DOCSLIB.ORG

Ecology and Management of Mule Deer and White-Tailed Deer in Montana

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ecology and Management of Mule Deer and White-Tailed Deer in Montana ECOLOGY AND MANAG eme NT of Mule Deer and White-tailed Deer in Montana Ecology and Management of Mule Deer and White-tailed Deer in Montana By Richard J. Mackie, David F. Pac, Kenneth L. Hamlin, and Gary L. Dusek Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Wildlife Division Helena, Montana Federal Aid Project W-120-R 1998 About the Authors Richard J. Mackie is Professor Emeritus, Fish and Wildlife Program, Department of Biology, Montana State University, Bozeman. He conducted and supervised research on deer in Montana since 1960. During 1975-94, he served as coordinator of the statewide deer research program. David F. Pac is Research Biologist, Wildlife Division, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Bozeman. He studied mule deer in the Bridger Mountains since 1974 and assisted in deer studies on other areas. Kenneth L. Hamlin is Research Biologist, Wildlife Division, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Bozeman. His studies of mule deer began in 1972. During 1975-89, he conducted studies in the Missouri River Breaks, prairie-badlands, and prairie-agricultural environments. Gary L. Dusek is Research Specialist, Wildlife Division, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Bozeman. His studies of deer began in 1969. During 1980-93, he conducted studies on white-tailed deer in plains riverbottom, prairie-agricultural, and northwest montane forest environments. Illustration and Photo Credits Illustrations: Diana Haker - Cover, pps. 11, 23, 27, 34, 40, 48, 67, 71, 75, 110, 117, 136, 141, 153, and 161; Media Works - Figs. 6, 8, 27, 28, 63, 64, 65, 66, 120; Robert Neaves - p. 58 Photos: Mike Aderhold - p. 156; Kevin Berner, courtesy North Dakota Game and Fish Dept. - p. 66; Brad Compton - p. 51; Kevin Dougherty, Glendive Ranger Review - p. 8 (lower right); Gary Dusek - Fig. 5A & B, pps. 8 (upper left), 79, 130, 149, and 160; Michael Francis - Fig. 9; Ken Hamlin - Fig. 3A, pps. 1, 102, 139, and 142; Terry N. Lonner - Fig. 2A & B, pps. 7, 69, 72, 101, 105, and 107; Rick Mace - Fig. 6B; Richard Mackie - Fig. 6A, pps. 3, 25, 50, 53, 77, and 159; MFWP - Fig. 19 and p. 94; Greg Pierson - p. 125; Craig Sharpe - p. 111; Frank Siroky Jr. - p. 147; USFWS, CMR - Fig. 3B; Dan Wesen - pp. 108, 124, 131, and 150; Tom Wesen - p. 122; Gene Wolfe - p. 119; Alan Wood - Fig. 4A & B ©1998 by Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks. All rights reserved. Designed by Media Works, Bozeman, Montana. Printed in the United States of America by Color World Printers, Bozeman, Montana, on recycled paper. Permission to reproduce or copy any portion of this bulletin is granted on condition of full credit to Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks and the authors. Foreword Mule deer and white-tailed and methods and their applications. deer are the most widely distributed By the early 1970s, the and abundant big game mammals in environments in which deer existed Montana. Although evolved to live and were changing rapidly. Some methods thrive in broadly different environments, for deer management became outdated the two species are remarkably adaptive. and it was evident that new information Both occur in a wide variety of habitats, and approaches were necessary. In under widely fluctuating environmental 1975, an important long-term and conditions, in the presence of numerous comprehensive statewide research other wild mammals and domestic effort was initiated employing new livestock, and in the wake of extensive and emerging technologies in research human development and disturbance. on both species and across a broad Managing deer across diverse spectrum of environments in Montana. habitats and conditions in Montana Numerous ancillary studies mostly in the begins with understanding both their form of 2-year graduate student research biology and behavior. It also requires projects were conducted in association effective methods for monitoring with this long-term investigation. populations and habitats as well as for This bulletin was prepared as a manipulating deer numbers or habitat comprehensive summary of results factors to meet diverse social and from all of these studies. Like earlier economic objectives. efforts, the results lend additional Montana has a long history of insight to understanding the behavior, research to provide basic information biology and ecology of the two about deer and their habitats and to species. However, unlike earlier develop and test new and improved investigations, this investigation focused methods and criteria for deer on formulating research results into management. Studies during the 1940s management recommendations. This and ’50s provided most of the first resulted in important advances to refine scientific data, laying the foundation management strategies and practices for “deer management based on facts.” to help reduce some of the uncertainty Later, studies evaluated and refined that always exists in dealing with wildlife some of the early management concepts resources in complex environments. Donald A. Childress Administrator, Wildlife Division Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks ECOLOGY AND MANAG eme NT OF Dee R IN MONTANA iii Preface The research presented in this of habitat is described in terms of report was funded and sponsored by juxtaposition of all components and hunters and the Federal Aid in Wildlife their use by individual deer or family Restoration program. Together they have units of deer, does habitat become provided major funding for scientific truly meaningful. Deer habitat is game management since 1941, including multidimensional and must include not numerous short-term and comprehensive only the basic components for survival, long-term field research investigations but also the social behavior of deer. as reported in this bulletin. Although Individual deer of both sexes the information presented herein is comprise the basis of a deer population. definitive, no reader should be deluded However, partitioning environments into thinking these are the “last words” into deer matriarchal units surrounded in our understanding of Montana’s two by nearby and overlapping younger most numerous large mammals. Our female units is integral to understanding knowledge can never be complete, both how populations operate and for nor will management be conducted management options of the two species. with certainty. As the environment and Male habitat selection and survival, society changes, so must our knowledge while necessary for species continuance, of deer-habitat relationships. Research is is peripheral to the importance of one means of obtaining the wherewithal matriarchal units for maintenance or to recognize and adapt management to increases in deer populations. Females those changes. establish the ultimate pattern of deer It is difficult to consider deer population distribution in both new separate from their environment. All habitats and in habitats recolonized after that deer are and all that deer do are population declines. biological and behavioral responses to Understanding population the environments in which they occur characteristics and dynamics, including as individuals, populations, and species. age structure of the female segment and This bulletin expands on that view in discussions of deer-habitat relations and patterns and rates of fawn recruitment deer population ecology. For example, and adult mortality, are crucial to the term “habitat” has been defined and managing deer at the local level. The characterized by many but understood severe reduction or loss of one cohort by few. Ask anyone what constitutes due to environmental stress often linked “deer habitat” and most will describe a with predation may not be critical to landscape that usually includes a buck the population, but severe reductions and/or a doe, and often a fawn or two in two or more consecutive cohorts can in a picturesque outdoor setting. Such set the stage for a significant population images are designed for economic decline. Conversely, good survival of markets or artwork and not scientific consecutive cohorts can foretell an understanding. Only when the “concept” imminent population increase. iv ECOLOGY AND MANAG eme NT OF Dee R IN MONTANA The probability of survival is high for almost 50 years, only in the past for most deer after achieving adulthood. decade or so have biologists begun to The majority of adult deer mortality define, quantify, and understand the can be accounted for by legal hunting, interaction of all causes of mortality in terminal wounding losses and illegal population ecology. killing. This human-induced mortality In terms of management, the replaces some natural mortality in results herein indicate that many adults, but those latter rates are existing theories or “principles of normally quite low. However, occasional deer management” are less applicable episodes of high natural mortality of than commonly believed. Traditional adult females also can trigger population interpretation of “carrying capacity” declines, especially in association with did not explain observed deer- low fawn recruitment. habitat interactions on or among the The authors have emphasized various study areas. The concept of a the importance of behavior in habitat consistent “limiting factor” influencing relationships and population dynamics. deer population dynamics statewide Social behavior, while hard to quantify could not be identified. Similarly, the and explain, is often the driving force concept of “compensatory” increases in selection of certain habitats and in fawn recruitment and deer numbers avoidance of other habitats. It also is or decreases in natural mortality
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Deer, Elk, Bear, Moose, Lynx, Bobcat, Waterfowl
    Hunt ID: 1501-CA-AL-G-L-MDeerWDeerElkBBearMooseLynxBobcatWaterfowl-M1SR-O1G-N2EGE Great Economy Deer and Moose Hunts south of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada American Hunters trekking to Canada for low cost moose, along with big Mule Deer and Whitetail and been pleasantly surprised by the weather and temperatures that they were greeted by when they hunted British Columbia, located in Canada, north of Washington State. Canada should be and is cold but there are exceptions, if you know where to go. In BC if you stay on the western Side of the Rocky Mountains the weather is quite mild because it is warmed by the Pacific Ocean. If you hunt east of the Rocky Mountains, what I call the Canadian Interior it can be as much as 50 degrees colder depending on the time of the year. The area has now preference point requirements, the Outfitter has his allotted vouchers so you can get a reasonably priced license and, in most cases, less than you can get for the same animal in the US as a non-resident. You don’t even buy the voucher from the Outfitter it is part of his hunt cost because without it you could not get a license anyway. Travel is easy and the residents are friendly. Like anywhere outside the US you will need a easy to acquire Passport if you don’t have one, just don’t wait until the last minute to get one for $10 from your local Post office by where you live. The one thing in Canada is if you have a felony on your record Canada will not allow you into their safe Country.
    [Show full text]
  • Mule Deer and Antelope Staff Specialist Peregrine Wolff, Wildlife Health Specialist
    STATE OF NEVADA Steve Sisolak, Governor DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE Tony Wasley, Director GAME DIVISION Brian F. Wakeling, Chief Mike Cox, Bighorn Sheep and Mountain Goat Staff Specialist Pat Jackson, Predator Management Staff Specialist Cody McKee, Elk Staff Biologist Cody Schroeder, Mule Deer and Antelope Staff Specialist Peregrine Wolff, Wildlife Health Specialist Western Region Southern Region Eastern Region Regional Supervisors Mike Scott Steve Kimble Tom Donham Big Game Biologists Chris Hampson Joe Bennett Travis Allen Carl Lackey Pat Cummings Clint Garrett Kyle Neill Cooper Munson Sarah Hale Ed Partee Kari Huebner Jason Salisbury Matt Jeffress Kody Menghini Tyler Nall Scott Roberts This publication will be made available in an alternative format upon request. Nevada Department of Wildlife receives funding through the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration. Federal Laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, sex, or disability. If you believe you’ve been discriminated against in any NDOW program, activity, or facility, please write to the following: Diversity Program Manager or Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Nevada Department of Wildlife 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Mailstop: 7072-43 6980 Sierra Center Parkway, Suite 120 Arlington, VA 22203 Reno, Nevada 8911-2237 Individuals with hearing impairments may contact the Department via telecommunications device at our Headquarters at 775-688-1500 via a text telephone (TTY) telecommunications device by first calling the State of Nevada Relay Operator at 1-800-326-6868. NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE 2018-2019 BIG GAME STATUS This program is supported by Federal financial assistance titled “Statewide Game Management” submitted to the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Jette Meadows SWDAR
    JETTE MEADOWS LANDOWNERS ASSOCIATION PHASE I Phase I-PWS ID # MT0003100 JETTE MEADOWS LANDOWNERS ASSOCIATION PHASE II Phase II-PWS ID # MT0003101 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES SOURCE WATER DELINEATION AND ASSESSMENT REPORTS Lake County, Montana 24 APRIL 2006 PREPARED FOR: JETTE MEADOWS LANDOWNERS ASSOCIATION PHASE I JETTE MEADOWS LANDOWNERS ASSOCIATION PHASE II PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES Robert Gambrel, Administrative Contact Eva Gambrel, Financial Contact Clay A. Sloan, Operator PO Box 34 Polson, Montana 59860 Phone: 406/ 883-0911 or / 885-7556 PREPARED BY: MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL Jette Meadows Landowners Assoc. Phase I & II SWDAR (combined) MT0003100 & MT0003101 QUALITY Source Water Protection Program Jeffrey Frank Herrick, Hydrogeologist P.O. Box 200901 Helena, Montana 59620-0901 ii Jette Meadows Landowners Assoc. Phase I & II SWDAR (combined) MT0003100 & MT0003101 iii Jette Meadows Landowners Assoc. Phase I & II SWDAR (combined) MT0003100 & MT0003101 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Source Water Delineation and Assessment Report was prepared under the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act and the Montana Source Water Assessment Plan. The Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is ensuring that assessments are completed for all public water systems in Montana. The purpose of these reports is to provide information so that the public water system operator, consumers, and community citizens can begin developing strategies to protect your source of drinking water. The information that is provided includes the identification of the area most critical to maintaining safe drinking water, i.e., the Inventory Region, an inventory of potential sources of contamination within this area, and an assessment of the relative threat that these potential sources pose to the water system.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Guidelines for Mule Deer: California Woodland Chaparral Ecoregion
    THE AUTHORS : MARY L. SOMMER CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME WILDLIFE BRANCH 1812 NINTH STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 REBECCA L. BARBOZA CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME SOUTH COAST REGION 4665 LAMPSON AVENUE, SUITE C LOS ALAMITOS, CA 90720 RANDY A. BOTTA CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME SOUTH COAST REGION 4949 VIEWRIDGE AVENUE SAN DIEGO, CA 92123 ERIC B. KLEINFELTER CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME CENTRAL REGION 1234 EAST SHAW AVENUE FRESNO, CA 93710 MARTHA E. SCHAUSS CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME CENTRAL REGION 1234 EAST SHAW AVENUE FRESNO, CA 93710 J. ROCKY THOMPSON CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME CENTRAL REGION P.O. BOX 2330 LAKE ISABELLA, CA 93240 Cover photo by: California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Suggested Citation: Sommer, M. L., R. L. Barboza, R. A. Botta, E. B. Kleinfelter, M. E. Schauss and J. R. Thompson. 2007. Habitat Guidelines for Mule Deer: California Woodland Chaparral Ecoregion. Mule Deer Working Group, Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 2 THE CALIFORNIA WOODLAND CHAPARRAL ECOREGION 4 Description 4 Ecoregion-specific Deer Ecology 4 MAJOR IMPACTS TO MULE DEER HABITAT 6 IN THE CALIFORNIA WOODLAND CHAPARRA L CONTRIBUTING FACTORS AND SPECIFIC 7 HABITAT GUIDELINES Long-term Fire Suppression 7 Human Encroachment 13 Wild and Domestic Herbivores 18 Water Availability and Hydrological Changes 26 Non-native Invasive Species 30 SUMMARY 37 LITERATURE CITED 38 APPENDICIES 46 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ule and black-tailed deer (collectively called Forest is severe winterkill. Winterkill is not a mule deer, Odocoileus hemionus ) are icons of problem in the Southwest Deserts, but heavy grazing the American West.
    [Show full text]
  • Level IV Ecoregions of Montana
    DRAFT 2 Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and quantity of environmental resources; they are designed to serve as a spatial framework for the research, assessment, management, and monitoring of ecosystems and ecosystem components. By recognizing the spatial differences in the capacities and potentials of ecosystems, ecoregions stratify the environment by its Ecoregions of Montana probable response to disturbance (Bryce and others, 1999). These general purpose regions are critical for Second Edition structuring and implementing ecosystem management strategies across federal agencies, state agencies, and nongovernment organizations that are responsible for different types of resources within the same 116° 115° 114° 113° 112° 111° 110° 109° 108° 107° 106° 105° 104° geographical areas (Omernik and others, 2000). ° 49° The approach used to compile this map is based on the premise that ecological regions can be identified 49 BRITISH COLUMBIA 42d through the analysis of the spatial patterns and the composition of biotic and abiotic phenomena that affect ALBERTA SASKATCHEWAN 42k or reflect differences in ecosystem quality and integrity (Wiken, 1986; Omernik, 1987, 1995). These 15d CANADA 15h 41b 42q 42n sa 17r ATE S phenomena include geology, physiography, vegetation, climate, soils, land use, wildlife, and hydrology. u F 41a 42l UNITED ST n l Plentywood a a 42n 42r 42m Scobey c th 42r o e The relative importance of each characteristic varies from one ecological region to another regardless of o a 42r K d R e i 42r 17r the hierarchical level. A Roman numeral hierarchical scheme has been adopted for different levels of k v a 41c e r Fresno 15h L 42i 42b 42d ecological regions.
    [Show full text]
  • Utah Pronghorn Statewide Management Plan
    UTAH PRONGHORN STATEWIDE MANAGEMENT PLAN UTAH DIVISION OF WILDLIFE RESOURCES DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES UTAH DIVISION OF WILDLIFE RESOURCES STATEWIDE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR PRONGHORN I. PURPOSE OF THE PLAN A. General This document is the statewide management plan for pronghorn in Utah. This plan will provide overall direction and guidance to Utah’s pronghorn management activities. Included in the plan is an assessment of current life history and management information, identification of issues and concerns relating to pronghorn management in the state, and the establishment of goals, objectives and strategies for future management. The statewide plan will provide direction for establishment of individual pronghorn unit management plans throughout the state. B. Dates Covered This pronghorn plan will be in effect upon approval of the Wildlife Board (expected date of approval November 30, 2017) and subject to review within 10 years. II. SPECIES ASSESSMENT A. Natural History The pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) is the sole member of the family Antilocapridae and is native only to North America. Fossil records indicate that the present-day form may go back at least a million years (Kimball and Johnson 1978). The name pronghorn is descriptive of the adult male’s large, black-colored horns with anterior prongs that are shed each year in late fall or early winter. Females also have horns, but they are shorter and seldom pronged. Mature pronghorn bucks weigh 45–60 kilograms (100–130 pounds) and adult does weigh 35–45 kilograms (75–100 pounds). Pronghorn are North America’s fastest land mammal and can attain speeds of approximately 72 kilometers (45 miles) per hour (O’Gara 2004a).
    [Show full text]
  • References for Montana Plant Community Field Guide
    References For Montana Plant Community Field Guide Achuff, P. L. 1989. Old-growth forests of the Canadian Rocky Mountain National Parks. Natural Areas Journal 9:12-26. Agee, J. K., and J. Kertis. 1987. Forest types of the north Cascades National Park Service complex. Canadian Journal of Botany 65:1520-1530. Aiken, S. G., M. J. Dallwitz, C. L. McJannet, and L. L. Consaul. 1996 onwards. Festuca of North America: Descriptions, Illustrations, Identification, and Information Retrieval, 2nd Version: URL, April 1998. http://biodiversity.uno.edu/delta/. Aiken, S.G. and S. J. Darbyshire. 1990. Fescue Grasses of Canada. Agriculture Canada Publication 1844/E. Aldous, A. E., and H. L. Shantz. 1924. Types of vegetation in the semiarid portion of the United States and their economic significance. Journal of Agricultural Research. 28(2):99-125. Alexander, R. R. 1985. Major habitat types, community types, and plant communities in the Rocky Mountains. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM-123, Fort Collins, CO. 105 pp. Alexander, R. R. 1985. Major habitat types, community types, and plant communities in the Rocky Mountains. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM-123. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO. 105 pp. Alexander, R. R., G. R. Hoffman, and J. M. Wirsing. 1986. Forest vegetation of the Medicine Bow National Forest in southeastern Wyoming: A habitat type classification. USDA Forest Service Research Paper RM-271. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO. 39 pp. Antos, J. A. 1977. Grand fir (Abies grandis (Douglas) Forbes) forests of the Swan Valley, Montana.
    [Show full text]
  • AWA IR C-AK Secure.Pdf
    United States Department of Agriculture Customer: 3415 Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Inspection Date: 25-JUN-14 Animal Inspected at Last Inspection Cust No Cert No Site Site Name Inspection 3415 96-C-0015 001 ALASKA WILDLIFE 25-JUN-14 CONSERVATION CENTER INC. Count Species 000002 Canadian lynx 000004 Reindeer 000009 Muskox 000004 Moose 000002 North American black bear 000003 Brown bear 000001 North American porcupine 000130 American bison 000001 Red fox 000021 Elk 000177 Total United States Department of Agriculture Customer: 7106 Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Inspection Date: 15-SEP-14 Animal Inspected at Last Inspection Cust No Cert No Site Site Name Inspection 7106 96-C-0024 001 S.A.A.M.S 15-SEP-14 Count Species 000008 Stellers northern sealion 000006 Harbor seal 000003 Sea otter 000017 Total United States Department of Agriculture Customer: 7106 Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Inspection Date: 24-JUN-15 Animal Inspected at Last Inspection Cust No Cert No Site Site Name Inspection 7106 96-C-0024 001 S.A.A.M.S 24-JUN-15 Count Species 000008 Stellers northern sealion 000006 Harbor seal 000014 Total DBARKSDALE United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 2016082567946548 Insp_id Inspection Report S.A.A.M.S Customer ID: 7106 P. O. Box 1329 Certificate: 96-C-0024 Seward, AK 99664 Site: 001 S.A.A.M.S Type: ROUTINE INSPECTION Date: 26-SEP-2016 No non-compliant items identified during this inspection. This inspection and exit briefing was conducted with facility representatives.
    [Show full text]
  • Knife River Flint Distribution and Identification in Montana
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2016 Knife River Flint Distribution and Identification in Montana Laura Evilsizer University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Indigenous Studies Commons, and the United States History Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Evilsizer, Laura, "Knife River Flint Distribution and Identification in Montana" (2016). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 10670. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/10670 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. KNIFE RIVER FLINT DISTRIBUTION AND IDENTIFICATION IN MONTANA By Laura Jean Evilsizer B.A. Anthropology, Whitman College, Walla Walla, WA, 2011 Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Master of Arts in Anthropology, Cultural Heritage University of Montana Missoula, MT May, 2016 Approved By: Scott Wittenburg, Dean of The Graduate School Graduate School Dr. Douglas H. MacDonald, Chair Department of Anthropology Dr. John Douglas Department of Anthropology Dr. Julie A.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning Record Index for the Flathead National Forest 2018 Land Management Plan and NCDE Grizzly Bear Amendments
    Planning Record Index for the Flathead National Forest 2018 Land Management Plan and NCDE Grizzly Bear Amendments Exhibit Author Description 00001 Flathead National Forest Public Involvement List of Meetings September 2013 to May 2015 00002 Chip Weber (forest supervisor, Flathead letter inviting Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes resource managers to meet with Flathead National Forest National Forest) planning team 00003 consultation record of meeting Jan. 21, 2015, with Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes 00004 Meridian Institute Flathead National Forest Plan Revision Middle Fork and South Fork Geographic Area Meeting – Mapping Management Areas Draft Summary 00005 Meridian Institute Flathead National Forest Plan Revision Swan Valley and Salish Mountains Geographic Area Meeting – Mapping Management Areas Draft Summary 00006 Meridian Institute Flathead National Forest Plan Revision Hungry Horse and North Fork Geographic Area Meeting – Mapping Management Areas Draft Summary 00007 Meridian Institute Flathead National Forest Stakeholder Collaboration Forest-Wide Meeting – Mapping Management Areas Draft Summary 00008 Meridian Institute Flathead National Forest Plan Revision - Salish Mountains Geographic Area Meeting Draft Summary 00009 Meridian Institute Flathead National Forest Plan Revision - Swan Valley Geographic Area Meeting Draft Summary 00010 Meridian Institute Flathead National Forest Plan Revision - Hungry Horse, Middle Fork, and South Fork - Geographic Areas Meeting - Draft Summary 00011 Meridian Institute Flathead National
    [Show full text]
  • Brochure Highlight Those Impressive Russia
    2019 44 years and counting The products and services listed Join us on Facebook, follow us on Instagram or visit our web site to become one Table of Contents in advertisements are offered and of our growing number of friends who receive regular email updates on conditions Alaska . 4 provided solely by the advertiser. and special big game hunt bargains. Australia . 38 www.facebook.com/NealAndBrownleeLLC Neal and Brownlee, L.L.C. offers Austria . 35 Instagram: @NealAndBrownleeLLC no guarantees, warranties or Azerbaijan . 31 recommendations for the services or Benin . 18 products offered. If you have questions Cameroon . 19 related to these services, please contact Canada . 6 the advertiser. Congo . 20 All prices, terms and conditions Continental U .S . 12 are, to the best of our knowledge at the Ethiopia . 20 time of printing, the most recent and Fishing Alaska . 42 accurate. Prices, terms and conditions Fishing British Columbia . 41 are subject to change without notice Fishing New Zealand . 42 due to circumstances beyond our Kyrgyzstan . 31 control. Jeff C. Neal Greg Brownlee Trey Sperring Mexico . 14 Adventure travel and big game 2018 was another fantastic year for our company thanks to the outfitters we epresentr and the Mongolia . 32 hunting contain inherent risks and clients who trusted us. We saw more clients traveling last season than in any season in the past, Mozambique . 21 dangers by their very nature that with outstanding results across the globe. African hunting remained strong, with our primary Namibia . 22 are beyond the control of Neal and areas producing outstanding success across several countries. Asian hunting has continued to be Nepal .
    [Show full text]
  • MNPS Annual Meeting: Needmore Prairie
    elseyaNewsletter of the Montana Native Plant Society Kelseya uniflora K ill. by Bonnie Heidel MNPS Annual Meeting:Needmore Prairie By Beth Madden, Maka Flora Chapter Join us June 17-19 at Camp Needmore in Ekalaka for the MNPS Annual Meeting. We will explore the rolling plains, buttes and table lands of southeast Montana, Narrowleaf penstemon some e of the most extensive, unbroken area of prairie (Penstemon angustifolius) in the state. A slate of field trips will take us to diverse stars as our emblematic prairie and ponderosa pine habitats. We’ll visit Forest plant for the Needmore Service and private lands around Capitol Rock, Bell Tower Prairie meeting. Carter Rock and Chalk Buttes, as well as nearby Medicine Rocks County is the only place State Park and area BLM lands. In the evening, we will in Montana where you return to Camp Needmore, a rustic camp built by the can see this lovely purple, Civilian Conservation Corps in the Custer National Forest. sand-loving wildflower. The main hall provides ample space to gather and share Artist Claire Emery meals. You can stay in dormitory-style cabins, pitch has created a stunning your tent or hook up an RV. We have invited both the woodcut of Penstemon Wyoming and Great Plains Native Plant Societies to join angustifolius for our logo. us here. Two original prints will be Friday night’s campfire will feature poetry and songs; available to lucky bidders please bring your contribution and/or instrument. On at the meeting. The Saturday night, rancher and conservation writer Linda Penstemon Angustifolius.
    [Show full text]