DOCSLIB.ORG

Ch1 Overview

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

RESERVATION OF RIGHTS A number of governments and agencies participated in the development of this Flathead Subbasin Plan, Part I (Assessment Volume), Part II (Inventory Volume), and Part III (Management Plan Volume), its appendices, and electronically linked references and information (hereafter Plan). The primary purpose of the Plan is to help direct Northwest Power and Conservation Council funding of projects that respond to impacts from the development and operation of the Columbia River hydropower system. Nothing in this Plan, or the participation in its development, is intended to, and shall not be interpreted to, compromise, influence, or preclude any government or agency from carrying out any past, present, or future duty or responsibility which it bears or may bear under any authority. Nothing in this Plan or the participation in its development constitutes a waiver or release of any rights, including the right to election of other remedies, or is intended to compromise, influence, or preclude any government or agency from developing and prosecuting any damage claim for those natural resource impacts identified in the Plan which are not directly and exclusively resulting from, or related to, the development and operation of the Columbia River hydropower system. Nothing in this Plan or the participation in its development is intended to, and shall not be interpreted to, waive any rights of enforcement of regulatory, adjudicatory, or police powers against potentially responsible parties for compliance with applicable laws and regulations pertaining to natural resource damages throughout the Flathead Subbasin whether or not specifically identified in this Plan. This Plan is the result of a group effort. Nothing in it or the participation in its development should be interpreted as constituting unqualified acceptance or endorsement of the Plan, its appendices, or any electronically linked reference or information by any party. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This assessment, much of which is a compilation of existing information, draws heavily on the previous work of many agencies, groups, educational institutions, consulting firms, and individuals. Throughout we have used excerpts or condensed or adapted sections from other reports, studies, and plans. In each case we have acknowledged such use. The Flathead River Subbasin Plan Technical Team expresses its gratitude for the use of these materials. The Technical Team also thanks Chip McConnaha, Drew Parkin, and Betsy Torell for their assistance with QHA, Paul Anders for his work on LQHA, Mike Panian for developing the terrestrial spreadsheet tool (TBA), Bob Jamieson for his revisions of the assessment outline and early organizational work on TBA, and Susan Ball and Volker Mell for their GIS work. We are also grateful to Albert Chirico and Mike Panian other colleagues in the British Columbia ministries for their help and cooperation with this effort. © 2004 Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) and Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (MFWP) Citation: Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes and Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks. 2004. Flathead Subbasin Plan: Part I: Flathead River Subbasin Assessment. A report prepared for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council. Portland, OR. Lead Agency: CSKT Co-lead Agency: MFWP Subbasin Coordinator: Lynn DuCharme, CSKT Co-coordinator: Brian Marotz, MFWP Technical Team Lynn DuCharme Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes Brian Marotz Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks Larry VanRinsum Flathead County Conservation District Leo Marnell Glacier National Park Albert Chirico BC Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management Mike Panian BC Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management Bob Jamieson Private Consultant Alan Wood Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks Scott Relyea Flathead Lake Biological Station, University of Montana Seth Makepeace Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes Barry Hansen Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes Craig Barfoot Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes Art Soukkala Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes Steve Phillips US Forest Service (USFS), Flathead National Forest Fred Samson USFS, Region One Wade Fredenberg US Fish and Wildlife Service Bill Westover BC Ministry of Land, Water, and Air Protection Jeff Hutten Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks Tom Weaver Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks Dean Sirucek US Forest Service (USFS), Flathead National Forest Beth Gardner US Forest Service (USFS), Flathead National Forest Pat Van Eimeren US Forest Service (USFS), Flathead National Forest Herb Tepper BC Ministry of Land, Water, and Air Protection David Rockwell CW Consulting Document Prepared by David Rockwell GIS work by Susan Ball and Volker Mell, CSKT For information on this document, contact Lynn DuCharme, Subbasin Coordinator Brian Marotz, Subbasin Co-Coordinator Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks PO Box 278 490 North Meridian Rd Pablo, MT 59855 Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: 406-675-2700 ext. 7279 Phone: (406) 751-4546 email: [email protected] [email protected] 2 INTRODUCTION This assessment constitutes the technical evaluation of the biological and physical characteristics of the Flathead Subbasin, the first step in the development of a subbasin plan, which will be reviewed and eventually adopted as part of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council’s Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. The primary purpose of the plan will be to help direct Bonneville Power Administration funding of projects that protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife that have been adversely impacted by the development and operation of the Columbia River hydropower system. The primary purpose of the assessment is to bring together and synthesize technical information so that it can be used to develop the biological objectives For the PowerPoint introduction to the Kootenai that form the foundation of the management plan. It begins with an overview of and Flathead Subbasin Plans the subbasin environment. Chapter 2 examines in some detail the major biomes that the Subbasin found in the subbasin—aquatic, riparian/wetland, grassland, coniferous forest. Coordinators gave the Each of these biomes is evaluated in terms of ecological function and process and Independent Scientific Review how human activities have affected those functions and processes. For each biome Panel, go to Appendix 96. we also describe the current condition and several reference conditions. Chapter 3 assesses fish and wildlife communities in the subbasin, Chapter 4 examines the status of individual focal and target species. In Chapter 5, we present the results of a detailed aquatic evaluation of each 6th-code HUC in the subbasin and a terrestrial assessment of various units within each of our targeted biomes. This resulted in a ranking of the restoration potential and protection value of each. Finally, in the last chapter we interpret and synthesize our results, setting the stage for development of specific objectives, which make up the bulk of the management plan. It is our hope that this approach, moving from the broad (biomes and communities) to the more specific (individual species and 6th-code HUCs), is a logical framework for developing objectives and strategies to protect, mitigate, and enhance the fish and wildlife of the Flathead Subbasin. 3 This Page Intentionally Blank 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Reservation of Rights................................................................................................. 1 Acknowledgements .................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 3 1 Subbasin Overview .................................................................................. 13 1.1 Subbasin Description ........................................................................................ 13 1.1.1 Land Status and Administrative Structure ................................................ 16 1.1.2 Climate ..................................................................................................... 20 1.1.3 Geology and Geomorphology .................................................................. 21 1.1.4 Hydrology ................................................................................................. 29 1.1.5 Soils and Landtypes .................................................................................. 35 1.1.6 Vegetation.................................................................................................. 37 1.2 The Subbasin in the Regional Context ............................................................. 45 1.2.1 Size, Placement, and Unique Qualities.................................................... 45 1.2.2 Relationship of the Subbasin to ESA Planning Units ............................... 47 1.2.3 External Environmental Conditions Impacting the Subbasin .................. 49 1.2.4 Macroclimate trends ................................................................................. 50 1.3 Fish, Wildlife, and Plant Species ...................................................................... 51 1.3.1 Vertebrate Species ..................................................................................... 51 1.3.2 Species at Risk .......................................................................................... 51 1.3.3 Aquatic Focal Species and Terrestrial Target Species ............................
Recommended publications
  • A Preliminary Assessment of the Native Fish Stocks of Jasper National Park

    A Preliminary Assessment of the Native Fish Stocks of Jasper National Park

    A Preliminary Assessment of the Native Fish Stocks of Jasper National Park David W. Mayhood Part 3 of a Fish Management Plan for Jasper National Park Freshwater Research Limited A Preliminary Assessment of the Native Fish Stocks of Jasper National Park David W. Mayhood FWR Freshwater Research Limited Calgary, Alberta Prepared for Canadian Parks Service Jasper National Park Jasper, Alberta Part 3 of a Fish Management Plan for Jasper National Park July 1992 Cover & Title Page. Alexander Bajkov’s drawings of bull trout from Jacques Lake, Jasper National Park (Bajkov 1927:334-335). Top: Bajkov’s Figure 2, captioned “Head of specimen of Salvelinus alpinus malma, [female], 500 mm. in length from Jaques [sic] Lake.” Bottom: Bajkov’s Figure 3, captioned “Head of specimen of Salvelinus alpinus malma, [male], 590 mm. in length, from Jaques [sic] Lake.” Although only sketches, Bajkov’s figures well illustrate the most characteristic features of this most characteristic Jasper native fish. These are: the terminal mouth cleft bisecting the anterior profile at its midpoint, the elongated head with tapered snout, flat skull, long lower jaw, and eyes placed high on the head (Cavender 1980:300-302; compare with Cavender’s Figure 3). The head structure of bull trout is well suited to an ambush-type predatory style, in which the charr rests on the bottom and watches for prey to pass over. ABSTRACT I conducted an extensive survey of published and unpublished documents to identify the native fish stocks of Jasper National Park, describe their original condition, determine if there is anything unusual or especially significant about them, assess their present condition, outline what is known of their biology and life history, and outline what measures should be taken to manage and protect them.
  • National Register of Historic/Peaces

    National Register of Historic/Peaces

    733NPS Form 10-900 0MB No. 1024-0018 (Rev. Oct. 1990) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC/PEACES < REGISTRATION FORM 1. Name of Property historic name: Methodist Episcopal Church South other name/site number: Corvallis United Methodist Church 2. Location street & number: Corner of First Street and Eastside Highway not for publication: n/a vicinity: n/a city/town: Corvallis state: Montana code: MT county: Ravalli code: 081 zip code: 59828 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1986, as amended, I hereby certify that this X nomination _ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property X meets does not meet the National Reaister Ci-iterja^-l-fecomffle'nci tliay^wTJT^perty^e considered significant nationally statewide X locally. Signature of certifying official/Title Date Montana State Historic Preservation Office State or Federal agency or bureau ( _ See continuation sheet for additional comments.) In my opinion, the property _ meets _ does not meet the National Register criteria. Signature of commenting or other official Date State or Federal agency and bureau 4. National Park Service Certification I, hereby certify that this property is: Date of Action ^entered in the National Register _ see continuation sheet _ determined eligible for the National Register _ see continuation sheet _ determined not eligible for the National Register _ see continuation sheet _ removed from the National Register _see continuation sheet _ other (explain): _________________ Methodist Episcopal Church South Ravalli County.
  • Phylogeography and the Origins of Range Disjunctions in a North Temperate Fish, the Pygmy Whitefish (Prosopium Coulterii), Infer

    Phylogeography and the Origins of Range Disjunctions in a North Temperate Fish, the Pygmy Whitefish (Prosopium Coulterii), Infer

    Journal of Biogeography (J. Biogeogr.) (2011) ORIGINAL Phylogeography and the origins of range ARTICLE disjunctions in a north temperate fish, the pygmy whitefish (Prosopium coulterii), inferred from mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequence analysis Jonathan D. S. Witt1,2*, Randy J. Zemlak3 and Eric B. Taylor2 1Department of Biology, University of ABSTRACT Waterloo, 200 University Ave. West, Waterloo, Aim To investigate the degree of phylogeographical divergence within pygmy ON, Canada N2L 3G1, 2Department of Zoology and Native Fishes Research Group, whitefish (Prosopium coulterii) and to test hypotheses concerning the origin of University of British Columbia 6270 University disjunct populations within North America. Blvd, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4, Location North America from western Alaska to Lake Superior. 3Peace/Williston Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program, 1011 4th Ave., Prince Methods Mitochondrial (ATPase subunit VI) and nuclear (ITS-1, ITS-2) DNA George, BC, Canada V2L 3H9 sequence variation was assessed across the species’ North American range to test for the existence of distinct phylogeographical groupings of pygmy whitefish associated with known glacial refugia. Coalescent simulations of the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) data were used to test hypotheses of population structure. Results This species is composed of two monophyletic mitochondrial clades across its North American range. The two mtDNA clades differed by an average 3.3% nucleotide sequence divergence. These clades were also distinguished by ITS-2, but the relationships among lineages were not resolved by the ITS-1 analysis. Coalescent analyses rejected the null hypothesis of the current disjunct distributions being a result of fragmentation of a single widespread ancestral lineage across a variety of effective population sizes and divergence times.
  • WDFW Final Status Report for the Pygmy Whitefish

    WDFW Final Status Report for the Pygmy Whitefish

    STATE OF WASHINGTON September 1998 WashingtonWashington StateState StatusStatus ReportReport forfor thethe PygmyPygmy Whitefish Whitefish byby MollyMolly HallockHallock andand PaulPaul E.E. MongilloMongillo Washington Department of FISH AND WILDLIFE Fish Management Program Freshwater Resource Division Washington State Status Report for the Pygmy Whitefish by Molly Hallock and Paul E. Mongillo Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Fish Management Program 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, Washington 98501-1091 September 1998 The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife maintains a list of endangered, threatened and sensitive species (Washington Administrative Codes 232-12-014 and 232-12-011, Appendix A). In 1990, the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission adopted listing procedures developed by a group of citizens, interest groups, and state and federal agencies (Washington Administrative Code 232-12-297, Appendix B). The procedures include how species listing will be initiated, criteria for listing and de-listing, public review and recovery and management of listed species. The first step in the process is to develop a preliminary species status report. The report includes a review of information relevant to the species’ status in Washington and addresses factors affecting its status including, but not limited to: historic, current, and future species population trends, natural history including ecological relationships, historic and current habitat trends, population demographics and their relationship to long term sustainability, and historic and current species management activities. The procedures then provide for a 90-day public review opportunity for interested parties to submit new scientific data relevant to the status report, classification recommendation, and any State Environmental Policy Act findings. During the 90-day review period, the Department holds statewide public meetings to answer questions and take comments.
  • SPECIAL SCIENTIFIC REPORT-FISHERIES Na 590 SPECIAL SCIENTIFIC REPORT-FISHERIES

    SPECIAL SCIENTIFIC REPORT-FISHERIES Na 590 SPECIAL SCIENTIFIC REPORT-FISHERIES

    XFWS-A 590 1-20 (1969) U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. 590 Spec. Sci. Rep. Fish. Distributions of Fishes in Fresh Water of Katmai National Monument, Alaska, and Their Zoogeographical Implications Ul ©^ A R Y AUG 10 1971 WOODS HOLE. mSS. SPECIAL SCIENTIFIC REPORT-FISHERIES Na 590 SPECIAL SCIENTIFIC REPORT-FISHERIES Robert L. Hacker, Editor Mary Fukuyama, Associate Editor PUBLICATION BOARD John A. Gulnan John M. Patton, Jr. Robert L. Hacker Edward A. Schaefers John I. Hodges Parker S. Trefethen Harvey Hutchings Robert C. WUson Leslie W. Scattergood, Chairman Special Scientific Report—Fisheries are preliminary or progress reports and reports on scientific Investigations of restricted scope. Established as Special Scientific Reports in 1940, nos. 1 to 67 were Issued from that date to 1949, when the new series. Special Scientific Report— Fisheries, with new serial numbering, was started. Special Scientific Report— Fisheries are distributed free to Libraries, research institutions. State agencies, and scientists. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service BUREAU OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES Distributions of Fishes in Fresh Water of Katmai National Monument, Alaska, and Their Zoogeographical Implications By WILLIAM R. HEARD, RICHARD L, WALLACE and WILBUR L. HARTMAN United States Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report- -Fisheries No. 590 Washington, D.C. October 1969 2 CONTENTS Page Introduction ^ Fresh-water areas of the monument 3 Bristol Bay Drainage ^ Shelikof Strait Drainage '* Methods and equipment 5 Annotated
  • List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017

    List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017

    Washington Natural Heritage Program List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017 The following list of animals known from Washington is complete for resident and transient vertebrates and several groups of invertebrates, including odonates, branchipods, tiger beetles, butterflies, gastropods, freshwater bivalves and bumble bees. Some species from other groups are included, especially where there are conservation concerns. Among these are the Palouse giant earthworm, a few moths and some of our mayflies and grasshoppers. Currently 857 vertebrate and 1,100 invertebrate taxa are included. Conservation status, in the form of range-wide, national and state ranks are assigned to each taxon. Information on species range and distribution, number of individuals, population trends and threats is collected into a ranking form, analyzed, and used to assign ranks. Ranks are updated periodically, as new information is collected. We welcome new information for any species on our list. Common Name Scientific Name Class Global Rank State Rank State Status Federal Status Northwestern Salamander Ambystoma gracile Amphibia G5 S5 Long-toed Salamander Ambystoma macrodactylum Amphibia G5 S5 Tiger Salamander Ambystoma tigrinum Amphibia G5 S3 Ensatina Ensatina eschscholtzii Amphibia G5 S5 Dunn's Salamander Plethodon dunni Amphibia G4 S3 C Larch Mountain Salamander Plethodon larselli Amphibia G3 S3 S Van Dyke's Salamander Plethodon vandykei Amphibia G3 S3 C Western Red-backed Salamander Plethodon vehiculum Amphibia G5 S5 Rough-skinned Newt Taricha granulosa
  • Growth and Morphometry of the Pygmy Whitefish

    Growth and Morphometry of the Pygmy Whitefish

    GROWTH AND MORPHOMETRY OF THE PYGMY WHITEFISH (PROSOPIUM COULTERI) INBRITISH COLUMBIA by PETER JAMES MCCART B.A. The University of Oregon, 1958 A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in the DEPARTMENT OF ZOOLOGY We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October, 1963 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Institute of Fisheries Department of Zoology The University of British Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada 6 September 1963 i ABSTRACT The present study is, in part, a description of meristic variation in the pygmy whitefish, Prosopium coulteri, of British Columbia fish with those of other areas. The species was shown to be highly variable meristically both within and between populations. There are indications in some characters of a north-south cline of meristic counts. One character (gill raker counts) seems to form a V-shaped curve of variation. The major part of the study is a comparison of the growth and relative growth of fish from four British Columbia lakes. The two "giant" forms from MacLure and McLeese Lakes are more like one another in relative growth than like either of the two dwarf forms inhabiting Cluculz Lake or Tacheeda Lake.
  • Range Extension for Pygmy Whitefish (Prosopium Coulterii)

    Range Extension for Pygmy Whitefish (Prosopium Coulterii)

    70 THE CaNaDiaN FiElD -N aTuRalisT Vol. 129 Range Extension for Pygmy Whitefish ( Prosopium coulterii ) in the Northwest Territories, Canada Paul VECsEi 1 and DamiaN PaNayi Golder associates ltd., 9–4905 48th street, yellowknife, Northwest Territories X1a 3s3 Canada 1Corresponding author: [email protected] Vecsei, Paul, and Damian Panayi. 2015. Range extension for Pygmy Whitefish ( Prosopium coulterii ) in the Northwest Territories, Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist 129(1): 70–75. We document the first occurrence of Pygmy Whitefish ( Prosopium coulterii ) in the Northwest Territories outside of Great Bear lake. six specimens were captured in Bluefish lake in september 2012. Bluefish lake is on the yellowknife River, approximately 25 km upstream from Great slave lake. Key Words: Range extension; Pygmy Whitefish; Prosopium coulterii ; Northwest Territories; Coregoninae; distribution; Bluefish lake; yellowknife lake; Great slave lake Introduction ing the retreat of the Wisconsin glaciation (Eschmeyer The Pygmy Whitefish ( Prosopium coulterii ) is the and Bailey 1955). smallest member of the subfamily Coregoninae. it has in lakes, the Pygmy Whitefish ranges from shoreline large scales, large eyes, a blunt snout with a subtermi - habitat to waters as deep as 168 m (Heard and Hartman nal mouth, and a cylindrical body. its gill rakers are 1965; lindsey and Franzin 1972). at northern latitudes, short and number between 13 and 20. scales along the species is most common in shallow water. although the lateral line range between 54 and 70 (Eschmeyer the Pygmy Whitefish is typically lake dwelling, it also and Bailey 1955). The Pygmy Whitefish is typical of occurs in fast-moving montane rivers and streams that fishes in the genus Prosopium in having a single inter - are clear or silted (mcPhail and lindsey 1970; may - narial flap (mcPhail and lindsey 1970).
  • Hydrogeomorphic Functional Assessment of ARCO Wetland and Riparian Mitigation Lands Final Status Report – 2018 Assessments

    Hydrogeomorphic Functional Assessment of ARCO Wetland and Riparian Mitigation Lands Final Status Report – 2018 Assessments

    Hydrogeomorphic Functional Assessment of ARCO Wetland and Riparian Mitigation Lands Final Status Report – 2018 Assessments Prepared For The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes PO Box 278 Pablo, Montana 59855 Prepared By Geum Environmental Consulting, Inc. 307 State Street Hamilton, Montana 59840 December 2019 Hydrogeomorphic Functional Assessment of ARCO Wetland and Riparian Mitigation Lands [This page intentionally left blank] i Hydrogeomorphic Functional Assessment of ARCO Wetland and Riparian Mitigation Lands Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 5 Project History .............................................................................................................................................. 9 Project Area Overview ................................................................................................................................ 11 HGM Overview and Key Terms ................................................................................................................... 12 Methods ...................................................................................................................................................... 14 Landscape Assessment Areas ................................................................................................................
  • Irrigation and Streamflow Depletion in Columbia River Basin Above the Dalles, Oregon

    Irrigation and Streamflow Depletion in Columbia River Basin Above the Dalles, Oregon

    Irrigation and Streamflow Depletion in Columbia River Basin above The Dalles, Oregon Bv W. D. SIMONS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1220 An evaluation of the consumptive use of water based on the amount of irrigation UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1953 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Douglas McKay, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. C. - Price 50 cents (paper cover) CONTENTS Page Abstract................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction........................................................................................................................... 2 Purpose and scope....................................................................................................... 2 Acknowledgments......................................................................................................... 3 Irrigation in the basin......................................................................................................... 3 Historical summary...................................................................................................... 3 Legislation................................................................................................................... 6 Records and sources for data..................................................................................... 8 Stream
  • MT-0030546 Jocko River Trout Hatchery Final NPDES Statement of Basis

    MT-0030546 Jocko River Trout Hatchery Final NPDES Statement of Basis

    2016 Statement of Basis MT0030546 Page 1 of 14 STATEMENT OF BASIS PERMITTEE: Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks PERMIT NUMBER: MT0030546 RECEIVING WATER: Jocko River FACILITY: Jocko River Trout Hatchery RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Ron Snyder, Manager 71873 Hatchery Lane Arlee, Montana 59821 (406)726-3344 LOCATION: 71873 Hatchery Lane Arlee, Montana 59821 T16N, R20W, Section 12 Latitude 47.170611º N and Longitude 114.086067º W Flathead Reservation, Lake County, Montana PERMIT TYPE: Indian Country, Minor Permit, Permit Renewal I. Permit Status The current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit for the Jocko River Trout Hatchery (Hatchery) became effective on October 1, 2010, and expired on September 30, 2015. The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP) submitted an application for renewal that was received and considered completed on July 23, 2015. II. Facility Information The Hatchery is located along the Jocko River on the Flathead Reservation in northwestern Montana near Arlee, Montana. The Hatchery is operated by the Montana FWP for the purpose of raising Arlee rainbow trout broodstock for egg production. Since the 2010 permit cycle, the Hatchery has increased production from approximately 34,000 pounds to 40,000 pounds of trout per year in its flow-through system. The eggs are provided to other FWP hatcheries, and the trout are distributed to Montana waters. The Hatchery consists of ten indoor tanks for cultivation of trout eggs and fifteen outdoor raceways. Source water for the Hatchery is from underground springs approximately 0.2 and 0.4 miles east of the Hatchery. Juvenile fish are raised in the indoor tanks, which are cleaned once per day (when fish are present) by lowering the water level in the raceway and using a push broom to remove the detritus.
  • National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form

    National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form

    !.PS Perm 10-900-b _____ QMB No. 1024-0018 (Jan. 1967) *-• United States Department of the Interior ».< National Park Service ^ MAR1 National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form This form is for use in documenting multiple property groups relating to one or several historic contexts. See instructions in Guidelines for Completing National Register Forms (National Register Bulletin 16). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering trie requested information. For additional space use continuation sheets (Form 10-900-a). Type all entries. A. Name of Multiple Property Listing_____________________________________________ _______Historic Resources in Missoula, Montana, 1864-1940___________ 3. Associated Historic Contexts________________________________________________ _______Commercial Development in Missoula, Montana, 1864-1940____ ______Commercial Architecture in Missoula, Montana, 1864Q194Q C. Geographical Data The incorporated city limits of the City of LJSee continuation sheet D. Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this documentation form meets the National Register documentation, standards and sets forth requirements for the listing of related properties consistent with the National Register criteria. This submission meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60 and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Planning and Evaluation. 3 - IH-^O Signature of certifying official //Y Date j\A "T Swpo ^ ° State or Federal agency and bureau I, here by, certify that this multiple property documentation form has been approved by the National Register as a basis for evi iluating related pro Derties for listing in the National Register. i. < / \ ——L- A ^Signature of the Keeper of the National Register Date ' ' ( N —— ——————— E.