^If 19 Q ^T^j &^ tmu^ VOL. V — No. 3 Montana Fish and Game Department Official Publication * %»^ , Settt IRitiei Si^ 9^' MONTANA FISH AND GAME DEPARTMENT Official \ "^t * , -'^'^ Publication 4 State of Montana J. Hugo Aronson, Governor MONTANA FISH AND GAME COMMISSION Manson Bailey, Jr., Glasgow, Chairman Ralph D. Shipley, Miles City William T. Sweet, Butte H. W. Black, Poison E. J. Skibby, Lewistown A. A. O'Claire, Helena, Secretary DIVISION DIRECTORS Walter J. Everin - Deputy Director Walter M. Allen -. Fisheries Superintendent Robert F. Cooney - - Wildlife Restoration M. J. Watt ..-.Chief Law Enforcement Officer W. Kenneth Thompson Information and Education Ovie N. Woolverton Chief Clerk ^ McKEE "^^^ PRINT. ■fjA -■? 'I 'i |i OcCl ^<^C^ - from an original draining bxj ^ern Graig ; '! The regal Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep (Ovis canadensis canadensis) is on J the road back. Once near extinction alcng with a sub-species, the Audubon || Badlands Sheep which disappeared from the Missouri Breaks in 1916, the bighorn J appeared doomed. Hov/ever, better game management practices reduced competi- , tion with other species for critical winter range. Trapping and transplanting opened i new vistas for the mountain rams, and accelerated law enforcement programs \ together with a changed outlook by Montana citizens protected the remnant herds. { Today the future of the bighorn is bright. Hunting, as a result of new j legislation in 1951, makes a controlled yearly harvest possible. In this way, the i herds are kept in balance, and the old surplus rams become sportsmen's trophies. J S 1 '7ft(MtaKCi ^cCcCii^e Vol. V Mary Moore, Editor No. 3 Vernon Craig, Artist TABLE OF CONTENTS Sun River Elk Inside Front Cover How Many Gunnery Ranges?. 3 Montana Sportsmen's Projects 4 The Bighorns Are Back! 6 Sixty-one Years on Bull Mountain 9 Montana's Wildlife Districts 1 1 The Otter's Diet— Good or Bad? 14 Big Medicine ior the Marias 18 Teen Age Delegates Tour r., 21 1954 Trophy Awards : 24 Fall Issue— 1955 "Montana Wildlife," published quarterly, may be obtained free of charge by writing the Montana Fish and Game Department at , Helena. Contents of this magazine- may be reproduced in whole or in part if properly credited. '' 'PA<^ta ^ecUU — 7 : Front and Back Cover, Pages 9, 10, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, \ !| 24 by Vern Craig; Inside Front Cover, Bob Cooney; Page \ i' 5, Ernst Peterson, Hamilton; Pages 14, 15, Kenneth Greer; i| i: Pages 19, 20, 22, 23, Kenneth Thompson. !' : 1 'I } EDITORIAL: |: How Many Gunnery Ranges? ;| There are only two things that are above criticism these days — grandmothers and 'i national defense. We'll go along with the grandmothers, they are nice people. And ' we certainly recognize the need for strong national defense. ( However, we can't help but wonder if the armed forces aren't going overboard in |' their demands for more and more gunnery ranges. For the past year, conservation i interests have been advised of the attempted encroachments on wildlife sanctuaries, ' wilderness country and other valuable lands for use as gunnery practice ranges. , This came home to Montanans this summer when the Navy was considering using ', 100 square miles of the Fort Peck Game Range for practice and testing grounds. (Inci- J' dentally, we hear they are back.) If this could be shown to be an essential use, con- i, servationists certainly would sacrifice the newly-developed bighorn sheep herd, some 'i of the best deer hunting i^ North America and the other wildlife resources of this region. || But we ask the question — does each unit of national defense need to tie up i thousands of valuable acres of land when, with a minimum of cooperation and planning, [' ' each could use a smaller number of areas interchangeably? ( As an indication of the encropchment being attempted on wildlife areas, we have '' the following partial list which has received national publicity: i| Most widely protested was the Army's sneak attempt to pirate 10,700 acres of the S - Wichita Wildlife Refuge to expand Fort Sill and destroy a top recreational area. / The Navy has a . proposed withdrawal of nearly a million acres in California of i| which about one-third lies in Death Valley National Monument. This would be an ]' air-to-air gunnery range. (| In Texas, the Air Force had a request to close part of San Antonio Bay and the 'i Gulf of Mexico for photoflash bombing practice. This, it is reported, would drive gome || from the Aransas National Wildlife Refuge, the last remaining winter refuge of the i, almost extinct whooping crane. This species would in all probability be doomed, and J' other species ■ of waterfowl would also be adversely affected. This plan, we under- i stand, has been blocked by conservation interests. ^ ■ 'i ■ ^ Ji There are many huge areas now established for military maneuvers and practice, , and these without known exception have been barred from the public, and in many i, instances, have become private hunting grounds for armed forces officials. One area J even has a complete staff of game wardens and game management men selected from i the services tc provide private hunting for men on the base. ' So we go back to our original thesis: Let's not throw away our natural resources, || our wild lands and national monuments, if there is any possible alternative. While we (| recognize the urgency of the moment in national defense, we must also consider that \' happy day in the future when the constant expansion of armed services will not be i necessary. Then we wll need even more the recreational areas and our wildlife. 'i We would like to see a really earnest attempt made to establish a few ^ gunnery Z ranges for the cooperative use of all segments of the armed forces. After all, in a 'i war, the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force work together — why not get a little [' practice in peacetime? i 'i 'i Montana Sportsmen's Projects (Twelfth in a Series) RAVALLI COUNTY FISH AND WILDLIFE ASSOCIATION 'Tublic sentiment is everything; with public sentiment nothing can foil, with- out it nothing can succeed/' (Montana Wildlife Federation) This significant statement quoted from the Federation's educational program has been made a reality by one of the organization's member clubs, the Ravalli County Fish and Wildlife Association. The Club's Educational Committee with an annual budget of $500, has brought resource management prob- lems to Bitterroot Valley residents through a variety of approaches. Chief among these is a Conservation Book Section at the Hamilton Public Library. The Library project was started in 1951 when a book shelf was planned at the County Library and books sup- plied from a fund set aside for that purpose. Each year, additional books and periodicals have been donated to the library. In 1954, a special bookcase was set up with a suitable plaque designating the corner as the Conservation Library. At present, the library contains 157 books on conservation subjects, both popular and technical, with reading material for every age level. In addition, regular subscriptions for ten of the most important periodi- cals provide a current file and refer- ence on specific topics. Included in the display rack are "The lournal of Wildlife Management," "The Living Wilderness" and "The Natural His- tory Magazine." But maintaining the library does not insure that the information it con- tains will reach all who might be in- terested in conservation. Therefore, the club distributes its literature by means of a mobile library, a mailing list and a special rotating system. The educational program of the Ravalli County Fish and Wildlife Association started in 1949. "This program became an obvious r^ecessity to club members when they realized that sportsmen would have to become interested and informed in sound management practices for the Bitterroot Valley," according to one of the club's officers. "Such prac- tices are vital if the recreational re- sources of the Valley are to be fully enjoyed by the present generation and still left as a heritage for future generations." Nor is the Library Project the only activity of the Educational Com- mittee. Its other accomplishments include sponsoring adult education forums, organizing and directing panel dis- cussions on problems of resource management, assisting at 4-H camps, preparation of county fair exhibits, sponsoring conservation contests and prizes. Behind this outstanding sports- men's project is some basic thinking and planning. It should be an en- couraging sign to ranchers farmers. lumbermen, state andfedeial officials to find a group of sportsmen inter- ested in learning the fundamental facts of resource management. This basic approach to an under- standing of the problem and needs of wildlife can only result in realiza- tion of the objectives designated by clubs to develop an interest and un- derstanding of sound resource man- agement. The educational program of the Ravalli County Fish and Wildlife Association is offered as a sugges- tion to other sportsmen's groups which would like to expand their program to include the field of Con- servation Education. More complete details are avail- able for any interested organization by writing to the Ravalli County Fish and Wildlife Association at Hamilton or to the Montana Fish and Game Department in Helena. Two Hamilton boys, Tom and Rol- and Peterson, in- vestigate the books in the conservation corner at the Ravalli County Library, I supplied by the Ravalli County Wildlife Association. The Bighorns Are Back! by Faye M. Couey, Assistant Coordinator, Wildlife Restoration Division This year, five hunters were grant- ed permits to hunt bighorn sheep in the Billy Creek area of the Fort Peck game range. These men were able to hunt their trophies in this once- historic sheep range because the Montana Fish and Game Department transplanted sheep into this area eight years ago, where the last sheep was sighted in 1916. On November 16, 1947, 16 bighorn sheep were liberated in a fenced, 320-acre pasture on Billy Creek, in the heart of the badlands of the Fort Peck game range. These mountain sheep, from the healthy Tarryall herd in Colorado, were planted with the hope of re-establishing mountain sheep in their native habitat. Results of the project have been gratifying. The herd numbers dou- bled by the fall of 1949, with two lamb crops. After this acclimatization period, about 16 sheep were liberated from the fenced area. They stayed in the vicinity of the pasture. All the sheep were liberated when the fence was completely removed in October, 1952. At that time, it was estimated that there were approximately 80 bighorns in the Billy Creek area and adjoining drainages. Since 1952, the sheep have scat- tered somewhat over the range, and it is presumed the increase has been good. Predators have not been a problem because of the protection afforded by the inaccessibility of the area. It is very difficult to census these animals in the rough, badland terrain, and the population figures are purely estimates, but there may be approximately 200 bighorn sheep in northern Garfield county. The last bighorn was reported in this part of the state in 1916. Since then, even with the protection of a closed season, Montana's bighorn herds gradually declined. Studies have shown that the ranges had been over-used, reproduction was low, and disease took a heavy toll. An immediate recommendation to im- prove the situation was to introduce some healthy animals into a good range and hope they would increase with the protection which could be given. Efforts to establish bighorn sheep in other sections of Montana have been in operation since 1943. Re- sults have ranged from very success- ful to poor. Increasing bighorn sheep herds are located in the Sun River, Gallatin, Rock Creek and Wildhorse Island areas. A herd in the Stillwater drain- age of the Beartooth Plateau country is in a static condition, the Ural herd in Lincoln county is decreasing, and herds in Glacier and Yellow- stone National Parks, and on the Bison Range at Moiese have shown little increase. Sheep plants in the Big Belt moun- tains and the Gates of the Mountains were not successful. The principle reason may have been that the ani- mals were not placed in a fenced enclosure, although they were in suit- able habitat. Plants of bighorns were made in the Kootenai Falls and Sixteen Mile area in 1954. Results of these plants will not be known for several years. Die-off in sheep populations has occurred when the animals faced heavy competition from elk, deer, and livestock for use of crowded win- ter ranges. Concentrations of big- horns into small areas also encour- ages and spreads disease such as verminous pneumonia and lung worm infestation, when the animals in natural habitat would be less susceptible to infection. The five hunters who travelled into the rough, precipitous badlands of northern Garfield county this year were the first to participate in a legal hunt of bighorn sheep in this area since 19 14. Recommendations from studies of this species conclude that the taking of a limited number of mature rams might prove beneficial to the herds by reducing the number dependent upon the critical range, and at the same time, provide some rare trophy hunting with the convic- tion that the herd would not be harmed. The 1953 Legislature gave the Montana Fish and Game Commis- sion authority to authorize the hunt- ing of bighorn sheep by special per- mit. In the fall of that year, a total of 30 permits were issued to take mature rams with a three-quarter horn curl; 20 permits for the Sun River area, five for the Gallatin and five for the Stillwater. Hunting suc- cess was approximately 65 percent. In 1954, 53 permits were authorized by the Department. In the Sun River, 19 of 20 permits were filled; 8 of 15 in the Gallatin; 4 out of 8 in the Still- water; 5 of 5 in the Rock Creek area west of Drummond; and 3 of 5 in the Ural area of Lincoln county. Hunting success in 1954 was fairly high, aver- ing 73 percent. The closing date of the season was extended from No- vember 15 to December 12, allowing time for the rams to concentrate near the winter range during the rut pe- riod. Easier, but less sporting, hunt- ing was provided for the permit holders. Approximately the same season was in effect for 1955, with the addi- tion of five permits for the Fort Peck area. No season extensions were granted for this species this year. Several other areas in the state are proposed as release sites for big- horns in an effort to get more healthy herds started. In selecting these new planting sites, consideration will be given to present range, avoiding competition from other animals, ade- quate cover, protection and historical use by bighorn sheep. ^fr YEARS OH BULL MOUHTAIH William T. Sweet, Butte Montana Fish and Game Commissioner I killed my first deer in Farnum Gulch, on the slopes of Bull Moun- tain, between Boulder and Cardwell in Jefferson county when I was a boy nine years old. That was 61 years ago, and I still think Bull Mountain is the most beau- tiful range in the west. My father came up the Missouri to Fort Benton on a steamboat in 1864, drifted west with an ox team and homesteaded a ranch in Boulder Valley which runs parallel to the mountain. I grew up there and some of my earliest memories are of the stories my father told us of the abun- dance of elk, deer, bear, mountain sheep and moose on the mountain in the early days. In my youth, the elk were gone but deer, bear, grouse and other game were still very plentiful. Some of the best hunting I can recall we had on our trips to Bull Mountain after blue or Richardson grouse when I was a boy. The mountain is noted for its lovely open parks and it was not unufual for us to see 500 grouse in a day in the pine and fir timber surrounding them. Often we lugged home a gunny sack full at the end of a day's hunt. never thinking the species would some day decline and require a defi- nite management program to assure its perpetuation. As a kid, I well remember my brother Chet, who with the' Berkin boys killed and sold deer for a living. They hunted mostly in the low Dunn Hills where deer wintered because of the light snowfall. There were no game laws at that time, and I have seen them come through Boulder each week with an old stagecoach drawn by four horses with a load of frozen deer stacked like cordwood. They sold the deer in Helena for $5 apiece, and be it said to their credit that they gave many away to hungry families who couldn't pay the price for fresh meat. As for market hunting, nobody thought there was anything wrong with it then. The deer herd soon began to shrink, however, but for a time no one knew why and there was no alarm in the decrease. Even when the Mon- tana legislature finally enacted gome laws, the season limit was six deer at first. Later that was reduced to three and then to one. Deer began to increase and today the deer hunting on Bull Mountain is as good as can be had anywhere in the country. As with the grouse, management came in time. The elk on this mountain were ex- terminated in the early days and for years there were none. But in 1911, a group of sportsmen at Boulder col- lected enough money to pay trans- portation charges at $5 per head on two carloads of elk from Yellowstone Park. Each carload consisted of 34 ani- mals. Released and protected for sev- eral years, the elk thrived. The high elevation, just over 10,000 feet at the peak, open parks, big timber, abun- dance of feed and pure mountain springs were exactly what the im- ported animals required. Today this area provides some of the finest elk hunting in Montana. My wife Lou, who has been my lifelong hunting partner, killed a rec- ord head on the slopes of the moun- tain almost 30 years ago. More re- cently, in 1953, Bull Mountain contrib- uted another record elk head. This one, the largest ever taken in Mon- tana, was shot by John Willard, out- door writer, along the Boulder River where it had drifted from its haunts on the timbered mountain three miles away. Bull Mountain has had its share of bears, mountain lions, bobcats, wolves and coyotes, too. My father used to relate how he was hired in the early days to guard the charcoal pits at Elkhorn, now a ghost town, from bears. He patrolled each night with two dogs and had many encounters with what he called "silvertips," but what I believe were a color phase of the black bear rather than grizzlies. Later, on this same mountain for several winters, Clarence and Roy Murray took annual catches of preda- tors averaging 150 coyotes, 50 bob- cats and 10 lions. It was they who killed the last wolves in that part of Montana, a pack of five that had taken a heavy toll of cattle in the area. Few sportsmen know it today, but the mountain once harbored a herd of bighorn sheep and produced some fine heads. Looking back now on 61 years of hunting on this beautiful mountain, when I recall the early plenitude of game, the scarcity that followed and the better days of recent years, it is my earnest hope that my successors on the Montana Game Commission will continue to manage the wildlife of this area wisely for the benefit of future generations. Given the chance. Bull Mountain will do its share to provide for our children and grand- children the kind of hunting that has delighted Lou and me and so many other sportsmen fall after fall as far back as I can remember. But denied the right kind of wise management, the game herds inev- itably will dwindle down again — on Bull Mountain or anywhere else in Montana. 10 MONTANA'S WILDLIFE DISTRICTS A million dollar business covering an area scattered over 148,000 square miles could not operate effectively from a headquarters located hun- dreds of miles from certain sections of its territory. This handicap became apparent in the management of Fish and Game Department affairs during the past several years. The need for decentralization re- sulted in a major reorganization of the Fish and Game Department's field activities. The de- velopment started in 1946 with a sep- aration of law en- forcement person- nel into seven dis- tricts, each under the direction of a District Warden Supervisor. This change was com- pleted in 1954 when it was apparent that other phases of Department ac- tivity should also operate in a district rather than on a project basis, as in the past. The key to the new operation is a three-man team — the warden super- visor, the district fisheries biologist and the district game biologist — working in each of the seven districts with headquarters located at Kali- spell, Missoula, Bozeman, Great Falls, Billings, Miles City and Glas- gow. These men represent the three major activities of the Department — game management, enforcement and fisheries management. Each man has a separate area of district responsi- bility, but programs are coordinated. One of the primary objectives of such a district organization is to initi- ate the closer teamwork between all Department divisions at the district level. Greater unity in the organiza- tion can only result in placing more force behind fish and game man- agement opera- tions. Men selected to fill the positions have a back- ground of experi- ence and training which particularly qualifies them for the work of carry- ing out Department policies and functions in the seven districts. To facilitate district operations, a headquarters building is maintained in each of the seven areas, which houses district vehicles, an equip- ment pool and furnishes office space for personnel. The new system provides faster action on local problems in each area by placing increasing responsibility in the field. The result is greater ef- ficiency in all phases of wildlife man- agement. 11 N *0^ n WILDLIFE DISTF District 1. Frank Stefanich (t Blair, Game Biolo^ Supervisor. District 2. Merle Rognrud (rea< Lewis. Warden Si Fisheries Biologist. District 3. (Top) Gene Sherml Boyd Opheim, Fish^ send. Game Biologj District 4, (Top) Nels Thoreso Brown, Warden Sup Biologist. District 5. (Top) Boyd Ophei left) Jack Kohler, 1 Ellig, Game Biologis District 6. (Left to right) Richd Thomas Hay, Wa Alvord, Fisheries Bio| District 7. (Left to right) Willi< Wesley Woodgerd, G Warden Supervisor. :t officials Fisheries Biologist; Robert and Ross Wilson, Warden cross). Game Biologist; Orville rvisor and Arthur Whitney, Warden Supervisor; (right) s Biologist and Joseph Town- Fisheries Biologist; (left) Don risor and Reuel Janson, Game Fisheries Biologist; (bottom Tden Supervisor and LeRoy Trueblood, Game Biologist; n Supervisor and William ist. Alvord, Fisheries Biologist; te Biologist and lohn Nicolay, ^ : (^ ,<^% ^?c^ # C' 7