Pacific northwest rivers study : project summary, State of Montana

Pacific Northwest Rivers Study

oject Summary: Montana

333 .711
U25 onrs
1&86

PLEASE RETURN

HI

STATE DOCUMENTS COLLPCTfON

Dtu ,

State of Idaho
State of Montana
State of Oregon
State of Wasington

NW Indian Tnbes

USDA Forest Service
USDI Bureau of

Land hAanagement
USDI fish and

Wildlife Service
USDI National

Park Sen/ice
NW Power Planning

Council
Bonneville flower

Administration

April 1986

^,5JC_N05^

^'ffJJSSTOW'

April 1986

PACIFIC NORTHWEST RIVERS STUDY: PROJECT SUMMARY
STATE OF MONTANA

This report presents a brief description of the assessment process and
preliminary findings for each of the resource categories analyzed in the
Montana component of the Pacific Northwest Rivers Study.

The Pacific Northwest Rivers Study was initiated to assess the
significance of river segments for a variety of environmental values. The
expressed purpose of the project is to identify environmental and
institutional considerations which might have a bearing on hydropower
development in the Northwest. Information produced through this project will
provide input into a variety of regional and state power planning and resource
management activities.

The State of Montana coordinated the assessment process within state
boundaries. The project itself is a cooperative effort of the four Northwest
states, federal land management agencies, and Indian tribes. The Bonneville
Power Administration provided regional coordination and funding.

The resource assessment phase of the Rivers Study was initiated in June
1985, and completed in January 1986. This phase produced both tabular
information regarding each river segment in the state and a series of maps
identifying the location of river segments. Each segment was also assigned to
one of a series of resource value classes depending on its relative
significance within a given resource category. Subsequent to the initial
assessment, information was encoded into computer format and made available
for review by project participants.

Separate yet coordinated resource assessments were conducted for each of
five resource categories. A summary is provided for each. They are presented
in the following order:

1. Resident Fish

2. Wildlife

3. Natural Features
A. Cultural Features
5. Recreation

For further information regarding the Montana component of the Pacific
Northwest Rivers Study, contact:

Patrick Graham, State Coordinator

Stewart Allen, Research Coordinator

Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks

1420 East Sixth Avenue

Helena, Montana 59620

(406) 444-2449

PACIFIC NORTHWEST RIVERS STUDY
MONTANA INVENTORY OF FISHERIES RESOURCES

The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks conducted
the fisheries inventory, with information obtained from fisheries
biologists with DFWP and the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land
Management, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The Montana Interagency Stream Fishery Database (started in
1973) was updated by adding additional streams, correcting
existing information, revising the fishes of special concern list
and adding a genetic value, and entering recent estimates of fish
populations and fisherman use.

Fisheries values assessed on each stream reach were habitat and
species value (for game and non-game species alike) and sport
fisheries value.

River reaches were assigned to one of five fishery resource
value classes (Outstanding, high, substantial, moderate, and
unknown) based on six criteria: fish abundance and/or biomass;
ingress (the legal right of the public to fish or landowner
willingness to allow fishing); esthetics; fisherman use; value of
the habitat for fishes of special concern; and genetic value of
special concern fishes. Special consideration was given to:
tributary streams that provide valuable spawning habitat for game
fishes; spring creeks; and streams that are locally important for
scientific study, nature study, or recreation.

Nearly 2500 river reaches, about 19,500 miles of streams, were
assessed in the study. About 11 percent (2087 miles) were rated
Class I (Outstanding or highest value); 17 percent (3395 miles)
Class II, 37 percent (7235 miles) Class III, 34 percent (66U
miles) Class IV, and 1 percent (175 miles) unknown. Habitat and
species value appeared to be the major determinant of final
resource value.

The number of reaches east and west of the Continental Divide
was roughly equal, although about two-thirds of the river mileage
was in the eastern part of the state.

The standards established in a 1980 stream evaluation for the
habitat and species value category were extensively revised for
the current study. This substantially increased the Class II
mileage for habitat and species value, from less than five
percent in 1980 to over 14 percent at present. This is much
closer to the target figure (about 15 percent in Class II).

The fisheries assessment benefits from a long history of
interagency efforts to classify streams based on fisheries

- 1

values, but reliable fish population information is still needed
for many stream reaches. In the future when the database
contains acceptable data for every stream reach, the standards
and criteria for Class IV can be made more stringent. Presently,
they are somewhat relaxed to insure that no stream reach is
placed in Class V when it should be at least Class IV.

- 2

PACIFIC NORTHWEST RIVERS STUDY
MONTANA INVENTORY OF WILDLIFE RESOURCES

The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks conducted
the wildlife study, with initial information gathered from more
than 40 wildlife biologists and land managers from DFWP, the U.S.
Forest Service, and Bureau of Land Management. No attempts to
assess the wildlife value of river reaches or basins statewide
had been made before.

Wildlife species' range and habitat are not strictly defined by
bodies of water, so individual river reaches were not rated.
Instead, 372 wildlife assessment units were created based on
river reaches and drainage basins.

Wildlife value class for each unit was based on habitat value,
species value, and recreational value. Habitat value was
determined by specialized land use (such as designated refuges
and management areas) and habitat characteristics (such as
quality and diversity). Species value was determined by the
presence of threatened and endangered species, species of special
concern (such as harlequin ducks, colonial birds, and nesting
raptors), and the density of game and furbearer species.
Recreation value was determined by the presence of consumptive
and nonconsumpti ve recreational uses.

Assessment units were assigned to one of four value classes
based on an average of habitat and species ratings, with
recreational value used as a tie-breaker. Eighteen percent (68
units) were rated as Class I (Outstanding value), 33 percent (121
units) were Class II (Substantial value), 31 percent (116 units)
were Class III (Moderate value), 11 percent (41) were Class IV
(Limited value), and 7 percent (26 units) were Class V (Unknown
value ) .

The western part of the state (DFWP management regions 1,2,3
and 4) contained 82 percent of the Class I units, 74 percent of
the Class II units, and only 24 percent of the Class IV units.
Region 3 had the highest percentage of Class I units and Region 1
had the greatest number of Class II units. Regional comparisons
are not straightforward, however, because region size and other
factors vary widely.

The percentages in each value class reflect two recent changes
made in the rating system following peer review. First, value
due to habitat conditions alone was increased. Previously, too
much weight had been placed on official designation, preventing
areas in excellent condition and having habitat diversity and
quality from obtaining a Class I rating. Second, weighting was
increased for units supporting a diversity and high density of

1 -

game species and furbearers. Previously, Class I species ratings
could not be obtained in an area that did not support threatened
and endangered species.

As a result, 32 units were upgraded to Class I in habitat value
(mostly in the eastern DFWP regions) and 43 units were upgraded
to Class I in species value (about 40 percent of the upgrades
were in Region 1). An additional 19 units achieved overall Class
I status from these revisions.

The accuracy of the wildlife inventory is good, especially for
habitat and species ratings. The data quality could be improved
by adding species use, density figures for each type of range,
and population estimates by hunting districts. The data base
could be expanded to include environmental assessment, land use,
and public access.

More accurate methods of assessing consumptive (and
non-consurapti ve ) recreation values should be explored.
Currently, non-consumptive uses are given more weight than
consumptive uses; a Class I designation cannot be achieved
without non-consumptive attributes. Consumptive recreation
value, measured by success rates, hunting pressure, and
non-resident pressure, was extrapolated from hunting districts to
the wildlife units (using only one year of hunting data).

These refinements are important because recreational value was
used as a tie-breaker in establishing overall value class in
about 40 percent of the units, downgrading the units in about 75
percent of the cases.

- 2 -

PACIFIC NORTHWEST RIVERS STUDY
MONTANA INVENTORY OF NATURAL FEATURES

The Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation
conducted the Natural Features inventory, with assistance from
the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, U.S.
Geological Survey, University of Montana, Montana State
University, Museum of the Rockies, Carter County Museum, Montana
Rare Plant Project, and the Nature Conservancy.

Existing National Natural Landmark Theme studies and U.S.
Forest Service lists of Research Natural Areas provided a
starting point for the inventory.

Features assessed were: rare, threatened, or endangered plant
species; rare, unique, or exemplary plant communities; geological
and hydrological features; and previously-designated natural
areas such as National Natural Landmarks or Research Natural
Areas .

Features were assigned to one of four value classes
(Outstanding, Substantial, Moderate, or Unknown) using four
criteria: resource scarcity from a local, regional, or national
perspective; scientific and educational value; public and
recreational use; and designation or listing by a management
agency. Each natural feature identified received a rating on
each criterion, and overall value class was the highest of the
four ratings.

The study identified 399 botanical features and 922 geological
features, about twice the number that had been anticipated. Of
the total, 31 percent of the sites were rated as Outstanding
(Class I), 29 percent as Substantial (Class II), and 31 percent
as Moderate (Class III) resources. The value of an additional
nine percent was unknown, so these fell in Class IV. Educational
value and previous designation were primary determinants of value
class. Most paleon tological sites and all 146 geologic type
locations received Class I ratings.

Most of the features were located in the western third of the
state. Sites were clustered around Missoula, Bozeman, and Butte,
in part because of previous work done by the Universities.

Because a field inventory was not conducted, the list of
natural features is far from complete although many high-value
natural features were identified. Priorities for further study
include: examination of 7.5' quadrangle maps for additional
features; identification of major co t tonwood/island/al luvium
complexes; and coordination with the Montana Natural Heritage
Program's rare plant inventory.

PACIFIC NORTHWEST RIVERS STUDY
MONTANA INVENTORY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES

The University of Montana conducted the cultural inventory,
using information from the Statewide Archaeological and
Historical Database maintained at the University. Archaeologists
from the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management
participated, as did other interested professionals.

While similar distributional studies have been conducted in the

state, largely for linear transmission facilities such as

powerlines and pipelines, none have explicitly considered the

relationship of cultural resource values and stream reaches.

The assignment of value classes was based on two criteria:
whether sites had been reported within the stream reach vicinity
(or could be expected to be found if a survey were conducted);
and the significance of the properties, measured using the
standards of the Keeper of the National Register and the
President's Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.

Class I was assigned to reaches in the general vicinity of
sites listed in (or determined eligible for listing in) the
National Register of Historic Places. Class II included reaches
in the general vicinity of sites eligible for listing in the
National Register by a concensus determination of the Montana
State Historic Preservation Officer and a federal agency head.
Class III was assigned to reaches in the vicinity of sites that
have been reported (or have not been reported) but not evaluated
for eligibility for listing in the National Register. Class IV
was used for reaches having no reported sites, but where some
potential exists for National Register eligible properties.

To maintain site confidentiality, value classes were assigned
to all stream reaches that had been assigned water codes by the
Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks; specific sites were not
identified on the maps. The University will maintain the type
and location of sites on file.

Over 6,700 stream reaches were assessed. Reaches were
distributed over the entire state, with the density of studied
reaches corresponding largely to the density of drainages in the
area .

More precise figures are forthcoming, but current estimates
place four percent of the reaches in Class I, one percent in
Class II, 25 percent in Class III, and 70 percent in Class IV.
Although a Class V category had originally been reserved for
reaches having no potential for significant historical and
cultural properties, study participants could not identify any

- 1

such reaches .

In most cases, cultural resource values were determined by the
extent of cultural resource survey in the area or the property's
degree of visibility (such as existence of a distinctive house
occupied by a well-known figure in the history of a community).

Because many previously unreported cultural properties are
being found and evaluated each year, the reaches should be
checked and re-evaluated at least annually. Classes IV and V
could be dropped because all stream reaches have the potential
for significant cultural values. The criteria for Class I and II
could remain the same, while Class III could include all other
stream reaches.

PACIFIC NORTHWEST RIVERS STUDY
MONTANA INVENTORY OF RECREATION RESOURCES

The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks conducted
the recreation inventory, with assistance from the U.S. Forest
Service, Bureau of Land Management, and river users and user
groups from throughout the state. No previous statewide
inventory of river recreation resources had been attempted.

State and federal recreation managers identified river reaches
having recreational value and provided information on eight
characteristics for each reach: opportunities for boating; other
water-based recreation activities; land-based recreation activies
related to the river; current use level estimates; access;
Recreation Opportunity Setting class; scenic quality; and number
and type of developed recreation sites along the river reach.

Recreation managers recommended one of five value classes for

each reach identified (Class I--Out standing , Class

II — Substantial, Class III--Moder ate , Class IV--Limited, or Class

V — Unknown value), considering a reach's position on the eight

inventory characteristics and other information as needed. Value

classes were determined by professional judgment, not by a point

system, but managers described the specific reasons for their
value class assignments.

State and federal managers and Rivers Study staff identified
about 300 private river users and commercial river users who were
asked to participate in the study by nominating river reaches for
inclusion in the data base. Nearly 200 reaches were suggested
(although many of these overlapped to some extent). These
ratings were compared with the managers' perceptions. Very few
significant differences were noted; river users' value
recommendations were seldom more than one class away from the
managers' ratings.

About 800 river reaches were identified, comprising about
12,600 miles of rivers. Out of 777 containing complete data, 8
percent (67) were rated as Outstanding, 18 percent (143) as
Substantial, 44 percent (344) as Moderate, 20 percent (156) as
Limited, and 9 percent (67) as Unknown value.

Nearly three-quarters of the reaches were described as not
boatable, pointing to the importance of maintaining opportunities
for boating on Montana rivers. This is especially true for the
relatively scarce Whitewater resource; only about seven percent
of the reaches contained moderate or larger-sized rapids.
However, a larger proportion of Whitewater reaches (compared to
flatwater reaches) were rated as having Outstanding or
Substantial value.

- 1 -

DFWP Management Region One contained 11 percent (87) of the
reaches, Region Two 20 percent (156), Region Three 34 percent
(266), Region Four 19 percent (148), Region Five 9 percent (70),
Region Six 3 percent (26), and Region Seven 3 percent (24).

This initial list and description of Montana rivers having
recreational value is better suited for broad regional planning
activities or for comparative purposes than for providing
detailed information on specific river reaches, which would
require field inventory. However, the data give a good overall
look at the relative availability of river-related recreation
opportunities in Montana.

Although the list of reaches and their ratings have been
reviewed by state and federal recreation managers, the inventory
will continue to be updated and expanded, becoming not only more
comprehensive but more accurate with each subsequent review.

- 2

DOE/BP-640
March 1986
5C