopes 211G Combest-Sharrott-Rock outcrop 0.2 0.0% complex, 40 to 85 percent slopes 222C Pleasantvalley-Winfall, dry 9.4 0.2% complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes 807A McLangor-Barzee mucky peats, 1.0 0.0% 0 to 2 percent slopes 872E Pashua-Pashua, deep complex, 5.4 0.1% 8 to 30 percent slopes 941C Trumancreek-Foyslake- 22.7 0.4% Blackcreek complex, 0 to 12 percent slopes W Water 4.9 0.1% Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 90.9 1.5% Totals for Area of Interest 6,003.1 100.0%

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

NOTCOM No Digital Data Available 294.9 4.9% Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 294.9 4.9% Totals for Area of Interest 6,003.1 100.0%

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

1 Aeric Haplaquepts, 1 to 3 1.1 0.0% percent slopes 6 Belton silt loam, 8 to 15 percent 0.3 0.0% slopes 17 Bohnly silt loam, 0 to 2 percent 3.9 0.1% slopes 25 Connah cobbly silt loam, 4 to 8 1.1 0.0% percent slopes

11 Custom Soil Resource Report

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

27 Connah-Water complex, 2 to 4 5.2 0.1% percent slopes 28 Courville gravelly silt loam, 4 to 42.6 0.7% 15 percent slopes 29 Courville gravelly silt loam, 15 20.9 0.3% to 30 percent slopes 30 Courville gravelly silt loam, 30 7.4 0.1% to 60 percent slopes 33 Courville gravelly silt loam, 3.1 0.1% warm, 30 to 60 percent slopes 43 Dubay silt loam, 2 to 6 percent 49.9 0.8% slopes 51 Finleypoint cobbly loam, 8 to 15 20.5 0.3% percent slopes 52 Finleypoint gravelly loam, 15 to 9.9 0.2% 30 percent slopes 59 Flott gravelly loam, 15 to 30 51.6 0.9% percent slopes 60 Flott gravelly loam, 30 to 60 22.0 0.4% percent slopes 61 Flott very gravelly loam, dry, 30 78.7 1.3% to 60 percent slopes 63 Gird silt loam, 0 to 2 percent 29.8 0.5% slopes 64 Gird silt loam, 2 to 4 percent 10.8 0.2% slopes 67 Gird-Vincom silt loams, 8 to 15 1.9 0.0% percent slopes 80 Irvine silty clay, 15 to 60 percent 1.3 0.0% slopes 81 Jocko gravelly loam, 0 to 4 22.1 0.4% percent slopes 84 Kerl loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes 16.7 0.3% 90 Kingspoint gravelly loam, 4 to 25.2 0.4% 15 percent slopes 92 Kingspoint very gravelly loam, 7.9 0.1% 30 to 60 percent slopes 97 Lonepine-Vincom silt loams, 4 7.2 0.1% to 8 percent slopes 101 McCollum fine sandy loam, 0 to 11.2 0.2% 2 percent slopes 102 McCollum fine sandy loam, 2 to 124.5 2.1% 4 percent slopes 103 McCollum fine sandy loam, 4 to 2.6 0.0% 8 percent slopes 104 McCollum fine sandy loam, 14.2 0.2% gravelly substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes

12 Custom Soil Resource Report

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

105 McDonald cobbly silty clay 79.1 1.3% loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes 106 McDonald cobbly silty clay 9.3 0.2% loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes 107 McDonald cobbly silty clay 48.4 0.8% loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 116 Mollman gravelly loam, 0 to 4 10.4 0.2% percent slopes 119 Mollman very gravelly loam, 30 18.7 0.3% to 60 percent slopes 129 Pits, gravel 102.6 1.7% 130 Polson silt loam, 0 to 2 percent 12.6 0.2% slopes 131 Polson silt loam, 2 to 4 percent 133.3 2.2% slopes 132 Polson-Vincom silt loams, 4 to 8 23.3 0.4% percent slopes 133 Post silt loam, 0 to 2 percent 96.2 1.6% slopes 134 Post silty clay loam, 2 to 4 370.9 6.2% percent slopes 135 Post silty clay loam, 4 to 8 54.0 0.9% percent slopes 136 Post-Ronan-Water complex, 2 390.7 6.5% to 8 percent slopes 137 Post-Ronan-Water complex, 8 13.0 0.2% to 15 percent slopes 140 Rock outcrop-Rubble land 3.2 0.1% complex 145 Round Butte silty clay loam, 2 10.2 0.2% to 4 percent slopes 151 Rumblecreek gravelly loam, 8 21.3 0.4% to 15 percent slopes 154 Sacheen fine sand, hummocky, 2.0 0.0% 3 to 10 percent slopes 155 Sacheen loamy fine sand, 0 to 82.1 1.4% 8 percent slopes 157 Selon fine sandy loam, 2 to 4 3.7 0.1% percent slopes 158 Selon fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 16.4 0.3% percent slopes 159 Selon sandy loam, 8 to 15 11.6 0.2% percent slopes 165 Truscreek silt loam, 0 to 2 0.0 0.0% percent slopes 166 Truscreek-Polson silt loams, 0 100.3 1.7% to 2 percent slopes 167 Truscreek-Polson silt loams, 2 32.3 0.5% to 4 percent slopes

13 Custom Soil Resource Report

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

170 Vincom silt loam, 15 to 60 74.8 1.2% percent slopes 174 Walstead gravelly loam, 0 to 2 9.1 0.2% percent slopes 182 Winfall very gravelly loam, 4 to 47.4 0.8% 15 percent slopes 183 Winfall very gravelly loam, 15 to 81.7 1.4% 30 percent slopes 186 Winkler very gravelly loam, 14.1 0.2% cool, 30 to 60 percent slopes 188 Xerofluvents, 0 to 2 percent 27.6 0.5% slopes W Water 2,437.2 40.6% Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 4,931.2 82.1% Totals for Area of Interest 6,003.1 100.0%

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

113 Upsata gravelly fine sandy 2.2 0.0% loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes 119 Waldbillig-Holloway gravelly 0.6 0.0% ashy silt loams, 30 to 60 percent slopes Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 2.8 0.0% Totals for Area of Interest 6,003.1 100.0%

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

4A Lamoose loam, 0 to 2 percent 3.9 0.1% slopes, moist 5B Whitearth silt loam, 0 to 4 6.6 0.1% percent slopes 11A Bolack silt loam, 0 to 2 percent 15.8 0.3% slopes 13A Round Butte silty clay loam, 0 0.5 0.0% to 2 percent slopes 13B Round Butte silty clay loam, 2 56.2 0.9% to 8 percent slopes 14B Belton silt loam, 2 to 8 percent 31.2 0.5% slopes 18B Dryfork silt loam, 0 to 4 percent 33.7 0.6% slopes 20E Winkler gravelly loam, 15 to 35 1.1 0.0% percent slopes 50E Bigarm gravelly loam, 15 to 30 24.4 0.4% percent slopes 54E Finleypoint gravelly loam, 15 to 10.0 0.2% 30 percent slopes

14 Custom Soil Resource Report

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

57E Minesinger stony loam, 15 to 30 0.8 0.0% percent slopes 91B Biglake gravelly loam, 0 to 8 2.1 0.0% percent slopes 112A Marklepass-Slickspots complex, 4.2 0.1% 0 to 4 percent slopes 117E Kerrdam-Dryfork-Vincom silt 16.1 0.3% loams, 8 to 35 percent slopes 118B Dryfork-Selow silt loams, 0 to 4 52.2 0.9% percent slopes 118D Dryfork-Kerrdam silt loams, 4 to 100.9 1.7% 15 percent slopes 123D Yourame-Wildgen gravelly 1.2 0.0% loams, 8 to 30 percent slopes 150E Bigarm-Hogsby-Rock outcrop 2.8 0.0% complex, 8 to 30 percent slopes 218D Dryfork-Selow silt loams, 4 to 5.5 0.1% 15 percent slopes DAM Dam 12.5 0.2% W Water 301.4 5.0% Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 683.3 11.4% Totals for Area of Interest 6,003.1 100.0%

Map Unit Descriptions

The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They

15 Custom Soil Resource Report

generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.

16 Custom Soil Resource Report

Flathead County Area and Part of Lincoln County, Montana

21F—Combest gravelly ashy silt loam, 35 to 60 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: mhhr Elevation: 3,500 to 5,400 feet Mean annual precipitation: 19 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 95 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Combest and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Combest Setting Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Volcanic ash over colluvium derived from quartzite Typical profile Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material Bw - 2 to 12 inches: gravelly ashy silt loam 2E - 12 to 26 inches: very gravelly sandy loam 2E/Bw - 26 to 60 inches: extremely cobbly coarse sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 35 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/ninebark-ninebark phase (PK261), Douglas-fir/snowberry-pinegrass phase (PK312) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Winkler Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Mountain slopes

17 Custom Soil Resource Report

Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/rough fescue (PK230), Douglas-fir/ snowberry-pinegrass phase (PK312), Douglas-fir/bluebunch wheatgrass (PK210) Hydric soil rating: No Rubble land Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: Unranked Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: Unranked

22F—Winkler gravelly sandy loam, cool, 35 to 60 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 58f1 Elevation: 3,000 to 5,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 17 to 30 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 43 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 90 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Winkler and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Winkler Setting Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium derived from argillite and quartzite Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 1 to 10 inches: gravelly sandy loam E - 10 to 36 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam E/Bw - 36 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 35 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (2.13 to 7.09 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches

18 Custom Soil Resource Report

Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 3.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/pinegrass-ponderosa pine phase (PK324), Douglas-fir/ninebark-ninebark phase (PK261) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 4 percent Hydric soil rating: No Rubble land Percent of map unit: 4 percent Hydric soil rating: No Sharrott Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/rough fescue (PK230), ponderosa pine/bitterbrush-Idaho fescue phase (PK162) Hydric soil rating: No

40D—Rumblecreek-Courville complex, dry, 4 to 15 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: mgb3 Elevation: 3,200 to 4,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 20 to 26 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 95 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Rumblecreek and similar soils: 40 percent Courville and similar soils: 30 percent Minor components: 30 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Rumblecreek Setting Landform: Moraines

19 Custom Soil Resource Report

Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Till derived from quartzite and/or siltstone Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 1 to 12 inches: gravelly loam E/Bt - 12 to 15 inches: gravelly loam Bt/E - 15 to 28 inches: very gravelly clay loam Bt - 28 to 60 inches: very gravelly clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250), Douglas- fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Courville Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Volcanic ash over till derived from quartzite and/or siltstone Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material Bw - 1 to 10 inches: gravelly ashy silt loam 2E - 10 to 22 inches: very cobbly fine sandy loam 2E/Bw - 22 to 60 inches: very cobbly fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified

20 Custom Soil Resource Report

Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322), Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Lozeau, deep Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250), Douglas- fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322) Hydric soil rating: No Combest Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/rough fescue (PK230) Hydric soil rating: No Mitten Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250), Douglas- fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322) Hydric soil rating: No Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: Unranked Pashua, deep Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322) Hydric soil rating: No

21 Custom Soil Resource Report

41F—Courville, dry-Rumblecreek, dry-Lozeau, deep complex, 30 to 60 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: k6mn Elevation: 3,100 to 3,800 feet Mean annual precipitation: 20 to 26 inches Mean annual air temperature: 38 to 43 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 90 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Rumblecreek and similar soils: 30 percent Courville and similar soils: 30 percent Lozeau, deep, and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Rumblecreek Setting Landform: Escarpments Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Till derived from quartzite and/or siltstone Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 1 to 12 inches: gravelly loam E/Bt - 12 to 15 inches: gravelly loam Bt/E - 15 to 28 inches: very gravelly clay loam Bt - 28 to 60 inches: very gravelly clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 30 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: C

22 Custom Soil Resource Report

Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250), Douglas- fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Courville Setting Landform: Escarpments Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Volcanic ash over till derived from quartzite and/or siltstone Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material Bw - 1 to 10 inches: gravelly ashy silt loam 2E - 10 to 22 inches: very cobbly fine sandy loam 2E/Bw - 22 to 60 inches: very cobbly fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 30 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250), Douglas- fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Lozeau, Deep Setting Landform: Escarpments Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium over residuum weathered from welded tuff Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 1 to 3 inches: gravelly loam E - 3 to 9 inches: gravelly loam E/Bw - 9 to 26 inches: gravelly loam Bt/E - 26 to 41 inches: gravelly clay loam BC - 41 to 56 inches: gravelly loam Cr - 56 to 60 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 30 to 60 percent

23 Custom Soil Resource Report

Depth to restrictive feature: 40 to 60 inches to paralithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322), Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Mitten Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Escarpments Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250), Douglas- fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322) Hydric soil rating: No Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: Unranked Tamarack Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Escarpments Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: grand fir/twinflower (PK590) Hydric soil rating: No

44D—Mitten gravelly ashy silt loam, dry, 8 to 15 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: mhkt Elevation: 4,200 to 6,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 25 to 40 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 43 degrees F

24 Custom Soil Resource Report

Frost-free period: 70 to 90 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance

Map Unit Composition Mitten and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Mitten Setting Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Convex, linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Volcanic ash over colluvium derived from quartzite Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material Bw - 1 to 10 inches: gravelly ashy silt loam 2E - 10 to 14 inches: very gravelly loam 2E/Bw - 14 to 30 inches: very gravelly very fine sandy loam 2BC - 30 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/ninebark-pinegrass phase (PK262), Douglas-fir/pinegrass-pinegrass phase (PK323) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Mitten, greater slope Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Convex, linear Across-slope shape: Convex Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/ninebark-ninebark phase (PK261), Douglas-fir/ninebark-pinegrass phase (PK262), Douglas-fir/pinegrass- pinegrass phase (PK323) Hydric soil rating: No Tevis Percent of map unit: 5 percent

25 Custom Soil Resource Report

Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear, convex Across-slope shape: Convex Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/ninebark-ninebark phase (PK261), Douglas-fir/snowberry-pinegrass phase (PK312) Hydric soil rating: No

211G—Combest-Sharrott-Rock outcrop complex, 40 to 85 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: vqbn Elevation: 3,500 to 4,900 feet Mean annual precipitation: 22 to 28 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 43 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 90 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Sharrott and similar soils: 30 percent Combest and similar soils: 30 percent Rock outcrop: 25 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Sharrott Setting Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium over residuum weathered from quartzite and/or argillite Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 1 to 5 inches: gravelly loam Bw - 5 to 11 inches: very gravelly loam BC - 11 to 13 inches: extremely gravelly loam R - 13 to 60 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 40 to 85 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 10 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 1.42 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 1.6 inches)

26 Custom Soil Resource Report

Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Shallow Cool Woodland (F043AP905MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/ninebark-ninebark phase (PK261), Douglas-fir/pinegrass-ponderosa pine phase (PK324) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Combest Setting Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Volcanic ash over colluvium derived from quartzite Typical profile Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material Bw - 2 to 12 inches: gravelly ashy silt loam 2E - 12 to 26 inches: very gravelly sandy loam 2E/Bw - 26 to 60 inches: extremely cobbly coarse sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 40 to 70 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/ninebark-ninebark phase (PK261), Douglas-fir/snowberry-pinegrass phase (PK312) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Rock Outcrop Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 Hydric soil rating: Unranked

Minor Components Rubble land Percent of map unit: 10 percent Hydric soil rating: Unranked

27 Custom Soil Resource Report

Winkler Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/ninebark-ninebark phase (PK261), Douglas-fir/pinegrass-ponderosa pine phase (PK324) Hydric soil rating: No

222C—Pleasantvalley-Winfall, dry complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: mj89 Elevation: 3,500 to 4,260 feet Mean annual precipitation: 22 to 28 inches Mean annual air temperature: 38 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 95 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Pleasantvalley and similar soils: 50 percent Winfall and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 30 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Pleasantvalley Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Volcanic ash over till derived from quartzite Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 1 to 4 inches: gravelly ashy silt loam Bw - 4 to 14 inches: gravelly ashy silt loam 2E - 14 to 26 inches: very cobbly silt loam 2E/Bw - 26 to 34 inches: very cobbly silt loam 2E/Bt - 34 to 60 inches: very cobbly silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)

28 Custom Soil Resource Report

Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250), Douglas- fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Winfall Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 1 to 9 inches: gravelly loam E and Bt - 9 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322), Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Courville Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250) Hydric soil rating: No

29 Custom Soil Resource Report

Tallcreek Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Outwash terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: spruce/dwarf huckleberry (PK450) Hydric soil rating: No Lynchlake, dry Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250) Hydric soil rating: No Glaciercreek Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines, outwash terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322), Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250) Hydric soil rating: No Meadowpeak Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Riparian Meadow (RM) LRU 44A-Y (R044AY080MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

807A—McLangor-Barzee mucky peats, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: ph0b Elevation: 3,400 to 4,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 41 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 75 to 95 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Mclangor and similar soils: 50 percent Barzee and similar soils: 30 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

30 Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Mclangor Setting Landform: Flood plains, depressions Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Parent material: Organic material over alluvium Typical profile Oe1 - 0 to 8 inches: mucky peat Oe2 - 8 to 17 inches: mucky peat C1 - 17 to 36 inches: stratified very fine sandy loam to silt C2 - 36 to 42 inches: stratified mucky peat to silt loam Oa - 42 to 54 inches: muck Cg - 54 to 60 inches: stratified very fine sandy loam to silt Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Very poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches Frequency of flooding: Frequent Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 19.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: A/D Ecological site: Wet Meadow Organic (WMO) LRU 44A-Y (R044AY182MT), Bottomland (R043AP802MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

Description of Barzee Setting Landform: Depressions, flood plains Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Organic material Typical profile Oi - 0 to 4 inches: mucky peat Oe - 4 to 60 inches: mucky peat Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 1 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Very poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches Frequency of flooding: Frequent Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 26.9 inches)

31 Custom Soil Resource Report

Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: A/D Ecological site: Wet Meadow Organic (WMO) LRU 44A-Y (R044AY182MT), Bottomland (R043AP802MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

Minor Components Blacklake Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Depressions Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Ecological site: Pothole (Ph) LRU 44A-Y (R044AY071MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes Mcgregor Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Closed depressions Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Ecological site: Meadow (M) LRU 44A-Y (R044AY082MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes Meadowpeak Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Ecological site: Riparian Meadow (RM) LRU 44A-Y (R044AY080MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

872E—Pashua-Pashua, deep complex, 8 to 30 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: s9q7 Elevation: 3,200 to 4,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 19 to 24 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 43 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 90 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Pashua and similar soils: 45 percent Pashua, deep, and similar soils: 30 percent Minor components: 25 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

32 Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Pashua Setting Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium over residuum weathered from welded tuff Typical profile A - 0 to 8 inches: gravelly loam E - 8 to 14 inches: gravelly silt loam Bt/E - 14 to 19 inches: gravelly clay Bt1 - 19 to 25 inches: clay Bt2 - 25 to 37 inches: gravelly clay loam Cr - 37 to 60 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low (0.06 to 0.14 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Pashua, Deep Setting Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium over residuum weathered from welded tuff Typical profile A - 0 to 8 inches: gravelly loam E - 8 to 14 inches: gravelly silt loam Bt/E - 14 to 19 inches: gravelly clay Bt1 - 19 to 41 inches: clay Bt2 - 41 to 58 inches: gravelly clay loam Cr - 58 to 60 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 40 to 60 inches to paralithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low (0.06 to 0.14 in/hr)

33 Custom Soil Resource Report

Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Rock outcrop, welded tuff Percent of map unit: 10 percent Hydric soil rating: Unranked Battlebutte Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/snowberry (PK310) Hydric soil rating: No Battlebutte, greater slope Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/snowberry (PK310) Hydric soil rating: No

941C—Trumancreek-Foyslake-Blackcreek complex, 0 to 12 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 1r07h Elevation: 2,900 to 4,100 feet Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 24 inches Mean annual air temperature: 38 to 42 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 90 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Trumancreek and similar soils: 45 percent Foyslake and similar soils: 25 percent

34 Custom Soil Resource Report

Blackcreek and similar soils: 15 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Trumancreek Setting Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: loam Bw - 7 to 22 inches: silt loam C1 - 22 to 28 inches: loam 2C2 - 28 to 35 inches: extremely gravelly loamy coarse sand 3Cg1 - 35 to 37 inches: gravelly clay loam 4Cg2 - 37 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly loamy coarse sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.20 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 12 to 24 inches Frequency of flooding: Rare Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w Hydrologic Soil Group: C/D Ecological site: Bottomland (R043AP802MT) Other vegetative classification: spruce/common horsetail (PK410), spruce/dwarf huckleberry (PK450), spruce/queencup beadlily (PK420) Hydric soil rating: Yes

Description of Foyslake Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Concave, linear Across-slope shape: Concave, linear Parent material: Till derived from calcareous siltstone and/or argillite Typical profile Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 2 to 12 inches: gravelly silt loam Bt/E - 12 to 21 inches: gravelly silt loam Bt - 21 to 28 inches: very gravelly silty clay loam Bk - 28 to 60 inches: very cobbly silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 12 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches

35 Custom Soil Resource Report

Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 40 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/twinflower-snowberry phase (PK291), Douglas-fir/ninebark (PK260), Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Blackcreek Setting Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Parent material: Alluvium and/or outwash Typical profile A - 0 to 4 inches: silt loam Bw - 4 to 10 inches: silt loam Bk - 10 to 36 inches: silt loam C - 36 to 42 inches: silt 2C - 42 to 60 inches: stratified loamy coarse sand to silt Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 12 to 24 inches Frequency of flooding: Rare Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D Ecological site: Bottomland (R043AP802MT) Other vegetative classification: spruce/common horsetail (PK410), spruce/dwarf huckleberry (PK450), spruce/queencup beadlily (PK420) Hydric soil rating: Yes

36 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Idahocreek Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Stream terraces, outwash terraces Down-slope shape: Linear, concave Across-slope shape: Linear, concave Other vegetative classification: spruce/redosier dogwood h.t. (HP107), spruce/ queencup beadlily (PK420) Hydric soil rating: No Kila Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces, outwash terraces Down-slope shape: Linear, concave Across-slope shape: Linear, concave Other vegetative classification: spruce/queencup beadlily (PK420) Hydric soil rating: No

W—Water

Map Unit Composition Water: 100 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

37 Custom Soil Resource Report

Flathead Indian Reservation Wilderness Area, Montana

NOTCOM—No Digital Data Available

Map Unit Composition Notcom: 100 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Notcom Properties and qualities

38 Custom Soil Resource Report

Lake County Area, Montana

1—Aeric Haplaquepts, 1 to 3 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vvr Elevation: 2,900 to 5,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 45 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Aeric haplaquepts and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Aeric Haplaquepts Setting Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Properties and qualities Slope: 1 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Depth to water table: About 6 to 18 inches Frequency of flooding: Frequent Frequency of ponding: None Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Ecological site: Bottomland (R043AP802MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

Minor Components Eaglewing Percent of map unit: 7 percent Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Mollman Percent of map unit: 6 percent Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Borohemists Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Depressions

39 Custom Soil Resource Report

Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 20"+ p.z. (R043XW154MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

6—Belton silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w4k Elevation: 2,500 to 3,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Belton and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Belton Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciolacustrine deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Bt/E - 8 to 10 inches: silty clay loam Btn - 10 to 19 inches: silty clay Bkn - 19 to 29 inches: silty clay C - 29 to 60 inches: silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 40.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.6 inches)

40 Custom Soil Resource Report

Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Round butte Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Clayey (Cy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW124MT) Hydric soil rating: No Post Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT) Hydric soil rating: No Kerl Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT) Hydric soil rating: No

17—Bohnly silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vys Elevation: 2,500 to 3,800 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 30 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 130 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Bohnly and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

41 Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Bohnly Setting Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Silty alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Bw - 8 to 36 inches: silt loam Cg1 - 36 to 46 inches: silt loam Cg2 - 46 to 60 inches: stratified silt loam to fine sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 6 to 24 inches Frequency of flooding: Occasional Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 5w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW188MT), Bottomland (R044AP801MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

Minor Components Colake Percent of map unit: 8 percent Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW188MT) Hydric soil rating: No Borohemists and similar soils Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Channels Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 20"+ p.z. (R043XW154MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

42 Custom Soil Resource Report

25—Connah cobbly silt loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w0f Elevation: 3,000 to 4,800 feet Mean annual precipitation: 16 to 40 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 125 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance

Map Unit Composition Connah and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Connah Setting Landform: Till plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 1 to 7 inches: cobbly silt loam Bt/E - 7 to 13 inches: silty clay Bt - 13 to 39 inches: clay Bk - 39 to 60 inches: silty clay Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

43 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Mcdonald Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Till plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty-Cool (SiCool) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW185MT) Hydric soil rating: No Rumblecreek Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Till plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Channels Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes Areas of short, steep slopes Percent of map unit: 2 percent Hydric soil rating: No Water Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Channels Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes

27—Connah-Water complex, 2 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w0h Elevation: 3,000 to 5,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 40 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 125 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Connah and similar soils: 65 percent Water: 20 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

44 Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Connah Setting Landform: Till plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 1 to 8 inches: silty clay loam Bt/E - 8 to 14 inches: silty clay Bt - 14 to 33 inches: clay Bk - 33 to 60 inches: silty clay Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F044AP903MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Somewhat poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 4 percent Hydric soil rating: No Mcdonald Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Till plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Rumblecreek Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Till plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

45 Custom Soil Resource Report

Poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Channels Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes

28—Courville gravelly silt loam, 4 to 15 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w0j Elevation: 3,000 to 6,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 22 to 45 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 90 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance

Map Unit Composition Courville and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Courville Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Volcanic ash over glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material Bw - 1 to 15 inches: gravelly ashy silt loam 2E/Bw - 15 to 33 inches: very gravelly loam 2Bw/E - 33 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e

46 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Mitten Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Winfall Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

29—Courville gravelly silt loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w0m Elevation: 3,000 to 6,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 45 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Courville and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Courville Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Volcanic ash over glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material Bw - 1 to 15 inches: gravelly ashy silt loam 2E/Bw - 15 to 33 inches: very gravelly loam 2Bw/E - 33 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 30 percent

47 Custom Soil Resource Report

Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Wildgen, south aspects Percent of map unit: 8 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Winfall Percent of map unit: 7 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

30—Courville gravelly silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w0q Elevation: 3,000 to 6,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 45 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Courville and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Courville Setting Landform: Moraines

48 Custom Soil Resource Report

Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Volcanic ash over glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material Bw - 1 to 15 inches: gravelly ashy silt loam 2E/Bw - 15 to 33 inches: very gravelly loam 2Bw/E - 33 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 30 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Wildgen, south aspects Percent of map unit: 8 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Winfall Percent of map unit: 7 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

33—Courville gravelly silt loam, warm, 30 to 60 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w0t Elevation: 3,000 to 6,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 45 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F

49 Custom Soil Resource Report

Frost-free period: 70 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Courville and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Courville Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Volcanic ash over glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material Bw - 1 to 10 inches: gravelly ashy silt loam 2E/Bw - 10 to 20 inches: very gravelly loam 2Bw/E - 20 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 30 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Warm Woodland (F043AP911MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Wildgen, south aspects Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

50 Custom Soil Resource Report

43—Dubay silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w2q Elevation: 2,300 to 3,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 24 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 125 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated

Map Unit Composition Dubay and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Dubay Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciofluvial deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: silt loam E - 5 to 30 inches: silt loam E and Bw - 30 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 6 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: High (about 11.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Gird Percent of map unit: 5 percent

51 Custom Soil Resource Report

Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Selon Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

51—Finleypoint cobbly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w3r Elevation: 2,900 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 16 to 25 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Finleypoint and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Finleypoint Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 1 to 10 inches: cobbly loam E - 10 to 31 inches: very gravelly loam E/Bw - 31 to 43 inches: very gravelly loam C - 43 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None

52 Custom Soil Resource Report

Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Wildgen Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Finleypoint, very stony loam Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

52—Finleypoint gravelly loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w48 Elevation: 2,600 to 5,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 25 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Finleypoint and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Finleypoint Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 1 to 11 inches: gravelly loam

53 Custom Soil Resource Report

E - 11 to 23 inches: very gravelly loam E/Bw - 23 to 35 inches: very gravelly loam C - 35 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Wildgen Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Bigarm Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty-Cool (SiCool) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW185MT) Hydric soil rating: No Finleypoint, dry Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

59—Flott gravelly loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w4j Elevation: 2,900 to 5,200 feet

54 Custom Soil Resource Report

Mean annual precipitation: 16 to 25 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Flott and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Flott Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 2 to 10 inches: gravelly loam E - 10 to 20 inches: very gravelly loam E/Bw - 20 to 34 inches: very gravelly loam Bk - 34 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 40 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Wildgen Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Finleypoint Percent of map unit: 5 percent

55 Custom Soil Resource Report

Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Kingspoint Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

60—Flott gravelly loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w4l Elevation: 2,900 to 4,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 25 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Flott and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Flott Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 2 to 15 inches: gravelly loam E - 15 to 20 inches: very gravelly loam E/Bw - 20 to 25 inches: very gravelly loam Bk - 25 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 30 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None

56 Custom Soil Resource Report

Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 40 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 6.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Warm Woodland (F043AP911MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Kingspoint Percent of map unit: 8 percent Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 2 percent Hydric soil rating: No

61—Flott very gravelly loam, dry, 30 to 60 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w4m Elevation: 2,900 to 4,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 25 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Flott and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Flott Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 2 to 12 inches: very gravelly loam

57 Custom Soil Resource Report

E - 12 to 20 inches: very gravelly loam E/Bw - 20 to 25 inches: very gravelly loam Bk - 25 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 30 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 40 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Warm Woodland (F043AP911MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Kingspoint Percent of map unit: 8 percent Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 2 percent Hydric soil rating: No

63—Gird silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w4y Elevation: 2,300 to 4,300 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated

Map Unit Composition Gird and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent

58 Custom Soil Resource Report

Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Gird Setting Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciofluvial deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 10 inches: silt loam Bw - 10 to 17 inches: silt loam Bk - 17 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Mccollum Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Polson Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Ninepipe Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

59 Custom Soil Resource Report

Dubay Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

64—Gird silt loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w53 Elevation: 2,300 to 4,300 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated

Map Unit Composition Gird and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Gird Setting Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciofluvial deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Bw - 8 to 20 inches: silt loam Bk - 20 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.4 inches)

60 Custom Soil Resource Report

Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Polson Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Mccollum Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Ninepipe Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Dubay Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

67—Gird-Vincom silt loams, 8 to 15 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w5d Elevation: 2,400 to 3,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Gird and similar soils: 50 percent Vincom and similar soils: 40 percent

61 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Gird Setting Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciolacustrine deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: silt loam Bw - 7 to 29 inches: silt loam Bk - 29 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Vincom Setting Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: silt loam Bk - 5 to 22 inches: silt loam C - 22 to 60 inches: stratified silt loam to silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None

62 Custom Soil Resource Report

Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 8 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 20.0 Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Selow Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Clayey (Cy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW124MT) Hydric soil rating: No Truscreek Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Kerrdam Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No Dryfork Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No

63 Custom Soil Resource Report

80—Irvine silty clay, 15 to 60 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w6z Elevation: 2,000 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 100 to 130 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Irvine and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Irvine Setting Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Varved clayey lacustrine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 8 inches: silty clay loam C1 - 8 to 14 inches: silty clay C2 - 14 to 60 inches: silty clay Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 13.0 Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Thin Clayey (TCy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW658MT), Upland Sagebrush Shrubland (R044AP809MT)

64 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Round butte Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Clayey (Cy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW124MT) Hydric soil rating: No Vincom Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Thin Silty (TSi) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW657MT) Hydric soil rating: No Badland, lake sediment outcrop Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No Lonepine Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No

81—Jocko gravelly loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w70 Elevation: 2,500 to 3,900 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 120 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Jocko and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Jocko Setting Landform: Outwash plains

65 Custom Soil Resource Report

Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Outwash Typical profile A - 0 to 13 inches: gravelly loam Bw1 - 13 to 19 inches: very gravelly loam Bw2 - 19 to 25 inches: very gravelly loamy sand Bk - 25 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly coarse sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Available water storage in profile: Low (about 3.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW150MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Lamoose Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Outwash plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Jocko, very gravelly loam Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Outwash plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW150MT) Hydric soil rating: No Walstead Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Outwash plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

66 Custom Soil Resource Report

84—Kerl loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w7d Elevation: 2,400 to 4,900 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 135 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated

Map Unit Composition Kerl and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Kerl Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciofluvial deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: loam Bw - 7 to 20 inches: gravelly loam Bk - 20 to 60 inches: gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

67 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Gird Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Polson Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Belton Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Niarada Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT) Hydric soil rating: No

90—Kingspoint gravelly loam, 4 to 15 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w86 Elevation: 2,900 to 5,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 30 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 125 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance

Map Unit Composition Kingspoint and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Kingspoint Setting Landform: Moraines

68 Custom Soil Resource Report

Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 3 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 3 to 20 inches: gravelly loam Bw - 20 to 36 inches: very gravelly loam Bk - 36 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Eaglewing Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Mcdonald Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty-Cool (SiCool) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW185MT) Hydric soil rating: No Kingspoint, stony loam Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Flood plains

69 Custom Soil Resource Report

Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes Somewhat poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 2 percent Hydric soil rating: No

92—Kingspoint very gravelly loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w8d Elevation: 2,900 to 5,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 17 to 25 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Kingspoint and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Kingspoint Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 3 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 3 to 8 inches: very gravelly loam Bw - 8 to 20 inches: very gravelly loam Bk - 20 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 30 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.7 inches)

70 Custom Soil Resource Report

Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 8 percent Hydric soil rating: No Repp Percent of map unit: 7 percent Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

97—Lonepine-Vincom silt loams, 4 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w8p Elevation: 2,000 to 3,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Lonepine and similar soils: 55 percent Vincom and similar soils: 35 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Lonepine Setting Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 6 inches: silt loam Bw - 6 to 14 inches: silt loam Bk - 14 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 8 percent

71 Custom Soil Resource Report

Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Vincom Setting Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: silt loam Bk - 5 to 22 inches: silt loam C - 22 to 60 inches: stratified silt loam to silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 8 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 20.0 Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

72 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Kerl Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Esteslake Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Saline Lowland (SL) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW134MT) Hydric soil rating: No

101—McCollum fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vvw Elevation: 2,300 to 3,400 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 24 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated

Map Unit Composition Mccollum and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Mccollum Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: fine sandy loam Bw1 - 7 to 29 inches: fine sandy loam Bw2 - 29 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained

73 Custom Soil Resource Report

Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Selon Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

102—McCollum fine sandy loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vvx Elevation: 1,300 to 4,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 20 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated

Map Unit Composition Mccollum and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Mccollum Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: fine sandy loam Bw1 - 7 to 29 inches: fine sandy loam

74 Custom Soil Resource Report

Bw2 - 29 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Gird Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Sacheen Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

103—McCollum fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vvy Elevation: 2,400 to 3,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated

Map Unit Composition Mccollum and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent

75 Custom Soil Resource Report

Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Mccollum Setting Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: fine sandy loam Bw1 - 7 to 29 inches: fine sandy loam Bw2 - 29 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Gird Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

104—McCollum fine sandy loam, gravelly substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vvz Elevation: 1,300 to 4,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 20 inches

76 Custom Soil Resource Report

Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 130 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated

Map Unit Composition Mccollum and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Mccollum Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: fine sandy loam Bw1 - 7 to 29 inches: fine sandy loam Bw2 - 29 to 42 inches: fine sandy loam 2C - 42 to 60 inches: very gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Jocko Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW150MT) Hydric soil rating: No Sacheen Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear

77 Custom Soil Resource Report

Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Sandy (Sy) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW183MT) Hydric soil rating: No

105—McDonald cobbly silty clay loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vw0 Elevation: 2,900 to 5,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 125 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Mcdonald and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Mcdonald Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile A - 0 to 13 inches: cobbly silty clay loam E - 13 to 17 inches: cobbly loam Bt - 17 to 33 inches: cobbly clay Bk - 33 to 60 inches: cobbly clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 11 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C

78 Custom Soil Resource Report

Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Connah Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Potholes in kicking horse area Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No Walstead Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Mcdonald, stony loam Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Somewhat poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Channels Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes

106—McDonald cobbly silty clay loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vw1 Elevation: 2,900 to 5,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 125 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Mcdonald and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

79 Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Mcdonald Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile A - 0 to 10 inches: cobbly silty clay loam E - 10 to 18 inches: cobbly loam Bt - 18 to 40 inches: cobbly clay Bk - 40 to 60 inches: gravelly clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 11 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 9.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Silty-Cool (SiCool) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW185MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Connah Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Mcdonald, stony loam Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Potholes in kicking horse area Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No

80 Custom Soil Resource Report

Walstead Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Somewhat poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Channels Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes

107—McDonald cobbly silty clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vw2 Elevation: 2,900 to 3,900 feet Mean annual precipitation: 16 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 125 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Mcdonald and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Mcdonald Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile A - 0 to 13 inches: cobbly silty clay loam E - 13 to 17 inches: cobbly loam Bt - 17 to 33 inches: cobbly clay Bk - 33 to 60 inches: cobbly clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches

81 Custom Soil Resource Report

Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 11 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Silty-Cool (SiCool) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW185MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Connah Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Walstead Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Mcdonald, stony loam Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Slopes more than 15 percent Percent of map unit: 3 percent Ecological site: Silty-Cool (SiCool) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW185MT) Hydric soil rating: No

116—Mollman gravelly loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vwd Elevation: 2,900 to 5,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 45 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 90 days

82 Custom Soil Resource Report

Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Mollman and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Mollman Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 3 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 3 to 17 inches: gravelly loam E/Bw - 17 to 34 inches: very gravelly loam Bw/E - 34 to 41 inches: very gravelly loam Bk - 41 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 35 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Somewhat poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No Poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes

83 Custom Soil Resource Report

119—Mollman very gravelly loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vwj Elevation: 2,900 to 5,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 17 to 45 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Mollman and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Mollman Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium Typical profile Oi - 0 to 3 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 3 to 18 inches: very gravelly loam Bw - 18 to 30 inches: very gravelly loam Bk - 30 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 30 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 35 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

84 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Repp Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Kingspoint Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

129—Pits, gravel

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vwx Elevation: 2,700 to 3,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 14 inches Mean annual air temperature: 43 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Pits: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Minor Components Areas supporting vegetation Percent of map unit: 10 percent Ecological site: Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW136MT) Hydric soil rating: No

130—Polson silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vwz Elevation: 2,400 to 3,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F

85 Custom Soil Resource Report

Frost-free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Polson and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Polson Setting Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciofluvial deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 10 inches: silt loam Btn - 10 to 18 inches: silt loam Bkn - 18 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 30.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Truscreek Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Belton Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear

86 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hydric soil rating: No Gird Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

131—Polson silt loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vx1 Elevation: 2,400 to 3,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Polson and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Polson Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciofluvial deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 10 inches: silt loam Btn - 10 to 18 inches: silt loam Bkn - 18 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 30.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.7 inches)

87 Custom Soil Resource Report

Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Truscreek Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Slick spots Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Gird Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

132—Polson-Vincom silt loams, 4 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vx2 Elevation: 2,400 to 4,300 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Polson and similar soils: 70 percent Vincom and similar soils: 15 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Polson Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciolacustrine deposits

88 Custom Soil Resource Report

Typical profile Ap - 0 to 10 inches: silt loam Btn - 10 to 18 inches: silt loam Bkn - 18 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 30.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R043AP810MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Vincom Setting Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciolacustrine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: silt loam Bk - 5 to 22 inches: silt loam C - 22 to 60 inches: stratified silt loam to silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 8 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 20.0 Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e

89 Custom Soil Resource Report

Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT), Upland Grassland (R043AP810MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Gird Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Truscreek Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Ninepipe Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

133—Post silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vx3 Elevation: 2,500 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Post and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Post Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear

90 Custom Soil Resource Report

Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 6 inches: silt loam Btn/E - 6 to 9 inches: silty clay loam Btn - 9 to 21 inches: clay Bkn - 21 to 27 inches: clay C - 27 to 60 inches: clay Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 45.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Post, cobbly loam Percent of map unit: 6 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Ronan Percent of map unit: 6 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Somewhat poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Channels Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Saline Lowland (SL) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW134MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes Water Percent of map unit: 1 percent Hydric soil rating: No

91 Custom Soil Resource Report

134—Post silty clay loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vx4 Elevation: 2,500 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Post and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Post Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 6 inches: silty clay loam Btn/E - 6 to 9 inches: silty clay loam Btn - 9 to 21 inches: clay Bkn - 21 to 27 inches: clay C - 27 to 60 inches: clay Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 45.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT)

92 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Post, cobbly loam Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Ronan Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Water Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No Somewhat poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Channels Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Saline Lowland (SL) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW134MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

135—Post silty clay loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vx5 Elevation: 2,500 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Post and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Post Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear

93 Custom Soil Resource Report

Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silty clay loam Btn/E - 8 to 10 inches: silty clay loam Btn - 10 to 21 inches: clay Bkn - 21 to 60 inches: clay Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to moderately saline (2.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 45.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Post, cobbly loam Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Ronan Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Water Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No Somewhat poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Channels Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Saline Lowland (SL) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW134MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

94 Custom Soil Resource Report

136—Post-Ronan-Water complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vx8 Elevation: 2,500 to 4,900 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 135 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Post and similar soils: 50 percent Water: 20 percent Ronan and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Post Setting Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciolacustrine deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Btn/E - 8 to 13 inches: silty clay loam Btn - 13 to 22 inches: clay Bkn - 22 to 60 inches: clay Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to moderately saline (2.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 45.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: D

95 Custom Soil Resource Report

Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Ronan Setting Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciolacustrine deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 4 inches: silty clay loam Btn1 - 4 to 7 inches: clay Btn2 - 7 to 16 inches: clay Bkn - 16 to 60 inches: clay Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to moderately saline (2.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 30.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Claypan (Cp) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW147MT), Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Niarada Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT) Hydric soil rating: No Ninepipe Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

96 Custom Soil Resource Report

Bolack Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Depressions Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW188MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

137—Post-Ronan-Water complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vx9 Elevation: 2,500 to 4,900 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 135 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Post and similar soils: 35 percent Ronan and similar soils: 30 percent Water: 20 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Post Setting Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciolacustrine deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Btn/E - 8 to 13 inches: silty clay loam Btn - 13 to 22 inches: clay Bkn - 22 to 60 inches: clay Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent

97 Custom Soil Resource Report

Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to moderately saline (2.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 45.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Ronan Setting Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciolacustrine deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 4 inches: silty clay loam Btn1 - 4 to 7 inches: clay Btn2 - 7 to 16 inches: clay Bkn - 16 to 60 inches: clay Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to moderately saline (2.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 30.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Claypan (Cp) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW147MT), Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Post, cobbly loam Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear

98 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hydric soil rating: No Niarada Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT) Hydric soil rating: No Ninepipe Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Bolack Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Depressions Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW188MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

140—Rock outcrop-Rubble land complex

Map Unit Composition Rock outcrop: 70 percent Rubble land: 30 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

145—Round Butte silty clay loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vxp Elevation: 2,000 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 100 to 130 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Round butte and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

99 Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Round Butte Setting Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: silty clay loam Btn - 7 to 14 inches: clay Bkn - 14 to 44 inches: silty clay C - 44 to 60 inches: stratified silt loam to clay Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 60.0 Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Clayey (Cy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW124MT), Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Ronan Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Lonepine Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No Irvine Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear

100 Custom Soil Resource Report

Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Clayey (Cy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW124MT) Hydric soil rating: No Marklepass Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Saline Lowland (SL) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW134MT) Hydric soil rating: No

151—Rumblecreek gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vy2 Elevation: 2,900 to 5,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 20 to 45 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 90 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance

Map Unit Composition Rumblecreek and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Rumblecreek Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 3 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 3 to 8 inches: gravelly loam E/Bt - 8 to 21 inches: gravelly loam Bt/E - 21 to 25 inches: very gravelly clay loam Bt - 25 to 60 inches: very gravelly clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None

101 Custom Soil Resource Report

Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Mollman Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

154—Sacheen fine sand, hummocky, 3 to 10 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vy6 Elevation: 1,300 to 4,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 20 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 125 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance

Map Unit Composition Sacheen and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Sacheen Setting Landform: Dunes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Eolian deposits Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 1 to 4 inches: loamy fine sand C - 4 to 60 inches: loamy fine sand Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 10 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained

102 Custom Soil Resource Report

Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Dune, sand Percent of map unit: 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No Blown-out land Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No

155—Sacheen loamy fine sand, 0 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vy7 Elevation: 1,300 to 4,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 20 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated

Map Unit Composition Sacheen and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Sacheen Setting Landform: Dunes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Eolian deposits Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 1 to 4 inches: loamy fine sand C - 4 to 60 inches: loamy fine sand

103 Custom Soil Resource Report

Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Mccollum Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Dunes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

157—Selon fine sandy loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vy9 Elevation: 1,300 to 4,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 24 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated

Map Unit Composition Selon and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Selon Setting Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciofluvial deposits

104 Custom Soil Resource Report

Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 1 to 8 inches: fine sandy loam E/Bw - 8 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Mccollum Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Sacheen Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

158—Selon fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vyb Elevation: 1,300 to 4,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 24 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated

105 Custom Soil Resource Report

Map Unit Composition Selon and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Selon Setting Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciofluvial deposits Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 1 to 8 inches: fine sandy loam E/Bw - 8 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Mccollum Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Sacheen Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

106 Custom Soil Resource Report

159—Selon sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vyc Elevation: 1,300 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 25 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 130 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance

Map Unit Composition Selon and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Selon Setting Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciofluvial deposits Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 1 to 8 inches: fine sandy loam E/Bw - 8 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F044AP903MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Mccollum Percent of map unit: 4 percent

107 Custom Soil Resource Report

Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Wildgen Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Yellowbay Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Kingspoint Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Sacheen Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

165—Truscreek silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vym Elevation: 2,400 to 3,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated

Map Unit Composition Truscreek and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

108 Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Truscreek Setting Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciofluvial deposits Typical profile Ap1 - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Ap2 - 8 to 12 inches: silt loam Bw - 12 to 24 inches: silt loam Bk - 24 to 32 inches: silt loam C - 32 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 20 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Belton Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Gird Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Polson Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear

109 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hydric soil rating: No

166—Truscreek-Polson silt loams, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vyn Elevation: 2,400 to 3,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Truscreek and similar soils: 60 percent Polson and similar soils: 30 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Truscreek Setting Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciofluvial deposits Typical profile Ap1 - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Ap2 - 8 to 12 inches: silt loam Bw - 12 to 24 inches: silt loam Bk - 24 to 32 inches: silt loam C - 32 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 20 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: B

110 Custom Soil Resource Report

Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Polson Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciofluvial deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: silt loam Btn - 7 to 15 inches: silt loam Bkn - 15 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 30.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Gird Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Belton Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

111 Custom Soil Resource Report

167—Truscreek-Polson silt loams, 2 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vyp Elevation: 2,400 to 3,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Truscreek and similar soils: 60 percent Polson and similar soils: 25 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Truscreek Setting Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciofluvial deposits Typical profile Ap1 - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Ap2 - 8 to 12 inches: silt loam Bw - 12 to 24 inches: silt loam Bk - 24 to 32 inches: silt loam C - 32 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 20 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: B

112 Custom Soil Resource Report

Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Polson Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciofluvial deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: silt loam Btn - 7 to 15 inches: silt loam Bkn - 15 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 30.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Belton Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Gird Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

113 Custom Soil Resource Report

170—Vincom silt loam, 15 to 60 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vyt Elevation: 2,000 to 3,300 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 100 to 135 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Vincom and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Vincom Setting Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: silt loam Bk - 5 to 22 inches: silt loam C - 22 to 60 inches: stratified silt loam to silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 8 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 20.0 Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Thin Silty (TSi) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW657MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT)

114 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Lonepine Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No Truscreek Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Polson Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Irvine Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Thin Clayey (TCy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW658MT) Hydric soil rating: No Vincom, gravelly loam Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No Badland, lake sediment outcrop Percent of map unit: 2 percent Hydric soil rating: No

174—Walstead gravelly loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vyz Elevation: 2,900 to 5,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 16 to 25 inches

115 Custom Soil Resource Report

Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 125 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance

Map Unit Composition Walstead and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Walstead Setting Landform: Alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 13 inches: gravelly loam Bw - 13 to 32 inches: very gravelly loam Bk - 32 to 60 inches: very gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 30 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R043AP810MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Mcdonald Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Finleypoint Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear

116 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hydric soil rating: No Flott Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

182—Winfall very gravelly loam, 4 to 15 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vzg Elevation: 3,000 to 6,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 45 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 105 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance

Map Unit Composition Winfall and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Winfall Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 3 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 3 to 22 inches: very gravelly loam E and Bt - 22 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e

117 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Courville Percent of map unit: 7 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Wildgen Percent of map unit: 6 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes

183—Winfall very gravelly loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vzh Elevation: 3,000 to 6,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 45 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Winfall and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Winfall Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till

118 Custom Soil Resource Report

Typical profile Oi - 0 to 3 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 3 to 18 inches: very gravelly loam E and Bt - 18 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Wildgen Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Courville Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

186—Winkler very gravelly loam, cool, 30 to 60 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vzn Elevation: 2,900 to 5,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 16 to 30 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

119 Custom Soil Resource Report

Map Unit Composition Winkler and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Winkler Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 1 to 5 inches: very gravelly loam E - 5 to 25 inches: very gravelly sandy loam E and Bt - 25 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 30 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 3.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Warm Woodland (F043AP911MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Finleypoint Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Sharrott Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No

120 Custom Soil Resource Report

Wildgen Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

188—Xerofluvents, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vzq Elevation: 2,500 to 3,300 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 41 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Xerofluvents and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Xerofluvents Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: Frequent Frequency of ponding: None Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Ecological site: Bottomland (R044AP801MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW188MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

121 Custom Soil Resource Report

W—Water

Map Unit Composition Water: 100 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

122 Custom Soil Resource Report

Missoula County Area, Montana

113—Upsata gravelly fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w9d Elevation: 3,800 to 7,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 22 to 50 inches Mean annual air temperature: 36 to 43 degrees F Frost-free period: 30 to 70 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Upsata and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Upsata Setting Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Volcanic ash over sandy and gravelly outwash Typical profile Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 2 to 8 inches: gravelly ashy fine sandy loam Bw - 8 to 16 inches: gravelly ashy fine sandy loam 2C - 16 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly loamy coarse sand Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 2.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043BP910MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Waldbillig Percent of map unit: 8 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear

123 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hydric soil rating: No Soils without volcanic ash Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Flood plains Hydric soil rating: Yes

119—Waldbillig-Holloway gravelly ashy silt loams, 30 to 60 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w9l Elevation: 3,000 to 7,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 25 to 60 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 43 degrees F Frost-free period: 20 to 90 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Waldbillig and similar soils: 55 percent Holloway and similar soils: 30 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Waldbillig Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alpine till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material Bw - 2 to 12 inches: gravelly ashy silt loam 2E - 12 to 28 inches: very gravelly fine sandy loam 2E and Bt - 28 to 60 inches: very gravelly fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 30 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None

124 Custom Soil Resource Report

Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Holloway Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium derived from argillite and/or quartzite Typical profile Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 2 to 12 inches: gravelly ashy silt loam 2E - 12 to 19 inches: extremely gravelly fine sandy loam 2E and Bt - 19 to 54 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam 2C - 54 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 30 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 3.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Courville Percent of map unit: 6 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Bata Percent of map unit: 6 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Areas of rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 3 percent

125 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hydric soil rating: No

126 Custom Soil Resource Report

Sanders and Parts of Lincoln and Flathead Counties, Montana

4A—Lamoose loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, moist

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 57g3 Elevation: 2,500 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 41 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 120 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Lamoose and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Lamoose Setting Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 10 inches: loam Bg - 10 to 27 inches: silt loam 2C - 27 to 60 inches: very gravelly sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.71 to 2.13 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 6 to 24 inches Frequency of flooding: Occasional Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D Ecological site: Bottomland (R043AP802MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Lamoose, nonflooded Percent of map unit: 8 percent Landform: Flood-plain steps

127 Custom Soil Resource Report

Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Lamoose, greater slope Percent of map unit: 7 percent Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

5B—Whitearth silt loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 57jn Elevation: 2,500 to 3,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 14 inches Mean annual air temperature: 41 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Whitearth and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Whitearth Setting Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile E - 0 to 7 inches: silt loam Btn - 7 to 13 inches: silty clay loam Bkn - 13 to 32 inches: silty clay loam C - 32 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent

128 Custom Soil Resource Report

Salinity, maximum in profile: Slightly saline to strongly saline (4.0 to 16.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 75.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Saline Lowland (SL) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW134MT), Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Slickspots Percent of map unit: 6 percent Hydric soil rating: No Sonyok Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Lake plains Microfeatures of landform position: Swales Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes Whitearth, greater slope Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Saline Lowland (SL) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW134MT) Hydric soil rating: No

11A—Bolack silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 573y Elevation: 2,500 to 3,300 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 41 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 120 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Bolack and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

129 Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Bolack Setting Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: silt loam Bg - 7 to 16 inches: silty clay loam C - 16 to 60 inches: silty clay Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 12 to 24 inches Frequency of flooding: Occasional Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: C/D Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW127MT), Bottomland (R044AP801MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

Minor Components Sonyok Percent of map unit: 9 percent Landform: Lake plains Microfeatures of landform position: Swales Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes Camascreek Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Drainageways Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Saline Lowland (SL) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW134MT) Hydric soil rating: No Water Percent of map unit: 2 percent

130 Custom Soil Resource Report

13A—Round Butte silty clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 574j Elevation: 2,500 to 3,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 14 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Round butte and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Round Butte Setting Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 10 inches: silty clay loam Btn - 10 to 18 inches: silty clay Bkn - 18 to 24 inches: silty clay loam C - 24 to 60 inches: clay Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 40.0 Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Clayey (Cy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW124MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT)

131 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Sonyok Percent of map unit: 9 percent Landform: Lake plains Microfeatures of landform position: Swales Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes Marklepass Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Lake terraces, lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Saline Lowland (SL) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW134MT) Hydric soil rating: No Round butte, greater slope Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Clayey (Cy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW124MT) Hydric soil rating: No

13B—Round Butte silty clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 574k Elevation: 2,000 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Round butte and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Round Butte Setting Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits

132 Custom Soil Resource Report

Typical profile Ap - 0 to 10 inches: silty clay loam Btn - 10 to 18 inches: silty clay Bkn - 18 to 24 inches: silty clay loam C - 24 to 60 inches: clay Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 40.0 Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Clayey (Cy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW124MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Vincom Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake terraces, lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No Round butte, greater slope Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Clayey (Cy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW124MT) Hydric soil rating: No Lonepine Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No Dryfork Percent of map unit: 2 percent

133 Custom Soil Resource Report

Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No

14B—Belton silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 575c Elevation: 2,500 to 3,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Belton and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Belton Setting Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Btn - 8 to 21 inches: silty clay loam C - 21 to 60 inches: silty clay Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 30.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e

134 Custom Soil Resource Report

Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Round butte Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Clayey (Cy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW124MT) Hydric soil rating: No Belton, greater slope Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT) Hydric soil rating: No Camascreek Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Drainageways Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Saline Lowland (SL) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW134MT) Hydric soil rating: No

18B—Dryfork silt loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 5766 Elevation: 2,500 to 3,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 14 inches Mean annual air temperature: 41 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 120 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Dryfork and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Dryfork Setting Landform: Lake terraces, lake plains

135 Custom Soil Resource Report

Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 6 inches: silt loam Bw - 6 to 16 inches: silt loam Bk - 16 to 31 inches: silt loam C - 31 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 40.0 Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT), Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Kerrdam Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No Dryfork, greater slope Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No

136 Custom Soil Resource Report

20E—Winkler gravelly loam, 15 to 35 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 576j Elevation: 3,000 to 5,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 17 to 30 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 100 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Winkler and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Winkler Setting Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium derived from argillite and quartzite Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 1 to 5 inches: gravelly loam E - 5 to 23 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam E/Bw - 23 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 35 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.71 to 2.13 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 3.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/bluebunch wheatgrass (PK210), Douglas-fir/rough fescue (PK230), Douglas-fir/snowberry-pinegrass phase (PK312) Hydric soil rating: No

137 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Winkler, greater slope Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/bluebunch wheatgrass (PK210), Douglas-fir/rough fescue (PK230), Douglas-fir/snowberry-pinegrass phase (PK312) Hydric soil rating: No Winkler, cool Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/ninebark-ninebark phase (PK261), Douglas-fir/pinegrass-ponderosa pine phase (PK324) Hydric soil rating: No Wildgen Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Moraines on mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250), Douglas- fir/ninebark-ninebark phase (PK261), Douglas-fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322) Hydric soil rating: No Sharrott Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: ponderosa pine/bitterbrush-Idaho fescue phase (PK162), Douglas-fir/rough fescue (PK230) Hydric soil rating: No Rock outcrop, metasedimentary Percent of map unit: 1 percent Hydric soil rating: No

50E—Bigarm gravelly loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 57g7 Elevation: 2,600 to 5,500 feet

138 Custom Soil Resource Report

Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 43 to 46 degrees F Frost-free period: 80 to 100 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Bigarm and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Bigarm Setting Landform: Hills Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium derived from argillite and quartzite Typical profile A - 0 to 11 inches: gravelly loam Bw - 11 to 26 inches: very gravelly loam C - 26 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Droughty Steep (Drstp) LRU 43A-A (R043AA038MT), Upland Grassland (R043AP810MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Bigarm, greater slope Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Hills Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Droughty Steep (Drstp) LRU 43A-A (R043AA038MT) Hydric soil rating: No Hogsby Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Hills Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear

139 Custom Soil Resource Report

Ecological site: Shallow Droughty (Swdr) LRU 43A-A (R043AA138MT) Hydric soil rating: No Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 1 percent Hydric soil rating: Unranked Rubble land Percent of map unit: 1 percent Hydric soil rating: Unranked

54E—Finleypoint gravelly loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 57hk Elevation: 2,600 to 5,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 25 inches Mean annual air temperature: 41 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Finleypoint and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Finleypoint Setting Landform: Hills Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A1 - 1 to 9 inches: gravelly loam A2 - 9 to 17 inches: very cobbly loam E - 17 to 39 inches: very cobbly sandy loam E/Bw - 39 to 60 inches: very gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.7 inches)

140 Custom Soil Resource Report

Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/bluebunch wheatgrass (PK210), Douglas-fir/rough fescue (PK230) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Finleypoint, greater slope Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Hills Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/bluebunch wheatgrass (PK210), Douglas-fir/rough fescue (PK230) Hydric soil rating: No Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No Bigarm Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Hills Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT) Hydric soil rating: No

57E—Minesinger stony loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 57j3 Elevation: 2,700 to 4,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Minesinger and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

141 Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Minesinger Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Tertiary sediments Typical profile A1 - 0 to 6 inches: gravelly loam A2 - 6 to 13 inches: gravelly loam Bt - 13 to 24 inches: very gravelly clay Bk - 24 to 60 inches: very gravelly clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 8 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT), Upland Grassland (R043AP810MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Minesinger, greater slope Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT) Hydric soil rating: No Bowlake Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT) Hydric soil rating: No

142 Custom Soil Resource Report

91B—Biglake gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 57r1 Elevation: 2,500 to 4,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 43 to 46 degrees F Frost-free period: 80 to 100 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Biglake and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Biglake Setting Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans, drainageways Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 9 inches: gravelly loam Bw - 9 to 20 inches: very cobbly sandy loam C - 20 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 3.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Shallow To Gravel (Swgr) LRU 44A-B (R044AB134MT), Upland Grassland (R043AP810MT) Hydric soil rating: No

143 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Biglake, very cobbly Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces, drainageways Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Shallow To Gravel (Swgr) LRU 44A-B (R044AB134MT) Hydric soil rating: No Biglake, greater slope Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Stream terraces, drainageways, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Shallow To Gravel (Swgr) LRU 44A-B (R044AB134MT) Hydric soil rating: No Bowlake Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces, drainageways Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Loamy Argillic (Loa) LRU 44A-B (R044AB033MT) Hydric soil rating: No

112A—Marklepass-Slickspots complex, 0 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 573l Elevation: 2,500 to 3,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 100 to 130 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Marklepass and similar soils: 55 percent Slickspots: 30 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Marklepass Setting Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits

144 Custom Soil Resource Report

Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: silty clay loam Btn - 7 to 24 inches: silty clay Bkn - 24 to 60 inches: silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to moderately saline (2.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 120.0 Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 7s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Saline Lowland (SL) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW134MT), Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Bohnly Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Swales Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW127MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes Marklepass, greater slope Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Saline Lowland (SL) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW134MT) Hydric soil rating: No Round butte Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake terraces, lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Clayey (Cy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW124MT) Hydric soil rating: No

145 Custom Soil Resource Report

117E—Kerrdam-Dryfork-Vincom silt loams, 8 to 35 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 573s Elevation: 2,500 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Kerrdam and similar soils: 40 percent Dryfork and similar soils: 25 percent Vincom and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Kerrdam Setting Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Eolian deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: silt loam Bw - 7 to 20 inches: silt loam Bk - 20 to 30 inches: silt loam C - 30 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 20 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B

146 Custom Soil Resource Report

Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT), Upland Sagebrush Shrubland (R044AP809MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Dryfork Setting Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 6 inches: silt loam Bw - 6 to 16 inches: silt loam Bk - 16 to 31 inches: silt loam C - 31 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 40.0 Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT), Saline-Sodic Shrubland (R044AP804MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Vincom Setting Landform: Lake terraces, lake plains Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 3 inches: silt loam E/Bw - 3 to 7 inches: silt loam Bk - 7 to 14 inches: silt loam C - 14 to 60 inches: stratified silt loam to silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 12 to 35 percent

147 Custom Soil Resource Report

Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 8 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 13.0 Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Thin Silty (TSi) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW657MT), Upland Sagebrush Shrubland (R044AP809MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Badland, lake sediment outcrop Percent of map unit: 5 percent Round butte Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Clayey (Cy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW124MT) Hydric soil rating: No Vincom, greater slope Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake terraces, lake plains Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Thin Silty (TSi) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW657MT) Hydric soil rating: No

118B—Dryfork-Selow silt loams, 0 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 573t Elevation: 2,000 to 3,100 feet

148 Custom Soil Resource Report

Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 14 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Dryfork and similar soils: 45 percent Selow and similar soils: 40 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Dryfork Setting Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 6 inches: silt loam Bw - 6 to 16 inches: silt loam Bk - 16 to 31 inches: silt loam C - 31 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 40.0 Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT), Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Selow Setting Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits

149 Custom Soil Resource Report

Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Btn - 8 to 14 inches: silty clay loam Btnk - 14 to 20 inches: silty clay loam 2Bk - 20 to 28 inches: silt loam 2C - 28 to 60 inches: very fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (1.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 40.0 Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Lonepine Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No Dryfork, greater slope Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No Round butte Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake terraces, lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Clayey (Cy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW124MT) Hydric soil rating: No

150 Custom Soil Resource Report

118D—Dryfork-Kerrdam silt loams, 4 to 15 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 573v Elevation: 2,000 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Dryfork and similar soils: 45 percent Kerrdam and similar soils: 40 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Dryfork Setting Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 6 inches: silt loam Bw - 6 to 16 inches: silt loam Bk - 16 to 31 inches: silt loam C - 31 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 40.0 Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B

151 Custom Soil Resource Report

Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT), Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Kerrdam Setting Landform: Lake terraces, lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Eolian deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: silt loam Bw - 7 to 20 inches: silt loam Bk - 20 to 30 inches: silt loam C - 30 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT), Upland Grassland (R043AP810MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Lonepine Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No Vincom Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake terraces, lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Thin Silty (TSi) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW657MT) Hydric soil rating: No

152 Custom Soil Resource Report

Round butte Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Clayey (Cy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW124MT) Hydric soil rating: No

123D—Yourame-Wildgen gravelly loams, 8 to 30 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 5743 Elevation: 3,000 to 5,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 17 to 30 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Yourame and similar soils: 45 percent Wildgen and similar soils: 40 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Yourame Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alpine till or drift derived from argillite and quartzite Typical profile Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 2 to 13 inches: gravelly loam E/Bt - 13 to 19 inches: gravelly loam Bt - 19 to 36 inches: very gravelly clay loam Bk - 36 to 60 inches: very gravelly clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent

153 Custom Soil Resource Report

Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/ninebark-ninebark phase (PK261), Douglas-fir/snowberry-pinegrass phase (PK312) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Wildgen Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alpine till or drift derived from argillite and quartzite Typical profile Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 2 to 10 inches: gravelly loam E - 10 to 24 inches: very gravelly loam E/Bw - 24 to 60 inches: very gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250), Douglas- fir/ninebark-ninebark phase (PK261), Douglas-fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Yourame, greater slope Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/ninebark-ninebark phase (PK261), Douglas-fir/snowberry-pinegrass phase (PK312)

154 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hydric soil rating: No Yourame, dry Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: ponderosa pine/bitterbrush-Idaho fescue phase (PK162) Hydric soil rating: No Winkler Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/bluebunch wheatgrass (PK210), Douglas-fir/rough fescue (PK230), Douglas-fir/snowberry-pinegrass phase (PK312) Hydric soil rating: No

150E—Bigarm-Hogsby-Rock outcrop complex, 8 to 30 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 575k Elevation: 2,600 to 5,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 43 to 46 degrees F Frost-free period: 80 to 100 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Bigarm and similar soils: 50 percent Rock outcrop: 20 percent Hogsby and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Bigarm Setting Landform: Hills Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium derived from argillite and quartzite Typical profile A - 0 to 11 inches: gravelly loam Bw - 11 to 26 inches: very gravelly loam C - 26 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly loamy sand

155 Custom Soil Resource Report

Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Droughty Steep (Drstp) LRU 43A-A (R043AA038MT), Upland Grassland (R043AP810MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Rock Outcrop Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 Hydric soil rating: Unranked

Description of Hogsby Setting Landform: Hills Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium over residuum weathered from argillite and/or quartzite Typical profile A - 0 to 9 inches: cobbly loam Bw - 9 to 12 inches: very cobbly loam C - 12 to 17 inches: extremely channery loam R - 17 to 60 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 10 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 1.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: D

156 Custom Soil Resource Report

Ecological site: Shallow Droughty (Swdr) LRU 43A-A (R043AA138MT), Shallow Grassland (R043AP805MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Bigarm, greater slope Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Hills Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Droughty Steep (Drstp) LRU 43A-A (R043AA038MT) Hydric soil rating: No Rubble land Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: Unranked

218D—Dryfork-Selow silt loams, 4 to 15 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 576v Elevation: 2,000 to 3,100 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 14 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Dryfork and similar soils: 45 percent Selow and similar soils: 40 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Dryfork Setting Landform: Lake terraces, lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 6 inches: silt loam Bw - 6 to 16 inches: silt loam Bk - 16 to 31 inches: silt loam C - 31 to 60 inches: silt loam

157 Custom Soil Resource Report

Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 40.0 Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT), Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Selow Setting Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Btn - 8 to 14 inches: silty clay loam Btnk - 14 to 20 inches: silty clay loam 2Bk - 20 to 28 inches: silt loam 2C - 28 to 60 inches: very fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (1.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 40.0 Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: D

158 Custom Soil Resource Report

Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Round butte Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Clayey (Cy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW124MT) Hydric soil rating: No Lonepine Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No Dryfork, greater slope Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake terraces, lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Thin Silty (TSi) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW657MT) Hydric soil rating: No

DAM—Dam

Map Unit Composition Dam: 100 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

W—Water

Map Unit Composition Water: 100 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

159 References

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084

160 Custom Soil Resource Report

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf

161 United States A product of the National Custom Soil Resource Department of Cooperative Soil Survey, Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for States Department of Agriculture and other Flathead County Area and Federal agencies, State Natural agencies including the Part of Lincoln County, Resources Agricultural Experiment Montana, Flathead Indian Conservation Stations, and local Service participants Reservation Wilderness Area, Montana, Lake County Area, Montana, and Sanders and Parts of Lincoln and Flathead Counties, Montana EWS Maintenance Areas

November 4, 2019 Preface

Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require

2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

3 Contents

Preface...... 2 Soil Map...... 5 Soil Map...... 6 Legend...... 7 Map Unit Legend...... 9 Map Unit Descriptions...... 10 Flathead County Area and Part of Lincoln County, Montana...... 13 22F—Winkler gravelly sandy loam, cool, 35 to 60 percent slopes...... 13 222C—Pleasantvalley-Winfall, dry complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes...... 14 807A—McLangor-Barzee mucky peats, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 16 941C—Trumancreek-Foyslake-Blackcreek complex, 0 to 12 percent slopes...... 18 W—Water...... 21 Flathead Indian Reservation Wilderness Area, Montana...... 22 NOTCOM—No Digital Data Available...... 22 Lake County Area, Montana...... 23 17—Bohnly silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 23 28—Courville gravelly silt loam, 4 to 15 percent slopes...... 24 43—Dubay silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes...... 25 59—Flott gravelly loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes...... 26 61—Flott very gravelly loam, dry, 30 to 60 percent slopes...... 28 81—Jocko gravelly loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes...... 29 102—McCollum fine sandy loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes...... 30 129—Pits, gravel...... 32 134—Post silty clay loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes...... 32 135—Post silty clay loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes...... 34 136—Post-Ronan-Water complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes...... 35 155—Sacheen loamy fine sand, 0 to 8 percent slopes...... 37 158—Selon fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes...... 38 170—Vincom silt loam, 15 to 60 percent slopes...... 40 182—Winfall very gravelly loam, 4 to 15 percent slopes...... 41 183—Winfall very gravelly loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes...... 43 188—Xerofluvents, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 44 W—Water...... 45 Sanders and Parts of Lincoln and Flathead Counties, Montana...... 46 17E—Kerrdam silt loam, 15 to 35 percent slopes...... 46 117E—Kerrdam-Dryfork-Vincom silt loams, 8 to 35 percent slopes...... 47 150E—Bigarm-Hogsby-Rock outcrop complex, 8 to 30 percent slopes..... 50 DAM—Dam...... 52 W—Water...... 52 References...... 53

4 Soil Map

The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.

5 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 114° 51' 45'' W 45'' 51' 114° W 9'' 36' 113°

660000 670000 680000 690000 700000 710000 720000 730000 740000 750000 48° 11' 9'' N 48° 11' 9'' N 5340000 5330000 5330000 5320000 5320000 5310000 5310000 5300000 5300000 5290000 5290000 5280000 5280000 5270000 5270000 5260000 5260000 5250000 5250000 5240000 5240000 5230000 5230000 5220000 5220000 47° 3' 30'' N 47° 3' 30'' N 670000 680000 690000 700000 710000 720000 730000 740000 750000

Map Scale: 1:610,000 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Meters

N 0 5000 10000 20000 30000 W 9'' 36' 113° 114° 51' 45'' W 45'' 51' 114° Feet 0 25000 50000 100000 150000 Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 11N WGS84 6 Custom Soil Resource Report

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION

Area of Interest (AOI) Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at scales Area of Interest (AOI) ranging from 1:20,000 to 1:24,000. Stony Spot Soils Very Stony Spot Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map Soil Map Unit Polygons measurements. Wet Spot Soil Map Unit Lines Other Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Map Unit Points Web Soil Survey URL: Special Line Features Special Point Features Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Water Features Blowout Streams and Canals Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator Borrow Pit projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts Transportation distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Clay Spot Rails Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more Closed Depression accurate calculations of distance or area are required. Interstate Highways Gravel Pit US Routes This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as Gravelly Spot of the version date(s) listed below. Major Roads Landfill Local Roads Soil Survey Area: Flathead County Area and Part of Lincoln Lava Flow Background County, Montana Survey Area Data: Version 14, Sep 16, 2019 Marsh or swamp Aerial Photography

Mine or Quarry Soil Survey Area: Flathead Indian Reservation Wilderness Area, Montana Miscellaneous Water Survey Area Data: Version 3, Sep 16, 2019 Perennial Water Soil Survey Area: Lake County Area, Montana Rock Outcrop Survey Area Data: Version 21, Sep 16, 2019 Saline Spot Soil Survey Area: Sanders and Parts of Lincoln and Flathead Sandy Spot Counties, Montana Severely Eroded Spot Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 16, 2019

Sinkhole Your area of interest (AOI) includes more than one soil survey Slide or Slip area. These survey areas may have been mapped at different scales, with a different land use in mind, at different times, or at Sodic Spot different levels of detail. This may result in map unit symbols, soil properties, and interpretations that do not completely agree across soil survey area boundaries.

7 Custom Soil Resource Report

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION

Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jan 1, 1999—Dec 31, 2003

The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

8 Custom Soil Resource Report

Map Unit Legend

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

22F Winkler gravelly sandy loam, 0.2 1.0% cool, 35 to 60 percent slopes 222C Pleasantvalley-Winfall, dry 0.2 0.9% complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes 807A McLangor-Barzee mucky peats, 0.7 3.4% 0 to 2 percent slopes 941C Trumancreek-Foyslake- 1.0 4.7% Blackcreek complex, 0 to 12 percent slopes W Water 0.7 3.3% Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 2.9 13.3% Totals for Area of Interest 21.5 100.0%

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

NOTCOM No Digital Data Available 2.2 10.0% Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 2.2 10.0% Totals for Area of Interest 21.5 100.0%

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

17 Bohnly silt loam, 0 to 2 percent 0.2 0.7% slopes 28 Courville gravelly silt loam, 4 to 0.1 0.3% 15 percent slopes 43 Dubay silt loam, 2 to 6 percent 0.3 1.5% slopes 59 Flott gravelly loam, 15 to 30 0.3 1.4% percent slopes 61 Flott very gravelly loam, dry, 30 0.5 2.5% to 60 percent slopes 81 Jocko gravelly loam, 0 to 4 0.7 3.3% percent slopes 102 McCollum fine sandy loam, 2 to 0.7 3.3% 4 percent slopes 129 Pits, gravel 0.1 0.6% 134 Post silty clay loam, 2 to 4 0.2 0.9% percent slopes 135 Post silty clay loam, 4 to 8 1.8 8.1% percent slopes 136 Post-Ronan-Water complex, 2 1.3 6.0% to 8 percent slopes

9 Custom Soil Resource Report

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

155 Sacheen loamy fine sand, 0 to 0.5 2.2% 8 percent slopes 158 Selon fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 0.4 1.9% percent slopes 170 Vincom silt loam, 15 to 60 0.1 0.7% percent slopes 182 Winfall very gravelly loam, 4 to 1.9 8.7% 15 percent slopes 183 Winfall very gravelly loam, 15 to 0.3 1.3% 30 percent slopes 188 Xerofluvents, 0 to 2 percent 1.6 7.3% slopes W Water 2.7 12.5% Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 13.6 63.3% Totals for Area of Interest 21.5 100.0%

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

17E Kerrdam silt loam, 15 to 35 0.0 0.0% percent slopes 117E Kerrdam-Dryfork-Vincom silt 0.7 3.3% loams, 8 to 35 percent slopes 150E Bigarm-Hogsby-Rock outcrop 0.7 3.3% complex, 8 to 30 percent slopes DAM Dam 0.6 2.6% W Water 0.9 4.0% Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 2.9 13.3% Totals for Area of Interest 21.5 100.0%

Map Unit Descriptions

The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.

10 Custom Soil Resource Report

Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion

11 Custom Soil Resource Report of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.

12 Custom Soil Resource Report

Flathead County Area and Part of Lincoln County, Montana

22F—Winkler gravelly sandy loam, cool, 35 to 60 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 58f1 Elevation: 3,000 to 5,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 17 to 30 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 43 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 90 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Winkler and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Winkler Setting Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium derived from argillite and quartzite Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 1 to 10 inches: gravelly sandy loam E - 10 to 36 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam E/Bw - 36 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 35 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (2.13 to 7.09 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 3.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/pinegrass-ponderosa pine phase (PK324), Douglas-fir/ninebark-ninebark phase (PK261) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 4 percent Hydric soil rating: No

13 Custom Soil Resource Report

Rubble land Percent of map unit: 4 percent Hydric soil rating: No Sharrott Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/rough fescue (PK230), ponderosa pine/bitterbrush-Idaho fescue phase (PK162) Hydric soil rating: No

222C—Pleasantvalley-Winfall, dry complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: mj89 Elevation: 3,500 to 4,260 feet Mean annual precipitation: 22 to 28 inches Mean annual air temperature: 38 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 95 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Pleasantvalley and similar soils: 50 percent Winfall and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 30 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Pleasantvalley Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Volcanic ash over till derived from quartzite Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 1 to 4 inches: gravelly ashy silt loam Bw - 4 to 14 inches: gravelly ashy silt loam 2E - 14 to 26 inches: very cobbly silt loam 2E/Bw - 26 to 34 inches: very cobbly silt loam 2E/Bt - 34 to 60 inches: very cobbly silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained

14 Custom Soil Resource Report

Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250), Douglas- fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Winfall Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 1 to 9 inches: gravelly loam E and Bt - 9 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322), Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Courville Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250)

15 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hydric soil rating: No Tallcreek Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Outwash terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: spruce/dwarf huckleberry (PK450) Hydric soil rating: No Lynchlake, dry Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250) Hydric soil rating: No Glaciercreek Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines, outwash terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/pinegrass-kinnikinnick phase (PK322), Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250) Hydric soil rating: No Meadowpeak Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Riparian Meadow (RM) LRU 44A-Y (R044AY080MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

807A—McLangor-Barzee mucky peats, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: ph0b Elevation: 3,400 to 4,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 41 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 75 to 95 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Mclangor and similar soils: 50 percent Barzee and similar soils: 30 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

16 Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Mclangor Setting Landform: Flood plains, depressions Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Parent material: Organic material over alluvium Typical profile Oe1 - 0 to 8 inches: mucky peat Oe2 - 8 to 17 inches: mucky peat C1 - 17 to 36 inches: stratified very fine sandy loam to silt C2 - 36 to 42 inches: stratified mucky peat to silt loam Oa - 42 to 54 inches: muck Cg - 54 to 60 inches: stratified very fine sandy loam to silt Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Very poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches Frequency of flooding: Frequent Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 19.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: A/D Ecological site: Wet Meadow Organic (WMO) LRU 44A-Y (R044AY182MT), Bottomland (R043AP802MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

Description of Barzee Setting Landform: Depressions, flood plains Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Organic material Typical profile Oi - 0 to 4 inches: mucky peat Oe - 4 to 60 inches: mucky peat Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 1 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Very poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches Frequency of flooding: Frequent Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 26.9 inches)

17 Custom Soil Resource Report

Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: A/D Ecological site: Wet Meadow Organic (WMO) LRU 44A-Y (R044AY182MT), Bottomland (R043AP802MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

Minor Components Blacklake Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Depressions Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Ecological site: Pothole (Ph) LRU 44A-Y (R044AY071MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes Mcgregor Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Closed depressions Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Ecological site: Meadow (M) LRU 44A-Y (R044AY082MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes Meadowpeak Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Ecological site: Riparian Meadow (RM) LRU 44A-Y (R044AY080MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

941C—Trumancreek-Foyslake-Blackcreek complex, 0 to 12 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 1r07h Elevation: 2,900 to 4,100 feet Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 24 inches Mean annual air temperature: 38 to 42 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 90 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Trumancreek and similar soils: 45 percent Foyslake and similar soils: 25 percent

18 Custom Soil Resource Report

Blackcreek and similar soils: 15 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Trumancreek Setting Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: loam Bw - 7 to 22 inches: silt loam C1 - 22 to 28 inches: loam 2C2 - 28 to 35 inches: extremely gravelly loamy coarse sand 3Cg1 - 35 to 37 inches: gravelly clay loam 4Cg2 - 37 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly loamy coarse sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.20 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 12 to 24 inches Frequency of flooding: Rare Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w Hydrologic Soil Group: C/D Ecological site: Bottomland (R043AP802MT) Other vegetative classification: spruce/common horsetail (PK410), spruce/dwarf huckleberry (PK450), spruce/queencup beadlily (PK420) Hydric soil rating: Yes

Description of Foyslake Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Concave, linear Across-slope shape: Concave, linear Parent material: Till derived from calcareous siltstone and/or argillite Typical profile Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 2 to 12 inches: gravelly silt loam Bt/E - 12 to 21 inches: gravelly silt loam Bt - 21 to 28 inches: very gravelly silty clay loam Bk - 28 to 60 inches: very cobbly silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 12 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches

19 Custom Soil Resource Report

Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 40 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Other vegetative classification: Douglas-fir/twinflower-snowberry phase (PK291), Douglas-fir/ninebark (PK260), Douglas-fir/dwarf huckleberry (PK250) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Blackcreek Setting Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Parent material: Alluvium and/or outwash Typical profile A - 0 to 4 inches: silt loam Bw - 4 to 10 inches: silt loam Bk - 10 to 36 inches: silt loam C - 36 to 42 inches: silt 2C - 42 to 60 inches: stratified loamy coarse sand to silt Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 12 to 24 inches Frequency of flooding: Rare Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D Ecological site: Bottomland (R043AP802MT) Other vegetative classification: spruce/common horsetail (PK410), spruce/dwarf huckleberry (PK450), spruce/queencup beadlily (PK420) Hydric soil rating: Yes

20 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Idahocreek Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Stream terraces, outwash terraces Down-slope shape: Linear, concave Across-slope shape: Linear, concave Other vegetative classification: spruce/redosier dogwood h.t. (HP107), spruce/ queencup beadlily (PK420) Hydric soil rating: No Kila Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces, outwash terraces Down-slope shape: Linear, concave Across-slope shape: Linear, concave Other vegetative classification: spruce/queencup beadlily (PK420) Hydric soil rating: No

W—Water

Map Unit Composition Water: 100 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

21 Custom Soil Resource Report

Flathead Indian Reservation Wilderness Area, Montana

NOTCOM—No Digital Data Available

Map Unit Composition Notcom: 100 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Notcom Properties and qualities

22 Custom Soil Resource Report

Lake County Area, Montana

17—Bohnly silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vys Elevation: 2,500 to 3,800 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 30 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 130 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Bohnly and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Bohnly Setting Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Silty alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Bw - 8 to 36 inches: silt loam Cg1 - 36 to 46 inches: silt loam Cg2 - 46 to 60 inches: stratified silt loam to fine sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 6 to 24 inches Frequency of flooding: Occasional Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 5w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW188MT), Bottomland (R044AP801MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

Minor Components Colake Percent of map unit: 8 percent Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear

23 Custom Soil Resource Report

Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW188MT) Hydric soil rating: No Borohemists and similar soils Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Channels Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 20"+ p.z. (R043XW154MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

28—Courville gravelly silt loam, 4 to 15 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w0j Elevation: 3,000 to 6,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 22 to 45 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 90 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance

Map Unit Composition Courville and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Courville Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Volcanic ash over glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material Bw - 1 to 15 inches: gravelly ashy silt loam 2E/Bw - 15 to 33 inches: very gravelly loam 2Bw/E - 33 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.3 inches)

24 Custom Soil Resource Report

Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Mitten Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Winfall Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

43—Dubay silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w2q Elevation: 2,300 to 3,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 24 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 125 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated

Map Unit Composition Dubay and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Dubay Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciofluvial deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: silt loam E - 5 to 30 inches: silt loam E and Bw - 30 to 60 inches: silt loam

25 Custom Soil Resource Report

Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 6 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: High (about 11.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Gird Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Selon Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

59—Flott gravelly loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w4j Elevation: 2,900 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 16 to 25 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Flott and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

26 Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Flott Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 2 to 10 inches: gravelly loam E - 10 to 20 inches: very gravelly loam E/Bw - 20 to 34 inches: very gravelly loam Bk - 34 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 40 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Wildgen Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Finleypoint Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Kingspoint Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear

27 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hydric soil rating: No

61—Flott very gravelly loam, dry, 30 to 60 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w4m Elevation: 2,900 to 4,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 25 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Flott and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Flott Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 2 to 12 inches: very gravelly loam E - 12 to 20 inches: very gravelly loam E/Bw - 20 to 25 inches: very gravelly loam Bk - 25 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 30 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 40 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Warm Woodland (F043AP911MT)

28 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Kingspoint Percent of map unit: 8 percent Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 2 percent Hydric soil rating: No

81—Jocko gravelly loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4w70 Elevation: 2,500 to 3,900 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 120 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Jocko and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Jocko Setting Landform: Outwash plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Outwash Typical profile A - 0 to 13 inches: gravelly loam Bw1 - 13 to 19 inches: very gravelly loam Bw2 - 19 to 25 inches: very gravelly loamy sand Bk - 25 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly coarse sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches

29 Custom Soil Resource Report

Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Available water storage in profile: Low (about 3.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW150MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Lamoose Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Outwash plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Jocko, very gravelly loam Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Outwash plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW150MT) Hydric soil rating: No Walstead Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Outwash plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

102—McCollum fine sandy loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vvx Elevation: 1,300 to 4,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 20 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated

Map Unit Composition Mccollum and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

30 Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Mccollum Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: fine sandy loam Bw1 - 7 to 29 inches: fine sandy loam Bw2 - 29 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Gird Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Sacheen Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

31 Custom Soil Resource Report

129—Pits, gravel

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vwx Elevation: 2,700 to 3,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 14 inches Mean annual air temperature: 43 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Pits: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Minor Components Areas supporting vegetation Percent of map unit: 10 percent Ecological site: Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW136MT) Hydric soil rating: No

134—Post silty clay loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vx4 Elevation: 2,500 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Post and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Post Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till

32 Custom Soil Resource Report

Typical profile Ap - 0 to 6 inches: silty clay loam Btn/E - 6 to 9 inches: silty clay loam Btn - 9 to 21 inches: clay Bkn - 21 to 27 inches: clay C - 27 to 60 inches: clay Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 45.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Post, cobbly loam Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Ronan Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Water Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No Somewhat poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Channels Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Saline Lowland (SL) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW134MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

33 Custom Soil Resource Report

135—Post silty clay loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vx5 Elevation: 2,500 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Post and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Post Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silty clay loam Btn/E - 8 to 10 inches: silty clay loam Btn - 10 to 21 inches: clay Bkn - 21 to 60 inches: clay Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to moderately saline (2.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 45.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

34 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Post, cobbly loam Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Ronan Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Water Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No Somewhat poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Channels Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Saline Lowland (SL) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW134MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

136—Post-Ronan-Water complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vx8 Elevation: 2,500 to 4,900 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 135 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance

Map Unit Composition Post and similar soils: 50 percent Water: 20 percent Ronan and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Post Setting Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear

35 Custom Soil Resource Report

Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciolacustrine deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Btn/E - 8 to 13 inches: silty clay loam Btn - 13 to 22 inches: clay Bkn - 22 to 60 inches: clay Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to moderately saline (2.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 45.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Ronan Setting Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciolacustrine deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 4 inches: silty clay loam Btn1 - 4 to 7 inches: clay Btn2 - 7 to 16 inches: clay Bkn - 16 to 60 inches: clay Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent

36 Custom Soil Resource Report

Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to moderately saline (2.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 30.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Claypan (Cp) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW147MT), Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Niarada Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT) Hydric soil rating: No Ninepipe Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Bolack Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Depressions Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW188MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

155—Sacheen loamy fine sand, 0 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vy7 Elevation: 1,300 to 4,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 20 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated

Map Unit Composition Sacheen and similar soils: 90 percent

37 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Sacheen Setting Landform: Dunes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Eolian deposits Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 1 to 4 inches: loamy fine sand C - 4 to 60 inches: loamy fine sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Mccollum Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Dunes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

158—Selon fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vyb Elevation: 1,300 to 4,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 24 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days

38 Custom Soil Resource Report

Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated

Map Unit Composition Selon and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Selon Setting Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glaciofluvial deposits Typical profile Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material A - 1 to 8 inches: fine sandy loam E/Bw - 8 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Mccollum Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Sacheen Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

39 Custom Soil Resource Report

170—Vincom silt loam, 15 to 60 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vyt Elevation: 2,000 to 3,300 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 100 to 135 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Vincom and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Vincom Setting Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: silt loam Bk - 5 to 22 inches: silt loam C - 22 to 60 inches: stratified silt loam to silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 60 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 8 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 20.0 Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Thin Silty (TSi) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW657MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No

40 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Lonepine Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No Truscreek Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Polson Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Irvine Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Thin Clayey (TCy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW658MT) Hydric soil rating: No Vincom, gravelly loam Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT) Hydric soil rating: No Badland, lake sediment outcrop Percent of map unit: 2 percent Hydric soil rating: No

182—Winfall very gravelly loam, 4 to 15 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vzg Elevation: 3,000 to 6,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 45 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F

41 Custom Soil Resource Report

Frost-free period: 70 to 105 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance

Map Unit Composition Winfall and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Winfall Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 3 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 3 to 22 inches: very gravelly loam E and Bt - 22 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Courville Percent of map unit: 7 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Wildgen Percent of map unit: 6 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Flood plains

42 Custom Soil Resource Report

Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes

183—Winfall very gravelly loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vzh Elevation: 3,000 to 6,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 45 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 105 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Winfall and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Winfall Setting Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile Oi - 0 to 3 inches: slightly decomposed plant material E - 3 to 18 inches: very gravelly loam E and Bt - 18 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Cool Woodland (F043AP909MT) Hydric soil rating: No

43 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Wildgen Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Courville Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Moraines Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No

188—Xerofluvents, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vzq Elevation: 2,500 to 3,300 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 41 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Xerofluvents and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Xerofluvents Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: Frequent Frequency of ponding: None Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Ecological site: Bottomland (R044AP801MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Poorly drained soils Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Flood plains

44 Custom Soil Resource Report

Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW188MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes

W—Water

Map Unit Composition Water: 100 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

45 Custom Soil Resource Report

Sanders and Parts of Lincoln and Flathead Counties, Montana

17E—Kerrdam silt loam, 15 to 35 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 5765 Elevation: 1,300 to 4,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 20 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Kerrdam and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Kerrdam Setting Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Eolian deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: silt loam Bw - 7 to 20 inches: silt loam Bk - 20 to 30 inches: silt loam C - 30 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 35 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Thin Silty (TSi) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW657MT), Upland Sagebrush Shrubland (R044AP809MT) Hydric soil rating: No

46 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Lonepine Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Thin Silty (TSi) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW657MT) Hydric soil rating: No Sacheen Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: ponderosa pine/Idaho fescue-rough fescue phase (PK142) Hydric soil rating: No Vincom Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake terraces, lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Thin Silty (TSi) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW657MT) Hydric soil rating: No

117E—Kerrdam-Dryfork-Vincom silt loams, 8 to 35 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 573s Elevation: 2,500 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Kerrdam and similar soils: 40 percent Dryfork and similar soils: 25 percent Vincom and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Kerrdam Setting Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear

47 Custom Soil Resource Report

Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Eolian deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: silt loam Bw - 7 to 20 inches: silt loam Bk - 20 to 30 inches: silt loam C - 30 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 20 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT), Upland Sagebrush Shrubland (R044AP809MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Dryfork Setting Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 6 inches: silt loam Bw - 6 to 16 inches: silt loam Bk - 16 to 31 inches: silt loam C - 31 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm)

48 Custom Soil Resource Report

Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 40.0 Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Silty (Si) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW125MT), Saline-Sodic Shrubland (R044AP804MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Vincom Setting Landform: Lake terraces, lake plains Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Lacustrine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 3 inches: silt loam E/Bw - 3 to 7 inches: silt loam Bk - 7 to 14 inches: silt loam C - 14 to 60 inches: stratified silt loam to silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 12 to 35 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 8 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 13.0 Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Thin Silty (TSi) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW657MT), Upland Sagebrush Shrubland (R044AP809MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Badland, lake sediment outcrop Percent of map unit: 5 percent Round butte Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake plains, lake terraces Down-slope shape: Linear

49 Custom Soil Resource Report

Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Clayey (Cy) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW124MT) Hydric soil rating: No Vincom, greater slope Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Lake terraces, lake plains Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Thin Silty (TSi) 10-14" p.z. (R044XW657MT) Hydric soil rating: No

150E—Bigarm-Hogsby-Rock outcrop complex, 8 to 30 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 575k Elevation: 2,600 to 5,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 43 to 46 degrees F Frost-free period: 80 to 100 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Bigarm and similar soils: 50 percent Rock outcrop: 20 percent Hogsby and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Bigarm Setting Landform: Hills Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium derived from argillite and quartzite Typical profile A - 0 to 11 inches: gravelly loam Bw - 11 to 26 inches: very gravelly loam C - 26 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained

50 Custom Soil Resource Report

Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Droughty Steep (Drstp) LRU 43A-A (R043AA038MT), Upland Grassland (R043AP810MT) Hydric soil rating: No

Description of Rock Outcrop Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 Hydric soil rating: Unranked

Description of Hogsby Setting Landform: Hills Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium over residuum weathered from argillite and/or quartzite Typical profile A - 0 to 9 inches: cobbly loam Bw - 9 to 12 inches: very cobbly loam C - 12 to 17 inches: extremely channery loam R - 17 to 60 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 10 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 1.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Shallow Droughty (Swdr) LRU 43A-A (R043AA138MT), Shallow Grassland (R043AP805MT) Hydric soil rating: No

51 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Bigarm, greater slope Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Hills Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Droughty Steep (Drstp) LRU 43A-A (R043AA038MT) Hydric soil rating: No Rubble land Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: Unranked

DAM—Dam

Map Unit Composition Dam: 100 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

W—Water

Map Unit Composition Water: 100 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

52 References

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084

53 Custom Soil Resource Report

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf

54 Little Bitterroot Dam

1:7,218 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.075 0.15 0.3 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife October 30, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Little Bitterroot Dam/EWS

1:14,435 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.175 0.35 0.7 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife November 6, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Hubbart Dam

1:28,871 0 0.25 0.5 1 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.375 0.75 1.5 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife October 30, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Upper Dry Fork Dam

1:14,435 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.175 0.35 0.7 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife October 30, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Lower Dry Fork Dam

1:14,435 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.175 0.35 0.7 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife October 30, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Pablo Dam

1:57,741 0 0.5 1 2 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.75 1.5 3 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife October 30, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Hellroaring Dam

1:7,218 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.075 0.15 0.3 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife October 30, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Twin-Turtle Dam

1:14,435 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.175 0.35 0.7 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife October 30, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Crow Dam

1:14,435 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.175 0.35 0.7 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife October 30, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper EWS Upstream Crow

1:14,435 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.175 0.35 0.7 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife November 6, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper EWS Downstream Crow

1:7,218 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.075 0.15 0.3 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife November 6, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Ninepipe Dam

1:57,741 0 0.5 1 2 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.75 1.5 3 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife October 30, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Kicking Horse Dam

1:57,741 0 0.5 1 2 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.75 1.5 3 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife October 30, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper McDonald Dam

1:14,435 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.175 0.35 0.7 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife October 30, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Mission Dam

1:28,871 0 0.25 0.5 1 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.375 0.75 1.5 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife October 30, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Tabor Dam

1:28,871 0 0.25 0.5 1 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.375 0.75 1.5 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife October 30, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Jocko Dam

1:14,435 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.175 0.35 0.7 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife October 30, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Black Lake Dam

1:14,435 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.175 0.35 0.7 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife October 30, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Black Lake Spillway

1:7,218 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.075 0.15 0.3 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife October 30, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper EWS Perma

1:7,218 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.075 0.15 0.3 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife November 6, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper EWS Arlee

1:14,435 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.175 0.35 0.7 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife November 6, 2019 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other

Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Flathead Indian Irrigation Project Flathead Indian Reservation, Montana Modernization

ITRC was contracted by the US Bureau of Indian Affairs to develop a modernization plan for the Flathead Indian Irrigation Project. The modernization plan encompassed all twelve “units” that make up the large, sprawling irrigation project. The plan focused on the following goals: a Enable USBIA to better control and measure flows with less uncertainty a Improve service with increased water delivery reliabilty, flexiblity and equity a Streamline processes for decisions to aid employee retention and training a Decrease unnecessary diversions

a Decrease operational spill, thereby improving river quality

Modernization Goals By Unit Hubbart Reservoir & Flathead Pumps & Camas A Canal/Camas Polson Canals Canal Unit Valley View Maximized utilization of in-stream lows from Improved low and water level control Improvements to Flathead River Pumps Mill Creed to prolong storage in Hubbart New limited-demand pipeline New pumpback system in Pablo Feeder Reservoir Regulating reservoir construction Canal Simpliied management of the canal unit Modiications to water level control structures Conversion of canals with Increased lexibility and reliability with water New or improved low measurement structures limited-demand pipelines deliveries to farmers Incorporation of SCADA Improved low measurement and control Vibratory compaction New SCADA sites Recirculation of operational spills and farmer Crow Creeks runoff & Reservoirs Control improvements at creek crossings Southern Pablo Control changes at feeder canals that supply Kicking Horse Reservoir Canal Unit Hubbart Reservoir Increased canal capacity & Camas A Canal Capture and re-regulation of excess lows Upgraded pump station at Crow Improved utilization of Horte Reservoir Creek as a regulating reservoir Mutliple new or improved low Improved ease of operation and measurement sites lexibility of water deliveries to ields Improved water level control Signiicant reduction of operational spills Incorporation of SCADA

Camas Canal Unit Post Canal Unit Improved spill sites Flathead Pumps Improved low control and Valley View & Polson Canals measurement Improved water level control Regulating reservoirs Conversion of laterals to limited-demand pipelines Incoporation of SCADA

Crow Creeks & Southern Pablo Reservoirs Canal Unit

Moiese Post Canal Unit Automated headgates Moiese Cleaned, expanded, and vibratory compacted canal sections Converstion to limited-demand pipelines Incorporation of SCADA Mission Canal Mission H Canal Unit Mission Canal Unit Improved low control & measurement Control changes to keep variable lows Lower Jocko & in the canal Revais Canal Physical modiications to canal Placid Canal & subsystems Jocko Canal Unit Jocko Rivers Improved water level control and spill measurement New SCADA sites

Placid Canal & Jocko Rivers Improved low control & measurement Vibratory compaction to decrease seepage New SCADA sites

Mission H Canal Lower Jocko & Jocko Canal Unit Revais Canal Improved safety and eased Buffer reservoirs along K and J canals Improved low measurement management of the canal system Division and “restarting” of long canals Increased pump low to meet Reduced diversions from the river Replacement of miles of small canals and laterals with pipelines irrigation demands Improved water delivery service to Improved and newly conigured stream and river structures to Improved water level control farmers maintain minimum instream low rates Eased management and operations

April 2017

United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Montana Field Office 585 Shephard Way, Suite 1 Helena, Montana 59601-6287 Phone: (406) 449-5225; Fax: (406) 449-5339

THREATENED, ENDANGERED AND CANDIDATE SPECIES for the FLATHEAD INDIAN RESERVATION 7/29/2019

In accordance with section 7(c) of the Act, the Service has determined that the following listed species may be present on the Flathead Indian Reservation: COMMON SCIENTIFIC STATUS1 RANGE – MONTANA NAME NAME Clark Fork, Flathead, Kootenai, St Salvelinus Threatened; Bull Trout Mary, and Belly river basins; cold confluentus Critical Habitat water rivers and lakes. Ursus arctos Resident, transient; Alpine/subalpine Grizzly Bear Threatened horribilis coniferous forest Lynx Resident; western Montana – Canada Lynx Threatened canadensis montane spruce/fir forests Upper Flathead River Fisher River Spalding’s Silence drainages; Tobacco Valley – open Campion (or Threatened spaldingii grasslands with rough fescue or “catchfly”) bluebunch wheatgrass Water Howellia Wetlands; Swan Valley, Lake and Threatened Howellia aquatilis Missoula Counties Yellow-billed Population west of the Continental cuckoo Coccyzus Threatened Divide; riparian areas with (western americanus cottonwoods and willows population) High elevation alpine and boreal forests that are cold and receive Gulo gulo Wolverine Proposed enough winter precipitation to luscus reliably maintain deep persistent snow late into the warm season Meltwater High elevation meltwater streams; Lednian Lednia tumana Proposed Glacier National Park Stonefly Forested areas in central and western Whitebark Pinus albicaulis Candidate Montana, in high-elevation, upper Pine montane habitat near treeline

1ENDANGERED (E) - Any species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. THREATENED (T) – Any species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. CANDIDATE (C) – Those taxa for which the Service has sufficient information on biological status and threats to propose to list 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. EXPERIMENTAL NONESSENTIAL POPULATION (XN) – A population of a listed species reintroduced into a specific more flexible management under the Act. CRITICAL HABITAT (CH) – 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.

United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Montana Field Office 585 Shephard Way, Suite 1 Helena, Montana 59601-6287 Phone: (406) 449-5225; Fax: (406) 449-5339

THREATENED, ENDANGERED AND CANDIDATE SPECIES for the FLATHEAD INDIAN RESERVATION 6/10/2020

In accordance with section 7(c) of the Act, the Service has determined that the following listed species may be present on the Flathead Indian Reservation: COMMON SCIENTIFIC STATUS1 RANGE – MONTANA NAME NAME Clark Fork, Flathead, Kootenai, St Salvelinus Threatened; Bull Trout Mary, and Belly river basins; cold confluentus Critical Habitat water rivers and lakes. Ursus arctos Resident, transient; Alpine/subalpine Grizzly Bear Threatened horribilis coniferous forest Lynx Resident; western Montana – Canada Lynx Threatened canadensis montane spruce/fir forests Upper Flathead River Fisher River Spalding’s Silence drainages; Tobacco Valley – open Campion (or Threatened spaldingii grasslands with rough fescue or “catchfly”) bluebunch wheatgrass Water Howellia Wetlands; Swan Valley, Lake and Threatened Howellia aquatilis Missoula Counties Yellow-billed Population west of the Continental cuckoo Coccyzus Threatened Divide; riparian areas with (western americanus cottonwoods and willows population) High elevation alpine and boreal forests that are cold and receive Gulo gulo Wolverine Proposed enough winter precipitation to luscus reliably maintain deep persistent snow late into the warm season Meltwater High elevation meltwater streams; Lednian Lednia tumana Threatened Glacier National Park Stonefly Forested areas in central and western Whitebark Pinus albicaulis Candidate Montana, in high-elevation, upper Pine montane habitat near treeline

1ENDANGERED (E) - Any species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. THREATENED (T) – Any species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. CANDIDATE (C) – Those taxa for which the Service has sufficient information on biological status and threats to propose to list 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. EXPERIMENTAL NONESSENTIAL POPULATION (XN) – A population of a listed species reintroduced into a specific more flexible management under the Act. CRITICAL HABITAT (CH) – 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.

11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Montana Natural Heritage - Species Snapshot Report generated 11/4/2019, 3:03:32 PM All Montana Species found in Tribal Boundary: Flathead Indian Reservation

Species of Potential MT Special Other Invasive Total Concern SOC Status Status and Pest Mammals 10 3 41 54 Birds 42 9 1 222 274 Reptiles 2 8 10 Amphibians 2 4 1 7 Fish 3 2 5 Invertebrates 13 8 104 125 ALL ANIMALS 72 20 1 381 1 475 Vascular Plants 41 6 320 15 382 Bryophytes 2 1 1 4 Lichens 11 3 3 17 Algae ALL PLANTS 54 10 324 15 403

Mammals 54 Species Number of Species Predicted Suitable Observations Occurrences Habitat Model

Mammals - American Mink (Mustela vison) 3

Mammals - Badger (Taxidea taxus) 2

Mammals - Beaver (Castor canadensis) 1 View Model

Mammals - Big Brown Bat (Eptesicus fuscus) 10 View Model

Mammals - Bison (Bos bison) SOC 1

Mammals - Black Bear (Ursus americanus) 3

Mammals - Bobcat (Lynx rufus) 2

Mammals - Bushy-tailed Woodrat (Neotoma cinerea) 11

Mammals - California Myotis (Myotis californicus) 17 View Model

Mammals - Canada Lynx (Lynx canadensis) SOC 1 View Model

Mammals - Columbian Ground Squirrel (Urocitellus columbianus) 7

Mammals - Coyote (Canis latrans) 7

Mammals - Deer Mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus) 193

Mammals - Dusky or Montane Shrew (Sorex monticolus) 3

Mammals - Fisher (Pekania pennanti) SOC 3 View Model

Mammals - Fringed Myotis (Myotis thysanodes) SOC 14 12 View Model

Mammals - Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos) SOC 5 1 View Model

Mammals - Heather Vole (Phenacomys intermedius) 2

Mammals - Hoary Bat (Lasiurus cinereus) SOC 7 4 View Model

Mammals - Hoary Marmot (Marmota caligata) PSOC 4 View Model

Mammals - House Mouse (Mus musculus) 3

Mammals - Little Brown Myotis (Myotis lucifugus) SOC 26 24 View Model

Mammals - Long-eared Myotis (Myotis evotis) 28 View Model

Mammals - Long-legged Myotis (Myotis volans) 19 View Model

Mammals - Long-tailed Vole (Microtus longicaudus) 10

Mammals - Long-tailed Weasel (Mustela frenata) 1

Mammals - Masked Shrew (Sorex cinereus) 9

Mammals - Meadow Vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus) 109

Mammals - Montane Vole (Microtus montanus) 52 mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 1/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Mammals - Mountain Cottontail (Sylvilagus nuttallii) 2

Mammals - Mule Deer (Odocoileus hemionus) 6 View Model

Mammals - Muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) 5

Mammals - Northern Pocket Gopher (Thomomys talpoides) 10

Mammals - Northern River Otter (Lontra canadensis) 2

Mammals - Porcupine (Erethizon dorsatum) PSOC 2 View Model

Mammals - Pygmy Shrew (Sorex hoyi) SOC 6 2 View Model

Mammals - Raccoon (Procyon lotor) 4

Mammals - Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) 4

Mammals - Red Squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) 74

Mammals - Red-tailed Chipmunk (Tamias ruficaudus) 26

Mammals - Short-tailed Weasel (Mustela erminea) 12

Mammals - Silver-haired Bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans) PSOC 13 View Model

Mammals - Snowshoe Hare (Lepus americanus) 4

Mammals - Southern Red-backed Vole (Myodes gapperi) 9

Mammals - Striped Skunk (Mephitis mephitis) 10

Mammals - Townsend's Big-eared Bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) 39 20 View Model SOC

Mammals - Vagrant Shrew (Sorex vagrans) 19

Mammals - Water Shrew (Sorex palustris) 5

Mammals - Western Jumping Mouse (Zapus princeps) 15

Mammals - Western Small-footed Myotis (Myotis ciliolabrum) 12 View Model

Mammals - White-tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus) 5 View Model

Mammals - Wolverine (Gulo gulo) SOC 2 3 View Model

Mammals - Yellow-bellied Marmot (Marmota flaviventris) 2

Mammals - Yellow-pine Chipmunk (Tamias amoenus) 12

Birds 274 Species Number of Species Predicted Suitable Observations Occurrences Habitat Model

Birds - American Avocet (Recurvirostra americana) 25

Birds - American Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus) SOC 10 2 View Model

Birds - American Coot (Fulica americana) 167

Birds - American Crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos) 86

Birds - American Dipper (Cinclus mexicanus) 6

Birds - American Goldfinch (Spinus tristis) 117

Birds - American Kestrel (Falco sparverius) 60

Birds - American Pipit (Anthus rubescens) 7

Birds - American Redstart (Setophaga ruticilla) 26

Birds - American Robin (Turdus migratorius) 749

Birds - American Three-toed Woodpecker (Picoides dorsalis) 4 View Model

Birds - American Tree Sparrow (Spizelloides arborea) 9

Birds - American White Pelican (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos) 13 View Model SOC

Birds - American Wigeon (Mareca americana) 67

Birds - Ancient Murrelet (Synthliboramphus antiquus) 1

Birds - Anna's Hummingbird (Calypte anna) 1

Birds - Baird's Sandpiper (Calidris bairdii) 6

Birds - Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) SSS 679 95 View Model

Birds - Bank Swallow (Riparia riparia) 13

Birds - Barn Owl (Tyto alba) 23

Birds - Barn Swallow (Hirundo rustica) 80 mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 2/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Birds - Barred Owl (Strix varia) 5

Birds - Barrow's Goldeneye (Bucephala islandica) PSOC 29 View Model

Birds - Belted Kingfisher (Megaceryle alcyon) 27

Birds - Bewick's Wren (Thryomanes bewickii) 2

Birds - Black Swift (Cypseloides niger) SOC 7 2 View Model

Birds - Black Tern (Chlidonias niger) SOC 6 4 View Model

Birds - Black-and-white Warbler (Mniotilta varia) PSOC 1 View Model

Birds - Black-backed Woodpecker (Picoides arcticus) SOC 3 3 View Model

Birds - Black-bellied Plover (Pluvialis squatarola) 1

Birds - Black-billed Magpie (Pica hudsonia) 247

Birds - Black-capped Chickadee (Poecile atricapillus) 492

Birds - Black-chinned Hummingbird (Archilochus alexandri) 6

Birds - Black-crowned Night-Heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) SOC 1 View Model

Birds - Black-headed Grosbeak (Pheucticus melanocephalus) 85

Birds - Black-necked Stilt (Himantopus mexicanus) SOC 22 3 View Model

Birds - Blackburnian Warbler (Setophaga fusca) 1

Birds - Blue Jay (Cyanocitta cristata) 6

Birds - Blue-winged Teal (Spatula discors) 56

Birds - Bobolink (Dolichonyx oryzivorus) SOC 14 21 View Model

Birds - Bohemian Waxwing (Bombycilla garrulus) 5

Birds - Bonaparte's Gull (Chroicocephalus philadelphia) 6

Birds - Boreal Owl (Aegolius funereus) PSOC 1 View Model

Birds - Brambling (Fringilla montifringilla) 1

Birds - Brewer's Blackbird (Euphagus cyanocephalus) 78

Birds - Brewer's Sparrow (Spizella breweri) SOC 17 24 View Model

Birds - Broad-winged Hawk (Buteo platypterus) 1

Birds - Brown Creeper (Certhia americana) SOC 15 9 View Model

Birds - Brown-headed Cowbird (Molothrus ater) 416

Birds - Bufflehead (Bucephala albeola) 42

Birds - Bullock's Oriole (Icterus bullockii) 56

Birds - Cackling Goose (Branta hutchinsii) 1

Birds - California Gull (Larus californicus) 42

Birds - California Quail (Callipepla californica) 2

Birds - Calliope Hummingbird (Selasphorus calliope) 70 View Model

Birds - Canada Goose (Branta canadensis) 229

Birds - Canada Jay (Perisoreus canadensis) 66

Birds - Canvasback (Aythya valisineria) 22

Birds - Canyon Wren (Catherpes mexicanus) 17

Birds - Carolina Wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus) 1

Birds - Caspian Tern (Hydroprogne caspia) SOC 7 2 View Model

Birds - Cassin's Finch (Haemorhous cassinii) SOC 33 34 View Model

Birds - Cassin's Vireo (Vireo cassinii) 335

Birds - Cattle Egret (Bubulcus ibis) 1

Birds - Cedar Waxwing (Bombycilla cedrorum) 140

Birds - Chestnut-backed Chickadee (Poecile rufescens) 13

Birds - Chipping Sparrow (Spizella passerina) 604

Birds - Cinnamon Teal (Spatula cyanoptera) 86

Birds - Clark's Grebe (Aechmophorus clarkii) SOC 1 View Model

Birds - Clark's Nutcracker (Nucifraga columbiana) SOC 51 35 View Model

Birds - Clay-colored Sparrow (Spizella pallida) 7

Birds - Cliff Swallow (Petrochelidon pyrrhonota) 33 mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 3/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Birds - Common Goldeneye (Bucephala clangula) 47

Birds - Common Grackle (Quiscalus quiscula) 5

Birds - Common Loon (Gavia immer) SOC 33 5 View Model

Birds - Common Merganser (Mergus merganser) 41

Birds - Common Nighthawk (Chordeiles minor) 51

Birds - Common Poorwill (Phalaenoptilus nuttallii) PSOC 9 View Model

Birds - Common Raven (Corvus corax) 191

Birds - Common Redpoll (Acanthis flammea) 10

Birds - Common Tern (Sterna hirundo) SOC 1 2 View Model

Birds - Common Yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas) 233

Birds - Connecticut Warbler (Oporornis agilis) 1

Birds - Cooper's Hawk (Accipiter cooperii) 9

Birds - Cordilleran Flycatcher (Empidonax occidentalis) 79

Birds - Crested Caracara (Caracara cheriway) 1

Birds - Dark-eyed Junco (Junco hyemalis) 663

Birds - Dark-eyed Junco (Montana) (Junco hyemalis montanus) 153

Birds - Double-crested Cormorant (Phalacrocorax auritus) 51

Birds - Downy Woodpecker (Dryobates pubescens) 42

Birds - Dunlin (Calidris alpina) 2

Birds - Dusky Flycatcher (Empidonax oberholseri) 339

Birds - Dusky Grouse (Dendragapus obscurus) 15

Birds - Eared Grebe (Podiceps nigricollis) 5

Birds - Eastern Kingbird (Tyrannus tyrannus) 135

Birds - Eastern Phoebe (Sayornis phoebe) 1

Birds - Eurasian Collared-Dove (Streptopelia decaocto) 19

Birds - Eurasian Wigeon (Mareca penelope) 5

Birds - European Starling (Sturnus vulgaris) 177

Birds - Evening Grosbeak (Coccothraustes vespertinus) SOC 18 16 View Model

Birds - Ferruginous Hawk (Buteo regalis) SOC 6 View Model

Birds - Flammulated Owl (Psiloscops flammeolus) SOC 4 2 View Model

Birds - Forster's Tern (Sterna forsteri) SOC 2 2 View Model

Birds - Fox Sparrow (Passerella iliaca) 19

Birds - Franklin's Gull (Leucophaeus pipixcan) SOC 4 View Model

Birds - Gadwall (Mareca strepera) 146

Birds - Glaucous Gull (Larus hyperboreus) 22

Birds - Glaucous-winged Gull (Larus glaucescens) 2

Birds - Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) SOC 30 9 View Model

Birds - Golden-crowned Kinglet (Regulus satrapa) 142

Birds - Grasshopper Sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum) 57 View Model

Birds - Gray Catbird (Dumetella carolinensis) 99

Birds - Gray Partridge (Perdix perdix) 13

Birds - Gray-crowned Rosy-Finch (Leucosticte tephrocotis) SOC 1 View Model

Birds - Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias) SOC 84 19 View Model

Birds - Great Egret (Ardea alba) 3

Birds - Great Gray Owl (Strix nebulosa) SOC 4 4 View Model

Birds - Great Horned Owl (Bubo virginianus) 56

Birds - Greater Scaup (Aythya marila) 10

Birds - Greater White-fronted Goose (Anser albifrons) 1

Birds - Greater Yellowlegs (Tringa melanoleuca) 13

Birds - Green-winged Teal (Anas crecca) 37

Birds - Gyrfalcon (Falco rusticolus) 16 mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 4/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Birds - Hairy Woodpecker (Dryobates villosus) 107

Birds - Hammond's Flycatcher (Empidonax hammondii) 163

Birds - Harris's Sparrow (Zonotrichia querula) 5

Birds - Hermit Thrush (Catharus guttatus) 20

Birds - Herring Gull (Larus argentatus) 33

Birds - Hoary Redpoll (Acanthis hornemanni) 2

Birds - Hooded Merganser (Lophodytes cucullatus) PSOC 17 View Model

Birds - Horned Grebe (Podiceps auritus) SOC 11 2 View Model

Birds - Horned Lark (Eremophila alpestris) 68

Birds - House Finch (Haemorhous mexicanus) 29

Birds - House Sparrow (Passer domesticus) 30

Birds - House Wren (Troglodytes aedon) 100

Birds - Killdeer (Charadrius vociferus) 181

Birds - Lark Sparrow (Chondestes grammacus) 29

Birds - Lazuli Bunting (Passerina amoena) 185

Birds - Least Flycatcher (Empidonax minimus) 24

Birds - Least Sandpiper (Calidris minutilla) 1

Birds - Lesser Scaup (Aythya affinis) 21

Birds - Lesser Yellowlegs (Tringa flavipes) 6

Birds - Lewis's Woodpecker (Melanerpes lewis) SOC 2 2 View Model

Birds - Lincoln's Sparrow (Melospiza lincolnii) 6

Birds - Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) SOC 1 View Model

Birds - Long-billed Curlew (Numenius americanus) SOC 135 122 View Model

Birds - Long-billed Dowitcher (Limnodromus scolopaceus) 3

Birds - Long-eared Owl (Asio otus) 209

Birds - Long-tailed Duck (Clangula hyemalis) 2

Birds - MacGillivray's Warbler (Geothlypis tolmiei) 481

Birds - Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) 292

Birds - Marbled Godwit (Limosa fedoa) 2

Birds - Marsh Wren (Cistothorus palustris) 72

Birds - Merlin (Falco columbarius) 12

Birds - Mew Gull (Larus canus) 22

Birds - Mountain Bluebird (Sialia currucoides) 63

Birds - Mountain Chickadee (Poecile gambeli) 258

Birds - Mourning Dove (Zenaida macroura) 146

Birds - Nashville Warbler (Oreothlypis ruficapilla) 21

Birds - Northern Flicker (Colaptes auratus) 273

Birds - Northern Flicker (Red-shafted) (Colaptes auratus cafer) 29

Birds - Northern Flicker (Yellow-shafted) 1 (Colaptes auratus auratus)

Birds - Northern Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) SOC 10 View Model

Birds - Northern Hawk Owl (Surnia ulula) SOC 1 View Model

Birds - Northern Pintail (Anas acuta) 17

Birds - Northern Pygmy-Owl (Glaucidium gnoma) 11

Birds - Northern Rough-winged Swallow 41 (Stelgidopteryx serripennis)

Birds - Northern Saw-whet Owl (Aegolius acadicus) 12

Birds - Northern Shoveler (Spatula clypeata) 136

Birds - Northern Waterthrush (Parkesia noveboracensis) 32

Birds - Olive-sided Flycatcher (Contopus cooperi) 56 View Model

Birds - Orange-crowned Warbler (Oreothlypis celata) 355

Birds - Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) 47 mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 5/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Birds - Pacific Loon (Gavia pacifica) 2

Birds - Pacific Wren (Troglodytes pacificus) SOC 65 44 View Model

Birds - Pectoral Sandpiper (Calidris melanotos) 3

Birds - Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) SOC 50 11 View Model

Birds - Pied-billed Grebe (Podilymbus podiceps) 29

Birds - Pileated Woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus) SOC 88 72 View Model

Birds - Pine Grosbeak (Pinicola enucleator) 8

Birds - Pine Siskin (Spinus pinus) 395

Birds - Pomarine Jaeger (Stercorarius pomarinus) 1

Birds - Prairie Falcon (Falco mexicanus) 19 View Model

Birds - Purple Finch (Haemorhous purpureus) 1

Birds - Pygmy Nuthatch (Sitta pygmaea) 30

Birds - Red-breasted Merganser (Mergus serrator) 3

Birds - Red-breasted Nuthatch (Sitta canadensis) 702

Birds - Red-eyed Vireo (Vireo olivaceus) 18

Birds - Red-naped Sapsucker (Sphyrapicus nuchalis) 47

Birds - Red-necked Grebe (Podiceps grisegena) 15

Birds - Red-necked Phalarope (Phalaropus lobatus) 11

Birds - Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) 143

Birds - Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus) 511

Birds - Redhead (Aythya americana) 112

Birds - Ring-billed Gull (Larus delawarensis) 153

Birds - Ring-necked Duck (Aythya collaris) 27

Birds - Ring-necked Pheasant (Phasianus colchicus) 169

Birds - Rock Pigeon (Columba livia) 24

Birds - Rock Wren (Salpinctes obsoletus) 50

Birds - Rough-legged Hawk (Buteo lagopus) 32

Birds - Ruby-crowned Kinglet (Regulus calendula) 347

Birds - Ruddy Duck (Oxyura jamaicensis) 27

Birds - Ruffed Grouse (Bonasa umbellus) 95

Birds - Rufous Hummingbird (Selasphorus rufus) PSOC 25 View Model

Birds - Rusty Blackbird (Euphagus carolinus) 3

Birds - Sage Thrasher (Oreoscoptes montanus) SOC 1 View Model

Birds - Sagebrush Sparrow (Artemisiospiza nevadensis) SOC 1 View Model

Birds - Sandhill Crane (Antigone canadensis) 23

Birds - Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis) 218

Birds - Say's Phoebe (Sayornis saya) 11

Birds - Scissor-tailed Flycatcher (Tyrannus forficatus) 1

Birds - Semipalmated Sandpiper (Calidris pusilla) 3

Birds - Sharp-shinned Hawk (Accipiter striatus) 12

Birds - Short-billed Dowitcher (Limnodromus griseus) 2

Birds - Short-eared Owl (Asio flammeus) PSOC 117 View Model

Birds - Snow Bunting (Plectrophenax nivalis) 3

Birds - Snow Goose (Anser caerulescens) 2

Birds - Snowy Egret (Egretta thula) 1

Birds - Snowy Owl (Bubo scandiacus) 26

Birds - Solitary Sandpiper (Tringa solitaria) 7 View Model

Birds - Song Sparrow (Melospiza melodia) 325

Birds - Sora (Porzana carolina) 146

Birds - Spotted Sandpiper (Actitis macularius) 57

Birds - Spotted Towhee (Pipilo maculatus) 231 mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 6/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Birds - Spruce Grouse (Falcipennis canadensis) 3

Birds - Steller's Jay (Cyanocitta stelleri) 56

Birds - Stilt Sandpiper (Calidris himantopus) 2

Birds - Surf Scoter (Melanitta perspicillata) 1

Birds - Swainson's Hawk (Buteo swainsoni) 13 View Model

Birds - Swainson's Thrush (Catharus ustulatus) 654

Birds - Tennessee Warbler (Oreothlypis peregrina) PSOC 4 View Model

Birds - Townsend's Solitaire (Myadestes townsendi) 231

Birds - Townsend's Warbler (Setophaga townsendi) 283

Birds - Tree Swallow (Tachycineta bicolor) 124

Birds - Trumpeter Swan (Cygnus buccinator) SOC 36 1 View Model

Birds - Tundra Swan (Cygnus columbianus) 6

Birds - Turkey Vulture (Cathartes aura) 24

Birds - Varied Thrush (Ixoreus naevius) SOC 130 74 View Model

Birds - Vaux's Swift (Chaetura vauxi) 5

Birds - Veery (Catharus fuscescens) SOC 2 1 View Model

Birds - Vesper Sparrow (Pooecetes gramineus) 305

Birds - Violet-green Swallow (Tachycineta thalassina) 32

Birds - Virginia Rail (Rallus limicola) 37

Birds - Warbling Vireo (Vireo gilvus) 316

Birds - Western Bluebird (Sialia mexicana) 20

Birds - Western Grebe (Aechmophorus occidentalis) 21

Birds - Western Kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis) 14

Birds - Western Meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta) 780

Birds - Western Sandpiper (Calidris mauri) 1

Birds - Western Screech-Owl (Megascops kennicottii) PSOC 4 View Model

Birds - Western Tanager (Piranga ludoviciana) 505

Birds - Western Wood-Pewee (Contopus sordidulus) 159

Birds - White-breasted Nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis) 48

Birds - White-crowned Sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys) 25

Birds - White-faced Ibis (Plegadis chihi) SOC 1 View Model

Birds - White-tailed Ptarmigan (Lagopus leucura) SOC 2 View Model

Birds - White-throated Swift (Aeronautes saxatalis) 7

Birds - White-winged Crossbill (Loxia leucoptera) 2

Birds - White-winged Dove (Zenaida asiatica) 1

Birds - White-winged Scoter (Melanitta fusca) 3

Birds - Wild Turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) 7

Birds - Williamson's Sapsucker (Sphyrapicus thyroideus) 2 View Model

Birds - Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii) 152 View Model

Birds - Wilson's Phalarope (Phalaropus tricolor) 23

Birds - Wilson's Snipe (Gallinago delicata) 331

Birds - Wilson's Warbler (Cardellina pusilla) 44

Birds - Wood Duck (Aix sponsa) 12

Birds - Yellow Warbler (Setophaga petechia) 185

Birds - Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) SOC 1 View Model

Birds - Yellow-breasted Chat (Icteria virens) 12

Birds - Yellow-crowned Night-Heron (Nyctanassa violacea) 1

Birds - Yellow-headed Blackbird (Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus) 283

Birds - Yellow-rumped Warbler (Setophaga coronata) 513

Birds - Yellow-rumped Warbler (Audubon's) 152 (Setophaga coronata auduboni) mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 7/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Reptiles 10 Species Number of Species Predicted Suitable Observations Occurrences Habitat Model

Reptiles - Common Gartersnake (Thamnophis sirtalis) 54 View Model

Reptiles - Gophersnake (Pituophis catenifer) 5 View Model

Reptiles - North American Racer (Coluber constrictor) 5 View Model

Reptiles - Northern Alligator Lizard (Elgaria coerulea) SOC 5 7 View Model

Reptiles - Northern Rubber Boa (Charina bottae) 11 View Model

Reptiles - Painted Turtle (Chrysemys picta) 87 View Model

Reptiles - Prairie Rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis) 10 View Model

Reptiles - Snapping Turtle (Chelydra serpentina) SOC 2 View Model

Reptiles - Terrestrial Gartersnake (Thamnophis elegans) 45 View Model

Reptiles - Western Fence Lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis) 7 View Model

Amphibians 7 Species Number of Species Predicted Suitable Observations Occurrences Habitat Model

Amphibians - American Bullfrog (Lithobates catesbeianus) AIS 9 View Model

Amphibians - Columbia Spotted Frog (Rana luteiventris) 132 View Model

Amphibians - Long-toed Salamander 74 View Model (Ambystoma macrodactylum)

Amphibians - Northern Leopard Frog (Lithobates pipiens) SOC 9 View Model

Amphibians - Pacific Treefrog (Pseudacris regilla) 44 View Model

Amphibians - Rocky Mountain Tailed Frog (Ascaphus montanus) 21 View Model

Amphibians - Western Toad (Anaxyrus boreas) SOC 49 10 View Model

Fish 5 Species Number of Species Predicted Suitable Observations Occurrences Habitat Model

Fish - Brook Trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) 3 View Model

Fish - Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) SOC 2 View Model

Fish - Columbia Slimy Sculpin (Cottus cognatus) 2 View Model

Fish - Pygmy Whitefish (Prosopium coulteri) SOC 1 View Model

Fish - Westslope Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii lewisi) 2 75 View Model SOC

Invertebrates 125 Species Number of Species Predicted Suitable Observations Occurrences Habitat Model

Invertebrates - Acentrella insignificans (A Mayfly) 3

Invertebrates - Aeshna constricta (Lance-tipped Darner) PSOC 1

Invertebrates - Aeshna interrupta (Variable Darner) 2

Invertebrates - Aeshna palmata (Paddle-tailed Darner) 6

Invertebrates - Aeshna umbrosa (Shadow Darner) 1

Invertebrates - Aglais milberti (Milbert's Tortoiseshell) 1

Invertebrates - Allogona ptychophora (Idaho Forestsnail) 1

Invertebrates - Ameletus similior (A Mayfly) 1

Invertebrates - Amphiagrion abbreviatum (Western Red Damsel) 1

Invertebrates - Antheraea polyphemus (Polyphemus Moth) 1

Invertebrates - Argia emma (Emma's Dancer) PSOC 1

Invertebrates - Attenella margarita (A Mayfly) 3

Invertebrates - Baetis tricaudatus (A Mayfly) 4

Invertebrates - Baetisca columbiana (A Mayfly) PSOC 1 mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 8/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Invertebrates - Bibiocephala grandis (A True Fly) 1

Invertebrates - Bombus bifarius (Two Form Bumble Bee) 2 View Model

Invertebrates - Bombus huntii (Hunt's Bumble Bee) 1 View Model

Invertebrates - Bombus occidentalis (Western Bumble Bee) 1 View Model

Invertebrates - Bombus suckleyi (Suckley Cuckoo Bumble Bee) 1 View Model

Invertebrates - Bombus vagans (Half-black Bumble Bee) 1 View Model

Invertebrates - Brachycentrus americanus (A Caddisfly) 1

Invertebrates - Branchinecta readingi 1 (Eastern Alkali Fairy Shrimp)

Invertebrates - Caenis youngi (A Mayfly) 3

Invertebrates - Cicindela purpurea (Cow Path Tiger Beetle) 2

Invertebrates - Cicindela tranquebarica borealis 4 (Oblique-lined Tiger Beetle)

Invertebrates - Coenonympha tullia (Common Ringlet) 1

Invertebrates - Coptotomus longulus 1 (A Predaceous Diving Beetle)

Invertebrates - Dicosmoecus gilvipes (A Caddisfly) 4

Invertebrates - Discus brunsoni (Lake Disc) SOC 5 3

Invertebrates - Discus shimekii (Striate Disc) SOC 1 1

Invertebrates - Discus whitneyi (Forest Disc) 2

Invertebrates - Doroneuria baumanni (Cascades Stone) 1

Invertebrates - Doroneuria theodora (Montana Stone) 1

Invertebrates - Drunella coloradensis (A Mayfly) 1

Invertebrates - Drunella doddsii (A Mayfly) 1

Invertebrates - Drunella spinifera (A Mayfly) 1

Invertebrates - Ecclisomyia maculosa (A Caddisfly) 1

Invertebrates - Enallagma annexum (Northern Bluet) 8

Invertebrates - Enallagma boreale (Boreal Bluet) 2

Invertebrates - Enallagma carunculatum (Tule Bluet) 5

Invertebrates - Enallagma ebrium (Marsh Bluet) 2

Invertebrates - Endopus parvipes (A Millipede) PSOC 1 1

Invertebrates - Ephemerella excrucians (A Mayfly) 1

Invertebrates - Erpobdella punctata (A Leech) 3

Invertebrates - Fossaria humilis (Marsh Fossaria) 5

Invertebrates - Gammarus lacustris (An Amphipod) 2

Invertebrates - Goereilla baumanni 1 1 (Northern Rocky Mountains Refugium Caddisfly) SOC

Invertebrates - Gyraulus circumstriatus (Disc Gyro) 7

Invertebrates - Gyraulus parvus (Ash Gyro) 9

Invertebrates - Helisoma anceps (Two-ridge Rams-horn) 8

Invertebrates - Hesperoperla pacifica (Golden Stone) 1

Invertebrates - Heterlimnius corpulentus (A Riffle Beetle) 1

Invertebrates - Hyalella "azteca" (An Amphipod) 3

Invertebrates - Ironodes nitidus (A Mayfly) 2

Invertebrates - Ischnura cervula (Pacific Forktail) 4

Invertebrates - Ischnura perparva (Western Forktail) 4

Invertebrates - Lepidostoma cascadense (A Caddisfly) 1

Invertebrates - Leptophlebia cupida (A Mayfly) 1

Invertebrates - Lestes congener (Spotted Spreadwing) 4

Invertebrates - Lestes disjunctus (Northern Spreadwing) 4

Invertebrates - Lestes unguiculatus (Lyre-tipped Spreadwing) 2

Invertebrates - Leucorrhinia intacta (Dot-tailed Whiteface) 2 mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 9/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Invertebrates - Libellula forensis (Eight-spotted Skimmer) 1

Invertebrates - Libellula pulchella (Twelve-spotted Skimmer) 5

Invertebrates - Libellula quadrimaculata (Four-spotted Skimmer) 1

Invertebrates - Limax maximus (Giant Gardenslug) 2

Invertebrates - Lycaena helloides (Purplish Copper) 1

Invertebrates - Lymnaea stagnalis (Swamp Lymnaea) 1

Invertebrates - Maccaffertium terminatum (A Mayfly) 3

Invertebrates - Margaritifera falcata (Western Pearlshell) SOC 3 3

Invertebrates - Megaleuctra stigmata (Giant Needlefly) 1

Invertebrates - Micrasema bactro (A Caddisfly) 1

Invertebrates - Mystacides alafimbriatus (A Caddisfly) 3

Invertebrates - Nectopsyche diarina (A Caddisfly) 6

Invertebrates - Neophylax splendens (A Caddisfly) 1

Invertebrates - Neothremma alicia (A Caddisfly) 1

Invertebrates - Ophiogomphus occidentis (Sinuous Snaketail) 4 PSOC

Invertebrates - Ophiogomphus severus (Pale Snaketail) 1

Invertebrates - Oreohelix alpina (Alpine Mountainsnail) SOC 5 5

Invertebrates - Oreohelix elrodi (Carinate Mountainsnail) SOC 3 2

Invertebrates - Oreohelix strigosa (Rocky Mountainsnail) 1

Invertebrates - Oreohelix subrudis (Subalpine Mountainsnail) 1

Invertebrates - Papilio multicaudata (Two-tailed Swallowtail) 1

Invertebrates - Paralauterborniella nigrohalterale 3 (A Paralauterborniellan Chironomid)

Invertebrates - Parapsyche elsis (A Caddisfly) 1

Invertebrates - Physa megalochlamys (Large-mantle Physa) 1 2 SOC

Invertebrates - Physella acuta (Pewter Physa) 8

Invertebrates - Physella gyrina (Tadpole Physa) 5

Invertebrates - Pieris rapae (Cabbage White) 1

Invertebrates - Planorbella trivolvis (Marsh Rams-horn) 3

Invertebrates - Plathemis lydia (Common Whitetail) 2

Invertebrates - Polycelis coronata (A Planarid Worm) 1

Invertebrates - Pristiloma wascoense (Shiny Tightcoil) SOC 2

Invertebrates - Promenetus exacuous (Sharp Sprite) 1

Invertebrates - Prophysaon humile (Smoky Taildropper) SOC 1 1

Invertebrates - Radiodiscus abietum (Fir Pinwheel) PSOC 7

Invertebrates - Rhionaeschna multicolor (Blue-eyed Darner) 1 PSOC

Invertebrates - Rhyacophila alexanderi 2 (Alexander's Rhyacophilan Caddisfly) SOC

Invertebrates - Rhyacophila unimaculata 3 (A Rhyacophilan Caddisfly)

Invertebrates - Rhyacophila vao (A Rhyacophilan Caddisfly) 1

Invertebrates - Serratella tibialis (A Mayfly) 1

Invertebrates - Soyedina potteri 2 (Northern Rocky Mountains Refugium Stonefly) SOC

Invertebrates - Sphaerium simile (Grooved Fingernailclam) 3

Invertebrates - Stagnicola caperata (Wrinkled Marshsnail) 1

Invertebrates - Stylurus olivaceus (Olive Clubtail) 1

Invertebrates - Suwallia salish (A Stonefly) 3

Invertebrates - Sympetrum costiferum 4 (Saffron-winged Meadowhawk) mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 10/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Invertebrates - Sympetrum danae (Black Meadowhawk) 2

Invertebrates - Sympetrum internum 3 (Cherry-faced Meadowhawk)

Invertebrates - Sympetrum obtrusum (White-faced Meadowhawk) 2

Invertebrates - Sympetrum pallipes (Striped Meadowhawk) 4

Invertebrates - Sympetrum semicinctum 7 (Band-winged Meadowhawk)

Invertebrates - Sympetrum vicinum (Autumn Meadowhawk) 1

Invertebrates - Tricorythodes explicatus (A Mayfly) 3

Invertebrates - Tropisternus lateralis (A Water Scavenger Beetle) 4

Invertebrates - Tvetenia vitracies (A Tvetenian Chironomid) 3

Invertebrates - Valvata humeralis (Glossy Valvata) 7

Invertebrates - Valvata sincera (Mossy Valvata) 3

Invertebrates - Valvata tricarinata (Threeridge Valvata) PSOC 12

Invertebrates - Vitrina pellucida (Western Glass-snail) 1

Invertebrates - Yoraperla brevis (Least Roachfly) 1

Invertebrates - Zacoleus idahoensis (Sheathed Slug) SOC 3 4

Invertebrates - Zaitzevia parvula (A Riffle Beetle) 3

Invertebrates - Zapada cordillera (Cordilleran Forestfly) SOC 1 3

Invertebrates - Zonitoides arboreus (Quick Gloss) 1

Vascular Plants 382 Species Number of Species Predicted Suitable Observations Occurrences Habitat Model

Vascular Plants - Acer glabrum (Rocky Mountain Maple) 1

Vascular Plants - Acer negundo (Box-elder) 1

Vascular Plants - Achillea millefolium (Common Yarrow) 19

Vascular Plants - Acorus americanus (Sweetflag) SOC 1 1

Vascular Plants - Agastache urticifolia (Nettle-leaf Giant-hyssop) 1

Vascular Plants - Agropyron cristatum (Crested Wheatgrass) 6

Vascular Plants - Agrostis capillaris (Colonial Bentgrass) 1

Vascular Plants - Agrostis gigantea (Redtop) 7

Vascular Plants - Agrostis scabra (Rough Bentgrass) 1

Vascular Plants - Agrostis stolonifera (Creeping Bentgrass) 3

Vascular Plants - Alisma triviale (Northern Water-plantain) 2

Vascular Plants - Allium columbianum (Columbia Onion) SOC 3 3

Vascular Plants - Alnus incana (Speckled Alder) 8

Vascular Plants - Alopecurus aequalis (Short-awn Foxtail) 1

Vascular Plants - Alopecurus arundinaceus (Creeping Foxtail) 1

Vascular Plants - Alopecurus carolinianus (Tufted Foxtail) 1

Vascular Plants - Alopecurus pratensis (Meadow Foxtail) 4

Vascular Plants - Alyssum alyssoides (Pale Alyssum) 2

Vascular Plants - Amaranthus retroflexus (Redroot Amaranth) 1

Vascular Plants - Amelanchier alnifolia (Saskatoon Serviceberry) 4

Vascular Plants - Angelica arguta (Lyall's Angelica) 1

Vascular Plants - Antennaria luzuloides (Rush Pussytoes) 1

Vascular Plants - Antennaria microphylla (Littleleaf Pussytoes) 1

Vascular Plants - Antennaria rosea (Rosy Pussytoes) 1

Vascular Plants - Anthemis cotula (Mayweed) 3

Vascular Plants - Arctium minus (Common Burdock) 1

Vascular Plants - Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (Kinnikinnick) 2

Vascular Plants - Argentina anserina (Silverweed cinquefoil) 1 mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 11/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Vascular Plants - Aristida purpurea (Purple Three-awn Grass) 1

Vascular Plants - Arnica chamissonis (Leafy Arnica) 1

Vascular Plants - Arnica fulgens (Hillside Arnica) 2

Vascular Plants - Artemisia cana (Silver Sagebrush) 2

Vascular Plants - Artemisia frigida (Fringed Sage) 1

Vascular Plants - Artemisia ludoviciana (White Sagebrush) 2

Vascular Plants - Asparagus officinalis (Garden Asparagus) 1

Vascular Plants - Asplenium trichomanes-ramosum 8 8 (Limestone Maidenhair Spleenwort) SOC

Vascular Plants - Atriplex truncata (Wedge-leaf Saltbush) SOC 1 1

Vascular Plants - Balsamorhiza sagittata (Arrowleaf Balsamroot) 1

Vascular Plants - Bassia hyssopifolia (Five-horn Smotherweed) 1

Vascular Plants - Beckmannia syzigachne (American Sloughgrass) 2

Vascular Plants - Berteroa incana (Hoary False-alyssum) N2B 1 View Model

Vascular Plants - Besseya rubra (Red kittentails) 2

Vascular Plants - Betula occidentalis (Spring Birch) 3

Vascular Plants - Betula papyrifera (Paper Birch) 1

Vascular Plants - Bidens cernua (Nodding Beggarticks) 2

Vascular Plants - Bolboschoenus maritimus (Saltmarsh Bulrush) 1

Vascular Plants - Botrychium lineare (Linearleaf Moonwort) 1 SOC

Vascular Plants - Botrychium lunaria (Common Moonwort) 1

Vascular Plants - Botrychium minganense 2 (Mingan Island Moonwort)

Vascular Plants - Botrychium montanum (Mountain Moonwort) 4 PSOC

Vascular Plants - Botrychium sp. (Non-SOC) 3 (Moonworts (Non-SOC)) PSOC

Vascular Plants - Botrychium sp. (SOC) (Moonworts (SOC)) 1 SOC

Vascular Plants - Bromus arvensis (Field Brome) 2

Vascular Plants - Bromus carinatus (California Brome) 2

Vascular Plants - Bromus inermis (Smooth Brome) 5

Vascular Plants - Bromus japonicus (Japanese Brome) 1

Vascular Plants - Bromus tectorum (Cheatgrass) R3 12 View Model

Vascular Plants - Calamagrostis canadensis 1 (Blue-joint reedgrass)

Vascular Plants - Camelina microcarpa (Little-seed False Flax) 1

Vascular Plants - Campanula rotundifolia (American Harebell) 1

Vascular Plants - Capsella bursa-pastoris 1 (Common Shepherd's Purse)

Vascular Plants - Cardamine rupicola (Cliff Toothwort) SOC 5 3

Vascular Plants - Carduus nutans (Musk Thistle) 1

Vascular Plants - Carex aquatilis (Water Sedge) 2

Vascular Plants - Carex athrostachya (Jointed-spike Sedge) 1

Vascular Plants - Carex bebbii (Bebb's Sedge) 4

Vascular Plants - Carex lacustris (Lake-bank Sedge) SOC 1 1

Vascular Plants - Carex lasiocarpa (Slender Sedge) 2

Vascular Plants - Carex microptera (Small-wing Sedge) 1

Vascular Plants - Carex nebrascensis (Nebraska Sedge) 7

Vascular Plants - Carex pachystachya (Thick-head Sedge) 1

Vascular Plants - Carex pellita (Woolly Sedge) 6

Vascular Plants - Carex petasata (Liddon Sedge) 3 mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 12/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Vascular Plants - Carex praegracilis (Clustered Field Sedge) 3

Vascular Plants - Carex praticola (Northern Meadow Sedge) 4

Vascular Plants - Carex retrorsa (Retrorse Sedge) 3

Vascular Plants - Carex scoparia (Pointed Broom Sedge) SOC 1 1 View Model

Vascular Plants - Carex stipata (Awl-fruit Sedge) 8

Vascular Plants - Carex utriculata (Common Beaked Sedge) 9

Vascular Plants - Carex vesicaria (Inflated Sedge) 2

Vascular Plants - Carex vulpinoidea (Fox Sedge) 1 1

Vascular Plants - Castilleja covilleana (Coville Indian Paintbrush) 1 View Model SOC

Vascular Plants - Castilleja lutescens 1 (Stiff Yellowish Indian Paintbrush)

Vascular Plants - Centaurea stoebe (Spotted Knapweed) N2B 47 View Model

Vascular Plants - Centunculus minimus (Chaffweed) SOC 1 2

Vascular Plants - Cerastium arvense (Field Chickweed) 3

Vascular Plants - Cerastium fontanum 1 (Common Mouse-ear Chickweed)

Vascular Plants - Ceratophyllum demersum (Common Hornwort) 3

Vascular Plants - Chenopodium album (White Goosefoot) 4

Vascular Plants - Chenopodium rubrum (Red Goosefoot) 1

Vascular Plants - Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus 4 (Sticky-leaf Rabbitbrush)

Vascular Plants - Cichorium intybus (Chicory) 2

Vascular Plants - Cirsium arvense (Canada Thistle) N2B 19 View Model

Vascular Plants - Cirsium undulatum (Wavyleaf Thistle) 2

Vascular Plants - Cirsium vulgare (Bull Thistle) 7

Vascular Plants - Clarkia rhomboidea (Diamond Clarkia) SOC 1

Vascular Plants - Cleome serrulata (Rocky Mountain Beeplant) 1

Vascular Plants - Clintonia uniflora (Queencup Beadlily) 1

Vascular Plants - Collomia debilis (Alpine Collomia) 1

Vascular Plants - Collomia linearis (Narrow-leaved Collomia) 2

Vascular Plants - Coreopsis tinctoria (Golden Tickseed) 1

Vascular Plants - Cornus sericea (Red-osier Dogwood) 6

Vascular Plants - Crataegus douglasii (Douglas's Hawthorn) 7

Vascular Plants - Cryptogramma cascadensis 1 1 (Cascade Rockbrake) SOC

Vascular Plants - Cryptogramma stelleri (Fragile Rockbrake) 1 REVIEW

Vascular Plants - Cynoglossum officinale 13 View Model (Common Hound's-tongue) N2B

Vascular Plants - Cyperus acuminatus (Short-pointed Flatsedge) 1 1 SOC

Vascular Plants - Cypripedium fasciculatum 2 4 (Clustered Lady's-slipper) SOC

Vascular Plants - Cypripedium parviflorum 1 (Small Yellow Lady's-slipper) PSOC

Vascular Plants - Dactylis glomerata (Orchard Grass) 4

Vascular Plants - Danthonia intermedia (Timber Oatgrass) 2

Vascular Plants - Delphinium bicolor (Little Larkspur) 1

Vascular Plants - Deschampsia cespitosa (Tufted Hairgrass) 5

Vascular Plants - Descurainia sophia (Herb Sophia) 3

Vascular Plants - Dianthus armeria (Deptford-pink) 6

Vascular Plants - Dichanthelium oligosanthes var. scribnerianum 3 3 (Scribner's Panic Grass) SOC mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 13/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Vascular Plants - Dipsacus fullonum (Common Teasel) 5

Vascular Plants - Distichlis spicata (Saltgrass) 1

Vascular Plants - Dodecatheon conjugens 1 (Bonneville Shootingstar)

Vascular Plants - Elatine californica (California Waterwort) 3 REVIEW

Vascular Plants - Eleocharis acicularis (Least Spikerush) 2

Vascular Plants - Eleocharis flavescens (Pale Spikerush) 1 1 REVIEW

Vascular Plants - Eleocharis palustris (Creeping Spikerush) 9

Vascular Plants - Eleocharis quinqueflora (Few-flower Spikerush) 1

Vascular Plants - Eleocharis rostellata (Beaked Spikerush) SOC 2 View Model

Vascular Plants - Elodea canadensis (Broad Waterweed) 3

Vascular Plants - Elymus cinereus (Great Basin Wildrye) 1

Vascular Plants - Elymus glaucus (Blue Wildrye) 1

Vascular Plants - Elymus hispidus (Intermediate Wheatgrass) 1

Vascular Plants - Elymus lanceolatus (Thickspike Wheatgrass) 1

Vascular Plants - Elymus repens (Quackgrass) 7

Vascular Plants - Elymus smithii (Western Wheatgrass) 5

Vascular Plants - Elymus spicatus (Bluebunch Wheatgrass) 13

Vascular Plants - Elymus trachycaulus (Slender Wheatgrass) 6

Vascular Plants - Elymus triticoides (Beardless Wildrye) 1

Vascular Plants - Epilobium brachycarpum (Panicled Willowherb) 1

Vascular Plants - Epilobium ciliatum (Hairy Willowherb) 6

Vascular Plants - Epilobium densiflorum (Dense Spike-primrose) 1 1 PSOC

Vascular Plants - Epilobium palustre (Marsh Willowherb) 1

Vascular Plants - Epipactis gigantea (Giant Helleborine) SOC 1 1

Vascular Plants - Equisetum arvense (Field Horsetail) 5

Vascular Plants - Equisetum hyemale (Rough Horsetail) 3

Vascular Plants - Equisetum palustre (Marsh Horsetail) SOC 3 4

Vascular Plants - Ericameria nauseosa (Rubber Rabbitbrush) 4

Vascular Plants - Erigeron filifolius (Threadleaf Fleabane) 2

Vascular Plants - Erigeron speciosus (Aspen Fleabane) 1

Vascular Plants - Eriogonum heracleoides 9 (Parsnip-flower Buckwheat)

Vascular Plants - Eriogonum microthecum (Slender Buckwheat) 2 REVIEW

Vascular Plants - Erodium cicutarium (Stork's bill) 1

Vascular Plants - Erysimum cheiranthoides 1 (Wormseed Wallflower)

Vascular Plants - Festuca campestris (Rough Fescue) 30

Vascular Plants - Festuca idahoensis (Idaho Fescue) 26

Vascular Plants - Festuca rubra (Red Fescue) 1

Vascular Plants - Filago arvensis (Field Fluffweed) 1

Vascular Plants - Fragaria virginiana (Virginia Strawberry) 1

Vascular Plants - Gaillardia aristata (Blanketflower) 5

Vascular Plants - Galium mexicanum (Mexican Bedstraw) 1

Vascular Plants - Galium trifidum (Small Bedstraw) 1

Vascular Plants - Geranium viscosissimum (Sticky Geranium) 7

Vascular Plants - Geum macrophyllum (Largeleaf Avens) 7

Vascular Plants - Geum triflorum (Prairie-smoke) 12

Vascular Plants - Glyceria grandis (American Mannagrass) 5 mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 14/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Vascular Plants - Glyceria striata (Fowl Mannagrass) 6

Vascular Plants - Glycyrrhiza lepidota (Wild Licorice) 1

Vascular Plants - Gnaphalium palustre (Western Marsh Cudweed) 2

Vascular Plants - Goodyera oblongifolia 1 (Giant Rattlesnake-plantain)

Vascular Plants - Gratiola neglecta (Clammy Hedge-hyssop) 7

Vascular Plants - Grindelia squarrosa (Curlycup Gumweed) 1

Vascular Plants - Halogeton glomeratus (Halogeton) 1

Vascular Plants - Helenium autumnale (Common Sneezeweed) 2

Vascular Plants - Helianthus annuus (Common Sunflower) 1

Vascular Plants - Heteranthera dubia (Water Star-grass) SOC 1 1

Vascular Plants - Heterocodon rariflorum (Western Pearl-flower) 1 SOC

Vascular Plants - Heterotheca villosa (Hairy Goldenaster) 1

Vascular Plants - Heuchera cylindrica (Poker Alumroot) 2

Vascular Plants - Hieracium aurantiacum (Orange Hawkweed) 1 View Model N2A

Vascular Plants - Hieracium scouleri (Scouler's Hawkweed) 3

Vascular Plants - Hippuris vulgaris (Common Mare's-tail) 2

Vascular Plants - Holosteum umbellatum (Jagged Chickweed) 1

Vascular Plants - Hordeum brachyantherum (Meadow Barley) 1

Vascular Plants - Hordeum jubatum (Foxtail Barley) 3

Vascular Plants - Hypericum perforatum 7 View Model (Common St. John's-wort) N2B

Vascular Plants - Impatiens ecalcarata (Spurless Touch-me-not) 6 6 PSOC

Vascular Plants - Iris pseudacorus (Yellowflag Iris) N2A/AIS 4

Vascular Plants - Juncus acuminatus (Tapered Rush) SOC 1 1

Vascular Plants - Juncus alpinoarticulatus (Northern Green Rush) 1

Vascular Plants - Juncus articulatus (Jointed Rush) 2

Vascular Plants - Juncus balticus (Baltic Rush) 5

Vascular Plants - Juncus bufonius (Toad Rush) 1

Vascular Plants - Juncus confusus (Colorado Rush) 1

Vascular Plants - Juncus effusus (Soft Rush) 1

Vascular Plants - Juncus ensifolius (Three-stamened Rush) 8

Vascular Plants - Juncus mertensianus (Mertens' Rush) 1

Vascular Plants - Juncus nodosus (Knotted Rush) 2

Vascular Plants - Juncus tenuis (Slender Rush) 4

Vascular Plants - Juniperus scopulorum (Rocky Mountain Juniper) 1

Vascular Plants - Kochia scoparia (Common Kochia) 3

Vascular Plants - Koeleria macrantha (Prairie Junegrass) 9

Vascular Plants - Lactuca serriola (Prickly Lettuce) 5

Vascular Plants - Lagophylla ramosissima (Slender Hareleaf) 1 1 SOC

Vascular Plants - Lemna minor (Lesser Duckweed) 6

Vascular Plants - Lemna trisulca (Star Duckweed) 1

Vascular Plants - Lepidium campestre (Field Pepper-grass) 3

Vascular Plants - Lepidium chalepense (Lenspod Whitetop) 1

Vascular Plants - Lepidium densiflorum 1 (Dense-flower Pepper-grass)

Vascular Plants - Lepidium draba (Whitetop) N2B 2 View Model

Vascular Plants - Lepidium perfoliatum (Clasping Pepper-grass) 6

Vascular Plants - Leucanthemum vulgare (Oxeye Daisy) N2B 8 View Model mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 15/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Vascular Plants - Lilaea scilloides (Flowering Quillwort) SOC 1

Vascular Plants - Limosella aquatica (Northern Mudwort) 1

Vascular Plants - Linaria dalmatica (Dalmatian Toadflax) N2B 2 View Model

Vascular Plants - Linnaea borealis (Twinflower) 1

Vascular Plants - Lithospermum ruderale (Western Gromwell) 12

Vascular Plants - Lobelia kalmii (Kalm's Lobelia) SOC 1

Vascular Plants - Lomatium macrocarpum 3 (Large-fruit Desert-parsley)

Vascular Plants - Lomatium triternatum (Nineleaf Biscuitroot) 4

Vascular Plants - Lupinus sericeus (Pursh's Silky Lupine) 5

Vascular Plants - Lycopus americanus (American Bugleweed) 1

Vascular Plants - Lysichiton americanus (Yellow Skunk-cabbage) 1

Vascular Plants - Malva neglecta (Dwarf Cheeseweed) 4

Vascular Plants - Marsilea oligospora (Pepperwort) SOC 1 1

Vascular Plants - Marsilea vestita (Hairy Water Fern) 1

Vascular Plants - Matricaria discoidea 1 (Pineapple-weed Chamomile)

Vascular Plants - Medicago lupulina (Black Medic) 2

Vascular Plants - Medicago sativa (Alfalfa) 4

Vascular Plants - Melica bulbosa (Oniongrass) 2

Vascular Plants - Melilotus albus (White Sweetclover) 3

Vascular Plants - Melilotus officinalis (Yellow Sweetclover) 5

Vascular Plants - Mentha arvensis (Wild mint) 8

Vascular Plants - Mimulus guttatus 5 (Common Large Monkeyflower)

Vascular Plants - Mimulus hymenophyllus 1 1 (Thinsepal monkeyflower) SOC

Vascular Plants - Minuartia nuttallii (Nuttall's Sandwort) 1

Vascular Plants - Minuartia obtusiloba (Alpine Stitchwort) 1

Vascular Plants - Monarda fistulosa (Beebalm) 5

Vascular Plants - Monolepis nuttalliana (Nuttall's Povertyweed) 1

Vascular Plants - Monotropa uniflora (Indian-pipe) 1

Vascular Plants - Montia linearis (Linearleaf Miner's-lettuce) 1

Vascular Plants - Myosotis scorpioides (True Forget-me-not) 1

Vascular Plants - Najas guadalupensis (Guadalupe Water-nymph) 1 1 SOC

Vascular Plants - Nepeta cataria (Catnip) 5

Vascular Plants - Oenothera villosa (Hairy Evening-primrose) 1

Vascular Plants - Ophioglossum pusillum (Adder's Tongue) 2 1 SOC

Vascular Plants - Oxytropis campestris var. columbiana 8 10 (Columbia Locoweed) SOC

Vascular Plants - Panicum capillare (Witch Panicgrass) 1

Vascular Plants - Pedicularis groenlandica 1 (Elephant's-head Lousewort)

Vascular Plants - Pellaea glabella (Smooth Cliffbrake) 1

Vascular Plants - Phacelia lyallii (Lyall Phacelia) 1

Vascular Plants - Phalaris arundinacea (Reed Canarygrass) 9

Vascular Plants - Phleum pratense (Meadow Timothy) 7

Vascular Plants - Phlox kelseyi var. missoulensis 1 View Model (Missoula Phlox) SOC

Vascular Plants - Picea engelmannii (Engelmann Spruce) 1

Vascular Plants - Pinus albicaulis (Whitebark Pine) SOC 12 24 View Model

Vascular Plants - Pinus contorta (Lodgepole Pine) 2 mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 16/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Vascular Plants - Pinus monticola (Western White Pine) 1

Vascular Plants - Pinus ponderosa (Ponderosa Pine) 11

Vascular Plants - Piperia elegans (Hillside Rein Orchid) 6

Vascular Plants - Plagiobothrys scouleri (Meadow Popcorn-flower) 2

Vascular Plants - Plantago lanceolata (English Plantain) 2

Vascular Plants - Plantago major (Common Plantain) 5

Vascular Plants - Plantago patagonica (Woolly Plantain) 1

Vascular Plants - Platanthera dilatata (White Bog Orchid) 4

Vascular Plants - Poa palustris (Fowl Bluegrass) 4

Vascular Plants - Poa pratensis (Kentucky Bluegrass) 18

Vascular Plants - Poa secunda (Sandberg Bluegrass) 4

Vascular Plants - Polemonium pulcherrimum 2 (Showy Jacob's-ladder)

Vascular Plants - Polygonum amphibium (Water Smartweed) 8

Vascular Plants - Polygonum aviculare (Knotweed) 1

Vascular Plants - Polygonum bistortoides (American Bistort) 2

Vascular Plants - Polygonum douglasii (Douglas Knotweed) 1

Vascular Plants - Polygonum lapathifolium 2 (Dock-leaf Smartweed)

Vascular Plants - Polygonum persicaria 1 (Lady's Thumb Smartweed)

Vascular Plants - Polygonum punctatum (Dotted Smartweed) 3

Vascular Plants - Polypogon monspeliensis (Rabbit's-foot Grass) 2

Vascular Plants - Polystichum kruckebergii 1 1 (Kruckeberg's Swordfern) SOC

Vascular Plants - Polystichum lonchitis (Northern Swordfern) 1

Vascular Plants - Populus balsamifera (Black Cottonwood) 8

Vascular Plants - Populus deltoides (Eastern Cottonwood) 1

Vascular Plants - Populus tremuloides (Quaking Aspen) 4

Vascular Plants - Potamogeton amplifolius (Largeleaf Pondweed) 1

Vascular Plants - Potamogeton crispus (Curly-leaf Pondweed) 1 N2B/AIS

Vascular Plants - Potamogeton foliosus (Leafy Pondweed) 1

Vascular Plants - Potamogeton gramineus (Grassy Pondweed) 1

Vascular Plants - Potamogeton natans (Floating Pondweed) 2

Vascular Plants - Potamogeton pectinatus (Sago Pondweed) 1

Vascular Plants - Potentilla fruticosa (Shrubby Cinquefoil) 2

Vascular Plants - Potentilla gracilis (Fanleaf Cinquefoil) 7

Vascular Plants - Potentilla norvegica (Norwegian Cinquefoil) 1

Vascular Plants - Potentilla recta (Sulphur Cinquefoil) N2B 11

Vascular Plants - Prunella vulgaris (Self-heal) 2

Vascular Plants - Prunus americana (American Plum) 2

Vascular Plants - Prunus virginiana (Chokecherry) 2

Vascular Plants - Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas-fir) 1

Vascular Plants - Psilocarphus brevissimus (Dwarf woolly-heads) 1 1 View Model SOC

Vascular Plants - Puccinellia nuttalliana (Nuttall's Alkaligrass) 1

Vascular Plants - Purshia tridentata (Antelope Bitterbrush) 1

Vascular Plants - Ranunculus acris (Tall Buttercup) N2A 1

Vascular Plants - Ranunculus aquatilis (White Water Buttercup) 4

Vascular Plants - Ranunculus sceleratus (Cursed Buttercup) 1

Vascular Plants - Ribes aureum (Golden Currant) 1

Vascular Plants - Ribes hudsonianum (Northern Black Currant) 1 mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 17/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Vascular Plants - Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum (Watercress) 3

Vascular Plants - Rosa acicularis (Prickly Rose) 2

Vascular Plants - Rosa woodsii (Woods' Rose) 16

Vascular Plants - Rotala ramosior (Toothcup) SOC 1

Vascular Plants - Rubus idaeus (Red Raspberry) 2

Vascular Plants - Rumex acetosella (Sheep Sorrel) 1

Vascular Plants - Rumex crispus (Curly Dock) 8

Vascular Plants - Rumex fueginus (Sea-side Dock) 1

Vascular Plants - Sagittaria latifolia (Common Arrowhead) 1

Vascular Plants - Salix amygdaloides (Peach-leaf Willow) 2

Vascular Plants - Salix bebbiana (Bebb's Willow) 9

Vascular Plants - Salix candida (Hoary Willow) 1

Vascular Plants - Salix drummondiana (Drummond's Willow) 5

Vascular Plants - Salix eriocephala var. watsonii (Yellow Willow) 4

Vascular Plants - Salix exigua (Sandbar Willow) 6

Vascular Plants - Salix geyeriana (Geyer's Willow) 1

Vascular Plants - Salix lasiandra (Pacific Willow) 1

Vascular Plants - Sambucus racemosa (Red Elderberry) 1

Vascular Plants - Sarcobatus vermiculatus (Black Greasewood) 1

Vascular Plants - Schedonorus arundinaceus (Tall Fescue) 2

Vascular Plants - Schedonorus pratensis (Meadow Fescue) 3

Vascular Plants - Schoenoplectus acutus (Hardstem Bulrush) 5

Vascular Plants - Schoenoplectus heterochaetus 1 (Slender Bulrush) SOC

Vascular Plants - Schoenoplectus pungens 1 (Three-square Bulrush)

Vascular Plants - Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani 1 (Softstem Bulrush)

Vascular Plants - Scirpus cyperinus (Woolgrass) 1

Vascular Plants - Scirpus microcarpus (Small-fruit Bulrush) 8

Vascular Plants - Sedum stenopetalum (Narrow-petal Stonecrop) 1

Vascular Plants - Senecio hydrophiloides (Sweet Marsh Ragwort) 1

Vascular Plants - Sidalcea oregana (Oregon Checker-mallow) 12 5 SOC

Vascular Plants - Silene conoidea (Conoid Catchfly) 1

Vascular Plants - Silene douglasii (Douglas's Catchfly) 1

Vascular Plants - Silene latifolia (Bladder Campion) 5

Vascular Plants - Silene spaldingii (Spalding's Catchfly) SOC 96 43 View Model

Vascular Plants - Sinapis arvensis (Corn Mustard) 2

Vascular Plants - Sisymbrium altissimum (Tall Tumble-mustard) 8

Vascular Plants - Solanum dulcamara (Climbing Nightshade) 5

Vascular Plants - Solidago canadensis (Canada Goldenrod) 3

Vascular Plants - Solidago missouriensis (Missouri Goldenrod) 5

Vascular Plants - Sonchus arvensis (Field Sowthistle) 4

Vascular Plants - Sparganium angustifolium 2 (Narrowleaf Bur-reed)

Vascular Plants - Sphenopholis intermedia (Slender Wedgegrass) 1 PSOC

Vascular Plants - Spiranthes romanzoffiana 1 (Hooded Lady's-tresses)

Vascular Plants - Sporobolus cryptandrus (Sand Dropseed) 1

Vascular Plants - Sporobolus neglectus (Small Dropseed) SOC 1 1

Vascular Plants - Stipa comata (Needle-and-Thread) 5 mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 18/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Vascular Plants - Stipa nelsonii (Nelson's Needlegrass) 7

Vascular Plants - Stipa occidentalis (Western Needlegrass) 2

Vascular Plants - Stipa richardsonii (Richardson's Needlegrass) 4

Vascular Plants - Stipa viridula (Green Needlegrass) 1

Vascular Plants - Suaeda calceoliformis (Horned Sea-blite) 3

Vascular Plants - Symphoricarpos albus (Common Snowberry) 9

Vascular Plants - Symphoricarpos occidentalis 1 (Western Snowberry)

Vascular Plants - Symphyotrichum ciliatum (Rayless Alkali Aster) 1

Vascular Plants - Symphyotrichum laeve (Smooth Blue Aster) 1

Vascular Plants - Symphyotrichum spathulatum 1 (Western Mountain Aster)

Vascular Plants - Synthyris canbyi (Mission Mountain kittentails) 9 7 View Model SOC

Vascular Plants - Taeniatherum caput-medusae (Medusahead) 1 N1A

Vascular Plants - Taraxacum officinale (Common dandelion) 5

Vascular Plants - Taxus brevifolia (Pacific Yew) 1

Vascular Plants - Thlaspi arvense (Field Pennycress) 5

Vascular Plants - Thuja plicata (Western Redcedar) 1

Vascular Plants - Tragopogon dubius (Meadow Goat's-beard) 5

Vascular Plants - Trifolium arvense (Rabbit-foot Clover) 1

Vascular Plants - Trifolium hybridum (Alsike Clover) 2

Vascular Plants - Trifolium pratense (Red Clover) 5

Vascular Plants - Trifolium repens (White Clover) 3

Vascular Plants - Triglochin maritima (Common Bog Arrow-grass) 1

Vascular Plants - Triodanis perfoliata 1 (Claspingleaf Venus'-looking-glass)

Vascular Plants - Tripleurospermum inodorum 1 (Scentless Chamomile)

Vascular Plants - Typha latifolia (Broadleaf Cattail) 7

Vascular Plants - Urtica dioica (Stinging Nettle) 2

Vascular Plants - Verbascum blattaria (Moth Mullein) 1

Vascular Plants - Verbascum thapsus (Common Mullein) 8

Vascular Plants - Verbena hastata (Swamp verbena) 2

Vascular Plants - Veronica americana (American Speedwell) 5

Vascular Plants - Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Brook-pimpernell) 1

Vascular Plants - Veronica peregrina (Purslane Speedwell) 1

Vascular Plants - Wolffia brasiliensis (Spotted Water-meal) 1 REVIEW

Vascular Plants - Wolffia columbiana (Columbia Water-meal) 2 1 SOC

Vascular Plants - Xanthium strumarium (Rough Cocklebur) 2

Vascular Plants - Zigadenus venenosus (Meadow Deathcamas) 2

Bryophytes 4 Species Number of Species Predicted Suitable Observations Occurrences Habitat Model

Bryophytes - Dicranum fragilifolium (Fragile Leaf Dicranum Moss) 1 1 PSOC

Bryophytes - Eurhynchiastrum pulchellum var. barnesii 1 (Barnes' Eurhynchium Moss) REVIEW

Bryophytes - Neckera douglasii (Douglas' Neckera Moss) SOC 1 2

Bryophytes - Syntrichia norvegica (Norwegian Syntrichia Moss) 1 SOC mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 19/20 11/4/2019 MTNHP.org - Species Snapshot

Lichens 17 Species Number of Species Predicted Suitable Observations Occurrences Habitat Model

Lichens - Cladonia pyxidata (Pebbled Pixie-Cup Lichen) 1

Lichens - Cladonia uncialis (Thorny Pixie-Sticks Lichen) SOC 1 1

Lichens - Evernia divaricata (Mountain Oakmoss Lichen) PSOC 5 4

Lichens - Hypogymnia physodes (Monk's-hood Lichen) 1

Lichens - Lobaria anomala (Netted Lungwort Lichen) SOC 3 2

Lichens - Lobaria hallii (Gray Lungwort Lichen) SOC 1 1

Lichens - Lobaria scrobiculata (Textured Lungwort Lichen) SOC 1 1

Lichens - Normandina pulchella (Elf-Ear Lichen) SOC 1 1

Lichens - Parmeliella triptophylla (Fingered Shingle Lichen) 1 1 SOC

Lichens - Phaeophyscia kairamoi (Least Shadow Lichen) SOC 1 1

Lichens - Platismatia glauca (Varied Ragbag Lichen) 1

Lichens - Platismatia stenophylla (Ribbon Rag Lichen) PSOC 1 1

Lichens - Psora rubiformis (Pea-green Scale Lichen) PSOC 2 2

Lichens - Ramalina obtusata (Hooded Bush Lichen) SOC 7 4

Lichens - Solorina spongiosa (Fringed Chocolate Chip Lichen) 1 1 SOC

Lichens - Stereocaulon paschale (Easter Foam Lichen) SOC 1 1

Lichens - Verrucaria kootenaica (Kootenai Speck Lichen) SOC 1 1

mtnhp.org/SpeciesSnapshot/ 20/20 8/11/2020 IPaC: Explore Location

IPaC U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

IPaC resource list

This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly aected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and extent of eects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-specic (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specic (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information.

Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS oce(s) with jurisdiction in the dened project area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.

Location Lake County, Montana

Local oce

Montana Ecological Services Field Oce  (406) 449-5225  (406) 449-5339

585 Shephard Way, Suite 1 Helena, MT 59601-6287

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/CQGXY6BQEBDB5HRREWHFNBRTTQ/resources 1/9 8/11/2020 IPaC: Explore Location

Endangered species

This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts.

The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species. Additional areas of inuence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the species range if the species could be indirectly aected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a sh population, even if that sh does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact the species by reducing or eliminating water ow downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any potential eects to species, additional site-specic and project-specic information is often required.

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from the local oce and a species list which fullls this requirement can only be obtained by requesting an ocial species list from either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local eld oce directly.

For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and request an ocial species list by doing the following:

1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE. 2. Click DEFINE PROJECT. 3. Log in (if directed to do so). 4. Provide a name and description for your project. 5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.

Listed species1 and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the sheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries2).

Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.

1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more information. 2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an oce of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.

The following species are potentially aected by activities in this location:

Mammals NAME STATUS

Canada Lynx Lynx canadensis Threatened There is nal critical habitat for this species. Your location overlaps the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3652

Grizzly Bear Ursus arctos horribilis Threatened There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7642

North American Wolverine Gulo gulo luscus Proposed Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5123

Birds NAME STATUS

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/CQGXY6BQEBDB5HRREWHFNBRTTQ/resources 2/9 8/11/2020 IPaC: Explore Location

Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus Threatened There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3911

Fishes NAME STATUS

Bull Trout Salvelinus conuentus Threatened There is nal critical habitat for this species. Your location overlaps the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8212

Flowering Plants NAME STATUS

Spalding's Catchy Silene spaldingii Threatened There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3681

Water Howellia Howellia aquatilis Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7090

Conifers and Cycads NAME STATUS

Whitebark Pine Pinus albicaulis Candidate No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1748

Critical habitats

Potential eects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered species themselves. This location overlaps the critical habitat for the following species:

NAME TYPE

Bull Trout Salvelinus conuentus Final https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8212#crithab

Canada Lynx Lynx canadensis Final https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3652#crithab

Migratory birds

Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act1 and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act2 .

Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.

1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918. 2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/CQGXY6BQEBDB5HRREWHFNBRTTQ/resources 3/9 8/11/2020 IPaC: Explore Location Additional information can be found using the following links:

Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/ birds-of-conservation-concern.php Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools- and-guidance/ conservation-measures.php Nationwide conservation measures for birds http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures.pdf

The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may nd in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For projects that occur o the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found below.

For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.

NAME BREEDING SEASON (IF A BREEDING SEASON IS INDICATED FOR A BIRD ON YOUR LIST, THE BIRD MAY BREED IN YOUR PROJECT AREA SOMETIME WITHIN THE TIMEFRAME SPECIFIED, WHICH IS A VERY LIBERAL ESTIMATE OF THE DATES INSIDE WHICH THE BIRD BREEDS ACROSS ITS ENTIRE RANGE. "BREEDS ELSEWHERE" INDICATES THAT THE BIRD DOES NOT LIKELY BREED IN YOUR PROJECT AREA.)

Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31 This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626

Cassin's Finch Carpodacus cassinii Breeds May 15 to Jul 15 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9462

Clark's Grebe Aechmophorus clarkii Breeds Jan 1 to Dec 31 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31 This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680

Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa avipes Breeds elsewhere This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9679

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/CQGXY6BQEBDB5HRREWHFNBRTTQ/resources 4/9 8/11/2020 IPaC: Explore Location

Long-billed Curlew Numenius americanus Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 31 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5511

Marbled Godwit Limosa fedoa Breeds May 1 to Jul 31 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9481

Olive-sided Flycatcher Contopus cooperi Breeds May 20 to Aug 31 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3914

Rufous Hummingbird selasphorus rufus Breeds Apr 15 to Jul 15 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8002

Willet Tringa semipalmata Breeds Apr 20 to Aug 5 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Probability of Presence Summary

The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the FAQ “Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report” before using or attempting to interpret this report.

Probability of Presence ( )

Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey eort (see below) can be used to establish a level of condence in the presence score. One can have higher condence in the presence score if the corresponding survey eort is also high.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25. 2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2. 3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of presence score.

To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

Breeding Season ( ) Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.

Survey Eort ( ) Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/CQGXY6BQEBDB5HRREWHFNBRTTQ/resources 5/9 8/11/2020 IPaC: Explore Location To see a bar's survey eort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

No Data ( ) A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

Survey Timeframe Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant information. The exception to this is areas o the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.

probability of presence breeding season survey eort no data

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

Bald Eagle Non-BCC Vulnerable (This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities.)

Cassin's Finch BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Clark's Grebe BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Golden Eagle Non-BCC Vulnerable (This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities.)

Lesser Yellowlegs BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Long-billed Curlew BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Marbled Godwit BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Olive-sided Flycatcher BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Rufous Hummingbird BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/CQGXY6BQEBDB5HRREWHFNBRTTQ/resources 6/9 8/11/2020 IPaC: Explore Location

Willet BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.

Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures and/or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.

What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specied location?

The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.

The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and ltered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identied as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to oshore activities or development.

Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the AKN Phenology Tool.

What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specied location?

The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets .

Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.

How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, migrating or present year-round in my project area?

To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or year-round), you may refer to the following resources: The Cornell Lab of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide, or (if you are unsuccessful in locating the bird of interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology Neotropical Birds guide. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specied. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.

What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?

Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:

1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacic Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands); 2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and 3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles) potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities (e.g. oshore energy development or longline shing).

Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, eorts should be made, in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics.

Details about birds that are potentially aected by oshore projects

For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird species within your project area o the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also oers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird model results les underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/CQGXY6BQEBDB5HRREWHFNBRTTQ/resources 7/9 8/11/2020 IPaC: Explore Location Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring.

What if I have eagles on my list?

If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.

Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report

The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ “What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specied location”. Please be aware this report provides the “probability of presence” of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look carefully at the survey eort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the “no data” indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey eort is the key component. If the survey eort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey eort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to look for to conrm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be conrmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ “Tell me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds” at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.

Facilities

National Wildlife Refuge lands

Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.

This location overlaps the following National Wildlife Refuge lands:

LAND ACRES

National Bison Range 24,678.43 acres

 (406) 644-2211  (406) 644-2661

58355 Bison Range Road Moiese, MT 59824-9439

https://www.fws.gov/refuges/proles/index.cfm?id=61540

Pablo National Wildlife Refuge 2,474.09 acres

 (406) 644-2211  (406) 644-2661

MAILING ADDRESS C/o National Bison Range 58355 Bison Range Road Moiese, MT 59824-9439

PHYSICAL ADDRESS Pablo National Wildlife Refuge Reservoir Road Pablo, MT 59855-9401

https://www.fws.gov/refuges/proles/index.cfm?id=61542 https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/CQGXY6BQEBDB5HRREWHFNBRTTQ/resources 8/9 8/11/2020 IPaC: Explore Location

Swan River National Wildlife Refuge 1,932.76 acres

 (406) 727-7400  (406) 727-7432

C/o Benton Lake Nwr 922 Bootlegger Trail Great Falls, MT 59404-6133

https://www.fws.gov/refuges/proles/index.cfm?id=61543

Fish hatcheries

THERE ARE NO FISH HATCHERIES AT THIS LOCATION.

Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory

Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.

For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District.

WETLAND INFORMATION IS NOT AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME This can happen when the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map service is unavailable, or for very large projects that intersect many wetland areas. Try again, or visit the NWI map to view wetlands at this location.

Data limitations

The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identied based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classication established through image analysis.

The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verication work conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.

Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or eld work. There may be occasional dierences in polygon boundaries or classications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site.

Data exclusions

Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters. Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tubercid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory. These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.

Data precautions

Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may dene and describe wetlands in a dierent manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to dene the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities involving modications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate federal, state, or local agencies concerning specied agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may aect such activities.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/CQGXY6BQEBDB5HRREWHFNBRTTQ/resources 9/9 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location

IPaC U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

IPaC resource list

This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly aected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and extent of eects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-specic (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specic (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information.

Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS oce(s) with jurisdiction in the dened project area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.

Location Flathead County, Montana

Local oce

Montana Ecological Services Field Oce  (406) 449-5225  (406) 449-5339

585 Shephard Way, Suite 1 Helena, MT 59601-6287

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/JF3PIC7MN5DHBIZWRRCJUP2RBA/resources 1/10 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location

Endangered species

This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts.

The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species. Additional areas of inuence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the species range if the species could be indirectly aected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a sh population, even if that sh does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact the species by reducing or eliminating water ow downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any potential eects to species, additional site-specic and project-specic information is often required.

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from the local oce and a species list which fullls this requirement can only be obtained by requesting an ocial species list from either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local eld oce directly.

For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and request an ocial species list by doing the following:

1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE. 2. Click DEFINE PROJECT. 3. Log in (if directed to do so). 4. Provide a name and description for your project. 5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.

Listed species1 and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the sheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries2 ).

Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.

1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more information. 2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an oce of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.

The following species are potentially aected by activities in this location:

Mammals NAME STATUS https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/JF3PIC7MN5DHBIZWRRCJUP2RBA/resources 2/10 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location

Canada Lynx Lynx canadensis Threatened There is nal critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3652

Grizzly Bear Ursus arctos horribilis Threatened There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7642

North American Wolverine Gulo gulo luscus Proposed Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5123

Birds NAME STATUS

Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus Threatened There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3911

Flowering Plants NAME STATUS

Spalding's Catchy Silene spaldingii Threatened There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3681

Critical habitats

Potential eects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered species themselves.

THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS AT THIS LOCATION.

Migratory birds

Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act1 and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act2 .

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/JF3PIC7MN5DHBIZWRRCJUP2RBA/resources 3/10 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.

1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918. 2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.

Additional information can be found using the following links:

Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/ birds-of-conservation-concern.php Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/ conservation-measures.php Nationwide conservation measures for birds http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures.pdf

The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may nd in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For projects that occur o the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found below.

For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.

NAME BREEDING SEASON (IF A BREEDING SEASON IS INDICATED FOR A BIRD ON YOUR LIST, THE BIRD MAY BREED IN YOUR PROJECT AREA SOMETIME WITHIN THE TIMEFRAME SPECIFIED, WHICH IS A VERY LIBERAL ESTIMATE OF THE DATES INSIDE WHICH THE BIRD BREEDS ACROSS ITS ENTIRE RANGE. "BREEDS ELSEWHERE" INDICATES THAT THE BIRD DOES NOT LIKELY BREED IN YOUR PROJECT AREA.)

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/JF3PIC7MN5DHBIZWRRCJUP2RBA/resources 4/10 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location

Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31 This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626

Olive-sided Flycatcher Contopus cooperi Breeds May 20 to Aug 31 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3914

Rufous Hummingbird selasphorus rufus Breeds Apr 15 to Jul 15 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8002

Probability of Presence Summary

The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the FAQ “Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report” before using or attempting to interpret this report.

Probability of Presence ( )

Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey eort (see below) can be used to establish a level of condence in the presence score. One can have higher condence in the presence score if the corresponding survey eort is also high.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25. 2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2. 3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of presence score.

To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/JF3PIC7MN5DHBIZWRRCJUP2RBA/resources 5/10 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location Breeding Season ( ) Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.

Survey Eort ( ) Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.

To see a bar's survey eort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

No Data ( ) A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

Survey Timeframe Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant information. The exception to this is areas o the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.

probability of presence breeding season survey eort no data

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

Bald Eagle Non-BCC Vulnerable (This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities.)

Olive-sided Flycatcher BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Rufous Hummingbird BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.

Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/JF3PIC7MN5DHBIZWRRCJUP2RBA/resources 6/10 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures and/or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.

What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specied location?

The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.

The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and ltered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identied as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to oshore activities or development.

Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the AKN Phenology Tool.

What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specied location?

The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets .

Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.

How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, migrating or present year-round in my project area?

To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or year-round), you may refer to the following resources: The Cornell Lab of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide, or (if you are unsuccessful in locating the bird of interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology Neotropical Birds guide. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specied. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.

What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?

Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:

1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacic Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands); 2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and 3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles) potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities (e.g. oshore energy development or longline shing).

Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, eorts should be made, in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/JF3PIC7MN5DHBIZWRRCJUP2RBA/resources 7/10 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location Details about birds that are potentially aected by oshore projects

For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird species within your project area o the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also oers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird model results les underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.

Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring.

What if I have eagles on my list?

If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.

Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report

The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ “What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specied location”. Please be aware this report provides the “probability of presence” of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look carefully at the survey eort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the “no data” indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey eort is the key component. If the survey eort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey eort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to look for to conrm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be conrmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ “Tell me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds” at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.

Facilities

National Wildlife Refuge lands

Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.

THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS AT THIS LOCATION.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/JF3PIC7MN5DHBIZWRRCJUP2RBA/resources 8/10 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location Fish hatcheries

THERE ARE NO FISH HATCHERIES AT THIS LOCATION.

Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory

Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.

For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District.

Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine the actual extent of wetlands on site.

This location overlaps the following wetlands:

FRESHWATER POND Palustrine

LAKE Lacustrine

RIVERINE Riverine

A full description for each wetland code can be found at the National Wetlands Inventory website

Data limitations

The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identied based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classication established through image analysis.

The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verication work conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.

Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or eld work. There may be occasional dierences in polygon boundaries or classications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site.

Data exclusions

Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/JF3PIC7MN5DHBIZWRRCJUP2RBA/resources 9/10 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tubercid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory. These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.

Data precautions

Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may dene and describe wetlands in a dierent manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to dene the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities involving modications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate federal, state, or local agencies concerning specied agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may aect such activities.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/JF3PIC7MN5DHBIZWRRCJUP2RBA/resources 10/10 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location

IPaC U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

IPaC resource list

This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly aected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and extent of eects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-specic (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specic (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information.

Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS oce(s) with jurisdiction in the dened project area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.

Location Flathead County, Montana

Local oce

Montana Ecological Services Field Oce  (406) 449-5225  (406) 449-5339

585 Shephard Way, Suite 1 Helena, MT 59601-6287

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/J6S4ECQIKRHORKTJKNV4AXDVH4/resources 1/7 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location

Endangered species

This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts.

The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species. Additional areas of inuence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the species range if the species could be indirectly aected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a sh population, even if that sh does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact the species by reducing or eliminating water ow downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any potential eects to species, additional site-specic and project-specic information is often required.

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from the local oce and a species list which fullls this requirement can only be obtained by requesting an ocial species list from either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local eld oce directly.

For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and request an ocial species list by doing the following:

1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE. 2. Click DEFINE PROJECT. 3. Log in (if directed to do so). 4. Provide a name and description for your project. 5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.

Listed species1 and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the sheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries2 ).

Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.

1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more information. 2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an oce of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.

The following species are potentially aected by activities in this location:

Mammals NAME STATUS https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/J6S4ECQIKRHORKTJKNV4AXDVH4/resources 2/7 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location

Canada Lynx Lynx canadensis Threatened There is nal critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3652

Grizzly Bear Ursus arctos horribilis Threatened There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7642

North American Wolverine Gulo gulo luscus Proposed Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5123

Birds NAME STATUS

Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus Threatened There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3911

Flowering Plants NAME STATUS

Spalding's Catchy Silene spaldingii Threatened There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3681

Critical habitats

Potential eects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered species themselves.

THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS AT THIS LOCATION.

Migratory birds

Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act1 and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act2 .

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/J6S4ECQIKRHORKTJKNV4AXDVH4/resources 3/7 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.

1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918. 2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.

Additional information can be found using the following links:

Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/ birds-of-conservation-concern.php Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/ conservation-measures.php Nationwide conservation measures for birds http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures.pdf

THERE ARE NO MIGRATORY BIRDS OF CONSERVATION CONCERN EXPECTED TO OCCUR AT THIS LOCATION.

Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.

Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures and/or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.

What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specied location?

The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.

The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and ltered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identied as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to oshore activities or development.

Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the AKN Phenology Tool.

What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specied location?

The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets .

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/J6S4ECQIKRHORKTJKNV4AXDVH4/resources 4/7 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.

How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, migrating or present year-round in my project area?

To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or year-round), you may refer to the following resources: The Cornell Lab of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide, or (if you are unsuccessful in locating the bird of interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology Neotropical Birds guide. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specied. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.

What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?

Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:

1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacic Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands); 2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and 3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles) potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities (e.g. oshore energy development or longline shing).

Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, eorts should be made, in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics.

Details about birds that are potentially aected by oshore projects

For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird species within your project area o the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also oers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird model results les underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.

Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring.

What if I have eagles on my list?

If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.

Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report

The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ “What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specied location”. Please be aware this report provides the “probability of presence” of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/J6S4ECQIKRHORKTJKNV4AXDVH4/resources 5/7 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location carefully at the survey eort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the “no data” indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey eort is the key component. If the survey eort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey eort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to look for to conrm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be conrmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ “Tell me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds” at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.

Facilities

National Wildlife Refuge lands

Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.

THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS AT THIS LOCATION.

Fish hatcheries

THERE ARE NO FISH HATCHERIES AT THIS LOCATION.

Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory

Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.

For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District.

Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine the actual extent of wetlands on site.

This location overlaps the following wetlands:

LAKE Lacustrine

RIVERINE https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/J6S4ECQIKRHORKTJKNV4AXDVH4/resources 6/7 4/10/2020 IPaC: Explore Location Riverine

A full description for each wetland code can be found at the National Wetlands Inventory website

Data limitations

The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identied based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classication established through image analysis.

The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verication work conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.

Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or eld work. There may be occasional dierences in polygon boundaries or classications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site.

Data exclusions

Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters. Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tubercid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory. These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.

Data precautions

Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may dene and describe wetlands in a dierent manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to dene the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities involving modications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate federal, state, or local agencies concerning specied agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may aect such activities.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/J6S4ECQIKRHORKTJKNV4AXDVH4/resources 7/7 Appendix D Correspondence

• IDT Request for Comment Letter/Email • CSKT – Whisper-Camel-Means • USFWS – Ben Conard • CSKT – Craig Barfoot

Breanne Carr

From: Gregory Wilson Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2020 11:20 AM To: Richard Janssen; Dan Lozar; Scott Johnston; [email protected]; Seth Makepeace; [email protected]; Les Evarts; Barry Hansen; Craig Barfoot; Dale Becker; Whisper Means; Stacy Courville; Art Soukkala; Rusty Sydnor; Willie Keenan; Tabitha Espinoza; Mary Price; Chauncey Means; Evan Smith; Daniel Lipscomb; Craig Pablo; Randall Ashley; Peter Gillard; Mark Couture; Michael Durglo; Kyle Felsman; Tony Incashola Jr; Vernon Finley; Tony Incashola Sr; Thompson Smith; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: Molly R. Davidson; Christine A. Pearcy; Breanne Carr Subject: SOD Dams Maintenance NEPA Project Info Request Attachments: CSKT Dams Maint PEA General Request.pdf

***This message originated from an External Source.*** Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.

Good morning all, Please find attached the NEPA request for information regarding the Safety of Dams – Dam Maintenance Activities.

All comments are to be sent to Christine Pearcy w/ Morrison‐Maierle by March 31, 2020. Her contact information is noted in the body of the letter.

Sincerely,

Gregory Wilson, P.E. Division of Engineering & Water Resources Safety of Dams Coordinator Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes Natural Resources Department P.O. Box 278 Pablo, MT 59855 Phone: 406.675.2700 Ext. 6215 [email protected] http://www.csktnrd.org/

1

115°11'40"W 115°5'0"W 114°58'20"W 114°51'40"W 114°45'0"W 114°38'20"W 114°31'40"W 114°25'0"W 114°18'20"W 114°11'40"W 114°5'0"W 113°58'20"W 113°51'40"W 113°45'0"W 113°38'20"W 113°31'40"W 113°25'0"W 113°18'20"W 113°11'40"W

48°7'30"N Litte Bitterroot %, Dam 48°6'40"N

48°3'20"N / 48°2'30"N

48°0'0"N Hubbart Dam

%, 47°58'20"N 47°55'50"N 47°54'10"N 47°51'40"N

Upper Dry 47°50'0"N Fork Dam 47°47'30"N %, Hell Roaring Dam 47°45'50"N Lower Dry

47°43'20"N %, Fork Dam %,

Pablo Dam %, 47°41'40"N

47°39'10"N %, Twin-Turtle Dam 47°37'30"N 47°35'0"N Crow Dam

Kicking Horse Dam 47°33'20"N

47°30'50"N %,

%, %, McDonald Dam 47°29'10"N

47°26'40"N %, Ninepipe Dam 47°25'0"N 47°22'30"N

%, Tabor Dam 47°20'50"N 47°18'20"N LEGEND Mission Dam %, Black %, Dam Locations Lake Dam 47°16'40"N 47°14'10"N Flathead Indian Reservation %, %,

Jocko Dam 47°12'30"N 47°10'0"N

115°10'0"W 115°4'10"W 114°57'30"W 114°50'50"W 114°44'10"W 114°37'30"W 114°30'50"W 114°24'10"W 114°17'30"W 114°10'50"W 114°5'0"W 113°58'20"W 113°51'40"W 113°45'0"W 113°38'20"W 113°31'40"W 113°25'0"W 113°18'20"W 113°11'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 10 20 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Miles DATE: 10/22/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 TOPOGRAPHY MAP OF PROJECT VICINITY 1 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 1_Dams Maintenance PEA_Topo Map.mxd 115°30'0"W 115°22'30"W 115°15'0"W 115°7'30"W 115°0'0"W 114°52'30"W 114°45'0"W 114°37'30"W 114°30'0"W 114°22'30"W 114°15'0"W 114°7'30"W 114°0'0"W 113°52'30"W 113°45'0"W 113°37'30"W 113°30'0"W 113°21'40"W 113°13'20"W 113°5'50"W 112°58'20"W 48°11'40"N / 48°12'30"N Litte Bitterroot 48°6'40"N Dam (Fig. 3) 48°7'30"N

48°2'30"N Hubbart Dam 48°3'20"N (Fig. 4) Flathead

47°57'30"N Lake 47°58'20"N

Flathead

47°52'30"N Sanders 47°53'20"N

Upper Dry 47°47'30"N Fork Dam 47°48'20"N (Fig. 5) Hell Roaring Dam (Fig. 9)

47°42'30"N Pablo Dam 47°43'20"N Lower Dry (Fig. 7) Fork Dam (Fig. 6) Twin-Turtle Dam Lake (Fig. 8) 47°37'30"N Flathead 47°38'20"N Sanders Crow Dam Missoula Powell (Fig. 10) Kicking Horse Dam

47°32'30"N (Fig. 12) 47°33'20"N Crow Dam EWS (Fig. 18)

47°27'30"N Ninepipe Dam McDonald Dam 47°28'20"N (Fig. 11) (Fig. 13) 47°22'30"N 47°23'20"N Tabor Dam (Fig. 15) Mission Dam

47°17'30"N Perma EWS 47°18'20"N (Fig. 19) (Fig. 14) Black Lake Dam (Fig. 17a) 47°13'20"N 47°12'30"N

LEGEND Sanders Lake Black Lake Missoula Dam (Fig. 17b) 47°7'30"N Index Maps Arlee EWS Jocko Dam 47°8'20"N (Fig. 20) (Fig. 16) 47°3'20"N 115°22'30"W 115°14'10"W 115°6'40"W 115°0'0"W 114°52'30"W 114°45'0"W 114°37'30"W 114°30'0"W 114°22'30"W 114°14'10"W 114°6'40"W 114°0'0"W 113°52'30"W 113°45'0"W 113°37'30"W 113°30'0"W 113°22'30"W 113°14'10"W 113°6'40"W 112°59'10"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 12 24 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Miles DATE: 11/7/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 INDEX MAP OF DAM LOCATIONS 2 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 2_Dams Maintenance PEA_Index Map.mxd 114°41'40"W / Little Bitterroot Lake

!(

Little Bitterroot River

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance !( EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°41'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 400 800 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD FLATHEAD COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - LITTLE BITTERROOT DAM 3 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 3_Dams PEA_Bitterroot Map.mxd 114°44'10"W 114°43'20"W 114°42'30"W

Hubbart Reservoir 47°55'50"N / 47°55'50"N

!(

!(

Briggs Creek

Little Bitterrot River

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

47°55'0"N 114°44'10"W 114°43'20"W 114°42'30"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 800 1,600 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD FLATHEAD COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - HUBBART DAM 4 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 4_Dams PEA_Hubbart Map.mxd 114°41'40"W 114°40'50"W 114°40'0"W /

Upper Dry Fork Reservoir !(

Dry Fork Reservoir Rd 47°45'0"N 47°45'0"N

!(

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance Camas Canal

EWS Maintenance Areas Upper Reservoir Rd

!( EWS Locations

114°41'40"W 114°40'50"W 114°40'0"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 800 1,600 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 06/20/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - UPPER DRY FORK DAM 5 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 5_Dams PEA_Upper DF Map.mxd 114°40'50"W 114°40'0"W / 47°42'30"N 47°42'30"N

Dry Fork Reservoir

Camas Canal

!(

Dry Fork Creek

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

47°41'40"N !( EWS Locations 47°41'40"N

114°40'50"W 114°40'0"W 114°39'10"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 1,000 2,000 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - LOWER DRY FORK DAM 6 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 6_Dams PEA_Lower DF Map.mxd 114°10'50"W 114°10'0"W 114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W 47°39'10"N / 47°39'10"N

!( !( Canal 47°38'20"N 47°38'20"N Pablo Reservoir

LEGEND 47°37'30"N Limits of Maintenance 47°37'30"N

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°10'50"W 114°10'0"W 114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 1,600 3,200 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - PABLO DAM 7 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 7_Dams PEA_Pablo Dam Map.mxd 114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W /

!(

!(

Turtle Lake 47°40'0"N 47°40'0"N

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 800 1,600 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - TWIN-TURTLE DAM 8 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 8_Dams PEA_Twin Turtle Map.mxd 114°1'40"W / 47°42'30"N 47°42'30"N

Hell Roaring Hell Roaring Creek Reservoir

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

114°1'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 200 400 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - HELL ROARING DAM 9 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 9_Dams PEA_Hell Roaring Map.mxd 114°14'10"W 114°13'20"W /

Lower Crow Reservoir

!(

Crow Creek 47°30'0"N 47°30'0"N

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas !( !( EWS Locations

114°14'10"W 114°13'20"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 600 1,200 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - CROW DAM 10 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 10_Dams PEA_Crow Dam Map.mxd 114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W 114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W 47°27'30"N / 47°27'30"N !( !( !( !(

Kicking Horse Dam Maintenance Area !( 47°26'40"N 47°26'40"N Ninepipe Reservoir 47°25'50"N LEGEND 47°25'50"N

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W 114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 2,000 4,000 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - NINEPIPE DAM 11 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 11_Dams PEA_Ninepipe Dam Map.mxd 114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W 114°3'20"W 114°2'30"W / 47°28'20"N 47°28'20"N

Kicking Horse Reservoir 47°27'30"N 47°27'30"N

!(

!(

114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W 114°3'20"W 114°2'30"W 47°26'40"N

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 2,000 4,000 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - KICKING HORSE DAM 12 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 12_Dams PEA_Kicking Horse Dam Map.mxd 114°0'0"W 113°59'10"W /

Post Creek

!(

McDonald Lake

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°0'0"W 113°59'10"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 500 1,000 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - MCDONALD DAM 13 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 13_Dams PEA_McDonald Dam Map.mxd 114°1'40"W 114°0'50"W /

Mission Reservoir 47°19'10"N 47°19'10"N

!(

!(

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations Mission Creek

114°1'40"W 114°0'50"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 900 1,800 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - MISSION DAM 14 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 14_Dams PEA_Mission Dam Map.mxd 113°56'40"W 113°55'50"W 113°55'0"W

Dry Creek /

!(

!(

!( Saint Mary's Lake 47°15'50"N 47°15'50"N

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

113°56'40"W 113°55'50"W 113°55'0"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 1,100 2,200 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - TABOR DAM 15 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 15_Dams PEA_Tabor Dam Map.mxd 113°45'50"W /

Jocko Road !(

Middle Fork Jocko River

!(

Lower Jocko Lake

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

113°45'50"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 600 1,200 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD MISSOULA COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - JOCKO DAM 16 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 16_Dams PEA_Jocko Dam Map.mxd 113°44'10"W 113°43'20"W /

Middle Fork Jocko River

!( Black Lake

Lower Jocko Lake

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations 47°11'40"N 113°44'10"W 113°43'20"W 47°11'40"N

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 650 1,300 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD MISSOULA COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - BLACK LAKE DAM 17a M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 17a_Dams PEA_Black Lake Dam Map.mxd 113°41'40"W /

Upper Jocko Lake

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

113°41'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 200 400 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD MISSOULA COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - BLACK LAKE SPILLWAY 17b M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 17b_Dams PEA_Black Lake Spillway Map.mxd 114°15'0"W 114°14'10"W 114°13'20"W 114°12'30"W 114°11'40"W 114°10'50"W 114°10'0"W 114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W /

47°31'40"N !( !( 47°31'40"N

0 150 300 Feet 0 150 300 Feet 47°30'50"N 47°30'50"N

!( 47°30'0"N !( 47°30'0"N

!(

47°29'10"N LEGEND 47°29'10"N Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°15'0"W 114°14'10"W 114°13'20"W 114°12'30"W 114°11'40"W 114°10'50"W 114°10'0"W 114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 3,500 7,000 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - EWS FOR CROW DAM 18 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 18_Dams PEA_Crow EWS.mxd 114°38'20"W 114°37'30"W 114°36'40"W 114°35'50"W 114°35'0"W 114°34'10"W 114°33'20"W 114°32'30"W 114°31'40"W 114°30'50"W 114°30'0"W 114°29'10"W 114°28'20"W 114°27'30"W 114°26'40"W 47°25'50"N / 47°25'50"N 47°25'0"N

!( 47°25'0"N 47°24'10"N 47°24'10"N

0 250 500 Feet 47°23'20"N 47°23'20"N 47°22'30"N 47°22'30"N 47°21'40"N 47°21'40"N !(

LEGEND

47°20'50"N Limits of Maintenance 47°20'50"N EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°38'20"W 114°37'30"W 114°36'40"W 114°35'50"W 114°35'0"W 114°34'10"W 114°33'20"W 114°32'30"W 114°31'40"W 114°30'50"W 114°30'0"W 114°29'10"W 114°28'20"W 114°27'30"W 114°26'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 1 2 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Miles DATE: 11/4/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - EWS PERMA 19 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 19_Dams PEA_Perma EWS.mxd 114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W 114°3'20"W 114°2'30"W 114°1'40"W 114°0'50"W 114°0'0"W 113°59'10"W 113°58'20"W 113°57'30"W 113°56'40"W 113°55'50"W 113°55'0"W / 47°12'30"N 47°12'30"N

!( 47°11'40"N 47°11'40"N

0 250 500 Feet 47°10'50"N 47°10'50"N 47°10'0"N 47°10'0"N ARLEE

!( 47°9'10"N 47°9'10"N 47°8'20"N LEGEND 47°8'20"N

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

47°7'30"N !( EWS Locations 47°7'30"N

114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W 114°3'20"W 114°2'30"W 114°1'40"W 114°0'50"W 114°0'0"W 113°59'10"W 113°58'20"W 113°57'30"W 113°56'40"W 113°55'50"W 113°55'0"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 1 2 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Miles DATE: 11/4/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - EWS ARLEE 20 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 20_Dams PEA_Arlee EWS.mxd CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices Vegetative Maintenance Actions Removal of beached root wads and drifting 1. Areas cleared of vegetation by maintenance, burning, spraying vegetation and debris from within the project 6, 8 or other activities will be seeded, when necessary, with an area approved weed- free seed mix. 2. Utilize sediment filter fence, erosion-control mats, weed free Removal of fallen trees from within the 6, 7, 8 straw bales or other means to reduce erosion and delivery of project area sediment to streams or channels where necessary. Removal of trees and their root system 3. Adhere to product label instructions regarding application. 6, 7, 8, 9 within the project area 4. Apply chemicals during appropriate weather conditions and during the optimum time for control of target species. Vegetation control via prescribed burn 1, 2, 9, 10 5. Use EPA approved herbicide. 6. Avoid wetlands; Consult with IDT if wetland impacts are anticipated. Control of vegetation and repair of 2, 8, 9 7. In accordance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, cutting or vegetation damage in embankment dams removal of trees or shrubs should take place between August th th Noxious weed control via chemical 16 and April 15 . 1, 3, 4, 5, 9 application 8. Minimize activities when soils appear excessively wet. 9. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout Reseeding or revegetating activities using 1, 2, 8, 9 spawning and rearing areas, avoid conducting sediment- various methods producing activities from September 1 through May 15. 10. Follow burn condition recommendations in an established burn Control of aquatic vegetation 3, 4, 5 plan.

Routine mowing using various methods 8

Geotechnical Investigation Actions Geotechnical drilling for soil identification on 1. If practicable, berm and cover stockpiles of sand, dirt or other 4, 5 and nearby dam structures construction material with tarps when rain is forecast or when Soil test pits they are not in use. 1, 2, 5

Page 1

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs) Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices Preparation of drill pad for geotechnical 2. Prevent sediment from migrating offsite and protect storm drain investigations inlets, drainage courses and streams by installing and maintaining appropriate BMPs (i.e. silt fences, gravel bags, fiber rolls, temporary swales, etc.). 3. Revegetate and/or control noxious weeds on drill pad/disturbed 2, 3, 4, 5 areas after use where necessary. 4. Plan and design skid trails, yard areas, and truck access roads to minimize stream crossings and avoid disturbing vegetated areas. 5. Minimize activities when soils appear excessively wet. Instrumentation Maintenance Actions Maintenance of Early Warning System 1. Avoid wetlands; Consult with IDT if wetland impacts are (EWS) components 3, 4 anticipated. 2. In accordance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, cutting or

removal of trees or shrubs should take place between August Relocation of EWS floats/instrumentation if 16th th necessary 1, 2, 3, 4, 8 and April 15 . 3. Properly dispose of or store all leftover construction materials Piezometer installation and maintenance 1, 2, 3, 4 during and after activities. 4. Plan and design skid trails, yard areas, and truck access roads Weir boxes, flumes, and related components to minimize stream crossings and avoid disturbing vegetated maintenance and clearing 4, 6 areas. Removal of algae, sediment, and debris from 5. Haul excess materials to a stable site away from Stream staff gauges, weir boxes, and miscellaneous 5, 6, 8 Management Zones. outfall structures 6. Implement the action only to the extent necessary to provide Installation of survey monitoring points adequate drainage and safety. 1, 2, 3, 4 7. Visually monitor turbidity and minimize releases into adjoining Verification of voltage and amperage or waterways. replacement of electrical controls 3 8. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout spawning and rearing areas, avoid conducting sediment- producing activities from September 1 through May 15. Repair of electrical or instrumentation 3 conduits

Page 2

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs) Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices Access Maintenance Actions 1. Implement the action only to the extent necessary to provide Roadway grading and blading, including adequate drainage and safety. using dust abatement agent 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 14, 20 2. Use water or a dust abatement agent, like magnesium chloride, when necessary. 3. Avoid disturbing stable road surfaces. 4. Minimize activities when soils appear excessively wet. 5. Grade road surfaces only as often as necessary to maintain a Improvements or repairs to the dam access 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, stable running surface and to retain original drainage features. road 11, 14, 20 6. Maintain road surface in a crowned or out-sloped condition. 7. Do not cut the toe of cut slopes or remove established vegetation except in ditches and high shoulder areas. 8. Roads ≤ 50 feet from stream, do not place any road material in Maintenance activities for access to EWS 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 20 a berm along either side of the road. locations 9. If necessary, haul material off site. 10. Where berm removal or off-site disposal is not practicable, cut weep holes in the berms at a minimum of 100-foot intervals to relieve concentrated flows. Surface overlay, chip-seal, crack-seal, 2, 14, 21 11. Roads > 50 feet from stream, keep downhill side of road free pothole patching, and full-depth patching from berms. 12. Maintain gates and associated safety devices in working condition. Replace as needed. 13. Maintain fence free of weeds and woody vegetation. Repair of vehicular traffic ruts on dam crest 1, 2, 4, 6, 14, 20 14. Maintenance and repair must be performed in a timely manner access road to maintain the desired control or safety benefits they provide. 15. Inspect safety fence bi-annually. 16. Maintain safety signs and replace when signs are missing or no longer legible. Snow plowing and ice removal 3, 14, 17, 18, 19 17. Open culverts and ditches restricted by snow or ice to allow proper drainage.

Page 3

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs) Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices 18. Side-casting of snow will be avoided where there is potential for snow or ice damming in adjacent stream channels. 19. Openings in snow berms will be provided and maintained as required for surface drainage. Avoid drainage outlets on Repair or replacement of cattle guards, erodible fills. fences, locks, gates, or other security 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 20. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout features spawning and rearing areas, avoid conducting sediment- producing activities from September 1 through May 15. 21. Avoid paving and seal coating in wet weather or when rain is forecast, to prevent materials that have not cured from contacting stormwater runoff. Dam Component Maintenance Actions 1. Draw reservoir level down when necessary. Reestablishment of freeboard or camber in 1, 2, 3 embankment dams 2. Inspect and repair based on engineer recommendation. 3. Properly dispose of or store all leftover materials during and Repair of cracking in concrete dams or after activities. 1, 2, 3 structures 4. Berm and cover stockpiles of sand, dirt or other construction material with tarps when rain is forecast or when they are not in Sealing of longitudinal or transverse cracks 1, 2, 3 use. in embankment dams 5. Prevent sediment from migrating offsite and protect storm drain inlets, drainage courses and streams by installing and Sealing of concrete joints 1, 2, 3 maintaining appropriate BMPs (i.e. silt fences, gravel bags, fiber rolls, temporary swales, etc.). 6. Implement the action only to the extent necessary to provide Repair of deteriorated or spalled concrete 1, 2, 3 adequate drainage and safety. 7. Reestablish normal slope. 8. Place bedding and competent riprap. Repair or replacement of gutters 1, 2, 3 9. When replacing or reinforcing riprap avoid narrowing or confining the stream channel; the design and implementation Repair/Replacement of outlet pipes 1, 2, 5, 11 must be mutually agreed upon by the engineers, hydrologists, and fish biologists.

Page 4

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs) Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices 10. When riprap is used the design and implementation must be Surfacing embankments 1, 2, 5, 11 mutually agreed upon by the engineers, hydrologists, and fish biologists. Repair of bent control stems and stem 11. Use sediment filter fence, weed-free straw bales or other 1, 2, 3 guides means to reduce delivery of sediment to streams or channels. 12. Haul excess materials to a stable site away from Stream Lubrication and maintenance of gates and 1, 2, 3 Management Zones. valves 13. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout Repair, replacement, and maintenance of spawning and rearing areas, avoid conducting sediment- electric motor gate actuators and associated producing activities from September 1 through May 15. 1, 2, 3 components, including but not limited to 14. Backfill existing rodent holes. power sources 15. Remove rodent habitat and repair damage. 16. Avoid wetlands; Consult with IDT if wetland impacts are Exercise of outlet gate openings 2 anticipated. 17. Plan and design skid trails, yard areas, and truck access roads Application or reapplication of coatings on 1, 2, 3 to minimize stream crossings and avoid disturbing vegetated gates, valves, and metal work areas. 18. Visually monitor turbidity and minimize releases into adjoining Cleaning of drain pipes, manholes, and 5, 11, 13, 20 waterways. outlets 19. Significant reservoir water level drawdowns will only occur Removal of sediment in dam spillway, outlet, during peak irrigation season if it is an emergency or if it does 1, 3, 5, 11, 13, 18, 19, 20 exit channel, and other areas not significantly impact the amount of water available for irrigation purposes. 20. Place dredged materials or excess sediment away from Dredging activities of outfall channels 5, 6, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 20 streams and wetlands.

Removal of debris build up on trash rack and 2, 3, 19 other areas

Stockpiling of miscellaneous materials 5, 11, 12, 14

Replacement of deteriorated or missing 8, 9, 10, 19, 20 riprap

Page 5

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs) Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices

Control of dam seepage within the project 1, 2, 5, 11 area

Repair of low area or depressions within 6, 16, 18 project area

Repair of erosion damage, sloughs, gullies, 5, 7, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18 sinkholes, and other eroded areas

Repair dam’s structural integrity from sliding 5, 11, 13 of embankment dam material

Control of rodents and repair of rodent 14, 15 damage in embankment dams

Repair of dam surface from livestock and 5, 11, 13 other wildlife trails/trampling

Page 6

Breanne Carr

From: Whisper Means Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 3:26 PM To: Christine A. Pearcy Cc: Molly R. Davidson; Breanne Carr; Dale Becker; Dale Becker Subject: RE: SOD Dams Maintenance NEPA Project Info Request Attachments: EAGLE BMPs_2020.docx

***This message originated from an External Source.*** Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.

For the wildlife section I have to consider multiple wildlife species that are protected under various federal laws. For consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service to concur with my recommendations I need to be able to adequately describe proposed activities that would negatively or not significantly affect threatened and endangered species, eagles, and all migratory birds. I understand the value of a Programmatic assessment for maintenance activities, however, when they fall in areas of known T&E species management and travel corridors I cannot simply evaluate a project with affects not clearly labeled or identified per site. I do not anticipate significant issues; individual displacement rather than population level. However, to satisfy US FWS concurrence I need more detail to give a valid response. I am going to include some Bald Eagle BMP’s for your addition.

I am attaching a table that includes all areas that grizzlies bears, lynx or eagles reside and would potentially be impacted.

Sites that will trigger T&E effect determinations.

Site Species Hell Roaring Dam Grizzly bear Twin Turtle Dam Grizzly bear Kicking Horse Dam Grizzly bear, eagle McDonald Dam Grizzly bear Tabor Dam Grizzly bear Black Lake Dam Grizzly bear, lynx Jocko Dam Grizzly bear, lynx Mission Dam Grizzly bear Crow Dam Grizzly bear corridor, Eagle Ninepipe Dam Grizzly bear, Eagle Upper Dry Fork Dam Eagle Pablo Dam Eagle Hubbart and Little Bitterroot are off of the Flathead Reservation and are not evaluated by CSKT Wildlife Management Program. Listed maintenance activities that can trigger impacts for T&E species:

Activity Description

1 Removal of trees and their root systems Depending on timing of removal and within the project area extent. We do not know how much you would be proposing to remove and when. In the case of higher elevation sites and areas with known grizzly bear use our views of minimal free and rootwad removal could be significantly different. The last tree removal for maintenance at Tabor Dam required a BA. Vegetation control via prescribed burn When (time of year, when grizzlies are on landscape or in den) and where (sites with grizzlies or not?

Noxious weed control via chemical When and where? What chemical application Any construction that requires significant When and where? Is it large or small scale? ground moving or loud disturbance We may have to go over some lines of action for this. I am unsure of the level of disturbance for some of the dam terms or their scale.

Whisper Camel-Means Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes

From: Christine A. Pearcy Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2020 2:55 PM To: Whisper Means Cc: Molly R. Davidson ; Breanne Carr Subject: RE: SOD Dams Maintenance NEPA Project Info Request

Hi Whisper, I hope this email finds you in good health. I’ve spoken with Greg and our MMI team and we’re trying to figure out the best way to dial in some more information for you, while keeping the document broad enough to be useful for maintenance activities. It sounds like more specific mapping would be helpful, in addition to a few more specifics included in the table.

Here are a couple of questions for you that may help us all:

 Are there any project activities/areas that you have specific concerns for wildlife that we can make note of in the table or maps?  Are there additional seasonal work windows regarding wildlife movement or habits we need to incorporate in the table?  Would it be useful if we labeled major dam components and access points on the maps?

If there is anything else that we can make note of or help better define, please let me know. I’m also available by both phone numbers in my signature block.

2 Thanks for your coordination.

Kindly, Christine

Christine A. Pearcy Environmental Scientist, Morrison-Maierle

406.922.6846 direct | 406.581.6543 mobile

From: Whisper Means [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, March 30, 2020 2:38 PM To: [email protected]; Dale Becker ; [email protected]; Dale Becker Cc: Christine A. Pearcy Subject: RE: SOD Dams Maintenance NEPA Project Info Request

***This message originated from an External Source.*** Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.

CSKT Wildlife Management Program response to initial call for general comments on the SOD Maintenance Project (3/30/2020) We will need more specific information in regards to each maintenance project that is located in potential Threatened and Endangered species habitat or known travel corridors. The extent of maintenance work has a influence on our recommendations and effect determinations for activities in these protected areas. The US Fish and Wildlife Service will also want to see that level of description for their approval. The general polygons over the maintenance areas, depending on specific maintenance action will either be significant or not, but we cannot evaluate that without further project detail. Your tables are helpful in their descriptions and some BMP’s, perhaps if those were organized by project (what will happen at each site), then we could evaluate effects per project.

Thank you for the opportunity to review.

Whisper Camel-Means Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes

From: Gregory Wilson Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2020 11:20 AM To: Richard Janssen ; Dan Lozar ; Scott Johnston ; Gregory Wilson ; Seth Makepeace ; [email protected]; Les Evarts ; Barry Hansen ; Craig Barfoot ; Dale Becker ; Whisper Means ; Stacy Courville ; Art Soukkala ; Rusty Sydnor ; Willie Keenan ; Tabitha Espinoza ; Mary Price ; Chauncey Means ; Evan Smith ; Daniel Lipscomb ; Craig Pablo ; Randall Ashley ; Peter Gillard ; Mark Couture ; Michael Durglo ; Kyle Felsman ; Tony Incashola Jr ; Vernon Finley ; Tony Incashola Sr ; Thompson Smith ; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: Molly R. Davidson ; Christine A. Pearcy ; Breanne Carr Subject: SOD Dams Maintenance NEPA Project Info Request

3 Good morning all, Please find attached the NEPA request for information regarding the Safety of Dams – Dam Maintenance Activities.

All comments are to be sent to Christine Pearcy w/ Morrison‐Maierle by March 31, 2020. Her contact information is noted in the body of the letter.

Sincerely,

Gregory Wilson, P.E. Division of Engineering & Water Resources Safety of Dams Coordinator Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes Natural Resources Department P.O. Box 278 Pablo, MT 59855 Phone: 406.675.2700 Ext. 6215 [email protected] http://www.csktnrd.org/

4 Eagle Best Management Practices BMP's will vary depending on the type of work being, length of project, type of equipment used, timing of work and the location of work from nest site. Any activity that disrupts breeding, feeding, sheltering, and roosting behavior and causes, or is likely to cause, nest abandonment or reduce productivity, is considered disturbance and is a violation of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) and state regulations. All recommendations in this section refer to the Montana Bald Eagle Management Guidelines: An Addendum to Montana Bald Eagle Management Plan (2010) and guidelines used by the CSKT Wildlife Management Program for all activities on the Flathead Indian Reservation.

Recommended seasonal restrictions from approximately February 1st through August 15th for the following activities:

• Construction and maintenance including building roads, trails, or any other outside construction within direct line of sight of an active nest.

• Loud noises including fireworks, blasting, and operation of forest harvest machinery (skidders, trucks, chainsaws, etc.), jackhammers, construction equipment, etc.

• Forest management activities, thinning, and fuels reduction including all activities associated with the removal forest vegetation around occupied nests.

Bald eagles exhibit greater sensitivity to disturbance when activities occur within full view of the bird. Therefore, existing visual buffers within ¼ mile of nest sites should not be removed, but enhanced if possible. Examples of alterations to visual buffers include, but are not limited to land clearing, the construction of new houses, power line construction, timber harvest, and fuels reduction. Recommended activities for visual buffer maintenance and enhancement:

• Managing forest and riparian habitats to protect and enhance important habitat components (i.e. perch trees, visual screening, etc.).

• Thinning around large potential or active bald eagle nest trees to protect them from crown fires. Thinning should be done so as not to compromise visual buffers between nest trees and potential human disturbance.

• Retaining a natural buffer around active nests, alternate nests, and large live trees and snags during fire protection activities that meet Wildland Urban Interface safety requirements and recommendations while providing visual security for bald eagles.

Distance buffers are intended to apply to activities near nest sites, concentrated foraging areas, and communal roost sites during the appropriate season of eagle use. Bald eagles concentrate in areas with abundant food resources during the non-breeding seasons. Roost sites near open rivers and lakes can be used routinely in winter. These concentrated foraging areas and associated roost sites, when used, should receive similar protection as nest sites during the appropriate season of use.

Extending distance buffers may be necessary in open landscapes where visual buffers within 1/2 mile of nests are not possible. Buffers based on tolerance for routine human activities may be assessed through consultation with a qualified biologist. Tolerance may be evaluated based on proximity at which an eagle displays vigilance or avoidance behavior, agitation, and/or flushing. Note that unoccupied nests are still protected by law and that destroying nests would violate both state and federal regulations.

Recommended distance buffers in the absence of a visual buffer:

• ½ mile for the following activities: o Any activity that will result in more than one house or permanent construction to include commercial use, buildings 3 or more stories high, activity that would increase human use, or project with a footprint greater than ½ acre.

o Any use of explosives or activities that produce extremely loud noise, such as blasting, use of jackhammers or gravel crushing equipment, or fireworks.

o Forest management activities that include harvesting and heavy truck traffic in areas that don’t normally have that type of activity.

o Construction of new above ground power and utility lines.

• ¼ mile for the following activities: o Any construction of infrastructure such as roads and trails including dozer lines for fire management activities, except when specifically constructed to save a bald eagle nest from fire. o Forest management activities to including timber harvest layout, snag removal, prescribed fires, planting, and thinning.

Keep all heavy equipment at least 1/4 mile away from nest sites at all times; if mechanized work needs to be within that distance, these activities are restricted between February 1 and August 15, unless the territory is documented as unoccupied during that breeding season.

Hand crews can be within 1/4 mile buffer in off-season, right up to base of nest tree, but must limit the visual changes to least amount possible, leaving historic perching/loafing trees (snags) within the buffer.

Additional Recommendations that apply to the CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Project:

• Avoid pesticides where bald eagles may scavenge. To reduce secondary poisoning limit the use of anti-coagulants and other pesticides and ensure all herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers are disposed of properly. All use of chemicals, including the application and handling, shall follow applicable state and federal laws.

• Stimulate cottonwood regeneration with natural flow regimes, exclosures, and other tools.

• Encourage coordination among agencies and landowners to identify opportunities to modify land stewardship practices that may benefit bald eagles and improve bald eagle habitat.

References: Montana Bald Eagle Working Group. 2010. Montana Bald Eagle Management Guidelines: An Addendum to Montana Bald Eagle Management Plan, 1994, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Helena, Montana.

Breanne Carr

From: Gregory Wilson Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2020 9:17 AM To: [email protected] Cc: Dan Lozar; Christine A. Pearcy; Breanne Carr; Dan Lozar; Molly R. Davidson Subject: RE: Dams Maintenance BMPs Attachments: USFWS_Dams Maint PEA Request for Info Letter_CSKT.pdf; Dam Maintenance Activities PEA Maps_reduced.pdf; Dam Maintenance Activities BMP Table.pdf

***This message originated from an External Source.*** Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.

Good morning Mr. Conrad, CSKT is requesting USFW’s input on its Dam Maintenance NEPA as further detailed in the attached Letter, Dams Maintenance Activities PEA Maps, and Dams Maintenance Activities BMPs Table.

As noted in the Letter, please send your written responses to Christine Pearcy, Environmental Scientist, Morrison‐ Maierle, Inc.

Thank you.

Gregory Wilson, P.E. Division of Engineering & Water Resources Safety of Dams Coordinator Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes Natural Resources Department P.O. Box 278 Pablo, MT 59855 Phone: 406.675.2700 Ext. 6215 Cell: (509) 994‐1081 [email protected] http://www.csktnrd.org/

From: Molly R. Davidson Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2020 4:23 PM To: Gregory Wilson Cc: Dan Lozar ; Christine A. Pearcy ; Breanne Carr ; Dan

1 Lozar Subject: Dams Maintenance BMPs

Greg,

Attached are the following Dams Maintenance NEPA associated documents:

 Letter to USFWS requesting input  Programmatic EA maps  BMP table

Would you kindly review, sign and forward to letter to USFWS along with the supporting documents?

Please let us know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Molly

Molly R. Davidson, PE Senior Water Resources Engineer, Morrison-Maierle 406.542.4825 direct | 406.360.3477 mobile

1055 Mount Ave., Missoula, MT 59801

2

115°11'40"W 115°5'0"W 114°58'20"W 114°51'40"W 114°45'0"W 114°38'20"W 114°31'40"W 114°25'0"W 114°18'20"W 114°11'40"W 114°5'0"W 113°58'20"W 113°51'40"W 113°45'0"W 113°38'20"W 113°31'40"W 113°25'0"W 113°18'20"W 113°11'40"W

48°7'30"N Litte Bitterroot %, Dam 48°6'40"N

48°3'20"N / 48°2'30"N

48°0'0"N Hubbart Dam

%, 47°58'20"N 47°55'50"N 47°54'10"N 47°51'40"N

Upper Dry 47°50'0"N Fork Dam 47°47'30"N %, Hell Roaring Dam 47°45'50"N Lower Dry

47°43'20"N %, Fork Dam %,

Pablo Dam %, 47°41'40"N

47°39'10"N %, Twin-Turtle Dam 47°37'30"N 47°35'0"N Crow Dam

Kicking Horse Dam 47°33'20"N

47°30'50"N %,

%, %, McDonald Dam 47°29'10"N

47°26'40"N %, Ninepipe Dam 47°25'0"N 47°22'30"N

%, Tabor Dam 47°20'50"N 47°18'20"N LEGEND Mission Dam %, Black %, Dam Locations Lake Dam 47°16'40"N 47°14'10"N Flathead Indian Reservation %, %,

Jocko Dam 47°12'30"N 47°10'0"N

115°10'0"W 115°4'10"W 114°57'30"W 114°50'50"W 114°44'10"W 114°37'30"W 114°30'50"W 114°24'10"W 114°17'30"W 114°10'50"W 114°5'0"W 113°58'20"W 113°51'40"W 113°45'0"W 113°38'20"W 113°31'40"W 113°25'0"W 113°18'20"W 113°11'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 10 20 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Miles DATE: 10/22/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 TOPOGRAPHY MAP OF PROJECT VICINITY 1 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 1_Dams Maintenance PEA_Topo Map.mxd 115°30'0"W 115°22'30"W 115°15'0"W 115°7'30"W 115°0'0"W 114°52'30"W 114°45'0"W 114°37'30"W 114°30'0"W 114°22'30"W 114°15'0"W 114°7'30"W 114°0'0"W 113°52'30"W 113°45'0"W 113°37'30"W 113°30'0"W 113°21'40"W 113°13'20"W 113°5'50"W 112°58'20"W 48°11'40"N / 48°12'30"N Litte Bitterroot 48°6'40"N Dam (Fig. 3) 48°7'30"N

48°2'30"N Hubbart Dam 48°3'20"N (Fig. 4) Flathead

47°57'30"N Lake 47°58'20"N

Flathead

47°52'30"N Sanders 47°53'20"N

Upper Dry 47°47'30"N Fork Dam 47°48'20"N (Fig. 5) Hell Roaring Dam (Fig. 9)

47°42'30"N Pablo Dam 47°43'20"N Lower Dry (Fig. 7) Fork Dam (Fig. 6) Twin-Turtle Dam Lake (Fig. 8) 47°37'30"N Flathead 47°38'20"N Sanders Crow Dam Missoula Powell (Fig. 10) Kicking Horse Dam

47°32'30"N (Fig. 12) 47°33'20"N Crow Dam EWS (Fig. 18)

47°27'30"N Ninepipe Dam McDonald Dam 47°28'20"N (Fig. 11) (Fig. 13) 47°22'30"N 47°23'20"N Tabor Dam (Fig. 15) Mission Dam

47°17'30"N Perma EWS 47°18'20"N (Fig. 19) (Fig. 14) Black Lake Dam (Fig. 17a) 47°13'20"N 47°12'30"N

LEGEND Sanders Lake Black Lake Missoula Dam (Fig. 17b) 47°7'30"N Index Maps Arlee EWS Jocko Dam 47°8'20"N (Fig. 20) (Fig. 16) 47°3'20"N 115°22'30"W 115°14'10"W 115°6'40"W 115°0'0"W 114°52'30"W 114°45'0"W 114°37'30"W 114°30'0"W 114°22'30"W 114°14'10"W 114°6'40"W 114°0'0"W 113°52'30"W 113°45'0"W 113°37'30"W 113°30'0"W 113°22'30"W 113°14'10"W 113°6'40"W 112°59'10"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 12 24 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Miles DATE: 11/7/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 INDEX MAP OF DAM LOCATIONS 2 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 2_Dams Maintenance PEA_Index Map.mxd 114°41'40"W / Little Bitterroot Lake

!(

Little Bitterroot River

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance !( EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°41'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 400 800 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD FLATHEAD COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - LITTLE BITTERROOT DAM 3 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 3_Dams PEA_Bitterroot Map.mxd 114°44'10"W 114°43'20"W 114°42'30"W

Hubbart Reservoir 47°55'50"N / 47°55'50"N

!(

!(

Briggs Creek

Little Bitterrot River

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

47°55'0"N 114°44'10"W 114°43'20"W 114°42'30"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 800 1,600 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD FLATHEAD COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - HUBBART DAM 4 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 4_Dams PEA_Hubbart Map.mxd 114°41'40"W 114°40'50"W 114°40'0"W /

Upper Dry Fork Reservoir !(

Dry Fork Reservoir Rd 47°45'0"N 47°45'0"N

!(

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance Camas Canal

EWS Maintenance Areas Upper Reservoir Rd

!( EWS Locations

114°41'40"W 114°40'50"W 114°40'0"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 800 1,600 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 06/20/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - UPPER DRY FORK DAM 5 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 5_Dams PEA_Upper DF Map.mxd 114°40'50"W 114°40'0"W / 47°42'30"N 47°42'30"N

Dry Fork Reservoir

Camas Canal

!(

Dry Fork Creek

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

47°41'40"N !( EWS Locations 47°41'40"N

114°40'50"W 114°40'0"W 114°39'10"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 1,000 2,000 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - LOWER DRY FORK DAM 6 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 6_Dams PEA_Lower DF Map.mxd 114°10'50"W 114°10'0"W 114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W 47°39'10"N / 47°39'10"N

!( !( Canal 47°38'20"N 47°38'20"N Pablo Reservoir

LEGEND 47°37'30"N Limits of Maintenance 47°37'30"N

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°10'50"W 114°10'0"W 114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 1,600 3,200 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - PABLO DAM 7 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 7_Dams PEA_Pablo Dam Map.mxd 114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W /

!(

!(

Turtle Lake 47°40'0"N 47°40'0"N

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 800 1,600 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - TWIN-TURTLE DAM 8 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 8_Dams PEA_Twin Turtle Map.mxd 114°1'40"W / 47°42'30"N 47°42'30"N

Hell Roaring Hell Roaring Creek Reservoir

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

114°1'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 200 400 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - HELL ROARING DAM 9 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 9_Dams PEA_Hell Roaring Map.mxd 114°14'10"W 114°13'20"W /

Lower Crow Reservoir

!(

Crow Creek 47°30'0"N 47°30'0"N

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas !( !( EWS Locations

114°14'10"W 114°13'20"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 600 1,200 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - CROW DAM 10 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 10_Dams PEA_Crow Dam Map.mxd 114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W 114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W 47°27'30"N / 47°27'30"N !( !( !( !(

Kicking Horse Dam Maintenance Area !( 47°26'40"N 47°26'40"N Ninepipe Reservoir 47°25'50"N LEGEND 47°25'50"N

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W 114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 2,000 4,000 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - NINEPIPE DAM 11 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 11_Dams PEA_Ninepipe Dam Map.mxd 114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W 114°3'20"W 114°2'30"W / 47°28'20"N 47°28'20"N

Kicking Horse Reservoir 47°27'30"N 47°27'30"N

!(

!(

114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W 114°3'20"W 114°2'30"W 47°26'40"N

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 2,000 4,000 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - KICKING HORSE DAM 12 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 12_Dams PEA_Kicking Horse Dam Map.mxd 114°0'0"W 113°59'10"W /

Post Creek

!(

McDonald Lake

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°0'0"W 113°59'10"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 500 1,000 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - MCDONALD DAM 13 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 13_Dams PEA_McDonald Dam Map.mxd 114°1'40"W 114°0'50"W /

Mission Reservoir 47°19'10"N 47°19'10"N

!(

!(

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations Mission Creek

114°1'40"W 114°0'50"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 900 1,800 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - MISSION DAM 14 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 14_Dams PEA_Mission Dam Map.mxd 113°56'40"W 113°55'50"W 113°55'0"W

Dry Creek /

!(

!(

!( Saint Mary's Lake 47°15'50"N 47°15'50"N

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

113°56'40"W 113°55'50"W 113°55'0"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 1,100 2,200 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - TABOR DAM 15 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 15_Dams PEA_Tabor Dam Map.mxd 113°45'50"W /

Jocko Road !(

Middle Fork Jocko River

!(

Lower Jocko Lake

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

113°45'50"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 600 1,200 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD MISSOULA COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - JOCKO DAM 16 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 16_Dams PEA_Jocko Dam Map.mxd 113°44'10"W 113°43'20"W /

Middle Fork Jocko River

!( Black Lake

Lower Jocko Lake

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations 47°11'40"N 113°44'10"W 113°43'20"W 47°11'40"N

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 650 1,300 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD MISSOULA COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - BLACK LAKE DAM 17a M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 17a_Dams PEA_Black Lake Dam Map.mxd 113°41'40"W /

Upper Jocko Lake

LEGEND

Limits of Maintenance

113°41'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 200 400 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD MISSOULA COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - BLACK LAKE SPILLWAY 17b M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 17b_Dams PEA_Black Lake Spillway Map.mxd 114°15'0"W 114°14'10"W 114°13'20"W 114°12'30"W 114°11'40"W 114°10'50"W 114°10'0"W 114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W /

47°31'40"N !( !( 47°31'40"N

0 150 300 Feet 0 150 300 Feet 47°30'50"N 47°30'50"N

!( 47°30'0"N !( 47°30'0"N

!(

47°29'10"N LEGEND 47°29'10"N Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°15'0"W 114°14'10"W 114°13'20"W 114°12'30"W 114°11'40"W 114°10'50"W 114°10'0"W 114°9'10"W 114°8'20"W 114°7'30"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 3,500 7,000 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Feet DATE: 10/28/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - EWS FOR CROW DAM 18 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 18_Dams PEA_Crow EWS.mxd 114°38'20"W 114°37'30"W 114°36'40"W 114°35'50"W 114°35'0"W 114°34'10"W 114°33'20"W 114°32'30"W 114°31'40"W 114°30'50"W 114°30'0"W 114°29'10"W 114°28'20"W 114°27'30"W 114°26'40"W 47°25'50"N / 47°25'50"N 47°25'0"N

!( 47°25'0"N 47°24'10"N 47°24'10"N

0 250 500 Feet 47°23'20"N 47°23'20"N 47°22'30"N 47°22'30"N 47°21'40"N 47°21'40"N !(

LEGEND

47°20'50"N Limits of Maintenance 47°20'50"N EWS Maintenance Areas

!( EWS Locations

114°38'20"W 114°37'30"W 114°36'40"W 114°35'50"W 114°35'0"W 114°34'10"W 114°33'20"W 114°32'30"W 114°31'40"W 114°30'50"W 114°30'0"W 114°29'10"W 114°28'20"W 114°27'30"W 114°26'40"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 1 2 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Miles DATE: 11/4/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - EWS PERMA 19 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 19_Dams PEA_Perma EWS.mxd 114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W 114°3'20"W 114°2'30"W 114°1'40"W 114°0'50"W 114°0'0"W 113°59'10"W 113°58'20"W 113°57'30"W 113°56'40"W 113°55'50"W 113°55'0"W / 47°12'30"N 47°12'30"N

!( 47°11'40"N 47°11'40"N

0 250 500 Feet 47°10'50"N 47°10'50"N 47°10'0"N 47°10'0"N ARLEE

!( 47°9'10"N 47°9'10"N 47°8'20"N LEGEND 47°8'20"N

Limits of Maintenance

EWS Maintenance Areas

47°7'30"N !( EWS Locations 47°7'30"N

114°6'40"W 114°5'50"W 114°5'0"W 114°4'10"W 114°3'20"W 114°2'30"W 114°1'40"W 114°0'50"W 114°0'0"W 113°59'10"W 113°58'20"W 113°57'30"W 113°56'40"W 113°55'50"W 113°55'0"W

DRAWN BY: BC PROJECT NO. 1055 Mount Avenue CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES 0 1 2 Missoula, MT 59801 CHK'D BY: CP Dam Maintenance Programmatic EA Project 0859.013.12 MONTANA Phone: (406) 542-8880 APPR. BY: MD LAKE COUNTY Fax: (406) 542-4801 FIGURE NO. Miles DATE: 11/4/19 COPYRIGHT · MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2019 AERIAL - EWS ARLEE 20 M:\0859\013 CSKT NEPA 3 Year Contract\12 - Dams Maint Programmatic EA\GIS\Fig 20_Dams PEA_Arlee EWS.mxd CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Best Management Practices for All Routine Dam Maintenance Activities

Assure that maintenance workers read and understand the BMPs and assure that BMPs are adhered to. Pages 1 and 2 of this guidance document outlines best management practices associated with threatened, endangered, and species of concern. The proceeding tables outlines BMP practices for a given dam maintenance action.

Grizzly Bear Habitat Dams located within Grizzly Bear habitat or corridors include: Hell Roaring Dam, Twin Turtle Dam, Kicking Horse Dam, McDonald Dam, Tabor Dam, Black Lake Dam, Jocko Dam, Mission Dam, Crow Dam, and Ninepipe Dam (as stated by CSKT Wildlife Management Program).  Conduct proposed activity during the summer (June 15 to September 15) or winter (November 15 – March 30) if possible.  Store all food, food related items, petroleum products, antifreeze, garbage, and personal hygiene items inside a closed, hard-sided vehicle or commercially manufactured bear resistant container.  No firearms allowed on the job site.  Immediately report sightings of grizzly bears or bear sign to the CSKT Wildlife Management Program or CSKT Fish & Game.

Bull Trout Waterways These include spawning and rearing areas: Middle Fork Jocko River and Lower and Upper Jocko Lakes (Jocko Dam, Black Lake Dam, and Black Lake Spillway), McDonald Lake and Post Creek (McDonald Dam), and Dry Creek (upstream of St. Mary’s Lake and Tabor Reservoir).  When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout spawning and rearing areas, perform sediment-producing activities from July 15 through August 31 when possible.  Check with CSKT Fisheries Department prior to initiating activities near potential Bull Trout waterways.

Foraging, migration, and overwintering habitat (FMO): Flathead River (EWS Perma), Mission Creek (Mission Dam), St. Mary’s Lake (Tabor Dam). All activities within 300 feet of a listed waterway must abide by the following BMPs:  When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout FMO areas, perform sediment-producing activities from July 1 through September 30 when possible.  Check with CSKT Fisheries Department prior to initiating activities near potential Bull Trout waterways.

Bald Eagle and Migratory Bird Nest Presence For proposed dam maintenance actions within direct line of sight or within ½ mile from an active nest:  Recommended seasonal restrictions from approximately February 1st through August 15th for significant earth moving or loud disturbance activities. o Keep all heavy equipment at least ¼ mile away from nest sites at all times; if mechanized work needs to be within that distance, these activities are restricted between February 1 and August 15, unless the territory is documented as unoccupied during that breeding season.  Existing visual buffers within ¼ mile of nest sites should not be removed but enhanced if possible.  Distance buffers are intended to apply to activities near nest sites, concentrated foraging areas, and communal roost sites during the appropriate season of eagle use.

Page 1

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

 Hand crews can be within ¼ mile buffer in off-season, right up to base of nest tree, but must limit the visual changes to least amount possible, leaving historic perching/loafing trees (snags) within the buffer.  Avoid pesticides where bald eagles may scavenge. To reduce secondary poisoning limit the use of anti-coagulants and other pesticides and ensure all herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers are disposed of properly. All use of chemicals, including the application and handling, shall follow applicable state and federal laws.  Contact CSKT Wildlife Program Biologist for most recent information on potential impacts to active nest locations.

Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices Vegetative Maintenance Actions Removal of beached root wads and drifting 1. Areas cleared of vegetation by maintenance, burning, spraying vegetation and debris from within the project 6, 8 or other activities will be seeded, when necessary, with an area approved weed- free seed mix. 2. Utilize sediment filter fence, erosion-control mats, weed free Removal of fallen trees from within the 6, 7, 8, 12 straw bales or other means to reduce erosion and delivery of project area sediment to streams or channels where necessary. Removal of trees and their root system 3. Adhere to product label instructions regarding application. 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14 within the project area 4. Apply chemicals during appropriate weather conditions and during the optimum time for control of target species. Vegetation control via prescribed burn 1, 2, 9, 10, 13, 14 5. Use EPA approved herbicide. 6. Avoid wetlands; Consult with IDT if wetland impacts are anticipated. Control of vegetation and repair of 2, 8, 9, 14 7. In accordance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, cutting or vegetation damage in embankment dams removal of trees or shrubs should take place between August Noxious weed control via chemical 16th and April 15th. 1, 3, 4, 5, 9, 13, 14 application 8. Minimize activities when soils appear excessively wet. 9. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout Reseeding or revegetating activities using 1, 2, 8, 9, 14 spawning and rearing areas, avoid conducting sediment- various methods producing activities from July 15 through August 31. 10. Follow burn condition recommendations in an established burn Control of aquatic vegetation 3, 4, 5 plan. 11. No trees with an active migratory bird or eagle nest present may be removed as part of this PEA. Coordination with the Routine mowing using various methods 8 proper authorities must be initiated prior to removal of trees Page 2

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices with inactive migratory bird or eagle nests to insure they are not occupied. 12. Removal of fallen trees within Grizzly Bear habitat outside of the June 15 to September 15 window will only take place when necessary in order to maintain dam functionality. 13. Check with CSKT Wildlife Program regarding the extent of project disturbance. 14. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout FMO areas, perform sediment-producing activities from July 1 through September 30 when possible. Geotechnical Investigation Actions Geotechnical drilling for soil identification on 1. If practicable, berm and cover stockpiles of sand, dirt or other 4, 5 and nearby dam structures construction material with tarps when rain is forecast or when Soil test pits they are not in use. 1, 2, 5 2. Prevent sediment from migrating offsite and protect storm drain Preparation of drill pad for geotechnical inlets, drainage courses and streams by installing and investigations maintaining appropriate BMPs (i.e. silt fences, gravel bags, fiber rolls, temporary swales, etc.). 3. Revegetate and/or control noxious weeds on drill pad/disturbed 2, 3, 4, 5 areas after use where necessary. 4. Plan and design skid trails, yard areas, and truck access roads to minimize stream crossings and avoid disturbing vegetated areas. 5. Minimize activities when soils appear excessively wet. Instrumentation Maintenance Actions Maintenance of Early Warning System 1. Avoid wetlands; Consult with IDT if wetland impacts are (EWS) components 3, 4 anticipated. 2. In accordance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, cutting or

removal of trees or shrubs should take place between August Relocation of EWS floats/instrumentation if 16th and April 15th. necessary 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9

Page 3

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices Piezometer installation and maintenance 3. Properly dispose of or store all leftover construction materials 1, 2, 3, 4 during and after activities. Weir boxes, flumes, and related components 4. Plan and design skid trails, yard areas, and truck access roads maintenance and clearing 4, 6 to minimize stream crossings and avoid disturbing vegetated areas. Removal of algae, sediment, and debris from 5. Haul excess materials to a stable site away from Stream staff gauges, weir boxes, and miscellaneous 5, 6, 8, 9 Management Zones. outfall structures Installation of survey monitoring points 6. Implement the action only to the extent necessary to provide 1, 2, 3, 4 adequate drainage and safety. Verification of voltage and amperage or 7. Visually monitor turbidity and minimize releases into adjoining replacement of electrical controls 3 waterways. 8. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout spawning and rearing areas, avoid conducting sediment- producing activities from July 15 through August 31. Repair of electrical or instrumentation 3 9. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout conduits FMO areas, perform sediment-producing activities from July 1 through September 30 when possible. Access Maintenance Actions 1. Implement the action only to the extent necessary to provide Roadway grading and blading, including adequate drainage and safety. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 14, 20, using dust abatement agent 2. Use water or a dust abatement agent, like magnesium chloride, 22 when necessary. 3. Avoid disturbing stable road surfaces. 4. Minimize activities when soils appear excessively wet. 5. Grade road surfaces only as often as necessary to maintain a Improvements or repairs to the dam access 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, stable running surface and to retain original drainage features. road 11, 14, 20, 22 6. Maintain road surface in a crowned or out-sloped condition. 7. Do not cut the toe of cut slopes or remove established vegetation except in ditches and high shoulder areas. 8. Roads ≤ 50 feet from stream, do not place any road material in Maintenance activities for access to EWS 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, a berm along either side of the road. locations 20, 22 9. If necessary, haul material off site.

Page 4

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices 10. Where berm removal or off-site disposal is not practicable, cut weep holes in the berms at a minimum of 100-foot intervals to Surface overlay, chip-seal, crack-seal, 2, 14, 21 relieve concentrated flows. pothole patching, and full-depth patching 11. Roads > 50 feet from stream, keep downhill side of road free from berms. 12. Maintain gates and associated safety devices in working condition. Replace as needed. Repair of vehicular traffic ruts on dam crest 1, 2, 4, 6, 14, 20, 22 13. Maintain fence free of weeds and woody vegetation. access road 14. Maintenance and repair must be performed in a timely manner to maintain the desired control or safety benefits they provide. 15. Inspect safety fence bi-annually. 16. Maintain safety signs and replace when signs are missing or no Snow plowing and ice removal 3, 14, 17, 18, 19 longer legible. 17. Open culverts and ditches restricted by snow or ice to allow proper drainage. 18. Side-casting of snow will be avoided where there is potential for snow or ice damming in adjacent stream channels. 19. Openings in snow berms will be provided and maintained as required for surface drainage. Avoid drainage outlets on erodible fills. Repair or replacement of cattle guards, 20. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout fences, locks, gates, or other security spawning and rearing areas, avoid conducting sediment- 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 features producing activities from July 15 through August 31. 21. Avoid paving and seal coating in wet weather or when rain is forecast, to prevent materials that have not cured from contacting stormwater runoff. 22. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout FMO areas, perform sediment-producing activities from July 1 through September 30 when possible. Dam Component Maintenance Actions

Page 5

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices 1. Draw reservoir level down when necessary. Reestablishment of freeboard or camber in 1, 2, 3 embankment dams 2. Inspect and repair based on engineer recommendation. 3. Properly dispose of or store all leftover materials during and Repair of cracking in concrete dams or after activities. 1, 2, 3 structures 4. Berm and cover stockpiles of sand, dirt or other construction material with tarps when rain is forecast or when they are not in Sealing of longitudinal or transverse cracks 1, 2, 3 use. in embankment dams 5. Prevent sediment from migrating offsite and protect storm drain inlets, drainage courses and streams by installing and Sealing of concrete joints 1, 2, 3 maintaining appropriate BMPs (i.e. silt fences, gravel bags, fiber rolls, temporary swales, etc.). 6. Implement the action only to the extent necessary to provide Repair of deteriorated or spalled concrete 1, 2, 3 adequate drainage and safety. 7. Reestablish normal slope. 8. Place bedding and competent riprap. Repair or replacement of gutters 1, 2, 3 9. When replacing or reinforcing riprap avoid narrowing or confining the stream channel; the design and implementation Repair/Replacement of outlet pipes 1, 2, 5, 11 must be mutually agreed upon by the engineers, hydrologists, and fish biologists. 10. When riprap is used the design and implementation must be Surfacing embankments 1, 2, 5, 11 mutually agreed upon by the engineers, hydrologists, and fish biologists. Repair of bent control stems and stem 11. Use sediment filter fence, weed-free straw bales or other 1, 2, 3 guides means to reduce delivery of sediment to streams or channels. 12. Haul excess materials to a stable site away from Stream Lubrication and maintenance of gates and Management Zones. 1, 2, 3 valves 13. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout Repair, replacement, and maintenance of spawning and rearing areas, avoid conducting sediment- electric motor gate actuators and associated producing activities from July 15 through August 31. 1, 2, 3 components, including but not limited to 14. Backfill existing rodent holes. power sources

Page 6

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices 15. Remove rodent habitat and repair damage. Exercise of outlet gate openings 2 16. Avoid wetlands; Consult with IDT if wetland impacts are anticipated. Application or reapplication of coatings on 17. Plan and design skid trails, yard areas, and truck access roads 1, 2, 3 gates, valves, and metal work to minimize stream crossings and avoid disturbing vegetated areas. Cleaning of drain pipes, manholes, and 5, 11, 13, 20, 21 18. Visually monitor turbidity and minimize releases into adjoining outlets waterways. 19. Significant reservoir water level drawdowns will only occur Removal of sediment in dam spillway, outlet, 1, 3, 5, 11, 13, 18, 19, 20, 21 during peak irrigation season if it is an emergency or if it does exit channel, and other areas not significantly impact the amount of water available for 5, 6, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 20, irrigation purposes. Dredging activities of outfall channels 21 20. Place dredged materials or excess sediment away from streams and wetlands. Removal of debris build up on trash rack and 21. When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout 2, 3, 19 other areas FMO areas, perform sediment-producing activities from July 1 through September 30 when possible. Stockpiling of miscellaneous materials 5, 11, 12, 14

Replacement of deteriorated or missing 8, 9, 10, 19, 20 riprap

Control of dam seepage within the project 1, 2, 5, 11 area

Repair of low area or depressions within 6, 16, 18 project area

Repair of erosion damage, sloughs, gullies, 5, 7, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, sinkholes, and other eroded areas 21

Repair dam’s structural integrity from sliding 5, 11, 13, 21 of embankment dam material

Page 7

CSKT Dam Maintenance Activities Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Routine Dam Maintenance Action Applicable BMPs Best Management Practices

Control of rodents and repair of rodent 14, 15 damage in embankment dams

Repair of dam surface from livestock and 5, 11, 13, 21 other wildlife trails/trampling  Insure that contractors read and understand the BMPs and insure that BMPs are adhered to.  Read the Material Safety Data Sheet for the product and follow the instructions on the product’s label at all times.  Apply chemicals during appropriate weather conditions and during the optimum time for control of target pest or weed.  Know and comply with regulations governing the storage, handling, application, and disposal of hazardous substances.  Do not transport, handle, store, load, apply, or dispose of any hazardous substances or fertilizer in a manner as to pollute water supplies or waterways or cause damage to land, General Maintenance Activities and humans, plants, and animals. Associated Hazardous Materials Handling  Ensure that all waste fuels, lubricating fluids, and other chemicals are properly stored in containers to prevent unnecessary spills.  Develop a contingency plan for hazardous substance spills, including cleanup procedures and notification to appropriate CSKT personnel.  Hazardous materials should not be stored, and construction equipment should not be refueled within 100 feet of aquatic sites.  Inspect maintenance equipment regularly to ensure hydraulic, fuel, and lubrication systems are in good condition and free of leaks.  Promptly clean up any project related spills, litter, garbage, debris, etc.

Page 8

Breanne Carr

From: Conard, Ben Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 2:54 PM To: [email protected] Cc: dan.lozar; Christine A. Pearcy; Breanne Carr; Molly R. Davidson; Fredenberg, Carter R Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] RE: Dams Maintenance BMPs

***This message originated from an External Source.*** Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.

Good afternoon, The USFWS has reviewed the proposal. The BMP's provided for federally‐listed species should minimize potential effects. We welcome the chance to work with you should the CSKT Fish and Wildlife biologists have any site‐specific concerns or if you require a section 7 Endangered Species Act consultation. Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Regards, Ben

Ben Conard Deputy Office Supervisor U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Montana Ecological Services Office 780 Creston Hatchery Road Kalispell, Montana 59901 phone: (406) 758-6882

From: Gregory Wilson Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2020 9:17 AM To: Conard, Ben Cc: dan.lozar ; Christine A. Pearcy ; Breanne Carr ; dan.lozar ; Molly R. Davidson Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Dams Maintenance BMPs

Good morning Mr. Conrad, CSKT is requesting USFW’s input on its Dam Maintenance NEPA as further detailed in the attached Letter, Dams Maintenance Activities PEA Maps, and Dams Maintenance Activities BMPs Table.

As noted in the Letter, please send your written responses to Christine Pearcy, Environmental Scientist, Morrison‐ Maierle, Inc.

Thank you.

Gregory Wilson, P.E. Division of Engineering & Water Resources Safety of Dams Coordinator Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes Natural Resources Department P.O. Box 278 Pablo, MT 59855 1 Phone: 406.675.2700 Ext. 6215 Cell: (509) 994‐1081 [email protected] http://www.csktnrd.org/

From: Molly R. Davidson Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2020 4:23 PM To: Gregory Wilson Cc: Dan Lozar ; Christine A. Pearcy ; Breanne Carr ; Dan Lozar Subject: Dams Maintenance BMPs

Greg,

Attached are the following Dams Maintenance NEPA associated documents:

 Letter to USFWS requesting input  Programmatic EA maps  BMP table

Would you kindly review, sign and forward to letter to USFWS along with the supporting documents?

Please let us know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Molly

Molly R. Davidson, PE Senior Water Resources Engineer, Morrison-Maierle 406.542.4825 direct | 406.360.3477 mobile

1055 Mount Ave., Missoula, MT 59801

2 Breanne Carr

From: Molly R. Davidson Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 10:10 AM To: Breanne Carr Cc: Christine A. Pearcy Subject: FW: CSKT SOD NEPA Efforts - IDT Meeting

FYI

Molly R. Davidson, PE Senior Water Resources Engineer, Morrison-Maierle

406.542.4825 direct | 406.360.3477 mobile

From: Craig Barfoot Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 10:54 AM To: Molly R. Davidson ; Dan Lozar Subject: RE: CSKT SOD NEPA Efforts ‐ IDT Meeting

***This message originated from an External Source.*** Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.

Hi Molly, Dan,

I reread the BMPs this morning and they look pretty thorough. At this point I don’t have anything to add.

I would note, however, the seasonal window for sediment‐producing activities proposed in your BMP list for dam maintenance differs from that in the BO for FIIP. That window is more restrictive and is 15 July through 31 August. The latter window is also more protective for cutthroat trout redds and early life stages.

For example, many years ago I did some estimates of timing of emergence for cutthroat trout in the Middle Fork Jocko River using degree‐day totals from temperature data that we collect, and based on known timing of spawning for radio‐ tagged fish. Those estimates placed emergence in early to mid‐July if my memory serves me. I know that cutthroat aren’t listed, but they are a priority management species for the tribes. So, perhaps we need to look at that window and discuss. It need not be applied across all waters and could just be applied to specific waters and activities. Let me know what you guys think.

Thanks, Craig

From: Molly R. Davidson Sent: Monday, May 4, 2020 10:56 AM To: Richard Janssen ; Dan Lozar ; Gregory Wilson ; Seth Makepeace ; [email protected]; Les Evarts ; Barry Hansen ; Craig Barfoot ; Dale Becker ; Whisper Means ; Stacy Courville ; Art Soukkala ; Rusty Sydnor ; Willie Keenan ; Tabitha Espinoza ; Mary Price ; Chauncey Means 1 ; Evan Smith ; [email protected]; [email protected]; Randall Ashley ; Peter Gillard ; [email protected]; Michael Durglo ; Kyle Felsman ; Tony Incashola Jr ; Vernon Finley ; Tony Incashola Sr ; Thompson Smith ; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Denny, Waylon ; Finley, Cheryl Cc: Breanne Carr ; Christine A. Pearcy Subject: RE: CSKT SOD NEPA Efforts ‐ IDT Meeting

All-

Good morning. Attached is the attendance list for the IDT meeting on 4/30/20. Please review and let us know if you have any corrections.

During the meeting, we reviewed the Dams Maintenance BMP Table (also attached). The table includes maintenance actions (column 1), applicable best management practices (column 2) and best management practices (column 3). During the meeting, we reviewed the actions (column 1) and BMPs (column 3) and we did not go over that applicable BMPs (column 2) due to time constraints. It was decided to allow additional time for view of the applicable BMPs and anything else in the table. Please let us know if you have other comments or revisions by end of business day Thursday, May 21, 2020.

Thank you so much,

Molly

Molly R. Davidson, PE Senior Water Resources Engineer, Morrison-Maierle

406.542.4825 direct | 406.360.3477 mobile

From: Molly R. Davidson Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2020 11:16 AM To: [email protected]; Dan Lozar ; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: Breanne Carr ; Christine A. Pearcy Subject: RE: CSKT SOD NEPA Efforts ‐ IDT Meeting

All-

Our meeting today uses Skype for Business. If you do not have that program on your computer or if you are unsure if you have that program, you can access using the web app. Please consider downloading the web app in advance of the meeting (click yellow highlight below). The download is 13.5 MB so please allow time to download. Once it is downloaded, you should be able to access the meeting with the platform of being able to view my screen share. The web app also allows you to video share using your camera if you chose to do so.

If all else fails, you are welcome to simply phone call into the meeting using the phone dial in below.

Thank you, 2

Molly

Molly R. Davidson, PE Senior Water Resources Engineer, Morrison-Maierle

406.542.4825 direct | 406.360.3477 mobile

From: Molly R. Davidson Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2020 9:20 AM To: [email protected]; Dan Lozar ; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: Breanne Carr ; Christine A. Pearcy Subject: RE: CSKT SOD NEPA Efforts ‐ IDT Meeting

All-

We could forward to meeting with you on-line tomorrow at 2 pm. You should have received a calendar appointment as well.

Join by video:

Join Skype Meeting Trouble Joining? Try Skype Web App

Or Join by phone:

1 (855) 296‐9103 Toll‐Free,,22027# (Missoula) English (United States)

(406) 542‐4885 Missoula, MT,,22027# (Missoula) English (United States)

Conference ID: 22027

Thank you,

Molly

Molly R. Davidson, PE Senior Water Resources Engineer, Morrison-Maierle

406.542.4825 direct | 406.360.3477 mobile

From: Molly R. Davidson Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 10:59 AM To: [email protected]; Dan Lozar ; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];

3 [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: Breanne Carr ; Christine A. Pearcy Subject: CSKT SOD NEPA Efforts ‐ IDT Meeting

Interdisciplinary Team,

I hope you are doing well and staying healthy. CSKT Safety of Dams has two NEPA efforts of which your input is requested. A video conferencing meeting will be set up for April 30th at 2PM via a separate appointment. The two topics for discussion include:

1. Flathead River Pumping Plant Electrical Upgrades – A scoping memo with site map are attached. 2. Programmatic EA for Dams Maintenance Activities – A scoping meeting occurred last summer (see attached Dams Maint EA Scoping Memo). We would like to discuss the Dams Maintenance Activities and associated BMPs table, which as also attached.

Video conferencing log-in here:

Join Skype Meeting Trouble Joining? Try Skype Web App

Or Join by phone

1 (855) 296‐9103 Toll‐Free,,22027# (Missoula) English (United States)

(406) 542‐4885 Missoula, MT,,22027# (Missoula) English (United States)

Find a local number

Conference ID: 22027

Sincerely,

Molly

Molly R. Davidson, PE Senior Water Resources Engineer, Morrison-Maierle 406.542.4825 direct | 406.360.3477 mobile

1055 Mount Ave., Missoula, MT 59801

4 Breanne Carr

From: Craig Barfoot Sent: Friday, June 26, 2020 6:02 AM To: Breanne Carr Cc: Christine A. Pearcy Subject: RE: Bull Trout Window Question Attachments: image001.png; image002.png; image003.png

***This message originated from an External Source.*** Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.

Hi,

We might have to pick the service's brain on this one, but the window we work under generally fits our needs, and it is in part driven by flow conditions. We have a section 10 permit for restoration actions and the BIA has a BO for operation and maintenance of the irrigation project. I think that both the section 10 permit and the BO have the same construction window, but both our program and the BIA have occasionally asked for variances.

Spawning and rearing habitat would be in the forks of the Jocko, although Middle Fork was not listed as critical habitat because the Bull Trout population is functionally extinct there. However, we did sample a subadult fish up there last year, the first in about 20 years. Its natal habitat was likely the South Fork Jocko River. The only other spawning and rearing habitat would be in Post Creek upstream of McDonald Lake and in Dry Creek upstream of St. Mary's (Tabor) Reservoir. Those are my greatest areas of concern. I don't think that any dam maintenance activity would have the potential to influence spawning and rearing habitat. All other critical habitat is foraging, migration, and overwintering (FMO). Much of the FMO habitat here (e.g., Flathead River) has high temperatures that further restrict seasonal use by Bull Trout, so that could and should be taken into account for dam maintenance actions. Perhaps we should discuss; I'm available next week.

Craig ______From: Breanne Carr [bcarr@m‐m.net] Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2020 10:16 AM To: Craig Barfoot Cc: Christine A. Pearcy Subject: Bull Trout Window Question

Hi Craig,

Thanks for sending your comments on the Dams Maintenance Activities BMP Table back in May. I am finalizing that table and would like some clarification on bull trout windows and waterways from you.

1. The list of waterways associated with bull trout (included below) was pulled from the Roads Maintenance EA from several years ago. Are these all inclusive of the reservoirs and waterways we are including in our EA or are there additional ones that should be included as bull trout occupied waterways?

These include : Flathead River (EWS Perma), McDonald Lake and Post Creek (McDonald Dam), Middle Fork Jocko River and Lower and Upper Jocko Lakes (Jocko Dam, Black Lake Dam, and Black Lake Spillway), Mission Creek (Mission Dam), St. Mary’s Lake (Tabor Dam). All activities within 300 feet of a listed waterway must abide by the following BMPs: 1 • When adjacent to or upstream of known or potential bull trout spawning and rearing areas, avoid conducting sediment‐producing activities from July 15 through August 31.

1. Are we dealing with both migration habitat and spawning habitat on the reservation? We may need to define which waterways are what type of habitat. The following statement below came directly from USFWS for a different project we are working on up in Flathead County. The dates do not align with the dates you provided me but it sounds like the dates you gave me better align with current CSKT regulations.

In rivers and streams, foraging, migrating, and overwintering habitat in‐channel disturbance should be limited to the period between July 1 and September 30; spawning and rearing habitat in‐channel disturbance should be limited to the period between May 1 and August 31.

You mentioned maybe looking at windows for specific waterways and activities to include in the EA. I would be more than happy to discuss this further with you so we can better refine the document to meet CSKT needs.

Thank you,

[cid:[email protected]]

Breanne Carr

Environmental Scientist, Morrison‐Maierle

[cid:[email protected]] 406.751.5854 direct | 406.885.0034 mobile

125 Schoolhouse Loop, Kalispell, MT 59901

2