the cabinet - purcell conservation...
TRANSCRIPT
American Wildlands - Summer 2008
Priority Linkage Assessment
The Cabinet - Purcell
Conservation Area
Photo courtesy of Randy Beacham Photography.
�
Table Of Contents
Executive Summary
Cabinet-Purcell Conservation Area Maps
All Major Wildlife Linkage Areas
Major Wildlife Linkage Areas: Bighorn Sheep
Major Wildlife Linkage Areas: Elk
Major Wildlife Linkage Areas: Grizzly Bear
Major Wildlife Linkage Areas: Lynx
Major Wildlife Linkage Areas: Moose
Major Wildlife Linkage Areas: Wolf
Major Wildlife Linkage Areas: Wolverine
Major Wildlife Linkage Areas: Private Lands
Conservation Partners
Introduction
American Wildlands’ Corridors of Life Program Overview
American Wildlands’ Priority Linkage Assessment
Background: The Cabinet-Purcell Conservation Area
Methods
Results
Literature Review
Guide to Reading Two-Pagers
Wildlife Linkages of the Cabinet-Purcells: Two-Pagers
Baldy Creek
Clark Fork
Clark Fork-Flathead Confluence
Copeland
Eureka North
4
6
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
18
18
19
20
24
26
32
48
50
50
52
54
56
58
�
Evaro
Fish Creek
Fisher River
Fortine Creek
Haugan
Heron
Hog Heaven
Idaho Hill
Jocko
Kootenai Falls
Lake Creek/Bull River
Lake Koocanusa
Libby
Lolo Pass
Lookout Pass
Lost Trail-Kenelty
Lower Bitterroot
Lower Flathead
Lower Yaak
Maclay
McArthur Lake
McGregor-Thompson
Moyie River
Ninemile
Ninepipes
Noxon
Petty Creek
Pipe Creek
60
62
64
66
68
70
72
74
76
78
80
82
84
86
88
90
92
94
96
98
100
102
104
106
108
110
112
114
�
Purcell Divide
Quartz
Ravalli Hill
St. Regis
Superior
Swift Creek-Stillwater
Thompson Divide
Thompson River
Troy
White Pine
Literature Cited
Appendices
116
118
120
122
124
126
130
132
134
136
138
142
�
Executive Summary
Maintaining the ecological connections, or wildlife movement corridors, between major wildland habitats is one of the most pressing challenges for habitat and wildlife conservation in the Northern Rockies today. American Wildlands’ Corridors of Life program plays a critical role in conserving the habitat links between the “string of pearls” represented by our national parks, wilderness and roadless areas, wildlife refuges, and other protected habitats. To focus and prioritize our Corridors of Life program work, and provide much needed information to other NGOs and agencies, in �007 AWL conducted a Priority Linkage Assessment (PLA) to determine the most important habitat connections, or “linkages,” in the U.S. Northern Rockies, in three of our four conservation areas – the Cabinet-Purcell, Crown, Hub, and High Divide. This assessment focused on the movement needs of wide-ranging carnivore species (grizzly bear, wolf, wolverine and lynx) and wide-ranging ungulate species (elk, moose, and bighorn sheep), although additional information about other locally-significant species was also collected.
The Cabinet-Purcell conservation area spans the U.S. Northern Rockies from the Canadian border to the Bitterroot Mountains and includes the Cabinet Mountains wilderness and key wildlands in the Selkirk, Purcell, Cabinet, Salish, Whitefish, Flathead, Coeur d’Alene and Bitterroot Mountains. For the Priority Linkage Assessment, American Wildlands interviewed twenty-eight biologists in the Cabinet-Purcell conservation area to identify critical habitat linkage at multiple scales, as well as the threats to, and opportunities for, conserving these forty-three wildlife linkage areas. Based on this data each linkage is prioritized into one of five hierarchical groups of threat and opportunities (very high, high, intermediate, low, very low). Ecological quality considers the importance of the linkage to local or regional wildlife connectivity and the current condition of the linkage.
Wildlife connectivity in the Cabinet-Purcell conservation area is changing dramatically with increasing subdivision, development, highway traffic, and other human activities. Throughout the region, the greatest threat to habitat connectivity identified by the Priority Linkage Assessment was private lands subdivision and/or conversion of agricultural or timber lands that currently comprise vast amounts of open space that are permeable to wildlife. Loss of these agricultural open spaces to development can result in overall habitat fragmentation for wildlife, and can lead to a bottleneck for wildlife attempting to disperse or migrate. Private land development increases other related threats, such as increased traffic and roading, increased risk of wildlife-human conflict and sanitation issues.
Other threats identified include:•Plum Creek real-estate development•Sanitation/human conflict issues•Forest/forest roads management •Increasing highway traffic•Wildlife mortality on railroads•Forest highways•Mining
Conservation opportunities include:•Conservation easements or land acquisition•Transportation mitigation, such as wildlife crossing structures•Community groups/conservation partnerships •Education and outreach to communities co-existing with wildlife •National Forest planning processes
Next, American Wildlands will work with conservation partners to act on the opportunities identified for each linkage area. Our next steps include:
�
•Identifying potential collaborative partners, such as other conservation NGOs, local community groups, and agencies, for each of the identified linkage areas.•Working with partners to develop and implement conservation strategies that address the threats and opportunities for conserving that linkage.•Providing AWL’s expertise regarding the latest science; GIS modeling, analysis and mapping; land and wildlife management laws, policies and best management practices.•Facilitating the engagement/procurement of additional expertise and capacities, as needed.
Hierarchical breakdown of our findings in the Cabinet-Purcell Conservation Area. View map of identified linkage areas on page 6.
6
All major wildlife linkages identified through the Priority Linkage Assessment in the Cabinet-Purcell Conservation Area.
7
Selection of major wildlife linkages identified through the Priority Linkage Assessment in the Cabinet-Purcell Conservation Area that are important for connectivity of bighorn sheep, one of American Wildlands’ eight focal species.
�
Selection of major wildlife linkages identified through the Priority Linkage Assessment in the Cabinet-Purcell Conservation Area that are important for connectivity of elk, one of American Wildlands’ eight focal species.
�
Selection of major wildlife linkages identified through the Priority Linkage Assessment in the Cabinet-Purcell Conservation Area that are important for connectivity of grizzly bear, one of American Wildlands’ eight focal species.
�0
Selection of major wildlife linkages identified through the Priority Linkage Assessment in the Cabinet-Purcell Conservation Area that are important for connectivity of lynx, one of American Wildlands’ eight focal species.
��
Selection of major wildlife linkages identified through the Priority Linkage Assessment in the Cabinet-Purcell Conservation Area that are important for connectivity of moose, one of American Wildlands’ eight focal species.
��
Selection of major wildlife linkages identified through the Priority Linkage Assessment in the Cabinet-Purcell Conservation Area that are important for connectivity of wolves, one of American Wildlands’ eight focal species.
��
Selection of major wildlife linkages identified through the Priority Linkage Assessment in the Cabinet-Purcell Conservation Area that are important for connectivity of wolverine, one of American Wildlands’ eight focal species.
��
Selection of major wildlife linkages identified through the Priority Linkage Assessment in the Cabinet-Purcell Conservation Area with a major private land component.
��
�6
This assessment is based on the information given by the following biologists:
Steve Anderson, Flathead National Forest
Pat Basting, Montana Department of Transportation
Dale Becker, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribe
Gael Bissell, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Lorraine Brewer, Lolo National Forest
Gerry Brown, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Lee Brundin, Kootenai and Idaho Panhandle National Forests
Jim Haden, Idaho Fish and Game
Mike Hartz, Idaho Transportation Department
Bob Henderson, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Scott Jackson, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Jamie Jonkel, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Wayne Johnson, Kootenai National Forest
Wayne Kasworm, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Rick Mace, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Tim Manley, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Tom Parker, Northwest Connections
Dave Roberts, Idaho Panhandle National Forest
Bill Ruediger, biological contractor
Chris Servheen, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Bruce Sterling, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Tim Their, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
John Vore, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Wayne Wakkinen, Idaho Fish and Game
John Waller, Glacier National Park
John Weaver, Wildlife Conservation Society
Jim Williams, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Seth Wilson, Blackfoot Challenge
We also appreciated assistance of the following individuals, organizations, and foundations:
Rick Bass
Chris Boyer, Kestrel Aerial, www.kestrelaerial.com
Greg Burak
Caroline Byrd, The Nature Conservancy
Sarah Canepa, Vital Ground
Jeff Copeland, Rocky Mountain Research Station
Molly Cross, Wildlife Conservation Society
Katie Deuel, Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative
Iain Douglas-Hamilton, founder of Save the Elephants
Jessica Hann
Lighthawk Aviation
Harvey Locke, co-founder of Y�Y Conservation Initiative
Jim Lynch, Montana Department of Transportation
Kathy McAllister, US Forest Service
Jon Miceler, World Wildlife Fund
Roderick Nash
Kylie Paul
Miquel Rafa, Fundacio Territori i Paisatge
Rick Ridgeway, head of Patagonia Environmental Program
Joy Ritter, Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, Helena, MT
Conservation Partners
�7
Gregg Servheen
Annie Sisk
T.O. Smith, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
John Squires, Rocky Mountain Research Station
Gary Tabor, Center for Large Landscape Conservation
Mike Thompson, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Steve Thompson, National Parks Conservation Association
Jill Wilkinson
Jamie Williams, The Nature Conservancy
Elizabeth Williamson
Graeme Worboys, The World Conservation Union
LaSalle Adams Foundation
Mid Shore Community Foundation
New-Land Foundation
Page Foundation
Weeden Foundation
Wilburforce Foundation
Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative
Pat Basting, Montana Department of Transportation
Jim Williams, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Seth Wilson, Blackfoot Challenge
For information regarding contents of this report, please contact the following American Wildlands staff:
General Questions and Content
April JohnstonConservation [email protected](�06) ��6-��7� x �06
Kim DavittNorthern Wildlands CoordinatorCorridors of Life [email protected](�06) 7��-�0�7
Maps, Data Analysis, and MethodologySarah OlimbGIS Lab [email protected](�06) ��6-��7� x �0�
Aerial photo of McArthur Lake, a priority linkage area (©www.kestrelaerial.com)
The Priority Linkage Assessment received scientific review from:
��
Introduction
American Wildlands Corridors of Life Program Overview
Maintaining the ecological connections, or wildlife movement corridors, between major wildland habitats is one of the most pressing challenges for habitat and wildlife conservation in the Northern Rockies today. The designation of national parks, refuges, wilderness, and roadless areas—without conserving the habitat that ties them together—creates a series of core habitat “islands.” These islands of habitat may eventually lead to extinction for resident wildlife because of negative influences common among small, isolated populations of wildlife—inbreeding, the effects of natural disasters, and the inability of wildlife to re-colonize an area.
American Wildlands’ Corridors of Life program focuses on keeping these large protected areas—the core habitats—ecologically connected within the U.S. Northern Rockies. American Wildlands (AWL) works to restore and maintain the wildlife movement corridors between these protected core habitats for the benefit of wide-ranging or migratory animals. Our work is the ecologically-necessary complement to the work of local, state, regional and national conservation groups that focus on conserving the large core habitats of this region.
American Wildlands addresses habitat connectivity at both the regional scale and at the more localized landscape level (addressing the need of wildlife to be able to move about within these regional corridors). The regional context addresses the needs of wide-ranging species such as grizzly bear, wolf, lynx and wolverine, while the landscape context addresses wildlife whose movement needs are more localized such as elk, moose, and bighorn sheep.
More than a decade ago, AWL literally put wildlife corridors in the Northern Rockies on a map with the development of a least cost path model developed by Dr. Lance Craighead and Richard Walker (Figure �). For the past decade, American Wildlands used this model to focus our conservation activities; however, much has changed in the Northern Rockies landscape in the past decade and an update to the original Corridors model was needed, thus the Priority Linkage Assessment was born.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
BearLake
Bear
Rive
r Ran
ge
Crownof the
ContinentEcosystem
Salmon - SelwayEcosystem
GreaterYellowstoneEcosystem
Cabinet -Purcells
Ecosystem
Boise
Butte
Helena
Bozeman
Lewiston
Missoula
Pocatello
Kalispell
Idaho Falls
Great Falls
Coeur d'Alene
Cody
Lander
Alpine
Jackson
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
BearLake
Bear
Rive
r Ran
ge
Crownof the
ContinentEcosystem
Salmon - SelwayEcosystem
GreaterYellowstoneEcosystem
Cabinet -Purcells
Ecosystem
Boise
Butte
Helena
Bozeman
Lewiston
Missoula
Pocatello
Kalispell
Idaho Falls
Great Falls
Coeur d'Alene
Cody
Lander
Alpine
Jackson
Protecting Habitat Connectivity for Wildlifein the U.S. Northern Rockies
Corridors of Life Program
1
2
3
4
American Wildlands
Corridors of Life
Regional Corridors
0 4020 Kilometers
´0 20 40 Miles
Core AreasHigh Qual. Corridors
Low Qual. Corridors
1. Cabinet- Purcells2. Crown of the Continent3. The Hub4. The High Divide
Figure �. ���� Walker and Craighead Corridors model (most recently updated in �006).
Regional Conservation Area
��
American Wildlands’ Priority Linkage Assessment
The Priority Linkage Assessment is an expert-driven opinion model that captures the extensive field knowledge and wildlife movement information of biologists in the region’s linkage areas, coupled with a literature review of peer-reviewed habitat connectivity models and research papers addressing wildlife linkage. Based on the expert opinion of the more than �0 state, tribal, independent and federal biologists we interviewed in the four conservation areas, American Wildlands identified critical habitat linkage at multiple scales, as well as the threats to, and opportunities for, conserving these wildlife linkage areas. Within each conservation area we assessed, biologists identified linkage areas of varying size. In some cases, we combined small linkage areas, or “sublinkages” into a linkage area. The result is that we created easy-to-read GIS maps of the identified linkage areas that can have nested sets of finer-scale data embedded within them (Figure �).
In �007, American Wildlands developed a Priority Linkage Assessment (PLA) to �) update and broaden our current understanding of wildlife linkage areas in the U.S. Northern Rockies; �) determine the highest priority habitat connections in the U.S. Northern Rockies so that we can apply our resources towards conservation of those linkage areas; and �) provide information to our conservation partners. This assessment focused on the movement needs of wide ranging carnivore species (grizzly bear, wolf, wolverine and lynx) and wide-ranging ungulate species (elk, moose, pronghorn, and bighorn sheep), although additional information about other locally-significant species was also collected. AWL has conducted this assessment in all four of our regional conservation areas (Figure �)—the Cabinet-Purcell, Crown, Hub and High Divide.
Figure �. American Wildlands Northern Rockies Conservation Areas
�0
short-grass/sagebrush prairie, intensively cultivated areas, natural wetlands/lakes, riparian plant communities, man-made reservoirs, small communities, and large towns and cities.
The Cabinet-Purcell conservation area is one of only two remaining North American wildlife corridors with the potential to connect wide-ranging carnivore species, particularly grizzly bears, living in the U.S. to more robust populations in British Columbia. The area also encompasses key habitat links to the Crown of the Continent conservation area. If grizzly bears are to naturally re-colonize the Salmon-Selway Ecosystem, then the north-south running Cabinet-Purcell linkage habitat is crucial for movement between the Bitterroot Mountains and the Canadian Purcells. The Cabinet Purcell corridor also contains important habitat links for wide-ranging species between the Purcell and Selkirk Mountains in northern Idaho.
There is increasing grizzly bear movement between the Cabinet-Purcell and Crown conservation areas through the Salish Mountains. Grizzly bears are moving west out of the Crown conservation area into the Salish Range north of Highway �, often through the Lost Trail-Kenelty linkage area. There have been several documented movements by bears between the areas. There are increasing numbers of female bears with cubs in the northern Salish Range. These bears are not considered Cabinet-Yaak or Crown bears, but residents between the two recovery areas.
Grizzly bears are also moving between the Selkirk Mountains of northern Idaho and Canada and the Purcells, the mountain range encircling the Yaak river valley. Last year, a radio-collared bear traveled across Highway �� in the northern part of the Idaho Panhandle between the two ecosystems.
Within the Cabinet-Yaak ecosystem, there is not a lot of known grizzly bear movement between the Cabinet Mountains and the Yaak
Background: The Cabinet-Purcell Conservation Area
Project Boundary and DescriptionThe U.S. portion of the Cabinet-Purcell corridor extends from the Canadian border to the Bitterroot Mountains. The area includes the northern Idaho Boundary and Bonner counties, the western Montana counties of Lincoln, Sanders, and Mineral, as well as portions of Flathead, Lake, and Missoula counties. The area includes a segment of the Selkirk mountain ecosystem in northern Idaho, the Cabinet-Yaak ecosystem in the northwestern corner of Montana, and the Bitterroot Ecosystem south of Interstate �0, which forms the southern anchor of the corridor.
The Cabinet-Purcell conservation area is located west of the Continental Divide in a landscape largely characterized by river valleys divided by rugged mountain ranges. Elevations range from the �666 m (�7�� ft.) Snowshoe Mountain in the Cabinet Mountains to ��� m (�,��0 ft.) where the Kootenai River enters Idaho near Troy, Montana. Major river drainages include the Clark Fork, Kootenai, Flathead and Bitterroot. There are seven major mountain ranges in the analysis area, including the Purcell, Salish, Whitefish, Flathead, Coeur d’Alene, Cabinet, and Bitterroot mountains. Mountainous habitats are dominated by coniferous forest (Douglas fir, lodgepole pine, Engelman spruce, western cedar, hemlock, western larch, whitebark pine, limber pine, ponderosa pine, juniper) and rocky sub-alpine/alpine communities. Within this landscape are several protected areas, including the ��,�7� acre Cabinet Mountains Wilderness on the Kootenai National Forest, a portion of the �,0��,0�7 acre Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness at the southern end of the corridor, the ��,000 acre National Bison Range Complex on the Flathead Indian Reservation, wilderness study areas, recommended wilderness, roadless areas, and numerous Fish, Wildlife and Park Wildlife Management Areas in Lincoln, Sanders, Lake, Missoula, and Boundary counties. Lower elevation habitats (below ���� m (6,000 ft.)) vary greatly and include mountain foothills,
Regional Wildlife Movement
��
Figure �. Nested sublinkages contained within the major linkage areas
A linkage zone analysis created by Chris Servheen, John Waller, and Per Sandstrom evaluated the extent of habitat fracture and the potential for grizzly bear linkage between the Cabinet-Yaak and Bitterroot recovery areas (two areas identified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for grizzly bear conservation); the Cabinet/Yaak and Selkirk recovery areas; the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) and Bitterroot recovery areas; and the NCDE and Cabinet-Yaak recovery areas. In the Cabinet-Yaak to Bitterroot area, habitat fragmentation was significant along Highway �00 between Plains, Montana and the Idaho border. There were some opportunities for movement across Interstate �0 between Superior, Montana and Lookout Pass. The Cabinet-Yaak to Selkirk linkage was
nearly completely fragmented by developments along Highway ��. The report found the only possible linkage area between the NCDE and the Bitterroots at Evaro Hill. Linkage opportunities were found between the NCDE and Cabinet-Yaak between Olney, Montana and Trego, Montana but the report noted that development continues to fragment these and other areas along Highway �� in Montana between the towns of Whitefish and Eureka. Within the Cabinet-Yaak ecosystem, the report noted that potential linkage areas remain Marion, Montana and Libby, Montana on Highway �, but that development along Highway � between west of Libby is fragmenting habitat (except where steep terrain precludes development and may allow for wildlife movement) (Servheen et al. �00�).
The highest priority linkages identified in the Cabinet-Purcell conservation area do not necessarily connect to form consecutive links
(Purcell Mountains). This north-south movement is critical to maintaining the integrity of the Cabinet-Yaak ecosystem. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is studying black bear movements in the Kootenai Falls linkage area, which is one of the critical north-south linkage between the Cabinets and Purcells. To cross between the two mountain ranges, wildlife must pass through steep topography over Highway �, a railroad, and the Kootenai River. There is also probable grizzly bear movement from the Selkirk Mountains to the Bitterroot Mountains. In �007, a grizzly bear was killed by a hunter in the northern Bitterroot Mountains near Kelly Creek. Genetic analysis determined that the bear was from the Selkirks. If this bear traveled recently (and is not from a “ghost” or remnant population), he crossed U.S. Highway �00 and Interstate �0, and traveled at least ��0 air miles, through several of the linkage areas identified in this assessment.
��
Figure �. Major linkages identified in the PLA. “Very High” and “High” linkage are highlighted in red, illustrating the importance of all the linkages identified for wildlife movement north-south and east-west among the major core habitat areas in the Cabinet-Purcell conservation area.
��
between the major ecosystems, though the highest priority linkage area, Lost Trail-Kenelty, forms a critical link between many of the major ecosystems. Largely, the highest priority linkages are �) clustered on the northern boundary of the Bitterroot Mountains in the Salmon-Selway ecosystem, �) located within the Purcell Mountains, �) linking the Selkirks and the Purcells, �) in the northern Salish range, and �) leading west from Glacier National Park through the Whitefish Range. There are regionally important linkages in the north-south wildlife corridors, notably on the Clark Fork River and Highway �00 that were not ranked as high as areas further south. Figure � illustrates the importance of all the linkages identified for wildlife movement north-south and east-west among the major core habitat areas in the Cabinet-Purcell conservation area.
The Cabinet-Purcell conservation area includes portions of seven western Montana counties (Lincoln, Flathead, Missoula, Lake, Sanders, Mineral, and Ravalli) and seven Idaho counties (Boundary, Bonner, Kootenai, Benewah, Shoshone, Clearwater, and Idaho). Population sizes vary from �,�7� in Mineral County to ��,0�� in Missoula County. Human population in these counties vary from � people per square mile in Idaho County to �7 people per mile in Missoula County.
Overall, northwestern Montana and northern Idaho are experiencing high population growth rates from both domestic migration and natural increases. The Mountain West leads the nation in highest population growth rates. Populations are increasing in all of the counties in the Cabinet-Purcell conservation area except for Shoshone and Clearwater counties, Idaho. The fastest growth rates are located near major population centers: Flathead County in and around Kalispell, Montana has increased �0�% since ��70; Ravalli County, south of Missoula, Montana has increased �7�%; Bonner County, in and around Sandpoint, Idaho has increased �6�%; and Kootenai County in and around Coeur d’Alene, Idaho has increased ���%. These counties have beautiful scenery,
natural resource amenities and recreational opportunities coupled with the amenities of nearby metropolitan centers. Although population growth increases the threats to wildlife movement, there is not necessarily a correlation between the highest priority linkage areas identified by the PLA assessment and the counties with the highest levels of growth.
Typically, wildlife avoid towns and cities and move in the most secure, least-developed habitat available. However, much of the growth in the Cabinet-Purcell area is happening outside of population centers and in the rural areas adjacent to them. In Montana, the rate of growth in unincorporated places during the ���0s was more than twice the rate of growth in incorporated areas. Households are increasing faster than the population, which means that second home development is increasing, as are the roads, cars, trucks, and traffic which accompanies that development. This increases the number of obstacles that wildlife must navigate around to move between seasonal habitats or secure blocks of habitat.
Threats to wildlife security and movement are changing with the changes in economic development in this region. Historically, the predominant industries in many of these Cabinet-Purcell counties were timber or mining production. Clearcuts, mining activity, and logging roads were the major threats to wildlife habitat in the region. Timber mills in northern Montana and mines in Idaho’s silver valley have closed. There is active mining in northwestern Montana and two new copper and silver mines are proposed in the Cabinet Mountains. However, mining reclamation and clean-up has become more predominant than exploration and development. In the ���0s, mining, logging, and wood product industries were declining while health services, trade contractors, business services, and real estate development were growing. Recreation and tourism and its accompanying service industry are increasing in the Cabinet-Purcell area. There are numerous ski resorts (in Sandpoint, Libby, Missoula and at Lookout Pass) and lakes and scenic areas are getting heavily impacted
Population and Economics
��
by second-home developments. This growth is largely in or near large population centers and currently represents the greatest threat to wildlife connectivity. A major difference between these two economies (the “Old West” economy of resource extraction and the “New West” economy of residential development and amenities) is the level of permanence. Impacts from logging, and to a lesser extent, mining can be reclaimed; trees and other vegetative cover can regenerate and logging roads can be closed and obliterated. However, subdivisions and developments are more permanent and offer fewer possibilities of wildlife habitat restoration in the future.
Priority Linkage Assessment Methods
The Interviews and Rating SystemThe bulk of this assessment involves American Wildlands staff interviewing experts from state, tribal, and federal agencies, and independent biologists within the region to identify, catalog and prioritize linkage areas in the regional corridor. In the Cabinet-Purcell conservation area, we selected �� biological experts from Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Confederated Salish and Kootanai Tribes, Montana Department of Transportation, Idaho Transportation Department, Idaho Fish and Game, and four non-profit/independent contractor experts with proven knowledge of wide-ranging wildlife in the Cabinet-Purcell corridor. American Wildlands gathered expert opinions that are based on scientific data, rather than more anecdotal traditional ecological knowledge. As wildlife connectivity in specific linkage areas is further defined, we will broaden our queries to other knowledgeable people such as landowners, highway maintenance workers, and commuters to learn more about specific wildlife movement.
To ensure equal coverage of the area of interest, geographic distribution of experts’ “areas of expertise” were considered during the selection of participants to promote a uniform sampling effort of the study areas. Individual interviews
with experts were preferred although in four cases, due to time restraints and the preference of the interviewees, interviews were conducted in small groups of two or three biologists.
The PLA process collected data on a variety of ungulate and carnivore species, as well as a few avian/small mammal species. While this does not include all wildlife living in the Northern Rocky Mountains, the species selected represent a wide variety of habitat requirements, scales of movement, and life history requirements. By collecting data on all these species, habitat requirements and linkages of many functional levels and scales were captured. This approach maximizes the usefulness of this data collection effort to a wide variety of resource management agencies, conservation organizations, and communities. Interviewees were questioned about wide-ranging ungulates (such as deer and elk) and wide-ranging carnivores (such as grizzly bears, black bears, wolves, wolverine and lynx). Information was collected about other species if appropriate. The connectivity lens shifts for each of these species. This assessment concentrates on the areas that overlap and are common for wide-ranging wildlife species. Areas with the highest ecological ratings usually correspond to movements by multiple wildlife species in topographically important areas, such as riparian areas linking multiple mountain ranges.
The interviews followed a standardized procedure with one of the authors conducting the interview and a second acting as recorder with minimal participation; both made every effort not to influence the experts’ opinions or responses. The purpose and procedure of the project were described in detail. Experts were asked to use previous professional and personal experience in the field to answer questions. They were encouraged to share as much information as possible, but not to extrapolate beyond their expertise. Each expert was given a large map (~60x�0 cm) of the study area (scale � cm = � km) with vegetation, roads, cities, and political boundaries demarcated and asked to delineate the area they considered their area of expertise. Next, a series of standardized
��
questions prompted the expert to �) delineate important habitat linkages and �) rate the ecological quality (EQ) of each from � (low quality) to �0 (high quality) while considering a range of qualifications (e.g. seasonal, migration path, dispersal path) and species (e.g. forest carnivores, ungulates, migratory birds). This step was repeated for conservation threats (e.g. fencing, roads, subdivision, social intolerance) and conservation opportunities (e.g. conservation easements, conservation-minded landowners). Conservation threats (CT) were rated from � (low threat) to �0 (high threat) and conservation opportunities (CO) were rated from � (low opportunity) to �0 (high opportunity). Linkages identified for EQ, CT, and CO could overlap, but were not required to do so (i.e. some linkages were given ratings for all three categories while others were given only one or two).
Several scientists believed that the linkage map that we were working to create should be turned on its head; urban areas should be ex-cluded and the remaining land should be con-sidered possible linkage habitat. Bears will go where we will allow them, they argued, and consideration of all of western Montana as con-nectivity habitat has been demonstrated by the State’s grizzly bear management plan for west-ern Montana. For the purposes of the Priority Linkage Assessment, we chose to identify and focus on the best habitat and opportunities for wildlife movement within the region so that as the landscape changes, restoration and protec-tion is focuses in priority locations to ensure long-term opportunities for movement among the region’s ecosystems.
After the interviews, experts’ areas of expertise and identified linkages were digitized in ArcGIS �.� (ESRI �007). Each distinct linkage was assigned a unique number, i.e. linkages identified by multiple experts were digitized only once and assigned only one number. Linkage- and expert-specific data were entered into a Microsoft Access database (Microsoft Windows XP Professional �00�). A record was created for each linkage identified by an expert. Hence, a linkage identified by five experts
had five separate records in the database, eachcontaining, when applicable, ratings and textual information for wildlife species, EQ, CT, and CO. The ratings assigned by the experts were used to rank the linkages; the ratings and textual information will be linked to the digitized polygons in ArcGIS.
Deriving linkage scoresThe experts’ ratings were averaged and combined to produce an overall score (L) for each linkage using the following equation:
Eq.�
where n(EQ, CT or CO) is the number of ratings. In the equation, EQ is weighted with a power of �� to ensure that even the lowest value of EQ (i.e. “�”) would outrank any stand-alone value of CT or CO. Hence, the overall linkage score is driven by the linkage’s ecological value with bonuses given for identified threats or opportunities. Linkages that were identified by an expert but not rated (i.e. the expert was uncomfortable assigning a ranking) were not included in the analysis.
Grouping
Many of the expert-identified linkages over-
lapped, resulting in a cluttered, almost indeci-pherable map. To make the map more usable and to eliminate duplicate linkages with the same function (e.g. multiple linkages on Inter-state �0), we grouped the linkages into Major linkages using the experts’ descriptions of the connectivity and our own knowledge. We aver-aged the ratings of “sub-linkages” that made up the major linkages to produce an overall Major Linkage Score (MLS) using the following equa-tion:
Eq.�
where Li are the scores of the sublinkages included in the Major linkage and nLi is the number of sublinkage scores averaged for the Major linkage.
�6
Results
Data Analysis
Bayesian ratingThe number of ratings per linkage (1≤ n ≤ 34) and the derived linkage scores (8 ≤ MLS ≤ 128) varied considerably, a result which, because of the inherent uncertainty in expert opinion-based studies, could be a result of expert or sampling bias. For example: �) not every expert is familiar with the entire study area and can thus identify and rate only a certain percentage of the set of potential linkages; �) experts self-select the linkages they wish to rate, thus “popular” or well-known linkages may receive a disproportionately high number of ratings; �) the value of ratings is not necessarily consistent among experts (i.e. some experts may give all linkages the highest possible rating whereas other experts may never give the highest rating); �) experts assign ratings based on the quality of the linkage from their professional perspective (i.e. a grizzly bear expert may perceive a linkage as very high quality while an elk expert may perceive the same linkage area as only moderate quality).
To account for this inherent uncertainty, a Bayesian averaging approach was used to adjust the linkage scores considering the number of times linkages were identified and the relative score of linkages compared to other linkages in the sampling set:
Eq. �
where C is a constant value proportional to the typical data set size (in this case, the average number of scores), ‾ ‾m is the prior mean (i.e. the average MLS), and x is the MLS. This algorithm considers the linkage score as well as the number of times it was rated based on the idea that a greater number of ratings will increase the accuracy of the data. Thus, the algorithm calculates a new ranking, the Bayesian average (‾x), which adjusts for expert and sampling bias, including reducing the impact of aberrantly high or low values.
Linkages were next ranked by ‾x values. Because the Bayesian average is an estimate based on the best available information about the sample population, linkages were presented in groups of quality, need and potential instead of in a numbered list, thus avoiding the implication of significance in minute differences of values when no verifiable significance exists. Groups were divided into five hierarchical classes (very high, high, moderate, low, very low) using the natural breaks (Jenks) algorithm which groups similar values and maximizes the differences between groups. It is important to note that, because experts were asked to identify “important wildlife linkages,” even linkages that fell in the “low” and “very low” groups are important areas to consider for maintaining wildlife connectivity. The grouping is instead intended to help prioritize the linkages where immediate conservation action may be most effective or needed if limited resources are available and such prioritization is necessary.
After the interviews in the Cabinet-Purcell conservation area we had 83 identified linkages, many of which overlapped (See Figure �). Based on the experts’ descriptions of the connectivity, the confluence of linkage boundaries, and our own knowledge, we grouped the linkages into �� major linkages.
Ratings of linkages comprising the major linkages were averaged so that all major linkages ended up with one value each for Ecological Quality, Conservation Threat, and Conservation Opportunity. Instead of ranking the adjusted overall linkage scores, we prioritized each linkage into one of five hierarchical groups of threat and opportunities (very high, high, intermediate, low, very low) based on natural breaks in the score distribution. This method groups similar values and maximizes the difference between groups, hence avoiding the data misrepresentation incurred by distancing very similar scores the same as very unlike scores. Whereas all of the major linkages identified in this analysis are important
�7
for connectivity in the Cabinet Purcell, the highest priority linkages are in the “Very High” group, followed by “High” and the remaining subsequent groups.
Structure of Linkage Reports
Ecological Setting: This section describes the local characteristics of each linkage including the human development and native habitats present. Dominant plant communities are de-rived from the Montana GAP analysis dataset in Arc Map© v.�.� (ESRI �006) and Northern Rockies natural history references.
Wildlife: This section contains wildlife informa-tion about the focal species that are present, specific localized uses, seasonal ranges, and core habitat contained within each linkage area. This information was compiled directly from the interviews. While most of the information gathered pertained to large ungulates and forest carnivores, information was also collected re-garding avian and small mammal species present in linkage. This is not a comprehensive overview of all small mammalian or avian species within each linkage; instead, data was typically pre-sented when a specific linkage area represented an important seasonal, core, or nesting habitat for other wildlife species.
The data collected for of each of the major link-age areas are discussed in individual two-page reports. The following sections are included for each major linkage:
Geographic Setting: This provides spatial refer-ence to the boundaries of the linkage, where delineated from the consensus of the PLA in-terviewees. Although boundaries are described for each area, these are not actual demarcated lines, but geographic formations that influence the movement of wildlife through the linkage area.
Importance of Linkage Area: This section pro-vides an over-arching view of how the linkage area functions within the greater regional area.
Figure 5. Hierarchical breakdown of our findings in the Cabinet-Purcell.
��
Conservation Threats: This section lays out the various threats to maintaining habitat con-nectivity for major wildlife species discussed in each linkage. This information was compiled directly from the interviews.
Conservation Opportunities: This section dis-cusses the various kinds of opportunities that currently exist, or may exist in the near (�-� year) term to maintain or restore persistent habitat connectivity for major wildlife species discussed in each linkage. This information was compiled directly from the interviews.
Linkage Map: Each linkage report contains a map depicting land ownership, major roads and natural features, and the linkage direction for three major groups of animals: forest car-nivores, ungulates, and others. Specific areas within each linkage that were discussed in inter-views have been highlighted with outlined text. Land ownership is indicated because conserva-tion threats and opportunities, and the strate-gies for each, differ according to land ownership patterns. Only groups of animals identified in the PLA interviews for each linkage will be rep-resented in the key for each map.
Linkage Scorecard: The “scorecard” for each linkage in the upper right corner of the first page of each linkage report indicates the cu-mulative scores of all sub-linkages within that linkage area. The black bar indicates the overall linkage score, taking each factor (ecological quality, conservation threats, and conservation opportunities) into account. The range for the overall score is 0-��0, with ��0 representing a maximum, “high quality” linkage. The green, blue, and red bars indicates (respectively) the ecological quality, conservation opportunity, and conservation threat score for each linkage, with
a range from 0-�0, with �0 being the maximum high score.
Animal Icons: Each linkage report contains a sidebar depicting animal icons. These icons represent the major species discussed for each linkage area, and are meant to facilitate easy transfer of information to the reader that may only be interested in specific species or groups of animals.
Identified Threats
Through our Priority Linkage Assessment, we identified the following list of threats to habitat connectivity and wildlife movement:
• Plum Creek real-estate development. Of all the threats in the Cabinet-Purcell corridor, the divestment of Plum Creek lands ranks the greatest. Plum Creek timber company owns over �.� million acres in northwestern Montana. Historically managed for industrial timber production, these lands are now being sold for residential subdivision and development. Plum Creek is the nation’s largest private landowner, with �.� million acres nationwide. In Montana, Plum Creek is developing its own subdivisions (such as the Meadowbrook subdivision west of Kalispell), selling land to developers, and selling some land for conservation purchases – for public acquisition or private conservation easements.
• Private land subdivision and county planning. Many areas in the Cabinet-Purcell conservation area are growing quickly. The lack of county land use planning tools, such as zoning, growth plans or subdivision regulations, was identified as a threat The types of issues that were identified (potential or realized) with unregulated development were habitat fragmentation and loss in critical areas (due to direct habitat loss from building within wildlife habitat, increased roading, or increased human population, thus causing avoidance by wildlife), increased risk of wildlife-human conflict (either due to direct interaction between wildlife and humans, or wildlife and domestic pets/livestock), sanitation issues, and long term, genetic isolation or extinction of
��
bears have been killed by trains in the Trego area and wolves and mountain lions were killed near Fisher River. Sometimes wildlife walk out on bridges and trestles and have no place to run when the train comes. In deep snow, wildlife follow the plowed tracks. In ���7, during a winter with a big snowpack, a BNSF railway engineer called Montana Fish, Wildlife and claimed to have killed �00 deer between Libby and Kalispell in one run.
• Forest/forest roads management. Many consider the public lands within the Cabinet-Purcell to be refuges for wildlife. However, certain aspects of public land management and projects on public lands can pose a threat to wildlife connectivity. This includes: grazing allotments, which can bring domestic livestock, such as sheep, into the core areas of wildlife populations, increasing risk of depredation and disease transmission; logging, which can fragment habitat, decrease overall habitat security, and alter water quality; suppression or alteration of natural fire regimes, which can increase severity of natural insect-borne plant diseases, or lead to lack of heterogeneity of forest vegetation; recreational development, which can fragment habitat through direct loss of habitat, wildlife avoidance of areas frequented by humans, or habituation of wildlife to humans, leading to increased risk of human-wildlife conflict. The construction of logging roads is one of the greatest impacts to wildlife movement and security. Generally, any road density greater than one mile per square mile threatens wildlife security.
• Forest highways. The Western Federal Lands Highways Program, in partnership with local counties and the Forest Service, has identified hundreds of miles of roads that they want to upgrade to Forest Highways. These are largely paving projects which will likely lead to increased traffic, development, and a host of related environmental impacts. These upgrades of regular forest roads to Forest Highways are funded by the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA). There are several roads in the Cabinet-Purcell corridor which may be paved under this program.
localized wildlife populations due to a loss of ecological immigration and emigration between metapopulations.
• Sanitation/human conflict issues. Increased developments also increase the sanitation and conflict issues between humans and wildlife coexisting in the wildland-urban interface. Sanitation issues include improper garbage storage; bears can smell and get into garbage that is not bear-proofed and kept outside. Bears and deer can be impacted by the inappropriate placement and timing of bird feeders. Other food attractants for bears include poorly stored pet food, compost piles with food scraps in them, beehives, and fruit trees, which can draw bears into orchards or to ripe fruit on the ground. Food attractants can habituate and food-condition black bears and grizzly bears to human developments and greatly increase their chances of being removed from that area or exterminated as a “problem bear.” Bear educators use the saying, “A fed bear is a dead bear.”
• Increasing highway traffic. In many areas throughout the Cabinet-Purcell, wildlife mortality on highways was listed as a threat to both wildlife and humans. These areas of high road kill frequency were concentrated into “hotspots” where roads were adjacent or parallel to wildlife linkage or core habitat areas. As development increases in the region and moves out of city centers, traffic increases on highways and roads, resulting in highways becoming a barrier to wildlife movement when traffic reaches thresholds approaching �00 vehicles per hour. Animal-vehicle collisions are the largest direct cause of human-related mortality for wild animals in the United States. Impacts to human safety are increasing also; from ���� to �00�, human fatalities due to animal-vehicle collisions rose from ��� to �0� (nationwide).
• Wildlife mortality on railroads. Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) and Montana Rail Link (MRL) tracks run through the Cabinet-Purcell corridor, often following U.S. highways. Grain dribbling from train cars can attract wildlife to the tracks. Wolves and grizzly
�0
• Mining. There are several active silver and copper mines in the Cabinet-Purcell conservation area, largely near the Cabinet Mountains. The Rock Creek Mine, a proposed mine near the Noxon linkage area, threatens to drill for metals underneath the Cabinet Mountain Wilderness. Mining creates a direct loss of wildlife habitat, as well as a roading and building infrastructure that threaten wildlife security and movement near the mining site. Mines bring traffic to those roads and increase the chances of wildlife-human conflicts. Mining waste can leach chemicals and contaminants into the ground water or nearby streams and rivers.
areas that would be priorities to secure conservation easements. On Plum Creek lands, land acquisition rather than conservation easement is the opportunity being pursued by some conservation partners. The Nature Conservancy and Trust for Public Lands are negotiating with Plum Creek for the acquisition of over �00,000 acres in Montana, partially financed by the federal Farm Bill. The Confederated Salish and Kootenai tribes have also pursued opportunities for land acquisition to increase tribally-owned lands on the Flathead Reservation. In some cases, biologists had knowledge of particular landowners who were or might be interested in private lands conservation. In some cases, an easement may be donated and in others it would need to be purchased.
• Information and Education. Many interviewees recommended the implementation of Living with Wildlife programs, education on best management practices for vegetation, and education regarding smart growth practices. Outreach to new landowners moving in to the region is seen as a priority, for their behaviors can have implications on wildlife movement and mortality.
• Forest Planning. Nearly all of the National Forests in the Cabinet-Purcell conservation area are in the process of revising their forest plans, including the Idaho-Panhandle, Kootenai, Flathead, Lolo, and Bitterroot National Forests. Biologists identified opportunities to have wildlife linkage areas identified and connectivity issues better addressed through the forest planning process.
• Wildlife crossing structures on highways and railroads. Where increasing highway and railroad traffic threatens wildlife movement, biologists identified opportunities for crossing structures, signs, fencing, or other types of transportation mitigation. In some cases, these opportunities were linked to existing or upcoming Montana Department of Transportation or Idaho Transportation Department projects. In other cases, experts identified opportunities
Opportunities
Many of the threats identified in the process were linked to conservation opportunities. For example, increasing traffic on Highway 93, known by the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes as ‘The People’s Way’ as it travels through the Flathead Indian Reservation, is creating a barrier for wildlife in Montana’s Mission Valley. However, when the highway was slated for upgrades, the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes negotiated with Montana Department of Transportation for over �0 wildlife crossing structures to retain wildlife connectivity. This project now serves as a model of how highway mitigation can reduce threats to wildlife populations.
Another example of an opportunity that came out of the PLA process is the idea of creating a staff position at Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks and/or Idaho Fish and Game to review the subdivisions proposed in grizzly bear habitat. This person could use the Priority Linkage Assessment, as well as other science-based information, to ensure that wildlife considerations are incorporated into county planning decisions.
The most common opportunities identified by biologists included:
• Conservation easements or land acquisition. Interviewees identified potential
��
to explore the possibilities for mitigation. Depending on the traffic volumes on highways, these opportunities may be short or long-term. Recommendations were generally made without specific knowledge about the costs of crossing structures or the engineering feasibility of structures for particular landscapes. There are numerous tools that can be used to facilitate wildlife passage over and under highways and railroads. In linkage areas where wildlife crossing structures were identified as opportunities, more work is needed to identify the best tool.
• Community groups. Interviewees all agreed that citizen-led grassroots efforts to conserve local linkages are something that should be pursued. To this end, existing groups, such as the Blackfoot Challenge and the Ninemile Wildlife Workgroup, were identified. The Blackfoot Challenge, a coalition of landowners, land trusts, federal and state agencies, and other conservation interests, have protected ��,000 acres of private land so far. Much of this land was acquired from Plum Creek. Working with county and city commissioners, developers, architects, and engineers to incorporate smart-growth principles was also identified.
Aerial photo of Quartz, a priority linkage area (©www.kestrelaerial.com)
��
Literature Review
This review is meant to describe kinds of animal movement and the relevancy of movements to corridors to a general audience that may not have direct experience with wildlife research. American Wildlands completed a literature review of wildlife corridor studies to better understand the role corridors play in wildlife conservation. We reviewed published literature regarding animal movement in the Northern Rocky Mountains, including home range sizes, long distance dispersal, migratory movements, the effects of fragmentation on movement patterns, and the need for corridors in a developing landscape. We touch on the controversy behind corridor conservation, provide a summary of where gaps currently exist in corridor knowledge, and suggest areas where future research may be directed.
METHODS
The literature search reviewed peer-reviewed papers and technical publications found through online search engines, library searches, and papers referred to us during our Priority Linkage Assessment interviews. Papers were reviewed from the following journals: Biological Conservation, Bioscience, Conservation Biology, Diversity and Distributions, Ecography, Ecological Modeling, Ecology, Journal of Animal Ecology, Journal of Applied Ecology, Journal of Environmental Management, Journal of Wildlife Management, Landscape Ecology, and Wildlife Society Bulletin. We also consulted several full length texts. The search was originally confined to the years �00� – �00�. Relevant articles written previous to these dates, encountered as citations in these articles, were also utilized. We paid specific attention to research performed in the U.S. Northern Rocky Mountain region with particular focus on large mammal work. Both empirical and theoretical research completed on animals outside of our focal species were examined to gain a better understanding of the
scientific basis of current corridor and habitat conservation.
KINDS OF ANIMAL MOVEMENT
Animal movement is essential for individual and long-term population survival. Movement allows animals to obtain appropriate, adequate and quality nutrients, water, viable mates, and effective habitat for shelter and raising young. Unfortunately, continued habitat fragmentation poses a formidable barrier to this movement. Appendix 1 identifies animals native to the U.S. Northern Rocky Mountains while Appendix 2 defines known home range sizes for these species. Appendix � lists known migration distances, and Appendix � lists known dispersal distances. Each of these plays a vital role in the long-term survival of a population. This review discusses each of these kinds of movement and details current knowledge specific to movement and corridor conservation.
Home range
Animals are able to meet basic needs through local movements made within their home range. Home range is defined as an area normally traversed by an individual or group of animals during activities associated with feeding, resting, reproduction and shelter-seeking (Harestad and Bunnell, ��7�). Appendix � lists the known home ranges for U.S. Northern Rocky Mountain wildlife, while identifying where more research is required.
When reviewing the home range of individual species, it is important to note the role of a species’ territory. While a home range defines the entire area traversed by an individual or group of individuals during their daily activities, the territory for an individual or group of individuals is defined as the area of a home range that they will defend against others of the same species (Lincoln et al., ����). For
��
example, if a grizzly bear had a home range of �� square kilometers, it does not necessarily mean that it is essential to conserve ��6 square kilometers of habitat for two grizzly bears, as there is some overlap of home range that is tolerated within the species. Rather, it is important to determine the territory, or the amount of land within the home range, that the grizzly bear will defend against another grizzly bear. This will provide the minimum amount of land necessary for two grizzly bears to subsist and coexist in the same general area.
Migration
Those animals unable to meet their basic survival needs in a single location may traverse long distances to do so. Migration is a seasonal, roundtrip, intra-population movement made primarily by resident adults between discrete areas not used at other times of the year (Semlitsch, �007; Berger �00�). Migration serves a variety of critical purposes, which vary by species, subpopulation, year and location. Some animals migrate for parturition (birthing) purposes. This occurs when the land upon which a population subsists for much of the year is in some way inadequate for raising young (i.e. predation risk for young is high), and, in turn, the land on which the young are born does not provide adequate sustenance year-round (Semlitsch, �007; Bergerud et al., ���0). Wildlife may migrate strictly based upon seasonal availability of food in different locales. This is seen when the summer range does not provide nourishment for winter survival or vice-versa, and is illustrated by migrations of some pronghorn (White et al., �007; Sawyer et al., �00�), and mule deer (Sawyer et al., �00�; Brown ����, Thomas and Irby, ����).
Still other wildlife species migrate based upon a critical threshold
at which point there is a potential for resource depletion. Migration of some individuals or an entire population may be seen when a population outgrows an area and its resources. These are often referred to as partial or adaptive migrations (Alerstam et al., �00�). These migrations have been identified in the U.S. Northern Rockies in populations of pronghorn (White et al., �007) and elk (Boyce, ����; Hebblewhite et al., �006).
Current migratory patterns of animals in the U.S. Northern Rocky Mountain region have changed due to four main causes (Berger, �00�):
�. Intolerance to bison outside Yellowstone National Park;
�. Winter feeding of elk; �. Increased human population; �. Habitat loss.
Aerial photo of Lower Yaak, a priority linkage area (©www.kestrelaerial.com)
��
Dispersal
Dispersal is an interpopulation, unidirectional movement from natal sites with no predictable returns (Semlitsch, �007; Sutherland et al., �000). Dispersal determines population spread, allows for colonization and recolonization of fragmented landscapes and encourages genetic flow (Trakhtenbrot et al., 2005; Hoffman et al., �006). Dispersal is less a matter of immediate individual or species survival, but rather a critical means by which a species maintains long-term survival (Hoehn et al., �007; Brown and Kodric-Brown, ��77). In fact, dispersing animals are less likely to survive than their counterparts remaining in familiar territory. Dispersing individuals are at a higher risk of encountering human development and roads, new predators, and low quality food in their travels. Dispersal may prove ever more important with increased fragmentation as a means to maintain population viability through genetic flow.
HABITAT FRAGMENTATION
Research has indicated that the ability to move across the landscape is necessary for long-term population survival of species. Habitat fragmentation is thought to seriously impair animal movement across the regional landscape. Social and cultural pressures demand that conservation and resource management groups bear the burden of proof that fragmentation is occurring (due to both natural and anthropogenic factors), that it impedes animal movement across the landscape, and that this impediment is deleterious to wildlife populations.
Defining fragmentation
Many fragmentation studies use the definition described by Fahrig (2003). This definition states that, “Habitat fragmentation is a process during which a large expanse of habitat is transformed into a number of smaller patches of smaller total area, isolated from each other by a matrix of habitats unlike the original.” As Fahrig (2003) notes, this definition is not restricted
to habitat fragmentation. Rather, it describes an interweaving of habitat fragmentation and habitat loss. Implicit in the definition are a reduction in habitat, an increase in isolation of habitat patches, an increase in number of patches, and a decrease in size of patches.
Proof of fragmentation effects on wildlife
Although Fahrig (�00�) suggests the need to define habitat loss and habitat fragmentation as two distinct entities, since the mixing of the two lead to inconsistencies in research findings, most of the studies we encountered in our literature search did not make this distinction. Appendix 5 lists the fragmentation studies we reviewed and identifies the positive or negative effects of fragmentation on species’ populations. Overall, the studies show that fragmentation, when combined with habitat loss, has deleterious effects on populations. It must be noted, though, that the few studies focusing on fragmentation, in the absence of habitat loss, showed slight positive effects on some wildlife populations. This was due to the lack of competition for resources in fragmented habitats and did not apply to wide ranging species.
Fragmentation’s impacts on wildlife populations
The studies we reviewed show that habitat loss and fragmentation are occurring throughout North America, and are impeding the movement of wildlife populations (Merrill et al., ����; Sawyer et al., �00�).
The studies show that by preventing animal movement, population viability decreases due to an inability to disperse and ensure genetic variability within subpopulations, leading to an increased risk of species’ extinction (Pimm et al., 2006; Harris and Pimm, 2008; Vellend et al., �006). The studies also show that fragmentation of the landscape can lead to predation changes that could potentially decimate native populations unable to move away from a new
��
danger (Crooks and Soule, ����; Kinley and Apps, �00�; Wittmer et al., �00�).
Indirectly related to movement, fragmentation and habitat loss can lead to changes in individual morphology (Neckel-Oliveira and Gascon, �006; Lomolino and Perault, �007; Fredrickson and Hedrick, �00�; Schmidt and Jensen, �00�; Schmidt and Jensen, �00�). It has been suggested that the small body size of individuals noted in some fragmentation studies may be due to the low quality habitat in fragmented habitat patches and an inability for individuals to reach higher quality habitat in other patches. There also exists an increased risk of exotic species’ invasion on fragmented landscapes with the potential elimination of native species (Saunders et al., ����; Crooks and Soule, ����). In a fragmented landscape, native species are less likely or unable to recolonize fragments within which populations have been lost.
The vast majority of the studies we reviewed were fragmentation studies as defined above, in which fragmentation and habitat loss go hand-in-hand. We did encounter a few studies that focused on fragmentation alone. These studies found or hypothesized that fragmentation could potentially produce positive effects on populations. One such study showed an increased movement and interbreeding between tropical tree frog populations (Phyllomedusa tarsius) (Neckel-Oliveira and Gascon, �006). The increased dispersal noted in this study may be due to a high population density in fragmented patches and a need for young, fit individuals to seek out alternate food sources on patches with higher quality habitat.
Other positive effects of habitat fragmentation include changes in predation in which prey species are able to disperse before predators are able to follow. The fragmented landscape allows temporary refugia for prey species and acts as a temporary barrier to predator species, allowing prey species the opportunity to bolster their population numbers (Fahrig, �00�). Other arguments for fragmentation focus around the consideration that fragmented populations are less likely to be wiped out by
a single denominator. For example, a single connected population may be eradicated by disease, whereas, in a fragmented landscape a population in one area may survive while a population in another area dies off (Simberloff et al., ����).
Some studies focusing only on habitat fragmentation show potential positive effects on populations, while studies focusing solely on habitat loss show strong negative effects, leading one to assume that the negative effects of habitat loss override the positive effects of fragmentation when the two are studied together. As Fahrig (�00�) suggested, it may be beneficial to define habitat loss and habitat fragmentation as separate phenomena to better understand their impact on wildlife populations.
Anthropogenic relationship to fragmentation
In the current socio-political climate, there are questions about whether anthropogenic changes to the environment are responsible for habitat loss and fragmentation and thus the cause of the resulting negative effects upon populations, or merely a reflection of naturally occurring processes. The literature we reviewed shows that although the cause of habitat fragmentation and habitat loss is due to a combination of human and natural factors (Apps and McLellan, �006), human disturbance appears to be the dominating factor. Laliberte and Ripple (�00�) mapped habitat range contraction for �� species across North America. They then compared this map with a map of the “human footprint” created by Sanderson et al. (�00�). They found that range contractions in North American species closely coincide with human disturbance of the land, suggesting that the negative effects of habitat loss and habitat fragmentation on wildlife populations are largely due to human land use.
As habitat fragmentation continues to create barriers to animal movement, habitat connectivity grows increasingly vital in promoting the long-term survival of species. Maintaining connectivity where it still exists and
�6
Aerial photo of Eurkea North, a priority linkage area (©www.kestrelaerial.com)
creating connectivity where it has been lost is of critical importance in land management plans directed at counteracting the effects of fragmentation on wildlife populations.
HABITAT CONNECTIVITY
Defining connectivity
Connectivity is defined as the degree to which the landscape facilitates or impedes movement among resource patches (Taylor et al., ����). For land management purposes it is important to emphasize the distinction between structural and functional connectivity. Structural connectivity is a spatial connection of the landscape. Functional connectivity provides a conduit for animal dispersal. Functional connectivity implies animal movement, whereas structural connectivity is strictly spatial (Tischendorf and Fahrig, �000). For example, if two habitat patches containing separate black bear subpopulations are connected by habitat that is incompatible with black bear needs, the landscape would be considered structurally connected, but not functionally connected. It would only be functional if the black bears were able to use the connecting landscape. Therefore, when planning landscape connectivity, functional connectivity is the desired outcome, and the ability of the species of interest to utilize the connected landscape must be taken into consideration. It is also important to note that the same landscape
may potentially provide varying amounts of connectivity for different species (Tischendorf and Fahrig, �000; With and Crist, ����). For example, a landscape providing functional connectivity for a bobcat may not provide functional connectivity for a grizzly bear.
Measuring connectivity
When incorporating landscape connectivity into land management planning, existing and potential connectivity for an area must be measured. To measure existing connectivity, Tischendorf and Fahrig (�000) suggest measuring a species’ movements across the landscape. Although landscape structure, species abundance and distribution are related to connectivity, they are not direct measures of it. The actual movement of a species in a landscape is the only true indicator of existing landscape connectivity.
Though it is not a measure of existing connectivity, landscape structure is an important indicator of potential connectivity. To predict whether an animal will use a habitat, it is important to understand the complexities inherent in the relationship between the animal and the landscape (With and Crist, ����). Understanding the habitat an animal requires and the spatial and habitat quality considerations that form an animal’s habitat
�7
choice are critical when creating functional connectivity. Belisle (�00�) suggests that an integration of animal behavior into the study of landscape ecology would enhance understanding of the choices an animal makes in this habitat selection process.
Corridors as a management approach to connectivity
Corridors are a means by which landscape connectivity is incorporated into land management plans. A corridor is a linear habitat, embedded in a dissimilar matrix, that connects two or more larger blocks of habitat and that is proposed for conservation on the grounds that it will enhance or maintain the viability of specific wildlife populations in the habitat blocks (Beier and Noss, ����). The term corridor was originally coined in ��7� by Wilson and Willis and is based on the equilibrium theory of island biogeography (MacArthur and Wilson, ��67), which states that a dynamic equilibrium exists between the extinction of species in a defined location and the random immigration of new species. Inherent in the study of corridor conservation is the theory of metapopulation (Perrow and Davy, �00�) which states that a metapopulation within a defined area consists of multiple subpopulations. When a subpopulation ceases to exist in one section of the defined area, the metapopulation persists because of the continuation or emergence of a subpopulation within the same defined area.
Functional connectivity of corridors
More recently, a corridor has been defined as a space, usually linear in shape that
improves the ability of organisms to move among patches of their habitat (Hilty et al., �006), thus implying a need for functional connectivity. Corridor utilization was investigated to determine whether corridors provide functional connectivity. Recent genetic research indicates that corridors can provide a functional connection between isolated populations (Dixon et al., �006; Hale et al., �00�). These studies found that isolated subpopulations in fragmented landscapes intermingled when appropriate corridors were available. Mech and Hallet (�00�) found two subpopulations of red squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris), whose genetic structures were altered by landscape fragmentation, returned “to their original state in terms of genetic structure,” when a corridor between the populations was created. Hilty and Merenlender (�00�) used remotely triggered cameras to determine corridor use by carnivores. Not only did they find carnivores traversed the corridor, they
Aerial photo of Petty Creek, a priority linkage area (©www.kestrelaerial.com)
��
found carnivores preferred the corridor over the surrounding, disturbed landscape.
Corridor effects on wildlife populations
When considering corridors as mitigation measures to fragmentation, it is important to determine if the animals utilize available corridors, and if the corridors are effective at ameliorating the negative effects of fragmentation.
Overall, studies show that corridors can counteract the negative population effects of habitat fragmentation. Studies show increased movement of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus) within landscapes where corridors were incorporated to counteract fragmentation (Coffman et al., �00�) and gene flow between subpopulations of red squirrels (Sciurus vulgaris) and red-backed voles (Clethrionomys gapper) is higher in fragmented landscapes containing corridors than in fragmented landscapes without corridors (Hale et al., �00�; Mech and Hallet, �00�). Lomolino and Perault (�007) also found that patches connected by corridors contained individuals with larger body size for the northwestern deer mouse (Peromyscus keeni), montane shrew (Sorex monticolus), and Trowbridge’s shrew (S. trowbridgii) than isolated patches. This study did not investigate the genetic basis for the morphological changes; therefore it is uncertain whether the decreased body size was a genetic response to the fragmented landscape or merely a morphological response due to habitat quality and quantity.
Some studies indicate the potential for corridors to have negative effects on populations. Research on meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus) concluded that individual survival is lower in landscapes connected by corridors than in landscapes with isolated patches (Coffman et al., �00�). In the presence of corridors, individuals are more likely to disperse to other patches than they would in fragmented landscapes lacking corridors. Dispersing individuals take on an inherent risk even in large contiguous
landscapes. Dispersal places high energy demands upon dispersing individuals, high quality nutrients may not always be readily available during dispersal, and new predators may be encountered. Corridors are often small habitat patches, in which an individual might easily wander out of and end up in a human-dominated landscape. A theoretical risk associated with corridors is population extinction. It would be more likely for a contiguous population to be wiped out by a single disease than a fragmented population (Simberloff and Cox, ���7). Corridors could also lead to changes in predation tactics. Carnivores could use narrow corridors as a way to “trap” their prey, and corridors close to human development could introduce exotic carnivores including domestic and feral dogs and cats.
RESEARCH NEEDED
Wildlife corridors are not without controversy (Simberloff and Cox, ���7; Simberloff et al., ����). One source of controversy lies in the fact that studies separating habitat fragmentation from habitat loss show that fragmentation to have slight positive effects on some wildlife populations (see Appendix �). In addition, although corridors appear beneficial overall, there are a number of potential drawbacks (as discussed previously). There is also the SLOSS (Single Large or Several Small) debate regarding whether conservation of a single large habitat for wildlife population survival is preferable to the conservation of several small habitats connected by corridors. Some conservationists argue that with limited resources available for land conservation, more attention should be paid to conserving large swathes of land as opposed to small patches connected by narrow corridors.
To resolve this controversy, more research must be completed. There remain significant gaps in knowledge surrounding the effects of habitat fragmentation and corridor conservation on wildlife populations. As Appendices � - � indicate, there is much to learn with regard to distances and patterns of species’ movement
��
in the Northern Rocky Mountains. The more fully we understand species’ movement, the better equipped we will be to conserve land to effectively meet those needs.
More research is also required to differentiate between habitat loss and habitat fragmentation. This knowledge will identify the exact effect each has on wildlife populations. It will also determine the most efficient means of habitat conservation and help resolve the SLOSS debate with the understanding that there may be more than one answer: some species may require single large habitats while others could survive with several smaller, connected habitats.
Further studies are necessary to better understand the impact of corridors on animal populations and movement. There is a need to determine species-specific habitat requirements and habitat selection processes so that conservation of habitat patches and corridors that will optimize effectiveness.
More research centered on U.S. Northern Rocky Mountain wildlife populations will help us design effective conservation actions for these distinct populations. Land ownership patterns in the U.S. Northern Rockies of Montana and Idaho elucidate the need for different strategies to ameliorate existing and prevent further habitat wildlife fragmentation. Ruediger et al. (�00�) analyzed land ownership patterns and determined that, in Montana, private land subdivision and transportation corridors will increasingly be significant sources of habitat fragmentation, and thus will be barriers to habitat connectivity for wide-ranging, low-density carnivores, such as grizzly bears, wolves, lynx, wolverine, and fisher. Knowing the responses of these populations to fragmentation and corridor connectivity will provide opportunities to create habitats and corridors that meet specific wildlife needs.
Despite the current gaps in scientific knowledge, American Wildlands believes that it is imperative to take immediate conservation action based upon the best science presently
available. Although a general consensus does not exist on the best means by which to maintain wildlife connectivity, there is enough science supporting the efficacy of wildlife corridor conservation that we created our Corridors of Life Program and determined that wildlife connectivity must be maintained or restored for long-term wildlife persistence.
SPECIES-SPECIFIC IMPLICATIONS OF MOVEMENT, FRAGMENTATION, AND CONNECTIVITY
In the Priority Linkage Assessment, American Wildlands focused on eight species (elk, moose, pronghorn, bighorn sheep, gray wolf, grizzly bear, wolverine, and Canada lynx). AWL also discussed several other local wildlife species with experts interviewed in the Priority Linkage Assessment. Following are descriptions of known data about these focal species regarding movement, habitat fragmentation, and habitat connectivity.
Focal Species
Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos horribilis)
Grizzlies can inhabit a wide variety of areas including alpine forests, subalpine meadows, arctic tundra and coastal areas; historically they even inhabited the American Southwest deserts. Grizzlies disperse widely and exhibit discrete elevational movements between spring and fall. Their non-migratory home range varies between �0-�00 miles� (females), and �00-�00 miles� (males).
Grizzly bears are omnivorous, with typically more than half their diet consisting of vegetarian sources, such as grasses, sedges, corms, berries, and pine nuts, with whitebark pine nuts as one of the most critical food sources in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Dependent upon region, a grizzly’s diet is ��%-50% meat, and includes carrion, fish, rodents, ungulates, insect aggregations and grubs. Grizzlies undergo an annual hibernation during winter months; thus, in the fall they enter an
�0
increased feeding period called hyperphagia to build enough fat to sustain them during their dormant period. They are solitary animals except for breeding seasons and while a female has cubs. Grizzly bears are currently listed as threatened, with the exception of delisted portions of the populations of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, which are now under state regulation.
In the U.S. Northern Rocky Mountains and Pacific Northwest, grizzly bears occur in five isolated populations- the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) of northwest Wyoming and southwest Montana, the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) and Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem of western Montana, the Selkirks of the Idaho Panhandle, and North Cascades of Washington state (USFWS, ����). Grizzly bear populations are especially vulnerable to fragmentation effects and human-caused mortality due to low reproductive capacity and limited dispersal ability (Allendorf et al., ����; Waller and Servheen, ����).
Within the Cabinet-Yaak region of Montana and Idaho, researchers modeled that with projected human population increases, there is an anticipated ��-��% decline in grizzly bear populations. These declines were predicted to be caused by habitat loss and fragmentation exacerbated by increased mortality due to human/bear conflicts, and increases in the ratio of unknown to known bear deaths (Mattson and Merrill, �00�). Kasworm et al.’s (�006) monitoring report supports Mattson and Merrill’s dire predictions; human caused mortality in the Cabinet-Yaak recovery zone averages �.� bears per year, with numbers of females with cubs averaging �.� per year. The report concludes that the population would not persist unless intensive management steps, such as population augmentation, were taken (Kasworm et al., �006).
Given the vulnerability of this species, much research has been devoted to Grizzly bear movement patterns and fine scale habitat use. Twenty five years ago, Picton (1983) concluded through detailed statistical analysis
that grizzly bear use of areas outside of current recovery zone was not accidental, and identified a likely “filter bridge” (wildlife corridor) that could link GYE and NCDE bears along the MacDonald Pass area west of Helena, the Elkhorns, Champion-Thunderbolt area, Highland Mountains, Tobacco Root Mountains, Snowcrest and Gravelly Mountains. Graves et al. (�007) used movement patterns of GPS collared bears in Alaska to define corridors, rather than characterize corridors by habitat variables, such as vegetation or elevation. They found that in areas with greater fragmentation, additional hazards, and fewer resources, animal movement was constrained, linear, and faster. As fragmentation continues to increase, and the corridor becomes less contiguous, there are less frequent movements between habitat patches, and the movements are also rapid and directional. At a certain threshold, where corridors become narrower and less continuous, risk increases and probability of use decreases, until the area is no longer a conduit for movement and is considered non-habitat. Defining corridors by animal movement eliminates the assumption that all habitat factors to which animals respond can be identified. This kind of information is particularly useful in the West, with increasingly rapid development and simultaneous increased attention on retention or conservation of wildlife corridors.
Transportation corridors are also sources of habitat fragmentation. Waller and Servheen (�00�) investigated how highways affect fine-scale movements and habitat selection. This research discovered that bears do cross highways, but that crossings are negatively related to traffic volume. Therefore, most crossings occurred at night, when traffic volumes are lowest. Contrary to the popular belief that male bears move most frequently, Waller found that adult females moved the most and males the least. Waller also found that GPS telemetry was more accurate that VHF telemetry for predicting habitat selection and movement. Waller and Servheen (�00�) concluded that at current estimated increases in traffic volumes, U.S. Highway 2 would
��
Wolves can thrive in a variety of environments, including forests, mountains, grasslands, tundra, and desert; this reflects overall adaptability of the species. This adaptability and reproductive success has allowed wolves to make a remarkable comeback in the Northern Rockies, with a current estimated population of �,�00 animals and an estimated annual growth rate of ��%, despite 7�� wolves being legally removed since the late ���0s, with an unknown number of animals poached annually.
Wolves’ habitat preference is based on the presence of native ungulates within a pack’s territory on a year-round basis (Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks, �00�). Biologists that participated in the Priority Linkage Assessment project indicated that social intolerance was the primary inhibitor to wolf movement, not habitat fragmentation. Wolves are considered non-migratory but disperse widely (Walton et al., �00�). Packs move widely to patrol their territories within their home ranges. Pack territories are dynamic and change annually with fluctuations in prey availability. Pack activity is centered on a den site and nearby rendezvous sites from April through September. Wolves live in packs with complex social hierarchy. Pack members may disperse to find their own mates or territories. Packs are structured with a breeding alpha male and female; however, contrary to popular belief, females other than the alpha may also produce pups within a pack. Annual pack home ranges may be up to several hundred square kilometers, dependent upon habitat quality and prey resources. Summer home range is typically smaller than winter home range. Average territory size for a northwestern Montana wolf pack is ��0 km�; in Yellowstone, the average territory size was much larger at ��� km� (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service et al., �000).
Wolves’ primary prey are deer and elk, however solitary animals will take small mammalian prey opportunistically. They scavenge on carrion, small rodents, and, in Yellowstone, will take bison. Depredations of livestock may occur, particularly in years when mild winters cause deer fawns to be less vulnerable to predation (USFWS, ����). Livestock depredation can
become a barrier to grizzly bears by �0��. These findings were similar to Graves et al. (2006), which concluded that, in Alaska, grizzlies cross highways more frequently at night than in the day, and that clustering of crossing areas was not well explained. They also observed that movements of bears as they crossed highways were more rapid and acute than prior to or after a highway crossing.
Landscapes may be physically permeable to wildlife but not socially permeable, thus effectively fragmenting habitat. The tension that can occur in communities in close proximity to grizzly bear populations warrants careful consideration. Primm and Wilson (�00�) suggest that conservation advocates must focus on participatory processes to guide conservation of linkage habitat. Their investigation acknowledges that this edict is particularly important for smaller scale efforts since sweeping legislation (such as Northern Rocky Ecosystem Protection Act) have failed to pass. Primm and Wilson (�00�) also caution that small scale efforts have to be designed carefully to contribute to larger bioregional efforts. They place an emphasis on communication among stakeholders to achieve clear objectives with action and dialogue interwoven in the process so progress can be made to practical problems.
Gray wolf (Canis lupus)
Wolves were extirpated from Montana in the early ��00s, but started naturally re-colonizing Montana from Canada in the late ��70s. In ���� and ���6, wolves were reintroduced into Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho.
Photo by USFWS
��
become a learned behavior and may result in lethal control of entire packs. In Minnesota, changes in snow pack induced shifts in deer populations and mobility that resulted in shifts in wolf pack movement, sociability, and feeding behavior (Fuller, ����).
Like grizzlies, there is tension in the Northern Rockies associated with the presence of wolves, in particular because of the risk of livestock depredation. By �00�, gray wolves had reached biological recovery goals. Montana and Idaho’s wolf management plans were approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in �00�. Currently, listing status is uncertain as there have been two changes in status in Fall-Winter �00�. The new administration will review the December �00� de-listing decision in Winter-Spring �00�. The gray wolf is a big game species in Idaho.
Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis)
Lynx are habitat specialists with very specific requirements. They primarily inhabit the subalpine fir zone in the U.S. Northern Rockies. This habitat is generally found above ����m west of the Continental Divide and is dominated by spruce, several species of fir, and seral lodgepole pine. East of the Continental Divide the subalpine fir forests inhabited by lynx occur at higher elevations (�,6�0 to �,�00 meters) and are composed mostly of subalpine fir (Ruediger et al., �000). Throughout their range, shrub-steppe habitats may provide important linkage habitat between the primary habitat types described above (Ruediger et al., �000). Snow conditions are an important environmental variable for lynx, who prefer areas with moderately deep annual snowfall amounts (�00 to ��7 centimeters) (Kelsall et al., ��77). In all lynx habitat types, patches of forest that have early successional stages created by disturbances such as fire and insect infestations are preferred since this creates forage and cover for snowshoe hares, the most important prey species of the lynx. However, older forests also provide habitat for snowshoe hares and lynx for longer periods than disturbance-created habitats (Ruediger et al., �000). Snags, downed timber, and thick brush are important as denning sites
for lynx. These sites tend to be within mature or old growth stands (Koehler, ���0; Koehler and Brittell, ���0). Additionally, denning habitat must be near or adjacent to foraging habitat as the hunting range of the female lynx is reduced when she has kittens (Ruediger et al., �000).
Lynx are also dietary specialists, with snowshoe hares comprising up to �7% of their diet (Koehler and Aubry, ����). When snowshoe hare populations are reduced, red squirrels are an important part of their diet. Lynx may also hunt grouse, ground squirrels, porcupines, and other small rodents.
Lynx are considered non-migratory but disperse widely. The home range size varies, from �0 to ��� km� (McCord and Cardoza, ����); with a typical home ranges of �6 to �0 km� (Quinn and Parker, ���7; Butts, ����). Factors that influence home range sizes include sex, age, population density, prey density, and method of survey and calculation (McCord and Cardoza, ����; Ward and Krebs, ����; Quinn and Parker, ���7; Hatler, ����). In other areas, long distance dispersal has been reported to range from �0� to 6�6 kilometers (Saunders, ��6�; Nellis and Wetmore, ��6�; Brainerd, ����; Ward, ����; Brittell et al., ����).
Lynx are solitary, and the female alone raises the kittens. A female will reproduce every �-� years, and the kittens stay with the mother through the next breeding season.
Lynx are considered a furbearer animal in Montana but they are not currently trapped, as they are listed as a Threatened species under the Endangered Species Act.
Wolverine (Gulo gulo)
One of the least-understood meso-carnivores in the Northern Rockies, the wolverine’s current distribution was thought to be limited to north-central Washington, northern/central Idaho, western Montana, and northwestern Wyoming. In March �00�, after an �6 year absence, a wolverine was photographed near Truckee, California by researchers from Oregon State
��
on how landscape features either facilitate or impede immigration and emigration in populations. Low population densities, habitat fragmentation, and high demographic sensitivity to mortality raise concerns among some biologists that the harvesting of wolverines could have detrimental effects on their metapopulation dynamics.
Wolverines are opportunistic; rodents and carrion form a large part of their diet (Hatler, ����) but they also been eat roots, berries, bird eggs and nestlings, and attack large ungulates hampered by deep snow.
Wolverines are generally solitary, but subadult offspring may travel with both parents prior to independence. Females give birth to kits in February or March in the Northern Rockies. In some areas, females may produce kits every two to three years (Wilson, ����).
Currently, the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management list the wolverine as a sensitive species, and Idaho lists them as a species of greatest conservation need (SHCN). Trapping is still allowed on a quota system in Montana. In �00�, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks reduced overall harvest quota for wolverine to nearly half of previous quotas.
Elk (Cervus elaphus)
In the Northern Rockies, elk prefer forest and forest edge habitat; they make seasonal elevational movements from higher altitudes in the summer to mountain valleys in the winter. Elk are highly adaptable and can be found in semi-deserts in the Great Basin. Herds can be resident or migratory. Habitat use is strongly influenced by human activities and road densities greater than �.0 miles/per square mile have been shown to influence habitat security (Lyons et al., ����). The home range of a non-migratory herd is �.�-�.� km�. Herds exhibit high site fidelity to their home range, but they may abandon their home ranges if they are excessively disturbed.
University. Throughout the Northern Rockies, wolverines occur at a low density (� per 6� km�). They are considered non-migratory but disperse widely with a mean annual home range of ��� km� (males) and ��� km� (females) (Hornocker and Hash, ����). Territory and range depends on availability of denning sites and food supply (Wilson, ����). While juveniles disperse approximately �0-�00 km from their natal dens, Magoun (����) and Gardner et al. (���6) recorded dispersal movements of greater than �00 km.
In the contiguous United States, wolverines are considered a true wilderness species closely associated with rugged, mountainous habitats with deep snow pack. Copeland et al. (�007) analyzed the seasonal habitat associations of wolverines in central Idaho, and found that elevation explained habitat use better than any other variable in both summer and winter. This research indicated that wolverines prefer higher whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulus) habitats in winter and the lower elevation Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziezii) and lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) habitats in summer; at all times they preferred northerly aspects and had a neutral response to trails, although in winter they both avoided roads and ungulate winter ranges.
Aubry et al. (�007) investigated the distribution and broad-scale habitat relations of wolverine in the contiguous United States. Their results indicated that distribution of wolverine had contracted substantially by the mid-��00s to their current ranges. The researchers investigated potential relations between historic wolverine distributions and varying environmental factors such as vegetation and temperature. The only variable that could fully account for the historic distribution patterns was spring snow cover. Extirpation from historic ranges is likely related to high levels of human caused mortality and low to non-existent immigration rates.
The findings of Ruggerio et al. (2007) support Aubry et al. (�007), by concluding that current wolverine populations appear to be relatively small and isolated. More research is needed
��
Elk are grazers that utilize grasses and forbs, but will also browse shrubs and small trees such as aspen. Cow elk live in small herds with calves throughout the year except in the fall rut, when bulls gather cows into harems.
Elk are a big game species that generate significant economic revenue, and state harvest strategies and management vary throughout the Rocky Mountains.
Pronghorn (Antilocapra Americana)
Pronghorn prefer open grasslands, sagebrush steppe, and desert-dominated vegetation less than 60cm in height with little or no snowcover in winter. Pronghorn habitat fragmentation occurs from human development on seasonal ranges. The pronghorn’s winter habitat is ideal for farming and rural residential development, which also provides favorable conditions for coyotes. An increase in farming and rural development has produced a significant decrease in pronghorn numbers in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem that is thought to be caused by high predator-induced mortality rates during the winter months (Hansen et al., �00�). Forbs are an important part of the pronghorn’s diet in spring and summer. Sagebrush dominates their diet in winter and grasses in fall and spring. Pronghorn migrate during severe weather conditions or when warranted by poor habitat conditions; herds have been known to travel
over �60 km to avoid deep snow. Fencing along migration routes can lead to habitat fragmentation due to the pronghorn’s inability to maneuver around it. Although pronghorn are the fastest land mammal in North America, they are poor jumpers and, unlike mule deer and elk, usually will not jump fences. Pronghorn research indicates that fencing in migration routes should therefore be minimized to allow access to vital winter grounds (Sheldon, �00�). Same-sex herds live together most of the year, with large mixed herds congregating on winter ranges and during migration. The pronghorn is classified as a big game species with harvest strategies that vary by state.
Moose (Alces alces)
Moose occur in cool, moist boreal and mixed deciduous forested areas where there is 60 to 70 cm of snow cover in the winter. Conifer cover, uneven plant age and the composition of willows are important habitat components; closed canopy stands may be important in winter (Mattson, ����). If adequate riparian habitat is available, moose may make substantial use of mid- to high elevation sagebrush habitat. They are the most able of any ungulate to negotiate deep snow. Snow accumulation is shown to affect populations even more strongly than wolf density (Mech et al., ���7). In naturally regulated ecosystems, predation by bears and wolves is often limited (Van Ballenbergie and Ballard, ����). Moose are non-migratory in North America, with an average home range of �-�0 km�. Moose are primarily browsers, eating twigs, bark, and leaves/needles of conifers, but prefer willows and aspen. When available, moose also eat water plants. Moose are known to be capable of altering the structure and dynamics of boreal forest by their browsing (McInnes et al., ����), preventing young saplings from growing into tree canopy, creating a forest with a more open canopy and a well-developed shrub understory.
Moose are generally solitary, but may congregate in small groups on winter habitats. In some areas, small breeding groups will form during the fall rut. Moose are a big game species
Photo by Denver Bryan
��
with individual harvest strategies in each state throughout the Northern Rockies.
Bighorn sheep (Ovis Canadensis)
Bighorn sheep prefer semi-open and open vegetation types in rugged terrain with minimal snow depth in winter and high quality green forage in growing seasons. Bighorns spend most of their time close to escape terrain such as cliffs and talus slopes (Pallister, ��7�), with cliffs, rocky outcroppings, and very steep slopes necessary for lambing security. Bighorn sheep depend on bunchgrasses and shrubs in winter and summer ranges consisting of grasses, sedges and forbs. They make local movements between seasonal ranges and do not readily disperse into new habitat. Their home range averages �7 km². They form same-sex herds during breeding season (Shakleton et al., ����). Bighorn sheep are classified as a big game species, with various state harvest and management strategies.
Ancillary Species:
General references for ancillary species include the following sources. Specific references are listed within text.
Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Field Guide www.fieldguide.mt.gov
Nature Serve www.natureserve.org
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Species website; www.fws.gov/species
Mathews, D. �00�. Rocky Mountain Natural History: Grand Teton to Jasper. Raven Editions, Portland, OR.
Sibley, D. �000. The Sibley Guide to Birds. Alfred Knopf Publishers, New York City, New York.
Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus)
Mule deer prefer sagebrush and forest edge habitats. They are browsers, with winter diets largely dependent upon sagebrush. Mule deer are non-migratory, but make seasonal elevational movements. Mule deer live in related herds, while males may disperse and
live together in unrelated herds. Mule deer are classified as a big game species, with harvest strategies that vary by state.
Mountain goat (Oreamnos americanus)
Mountain goats prefer precipitous terrain and occasionally enter subalpine forests. Snowcover is an important influence on winter distribution. Winter habitat includes steep, south-facing canyon walls, and windblown ridge tops. Spring habitat includes south and west facing cliffs, while summer habitat consists of meadows, cliffs, ravines, and forests. Their diet varies by range and season, and includes grasses, sedges, forbs, coniferous trees, mosses and lichens. They have seasonal movements of �-�� km between winter and summer ranges, and may travel even farther in springtime to access salt licks. Their average home range size is �� km�; although males show little home range fidelity and are usually solitary. Female mountain goats form nursery bands consisting of females, kids and outlying juvenile males. Mountain goats may congregate at mineral licks. Mountain goats are classified as a big game species, with harvest strategies that vary by state.
Mountain lion (Puma concolor)
Mountain lions are extremely adaptable, and occupies almost all habitats in the Northern Rockies except open prairie. Research indicates a preference for rock formations such as precipices, canyons, and dense brush. Preferred prey is deer and elk, but may also include other small mammals such as mice, rabbit, beaver, porcupine, and grouse. The mountain lion is
Photo by Phil Knight
�6
non-migratory but disperses widely: <��0 km² and ��0-��0 km² for females and males respectively. They are solitary animals, except during breeding season and when mothers have cubs. Trapping and chase seasons exist for mountain lions and are limited by an annual harvest quota.
Fisher (Martes pennanti)
Fisher prefer hardwood stands with young conifers and herbaceous cover in the summer. In winter they prefer conifer forests with tracts greater than �.0 km². Forest with continuous canopy cover is more important than tree species composition, and can include early successional forests with dense overhead cover. Fisher prefer to eat small and medium mammals such as squirrels, mice, shrews, porcupines and hares, although they will also feed on carrion when available. Fishers are non-migratory and the average home range size is 7-7� km�. They are solitary animals except during breeding season and when mothers have kits. Fishers were considered extirpated from Montana by 1930. Between 1959 and 1991, 188 fishers were translocated from British Columbia, Minnesota and Wisconsin to western Montana. Studies show that although most of the fishers currently inhabiting western Montana are descendents of these translocations, a number of fishers in west-central Montana are genetically distinct (Vinkey et al., �006). This distinct population is thought to be descended from the fisher population native to Montana and Idaho, descendents of the eliminated population that potentially found refuge in the Selway-Bitterroot Mountains. Because of the relocations that potentially augmented an existing population, fishers are
now classified as a sensitive species. Trapping is allowed in Montana with a harvest quota.
Marten (Martes americana)
Martens prefer mature conifer and mixed wood forests with deadfall and snags for denning. In Glacier National Park, research shows that martens prefer areas containing mesic spruce and subalpine fir. Martens are omnivorous and prefer to eat small mammals such as voles, mice and shrews, but will also eat birds, insects, and fruit. Martens are non-migratory with an average home range size of 0.7 km� and �.� km� for females and males respectively. Martens are a solitary animal except during breeding season and when mothers have kits. They are classified as a furbearing species and trapping is allowed in some areas.
Black bear (Ursus americanus)
Habitat use by black bears is tied to seasonal food availability. Black bears commonly use dense forests, riparian slopes and avalanche chutes during spring green-up. Other favored habitats include stream bottoms, wet meadows, and dry mountain meadows. Black bears are omnivorous. Their diet varies by season and consists of grasses, sedges, berries, fruits, tree cambium, honey, eggs, carrion, rodents, insects and occasionally ungulates. Black bears are non-migratory but disperses widely. Their home range size varies from ��.� - ��6.7 km². Black bears are a big game species with harvest strategies that vary by state.
Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
Bald eagles prefer conifer or cottonwood forested areas in close proximity to water.
Photo by Lance Craighead
Photo by Tim & Shelley Duggins
�7
They feed on fish, waterfowl and other birds, small mammals, and carrion. Their hunting area, or home range, is 7- �0.� km². Adult bald eagle pairs mate for life and defend nesting territories. In wintertime, eagles will congregate near open water where fish and waterfowl are abundant. The federal government delisted bald eagles from the Endangered Species Act and their management now lies under state authority.
��
Major Linkage NameGeographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
The outer boundary of the linkage is described using local landmarks, highways, or other features. The name of the linkage (i.e. Ninemile) describes a nearby geographical feature or place name. Some linkages also represent critical core habitat as well as connections between other linkages.
The important habitat uses and connections for several wildlife species that are provided by the linkage area are described in this section. The connections may be between seasonal habitats within the local geographic area (i.e. bighorn movement between summer and winter range), or linkages between this particular area and adjoining habitats at a regional scale (i.e. wolverine movement between major mountain ranges).
The natural features of the linkage are described here. This includes descriptions of the vegetation communities (i.e. kinds of trees and plants), general topography and river drainages, and the kinds of human development (i.e. highways, railroads, major power lines) or natural disturbances (i.e. wild fires) that have occurred in the area that influence habitat quality and continuity.
This section describes the primary wildlife uses that occur in the linkage, emphasizing those focal species that have important wide-ranging or seasonal movements.
Linkage “scorecard” - see page �� for details
Animal Icons. These repre-sent the major species discussed for each linkage area.
GUIDE TO READINGPRIORITY LINKAGE ASSESSMENT TWO-PAGERS (pages 50-137)
��
Conservation Threats Conservation Opportunities
Human activities or developments within a linkage that adversely affect the ability of wildlife to use existing habitat or to move through the area are considered to be conservation threats. This includes such things as highways and railroads that fragment habitat continuity and may be a mortality hazard, subdivisions that remove habitat and increase human presence in an area, or high intensity recreational use or roads that represent enough sustained disturbance to limit wildlife use of an area. Often these threats may not be individually severe but in combination with others, are sufficient to reduce potential wildlife uses. Those activities or developments that are the most permanent on the landscape represent the greatest threats.
Opportunities to conserve habitat through private or public land management actions are described in this section. The focus is on people who are living or working in a particular linkage and are concerned about maintaining or improving wildlife habitat quality and connectivity. The presence of conservation-minded citizen groups or individuals, non-governmental organizations and partnerships, and state and/or federal agency plans that are focused on maintaining or improving habitat quality and connectivity is emphasized.
Linkage map-
This map displays the general area of a linkage, and map labels represent some of the local landmarks for which the linkage is named. Specific wildlife movement corridors within the area are NOT displayed because they are variable depending on the wildlife species, and upon weather, seasonal disturbances and many other factors.
SpecieS
�0
Baldy Creek
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
The Baldy Creek linkage area straddles the Yaak River Road in the heart of Northwest Montana’s Yaak River Valley. Located in the Purcell Mountains, this area links roadless areas from the Montana-Idaho border to the South Fork Yaak River.
This linkage area contains good quality wildlife habitat on public lands. It is an important linkage between two big blocks of undeveloped Forest Service land near Mt. Baldy and Red Top Mountain to the west and Clark Mountain and Roderick Mountain to the east. Biologists gave Baldy Creek a high priority rating.
The Baldy Creek linkage is a small, mostly forested area southeast of Mount Baldy. The Yaak River and highway bisect this linkage. The area is steep and mountainous with a wide variety of vegetation cover. This area has a wide variety of coniferous trees including western red cedar (Thuja placata), grand fir (Abies grandis), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), and Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa). Open shrub areas occur throughout the region as do small patches of short to medium height grasses and forbes. The southwestern portion of this linkage has a large area of standing burnt forest. The elevation in this area ranges from ��00 feet to 6�00 feet.
noted the presence of grizzly bears and wolves using this linkage area. Grizzly bears have been monitored crossing the Yaak River Road at this location many times. Wolves use this same area to move across the Yaak River. It also is potential linkage habitat for other wide-ranging carnivores, such as the Canada lynx.
Conservation Threats
Conservation Opportunities
This area is important for big game movement, specifically for moose and white-tailed deer. Biologists have also
The biggest threats to connectivity in this area include traffic on the Yaak River Road and increasing rates of subdivision on private lands near the linkage area. As private home development increases in the Baldy area, sanitation issues such as food storage, garbage, bird feeders, and pets become attractants and increase chances of bear-human conflicts.
Since the Baldy linkage area is largely located on U.S. Forest Service lands, Kootenai National Forest management issues are the major opportunities to improve wildlife movement in the area. The Kootenai National Forest has reduced road densities in the area and there is an opportunity to continue to close roads on public lands. The creation of a Kootenai National Forest Connectivity Plan is an opportunity that could be incorporated into the Forest’s planning process.
��
SpecieS
��
Clark Fork
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
The Clark Fork linkage is centered around the northern Idaho town of Clark Fork and spans from Lake Pend Oreille to the Montana border. The linkage area is bisected by Highway �00 and the Clark Fork River. The Cabinet Mountains are located to the north and the Coeur d’Alene Mountains are located to the south. Scotchman Peak is located just east of the linkage area.
The area is an important link between the Cabinet and Coeur d’Alene Mountains and regionally part of the north-south movement corridor between the Cabinet-Yaak and Salmon-Selway ecosystems. Linkage is constricted to the west of the linkage zone, largely by Lake Pend Oreille. This location is one of the first opportunities for southern movement from the Selkirks. Scotchman Peaks roadless area is located north and east of the linkage area. The Clark Fork linkage area received a high rating as a connectivity priority.
This linkage adjoins the east shoreline of Lake Pend Oreille, and includes the lower reaches of the Clark Fork River. The broad river corridor includes the braided river channel, the small town of Clark Fork, Highways �0 and �00, a railroad, and scattered residential and agricultural developments. The river delta where it enters the lakes is a broad complex of wooded islands, wetlands and emergent vegetation. River terraces on both sides are open grassland and pasture land grading into mixed deciduous and conifer forest dominated by western larch (Larix occidentalis), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga
menziesii), Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), western red cedar (Thuja placata), grand fir (Abies grandis), and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla). Throughout the forest are open patches dominated by shrubs such as alder (Alnus spp.) and serviceberry (Amelanchier spp.). Aspen (Populus tremuloides) and cottonwood (Populus spp.) occur as riparian species. The elevation in this region ranges from ��00 feet at the river to ��00 feet on the surrounding hillsides.
The northern portion of the linkage area is in a grizzly bear recovery zone and grizzly bears may use the linkage for occasional movements to the south. The linkage area is a good potential movement area for grizzly bears. The Clark Fork linkage contains elk winter range; elk and deer move seasonally through the area and the linkage allows for increases in elk range expansion. The linkage zone may be linking two mountain goat populations in the area. Biologists indicated that black bear and moose have also been reported using habitat in the linkage area.
Conservation Threats
Threats to wildlife linkage include impacts from subdivision and development. Subdivision is mostly occurring on the north side of the highway. Human development and the accompanying increases in traffic lead to additional habitat fragmentation and direct habitat loss and wildlife mortality. There is increasing traffic on the highway and railroad. Forest practices on industrial timberlands managed by the timber company Forest Capital may also affect habitat security in the linkage area. These industrial timberlands could be logged, which might reduce habitat security, or
��
Conservation Opportunities
There is an opportunity for expansion of the Wildlife Management Area (WMA) in the linkage area. The Bonneville Power Authority (BPA) includes this area in their mitigation program, so there is possible funding and restoration work that could occur as part of their program. The
sold for private development. The Clark Fork river system may serve as a natural barrier that hinders animal movement across the river.
Forest Service will be doing a transportation plan in �00� and is currently in the process of Forest Planning, which could give management direction in favor of wildlife linkage. Forest Capital may be open to negotiating conservation easements on their lands. There is significant agency cooperation in this area with the Forest Service, Idaho Fish and Game and others, which may increase the likelihood of implementing some of these opportunities.
SpecieS
��
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Clark Fork-Flathead Confluence
This linkage includes the meeting of the Clark Fork and Flathead Rivers near Paradise, Montana. The river continues northwest as the Clark Fork River from this junction. The Thompson Peaks and Flathead Indian Reservation are to the north and the Siegel Mountain roadless area and Ninemile Divide are located to the south. The linkage area includes portions of Highway �00 and Highway ���.
This linkage is located between some very wild roadless areas – Siegel Mountain and Patrick’s Knob. It also provides a north-south connection between the Cabinet-Yaak and the Bitterroots. The linkage area also offers riverbottom connections to the Mission Mountains. Experts gave this linkage area an intermediate priority rating.
The confluence of the Clark Fork and the Flathead is located in this linkage. Highways � and ��� parallel both rivers, along with a railroad each corridor. Scattered residences and small communities occur along both rivers, along with agriculatural lands along the Flathead/lower Clark Fork section. Mountain forests adjacent to both river valleys are largely intact and unroaded. Extensive logging and road development has occurred to the east and south of this linkage area. Denser forest habitat is limited to north-facing slopes through much of this linkage, with more open dry forest/grassland occurs on south-facing slopes. Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine are the dominant tree species along with western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), grand fir (Abies grandis), Engelmann
spruce (Picea engelmannii), and western larch (Larix occidentalis). Some subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) and lodgepole pine (P. contorta) are present at higher elevations. Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum), limber pine (P. flexilis) and small patches of big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentate spp.) are located along the lower north slopes above the Flathead River. Elevations in this linkage range from �,�00 feet at Paradise to over 6,�00 feet on Patrick’s Knob.
Elk and deer move seasonally through the Clark Fork-Flathead Confluence linkage area, which includes big game winter range. Biologists reported that elk cross Highway ��� near the campground. Black bears move through the area regularly. There have been reports of wolf movement in the corridor, as well. The linkage area may provide for grizzly bear movement now and in the future. The grizzly bear that traveled to the Ninemile area in �00� may have traveled through this area.
The major threats in this linkage area come from the transportation corridors: growing traffic on Highway 135, Highway �00, and the Montana Rail Link railway. Subdivision and development along the transportation corridors threaten wildlife connectivity, as well, by further fragmenting linkage habitat. Increasing problems with garbage-related sanitation threaten carnivore populations. Readily available garbage, human and pet foods, birdseed and fruit trees attract hungry bears and lead to human-wildlife conflicts and bear mortality. The potential paving of the Ninemile Road, which enters the
��
Conservation Opportunities
southern portion of this linkage area, could be a major threat by bisecting secure habitat and increasing traffic in efforts to connect with Highway �00. The Ninemile Road is listed as a potential future project of the Forest Highways program, though there are no current plans for its improvement. Development of the road could result in making the linkage area a transportation and development hub.
al large parcels that are not subdivided that may be opportunities for private land conservation outreach. Revisiting the list of the Forest High-ways inventory to remove the Ninemile Road was listed as a potential opportunity to prevent fragmentation in this linkage area. A portion of the linkage area is on the Flathead Indian Res-ervation. There may be opportunities for addi-tional acquisition or easement of private lands, although much has been accomplished already. Zoning was also listed as a possible opportunity. Biologists suggested that Wild and Scenic River designation on this stretch of the Clark Fork River would be an opportunity for riparian pro-tection and the wildlife movement that occurs along river bottoms.
Transportation mitigation is an opportunity, although the topography and close proximity of the river make crossing structures difficult. Conservation easements would need to accom-modate any highway crossings. There are sever-
SpecieS
�6
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Copeland
The Copeland linkage area connects the Selkirk and Purcell Mountains in the Idaho Panhandle near the Idaho-Canadian border. Highway �� bisects the corridor in the southern portion and then heads east. Highway � continues along the Purcell Trench north into Canada. The Kootenai River flows through the middle of the corridor.
The Copeland area links the Selkirk and Purcell Mountains in northern Idaho. The only known movement of grizzly bears from the Selkirk to Purcell recovery zones occurred in this area. There are several crossing structures (wildlife underpasses) on Highway �� in this linkage area. Although much of the area is used agriculturally, there is little human development to impact animal movement. Biologists gave this linkage area an intermediate priority ranking.
The Kootenai River meanders through this low valley known as the Purcell Trench. The majority of this valley has been converted to agricultural lands although some native plant communities remain, particularly towards the valley edges. Forest stands with ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), western red cedar (Thuja placata), and cottonwood (Populus spp.) are found at lowest elevations grading into Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) forests with Englemann spruce (Picea englemannii), western larch (Larix occidentalis), and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) present depending on elevation and aspect. These forests are broken up by open rocky areas, grassy ridges, and open meadows. The
area has been heavily logged resulting in various clearcuts and openings. Roads constructed to support timber harvest are widespread. The elevation in this linkage ranges from approximately ��00 feet at the river to ��00 feet in the foothills.
The Copeland linkage area contains the only known movement of a grizzly bear from the Selkirk to the Cabinet-Yaak recovery area. Recently, three grizzly bears were caught by a black bear researcher and given GPS collars. Grizzly bear use generally occurs in the spring and fall. Field research indicates that black bears frequently cross Highway �� and use habitat on both sides of the highway. The Copeland area also serves as a local connector for many wildlife species, such as elk, deer and wolves. The U.S. Forest Service’s Lynx Management Direction identifies a possible east-west lynx linkage at the southern end of the Copeland linkage area.
Conservation Threats
The valley is broad and offers little cover for secure wildlife movement. There is a low threat of subdivision in this area because much of the land is below the water table and can not be developed. Much of the landscape has been converted to agricultural production. The highway currently has a low traffic volume at the �,000 average daily transport (ADT) level. Multiple ownerships may make conservation opportunities more difficult to pursue. Agricultural production and activity may impact linkage habitat and wildlife movement in the Copeland area.
�7
Conservation Opportunities
There has been significant conservation in this linkage zone and the potential exists for more. Idaho Transportation Department has constructed underpasses on Highway �� in the Copeland area. Further mitigation may make these underpasses more effective. Wetlands have been purchased in the Round Prairie area for additional conservation mitigation. Idaho Fish and Game is conducting research on black bear use of the area. Forest Capital, who manages industrial timberlands in the
linkage area, has placed four sections under conservation easement and there is potential opportunity for additional conservation on their lands. Boundary County has completed a zoning plan, which may limit housing densities in key wildlife movement areas. Idaho Fish and Game has acquired ��00 acres on the Canada/US border. The Nature Conservancy has purchased the Ball Creek Ranch for conservation purposes. Further conservation work is needed in the schools and during hunting season. There is also an opportunity to improve enforcement of hunting regulations by increasing staffing.
SpecieS
��
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Eureka North
This linkage area is located in northwestern Montana between the Whitefish Range and the Purcell Mountains. The Eureka linkage extends from Black Lake and the town of Eureka up to the Canadian border. Lake Koocanusa is the western boundary of the linkage.
This linkage is important for north - south movement parallel to the highway. It is a highly threatened area and a mortality sink for grizzly bears. The Eureka North linkage also provides east west connectivity for seasonal elk movement. The linkage area allows for connectivity to Canadian wildlife populations and also between the Purcell Mountains and Whitefish Range (and then further east to Glacier National Park). Biologists gave the Eureka North linkage area a high priority rating.
The Eureka North linkage lies in an open valley adjoining Lake Koocanusa and bounded by steep mountains on the east. The topography and vegetation are both unique in northwestern Montana. Rolling foothills are the result of prehistoric glacier outwash filling an ancient river valley. In contrast to all surrounding habitat, there is less forest cover in this linkage, and more grasslands and agriculture. Dry land pasture and irrigated hay lands are common throughout the southern half of the linkage. Residential development is common in the linkage, particularly around several lakes in the western
portion. Highway �� and numerous secondary roads fragment the linkage. Timber harvest has occurred adjacent to Lake Koocanusa. Open forest cover occurs along the east side of Lake Koocanusa with ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) as the dominant conifer species. Lesser amounts of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and western larch (Larix occidentalis) occur on specific sites. Bitterbrush may be present in the ponderosa pine understory in the Kootenai River canyon, along with serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), chokecherry (Prunus virginiana) and Woods rose (Rosa woodsii). The elevation ranges from approximately �600 feet at Lake Koocanusa to over 7�00 feet in the eastern mountains.
This linkage is utilized by both ungulates and carnivores. It is a mortality sink for grizzly bears, due to food conditioning issues. Wolves have been observed in the linkage area. The Eureka North linkage also provides east-west connectivity for seasonal elk movement, specifically across Highway 93 at mile markers ��6, ���.�, and by the golf course at mile marker ���.�. Mule deer, white-tailed deer and elk travel over Purdy Hill between mile markers �77 and �7�. Bighorn sheep use steep slopes to move through the linkage area.
The proximity to Eureka makes this linkage significantly threatened by private land development and subdivision. Increasing problems with garbage-related sanitation issues threaten bear populations. Readily available garbage, human and pet foods, birdseed and
��
Conservation Opportunities
fruit trees attract hungry bears and lead to human-wildlife conflicts and bear mortality. There has been some resistance from residents to attraction reduction efforts in the area. Increasing traffic on Highway 93 is a threat, as well, and increases chances of wildlife-vehicle collisions.
The linkage area is receiving attention from Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks and other land
trusts, who are pursuing conservation easements and land acquisition. There are opportunities for additional conservation easements from willing landowners. There are several large ranches in the linkage with opportunities for private lands conservation. Additionally, there are opportunities for future highway mitigation and sanitation-related projects.
SpecieS
60
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Evaro
This linkage area is located north of Missoula, Montana on the Flathead Indian Reservation. The town of Evaro is at the southern end of the linkage area. The Evaro linkage is bisected by Highway �� and the Montana Rail Link railroad.
The Evaro linkage is a critical link among the Crown, Cabinet-Yaak, and Salmon-Selway ecosystems. It is a natural topographic tunnel. The Rattlesnake Wilderness area is located to the east of the linkage and Reservation Divide is located to the West. The Mission Mountains are to the north. Biologists gave the Evaro linkage area a very high priority rating.
This linkage occupies a broad forested pass between the upper Jocko River valley and the Missoula valley. The area has been extensively affected by human development. Highway �� and a railroad bisect the linkage. Numerous dispersed residences, small subdivisions and small communities occur along the highway, along with small agricultural tracts. Four major power lines cross through the linkage, and the area has sustained extensive timber harvest and roading. Lower elevation habitat in the Jocko River valley has been converted to irrigated pasture and hay lands. Extensive subdivisions with spotted knapweed (Centaurea stoebe) and leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) have replaced native grasslands on the Missoula valley side of the linkage. Forest habitat is dominated by ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) on lower foothills, and
In �007, a grizzly bear got close to the Evaro linkage area and there is historic movement by grizzlies through the area. There is current black bear and ungulate use. Black bears were radio-collared and tracked as part of a master’s thesis in the area. Mule deer, white-tailed deer, and elk use the linkage area for daily and seasonal movements. Mountain lions and wolves have been observed in the linkage area. Biologists suspect that lynx and wolverine may use the linkage area to move between higher elevation habitat in the Missions, Rattlesnakes and Reservation and Ninemile Divides. The U.S. Forest Service’s Lynx Management Direction identifies a possible east-west lynx linkage linking the Rattlesnake Mountains with Reservation Divide.
The main threats in the linkage are include subdivision and site development, increasing traffic on Highway 93, railroad use, and tribal forestry. Joe’s Smoke Ring, a convenience store/gambling site/outdoor concert venue will expand soon and developments, such as day spas and restaurants, may be constructed in the linkage area. There are high numbers of road-killed animals on the highway. There is also a potential threat of gas pipelines
Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and western larch (Larix occidentalis) at mid elevation. Engelman spruce (Picea engelmannii), subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) and lodgepole pine (P. contorta) are present at higher elevations with some whitebark pine (P. albicaulis) present at timberline. Elevations range from �,�00 feet on the north and south ends of the linkage to over �,000 feet on Murphy Peak.
6�
Conservation Opportunities
running through the area. Sanitation issues and human-wildlife conflicts threaten carnivore populations.
structures and a railroad bridge re-design. The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes will remove some tribal housing that is located close to the overpass. The tribe is also working on habitat restoration projects in the area. There are opportunities for private land, Forest Service and tribal land exchanges, acquisitions and conservation easements. Plum Creek timberlands will be acquired by the Legacy Project in �0�0 and then managed as either public or tribal lands. There are opportunities to maintain and restore visual cover close to the highway.
The Evaro linkage has become a poster child for wildlife linkage opportunities and its notoriety will bring additional opportunities. A wildlife overpass and two underpasses will be constructed in the linkage area in �00� as part of The People’s Way/Highway �� reconstruction projects. Including lands to the north and south, there will be a total of six wildlife crossing
SpecieS
6�
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Fish Creek
The Fish Creek linkage area extends from Stark Mountain to the north and Burdette and Cache Creeks to the south in the Fish Creek watershed. The linkage includes the Clark Fork River and Interstate �0 between Sawmill Gulch Road and Tarkio. The Ninemile Divide is to the north and the Bitterroots are south of Interstate �0.
The Fish Creek linkage is a north-south connection between the Ninemile Divide and the Bitterroot Mountains. Regionally, it is a stepping stone linkage between the Bitterroots and many mountain ranges. It is also a major riparian corridor that connects to the Clark Fork River. The Fish Creek linkage area is relatively undeveloped and offers one of the best chances for grizzly bears and other wide-ranging carnivores to move south into the Bitterroot Mountains. Biologists gave the Fish Creek linkage area a very high priority rating.
The area is located entirely within Missoula County. Dominant landcover in the area consists of ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) (mostly concentrated in the northern portion), mixed mesic forest, Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and low/moderate cover grasslands. A small patch of western larch (Larix occidentalis) is located in the east central portion of the area. The Clark Fork River runs through the northern portion of the area. Elevations range from around �,000 feet around the Clark Fork River to �,700 feet in the Lolo National Forest.
The linkage area includes forested habitat and large river and stream drainages. A grizzly bear was killed in the Bitterroot Mountains in �007 south of the Fish Creek drainage. Grizzly bears had not been documented in the Bitterroot Mountains for many years until this mistaken-identity killing during black bear hunting season. Biologists noted that the Fish Creek linkage was an important potential movement area for grizzly bears dispersing into the Bitterroot Mountains and central Idaho wilderness complex. Black bears and mountain lions utilize habitat in the Fish Creek linkage area. Wildlife frequently cross Interstate �0 between mile markers 67 and 7�. Mule deer and elk move seasonally through the linkage area, as well. Biologists suspect use by rare forest carnivores, such as lynx and wolverine.
The Nature Conservancy and Trust for Public Land recently removed the most significant threat to the Fish Creek Linkage area by purchasing the Plum Creek land in the area. There is still subdivision threat on private land in the Clark Fork river corridor, which could fragment key linkage habitat already bisected by the highway and railroad. Interstate �0, which bisects the linkage area, is a potential barrier to wildlife movement. Traffic on the interstate is increasing and leading to increasing numbers of animal-vehicle collisions.
Conservation Opportunities
Crossing structures on the highway are a potential opportunity to restore linkage. A bridge already exists on the interstate; it could be retrofitted or replaced to
6�
allow for better wildlife passage underneath the highway. Montana Department of Transportation is currently working on an interchange project east of Tarkio; this project will eliminate existing access ramps, close one of the bridges over the Clark Fork River to allow pedestrian access only, and construct a split diamond interchance west of the river. There may be opportunities to include wildlife mitigation, such as fencing, as part of the project. There are opportunities for additional conservation easements or acquisition in the area. Legacy
Project lands will likely be managed by Montana’s Department of Natural Resources and Conservation and there are opportunities to ensure and promote their management enhances wildlife connectivity. The Great Burn Study Group is actively working to restore wildlife habitat in the Fish Creek area. The area is also an important conservation priority for many agency wildlife biologists and managers.
SpecieS
6�
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Fisher River
The Fisher River linkage area is located in northwestern Montana, south of the town of Libby. The Cabinet Mountain Wilderness is located to its west and the Salish Mountains to the east. The linkage area is bisected by Highway �.
The area links summer and winter range for elk and other big game species. It is also part of a chain of linkage between the Cabinet and Salish Mountains, and therefore possibly a link between the Northern Continental Divide and Cabinet Yaak Ecosystems for many wide-ranging species, including grizzly bears. Biologist gave the Fisher River a very low conserva-tion priority ranking.
Although areas of uncut forest cover are still interspersed between clearcuts and other developments, and some old cuts are reforested to some extent, overall forest cover has been significantly reduced. Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) are the dominant tree species along with some patches of western red cedar (Thuja placata), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), and western larch (Larix occidentalis). Some subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) and lodgepole pine (P.contorta) are present at higher elevations on moist sites. The linkage also contains areas of shrubland, often associated with old clearcuts, that include species such as alder (Alnus spp.), huckleberry (Vaccinium spp.), snowberry (Symphoricarpos spp.) and western serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia). The elevation varies between �600 feet and over 7�00 feet.
The Fisher River linkage area is used by elk, mule deer, and white-tailed deer to move from summer range in the Cabinets to winter range in the Salish Mountains. Topographically, the area is a funnel for wildlife movement. Moose frequently move through the area. Mountains lions and black bears are reported to utilize habitat in the linkage area. The Fisher River area is used by lynx and grizzly bears. Grizzly bears are using the Salish Mountains as a linkage and they move through the Fisher River area.
This region is characterized by extensive human development and habitat fragmentation. Timber harvest and road development are present throughout the linkage, and numerous residences, small farms and agricultural lands occur throughout the Highway � corridor. Subdivision and development are the greatest threats to wildlife connectivity in the Fisher River linkage area. Plum Creek Timber Company has already started selling their lands for subdivision within the corridor. The linkage area contains historic and active timber harvest. Transportation issues threaten wildlife movement in the Fisher River area. There is increasing traffic on Highway � and the Fisher Road. The Wolf Creek Road has already been paved; if it were to be widened it could impact wildlife movement.
Conservation Opportunities
This area is conserved by the largest Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks conservation easement in Montana. There are additional opportunities
6�
to build on this private land conservation. Conservation easements could be pursued in Wolf and Little Wolf Creeks. Land use planning and zoning could improve connectivity in this area. The increasing subdivisions and development in the area increase the risk of sanitation-related conflicts. Public education about wildlife interactions with humans is
needed. There are private land acquisition and conservation easement opportunities in the eastern portion of the corridor. Highway crossings could be pursued on Highway � and the major roads in the area. Additional conservation easements with Plum Creek could secure some of the critical private land in the corridor.
SpecieS
66
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Fortine Creek
The Fortine Creek linkage area is located west of the Whitefish Range and Stillwater State Forest and north and east of the Salish Mountains. Grave Creek is located in the northern part of the linkage and Edna Creek and Stryker are located in the south. The linkage area includes the towns of Trego, Fortine, and Stryker and Murphy, Marl, Loon and Dickey Lakes. Highway �� and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway bisect the corridor, as do Fortine Creek and Deep Creek roads. Fortine Creek runs through the linkage and then heads southwest into the Salish Mountains.
This linkage is located within the wildlife dispersal corridor from Glacier National Park to the Salish Mountains. For grizzly bears, it is a key corridor between two grizzly bear recovery zones. Biologists gave the Fortine Creek linkage area a high priority rating.
This linkage occupies the foothills on the west slope of steep, heavily forested mountains. These rolling foothills are the result of prehistoric glacial outwash filling an ancient river valley. Forested habitat is widely interspersed with agricultural lands, small communities and dispersed residences in the western half of the linkage. Dry land pasture and irrigated hay lands are common throughout the central part of the linkage. Highway �� and numerous secondary roads fragment the linkage. The portion of the linkage west of Highway �� has been heavily logged with a network of roads. The mountains east of the highway support intact forested habitat extending
into high elevations with numerous avalanche chutes and alpine meadows. Forest habitat at lower elevation in the western area is dominated by ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). As elevation increases in the eastern part of the linkage, these same species grade into a mixed conifer forest of grand fir (Abies grandis), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), lodgepole pine (P. contorta) and subalpine fir (A. lasiocarpa). Elevations in the linkage range from �,000 feet to about �,000 feet.
This Fortine Creek linkage area contains a hot spot for animal-vehicle collisions on Highway ��. Mule deer and elk frequently move through the area. Deer, elk, and black bears cross Highway �� south of Grave Creek. Deer and black bears frequently cross between mile markers �67 and �6�. Deer and elk move around Murphy Lake and there is mule deer spring movement around Dickey Lake. There is forested cover for wildlife, but a lot of past logging. Some old growth habitat remains in the linkage area. Grizzly bears are known to occupy the linkage zone, with a known den site in the Whitefish range and movement to Pinkham Creek. Grave Creek, in the northern part of the linkage area, is also a known grizzly bear travel corridor.
There is increasing traffic on Highway ��. Highway �� is already a three lane highway in this section. The Fortine Creek area contains a high rate of private land subdivision and development. Many people are purchasing summer homes in the area. Habituation and food
67
Conservation Opportunities
incorporate wildlife movement into the wildland urban interface timber sales planned for the area; cover needs to be maintained for wildlife movement. Conservation easements could be acquired in the linkage area. There is an opportunity to work on community food storage and sanitation issues. As traffic increases on Highway �� and the Montana Department of Transportation engages in future highway plans and projects, there may be opportunities to construct wildlife overpasses or underpasses.
conditioning is a problem for grizzly bears in the area. There are numerous food storage problems in the linkage area and experts have identified several known problem areas for grizzly bears and other carnivores that may be using the linkage area. There are several future timber sales – wildland urban interface (WUI) projects– planned for the area on Forest Service land. These projects may impact wildlife cover and security in the linkage area.
Road closures on public land need to be initiated and monitored. There are opportunities to
SpecieS
6�
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Haugan
The Haugan linkage area is located in western Montana along the Interstate �0 corridor. It is bisected by the highway and the St. Regis River. The Bitterroot Mountains are to the south and the Coeur d’Alene Mountains are to the north.
This linkage area was rated as a high priority for connectivity. Regionally, it could be the southernmost link between the Cabinet-Yaak and Salmon-Selway ecosystems.
This linkage provides relatively dense forest habitat in steep mountainous terrain. Interstate �0 and the Camel’s Hump Road pass through the linkage area. Numerous other roads support timber harvest activities, and logging has occurred throughout the area. Otherwise relatively little human development has occurred outside highway corridors. A wide diversity of coniferous and deciduous forest occurs in this area. Cottonwood (Populus spp.), maples (Acer spp.), and alder (Alnus spp.) communities occur in riparian areas. Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) is the dominant tree species along with ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), western red cedar (Thuja placata), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), grand fir (Abies grandis), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), and western larch (Larix occidentalis). Some subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) and lodgepole pine (P. contorta) are present at higher elevations. Elevations range from �,�00 feet to �,600 feet.
This linkage area accommodates a local elk herd’s daily movements. Elk move frequently through the area, and the Haugan linkage area allows for movement between seasonal habitats for mule deer, white-tailed deer and moose as well. There is a winter migration route across the paved Camel’s Hump Road. Wetlands near Interstate �0 attract moose close to highway. The area contains a concentration of animal-vehicle collisions on Interstate �0. There is concentrated wildlife crossings of Interstate �0 in the Henderson area (mile markers �0-��) and near the weigh station (mile marker ��-��). Approximately ��% of the animals killed on the interstate between Lookout Pass and St. Regis occurs within a seven mile section within this linkage area. There are lynx in the Bitterroot Mountains on the south side of the interstate and their use of the Haugan linkage is suspected by area biologists. The U.S. Forest Service Lynx Management Direction identifies a potential lynx linkage through the Haugan linkage area. Black bear and wolf movements have been reported in the area. Currently, the Haugan linkage area is not known to be used by grizzly bears, but the linkage area provides possible linkage habitat for grizzly bear dispersal south into the Bitterroot Mountains.
Conservation Threats
The town of Haugan is in the center of the linkage area, but good wildlife habitat exists on either side of it. Increasing automobile and truck traffic on the interstate is the biggest barrier to wildlife movement. There are high rates of animal-vehicle collisions in the linkage area. Private land development threatens connectivity in the area, as well.
6�
Conservation Opportunities
Several bridges exist on Interstate �0 that may function as underpasses for animals. They could be renovated to better accommodate wildlife passage. Because the area contains such a high rate of animal vehicle collisions, the Montana Department of Transportation may need to mitigate the situation for human
Sanitation and food storage issues are increasing threats to carnivore species. Food attractants at campgrounds on Forest Service land may be a problem. Development of the Little Joe Road, a current Forest Highways project, could impact wildlife movement in the area.
safety reasons. On public land, bear resistant containers at Forest Service campgrounds may improve carnivore security, if this has not been completed already. On private land, partnerships with state and federal agencies and the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation have addressed some wildlife habitat issues. This partnership has the potential to work on conservation easements in the area, as well. Prevention of the paving project on the Little Joe Road is an important opportunity to prevent further increases of all the threats in the linkage area. Paving Forest Highway roads can lead to subdivisions and developments, increased traffic, and increasing wildlife-human interactions.
SpecieS
70
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Heron
The Heron linkage area is located near the Idaho border in western Montana. It is bisected by Highway �00 and the Cabinet Gorge Reservoir of the Clark Fork River. The towns of Heron and Noxon are located within the linkage area and the Cabinet Mountain Wilderness is located to the north and the Coeur d’Alene Mountains of the Bitterroot Range to the south. The Bull River and Highway �6 come into the linkage area from the northeast.
This linkage area connects the Cabinet Mountains with the Bitterroot Mountains and is a critical link in the north-south regional corridor between the Cabinet-Yaak and Selway Bitterroot ecosystems. The Bull River area is fertile grizzly bear habitat and a natural movement corridor leading into the linkage area. Biologists gave the Heron linkage area an intermediate priority ranking.
This linkage is in the Clark Fork River valley between Noxon and the Idaho state line. The river valley is bounded by steep mountain slopes. The river is controlled by the Cabinet Gorge Reservoir and Noxon Rapids Reservoir through the entire length of the linkage. Highway �00, a railroad, and a power line and pipeline corridor parallel the river throughout. Residences, small subdivisions and communities occur in the linkage along with agricultural pasture and hay land. Some timber harvest and road development has occurred in the linkage. Lower mountain slopes support large areas of ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) and grasslands
bounded at mid-to higher elevation by mixed conifer forest dominated by Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), western larch (Larix occidentalis), grand fir (Abies grandis), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), lodgepole pine (P. contorta), and subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa). Understory shrubs such as alder (Alnus spp.), huckleberry (Vaccinium spp.), snowberry (Symphoricarpos spp.) and western serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia) are common. The elevation in this area is �600 feet at the river and climbs above ��00 feet in the surrounding mountains.
Grizzly bears and black bears are using this linkage area. Elk regularly cross both Highway �00 and Highway �6. Ungulate winter range is located in the northern portion of the linkage area. The more narrow sections of the reservoir are more likely to be used by wildlife for crossings. Wolves use the Heron linkage area and both bears and wolves have been hit on Highway �00 on the stretch from Plains to Noxon.
Conservation Threats
Second home development threatens connectivity in the linkage area. Increasing rates of subdivision and development on private land result in direct habitat loss and increased chances of human-bear conflicts. These conflicts often result in bear mortality. Transportation issues are also major threats to wildlife movement. The railroad is a source of direct mortality. A grizzly bear and two cubs have been hit by the railroad in the Heron linkage area. There are also numerous animal-vehicle collisions and increasing traffic on both highways. The Rock Creek silver and copper mine in the
7�
Conservation Opportunities
Cabinet Wilderness and its related effects may impact wildlife use and movement in the linkage zone. The mining company has recently begun to build infrastructure for the mine on private lands, although the public lands decision is still tied up in the courts. If completed, the ��-year mining project would build several miles of roads into the Cabinets, as well as railroad stations, pipelines, power lines, a tailings treatment plant and other infrastructure on more than �,�00 acres.
easements in the corridor could be very effective at curbing the increasing subdivision pressure and increasing habitat security. There are opportunities for the local land trust, the Clark Fork-Pend Oreile Land Trust, to pursue conservation easements in key linkage habitat. There are landowners who may be interested in private land conservation options. A future highway crossing structure in the linkage area is currently on hold; there is an opportunity to pursue its construction in the near term. Noxious weeds need to be eliminated or controlled in the area. There is a need to address garbage and food storage issues in the linkage, as well.
Because of the relative lack of development, there is the potential that conservation
SpecieS
7�
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Hog Heaven
The Hog Heaven linkage is located west of Flathead Lake in the Salish Mountains. It includes Blacktail Mountain in the north and the Irvine Flats to the south. Lake Mary Ronan is located in the center of the linkage. The linkage area is bisected east-west by Highway ��.
This is a wildlife linkage within the Salish mountain range. At a local scale it links Sullivan Creek with Lake Mary Ronan and Blacktail Mountain with lands on the Flathead Indian Reservation. The Salish range is an important regional connector between the major ecosystems of the Northern Rockies: the Northern Continental Divide, the Cabinet-Yaak and the Salmon-Selway. Biologists gave the Hog Heaven linkage area an intermediate priority ranking.
This linkage occupies a much drier micro-climate than much of the surrounding area. Natural grasslands are common on south-facing slopes, particularly in the western portion of the linkage. Forested habitats are confined to north-facing slopes south of Highway �� but are more widespread to the north. Timber harvest and road development has occurred throughout most of this forested habitat. Although some regeneration has occurred in old clearcuts and cutting units, and some uncut areas remain, forest cover has been significantly reduced throughout this entire area. Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) are the dominant conifers in this area, with various other conifer species present on more moist sites.
Scattered residences, agricultural lands, and small communities are present in the southern half of the linkage and around Lake Mary Ronan. Elevations in this linkage range from less than �,000 feet near Elmo on Flathead Lake to 6,�00 on Blacktail Mountain.
The Hog Heaven wolf pack frequently occupies this dry and arid linkage zone within the Salish Range. Black bears move through the area. Bighorn sheep frequent the area and come down onto Highway ��. The Hog Heaven linkage area also contains seasonal habitat for elk and white-tailed deer.
Conservation Threats
Conservation Opportunities
The development of Plum Creek land in this linkage is the greatest threat to wildlife connectivity. Plum Creek, an industrial timber company, currently is disposing of much of its property in northwestern Montana and selling it for subdivision and development. The conversion of these lands could result in increased habitat fragmentation, direct habitat loss, and increasing human-wildlife conflicts. Current traffic levels on Highway �� are relatively low, but have resulted in bighorn sheep collisions.
There has been some land acquisition by the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes in this linkage area and there is an opportunity for additional acquisition and easement. Montana Department of Transportation has put up road signs to alert drivers about bighorn sheep on Highway ��. Additional mitigation may be necessary if traffic increases on the highway.
7�
SpecieS
7�
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Conservation Opportunities
Idaho Hill
The Idaho Hill linkage area is located in the Salish Mountains and extends between Kila and Marion in western Montana. Pleasant Valley Mountain is in the northern portion and Haskill Mountain and Kofford Ridge are in the south. The linkage includes portions of Ashley Lake, Little Bitterroot Lake, and Lake Rogers. Highway � bisects the linkage area.
Idaho Hill is a topographic linkage where public land comes closest together. It is a connection within the Salish Range and links the Talley Lake area with the Island Unit of the Flathead National Forest. Experts gave this linkage an intermediate priority rating.
The area is located just west of the Flathead Valley and is characterized by extensive habitat fragmentation from timber harvest and road development. Highway � bisects the linkage, and the number of residences and small subdivisions along the highway increase closer to the western edge of the Flathead Valley. Although areas of uncut forest cover are still interspersed between clearcuts and other cutting units, and some old cuts are reforested to an extent, overall forest cover has been significantly reduced. Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) are the dominant tree species along with some patches of western red cedar (Thuja placata), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), grand fir (Abies grandis), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), and western larch (Larix occidentalis). Some subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) and
No known marked grizzly bears have crossed here, but experts suspect bear movement through the linkage area. The Idaho Hill area includes wetlands, which are utilized by moose. The linkage contains ungulate winter range and is frequently used for seasonal movements by elk and white-tailed deer. There are high numbers of road-killed animals on Highway � in the linkage area. Black bears and mountain lions also utilize the Idaho Hill area.
This linkage area is located close to Kalispell, a major population center in western Montana. Development on both Plum Creek and private lands is increasing. There are threats of large, upscale developments that have views to Glacier National Park on key parcels. Increasing traffic on Highway 2 also threatens wildlife movement. There is a threat that the Forest Service could exchange lands in the Island Unit with Plum Creek for parcels in other locations. Plum Creek could then sell those lands for subdivision and development.
There are opportunities for large landowner conservation easements.
lodgepole pine (P. contorta) are present at higher elevations. The linkage also contains areas of shrubland, often associated with old clearcuts, that include species such as red alder (Alnus rubra), huckleberry (Vaccinium spp.), snowberry (Symphoricarpos spp.) and western serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia). The elevation varies between �,�00 feet to over 6,000 feet.
7�
Land prices are expensive, however (generally over $��00/acre) and experts believe that the area is not a high enough conservation priority to warrant the prices. There are opportunities to block up Forest Service ownership with land exchanges or acquisition. There are also
opportunities for highway crossing structures, such as underpasses or overpasses, on Highway �. These opportunities could be pursued when Montana Department of Transportation initiates planning or projects in the linkage area.
SpecieS
76
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Jocko
The Jocko linkage area is located in the Jocko Valley of northwestern Montana. The Rattlesnake Wilderness is located to the east, the Mission Mountains to the northeast, and Edith Peak and Reservation Divide to the West. The Jocko River flows into the linkage area from the east. The linkage area is largely on the Flathead Indian Reservation. The town of Arlee is located at its center. Highway �� and the Montana Rail Link railroad bisect the linkage area.
The Jocko linkage area is a major stepping stone in regional linkage habitat north to the Missions and Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem and southwest to Reservation Divide and the Bitterroots.
This linkage occupies the area where the Jocko River emerges from a mountainous canyon and enters the broad river valley at Arlee. Most of the area is in agricultural production as irrigated pasture lands, hay lands, or croplands. Residences are common throughout the valley, particularly along Highway �� that bisects the linkage. Timber harvest and a widespread road network are present on the west side of the valley. Lower foothills surrounding the valley are vegetated by grasslands quickly grading into a mixed forest of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) and western larch (Larix occidentalis) at slightly higher elevations. The Jocko River supports a narrow band of black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) and willow (Salix
spp.) riparian habitat that runs through the middle of the linkage. Elevation in the linkage ranges from �,000 feet to �,�00 feet.
The Jocko linkage area contains low elevation, relatively dry wildlife habitat. Elk and deer utilize winter range in the linkage area. There is not much grizzly bear movement yet but it is a logical landform connection between two ecosystems. Grizzly bears have crossed Highway �� only �0-�� miles north of the Jocko linkage area. Black bears are known to move through the linkage area. Bull trout inhabit the Jocko River. The Jocko linkage area provides opportunities for movement for all wide-ranging species and biologists suspect that lynx, wolverine, wolves and lions may also use the area.
The Arlee community and its surrounding lands have been likened to the Bitterroot Valley as far as their rate of subdivision and development. This area is a bedroom community to Missoula and private lands are rapidly being sold and developed. The secure routes around residential homes are diminishing and there will be fewer linkage options for wildlife if the current rate of development is maintained or increased. Increasing development could also mean increases in wildlife human conflicts and sanitation problems. There have been some impacts to wildlife linkage habitat from grazing – both from plant conversions and livestock as attractants for wolves and bears. If bears and wolves get in trouble killing livestock, they could be removed from the area or killed.
77
Conservation Opportunities
Because these private lands are within the Flathead Indian Reservation boundary, the greatest opportunities for their conservation are tribal land acquisitions, conservation easements, and tribal policies to protect wildlife resources. The tribe is focusing on this area for land acquisition and for fisheries mitigation,
which may indirectly benefit wildlife riparian habitat. There are five crossing structures planned on Highway �� in this linkage area as part of Montana Department of Transportation’s and the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribe’s agreements for wildlife mitigation of the highway improvement project.
SpecieS
7�
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Kootenai Falls
Because these private lands are within the Flathead Indian Reservation boundary, the greatest opportunities for their conservation are tribal land acquisitions, conservation easements, and tribal policies to protect wildlife resources. The tribe is focusing on this area for land acquisition and for fisheries mitigation, which may indirectly benefit wildlife riparian habitat. There are five crossing structures planned on Highway �� in this linkage area as part of Montana Department of Transportation’s and the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribe’s agreements for wildlife mitigation of the highway improvement project.
This linkage area connects the Yaak with the Cabinet Mountains within the Cabinet-Yaak ecosystem. The linkage area is largely comprised of public land, with some development along the highway. It is an important north-south movement corridor. Biologists gave the Kootenai Falls linkage area an intermediate priority ranking.
Timber harvest and roading has occurred around this linkage but the interior of the linkage is unroaded with intact habitat. Riparian communities along the river are a mix of cottonwood (Populus spp.) and western red cedar (Thuja placata) communities. There is a patchwork of forest, shrublands and high elevation grasslands on both sides of the river. Differences are due to drier, hotter conditions on the south-facing slopes and cooler, wetter conditions on north-facing slopes. Forested areas are dominated by ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa),
Grizzly bear habitat exists on both sides of the transportation corridor. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working on a research project to document bear crossings within this dry, rocky and steep corridor. Although the habitat is not very hospitable to bears, it is their best chance for movement between the Cabinets and Yaak. Black bears have traveled north-south through the linkage areas, but grizzly bears have not yet been documented. Big game are known to cross in this location and the area includes winter range for all ungulate species, as well as year-round habitat for lynx and wolverine. Biologists reported that bobcats, fisher, and wolves also use the Kootenai Falls area. Bighorn sheep are found in the area and swim through the Kootenai River to move through the linkage area. The U.S. Forest Service’s Lynx Management Direction identifies a possible north-south lynx linkage through the Kootenai Falls linkage area.
lodgepole pine (P. contorta), Douglsa-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii ), western red cedar, western larch (Larix occidentalis). Higher elevations and north-facing slopes support subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii) with whitebark pine (P. albicaulis) at tree line. Aspen (Populus tremuloides), alder (Alnus spp.), maple (Acer spp.) and a variety of other deciduous trees and shrubs are in the understory or openings within forested areas. Small areas of moist grasslands dominated by beargrass (Xerophyllum tenax) and sedges (Carex spp.) also occur at the higher elevations. The elevation in this linkage rages from roughly �600 feet to over 6�00 feet.
7�
Conservation Threats Conservation Opportunities
Highway crossing mitigation is a possibility, but it would likely need to extend over the highway, railroad, and river. The highway could be elevated in the area. Railroad mitigation could be pursued. Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks purchased land for a Wildlife Management Area within the linkage area. Conservation easements on key adjacent private land parcels could be pursued as well. Tolerance for carnivores within the area has improved, although sanitation issues continue to be a problem. There may be an opportunity for public education and sanitation clean-up, such as bear proof dumpster sites. Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) includes this area for their dam mitigation on the Kootenai River, which may provide funding for restoration or transportation mitigation options.
Transportation corridors are the major threat in this linkage area; the railroad and Highway � are a source of direct wildlife mortality risk. The Kootenai River may form a natural barrier that is magnified by the presence of the highway and railroad. Any further highway expansion or traffic could further threaten wildlife linkage. There is some rural development within the highway corridor, but the majority of the land within the Kootenai Falls linkage area is Forest Service land. Further residential development could threaten wildlife movement in key areas. There is a hiking trail along the north side of the river that could be paved and improved. Although this would be a relatively minor threat, this increase in infrastructure should be discouraged. There are patches of heavily logged forests and there is currently active timber harvesting within the linkage area.
SpecieS
�0
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Lake Creek/Bull River
The Lake Creek/Bull River linkage area is located to the west of the Cabinet Mountains Wilderness area and links the east and west Cabinet ranges. It is bisected by Highway �6 south of Troy, Montana Lake Creek runs north-south through the middle of the linkage and Bull Lake forms in its center. The Bull River runs through the southern portion to meet the Clark Fork River. The three forks of the Bull River meet the forks of Ross Creek near the Giant Cedars area.
This area provides critical habitat connections between the east and west Cabinets. It contains high quality wildlife habitat and is a natural funnel for movement of wide-ranging species. The Lake Creek linkage area is a major public land link between the Cabinet Mountains Wilderness Area and the West Cabinet roadless areas on the Idaho border. Lake Creek/Bull River was rated as an intermediate priority linkage area by the biological experts.
This area is a mosaic of mountain forests, shrublands, agricultural lands and grasslands, interspersed with residences and small subdivisions. Most development is present in the northern half of the linkage, closer to Highway �. Highway �6 and the Bull River bisect the linkage. Bull Lake in the center of the linkage is both an attraction to wildlife as well as a barrier to trans-valley movments. Forested areas are dominated by ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), western red cedar (Thuja placata),
lodgepole pine (P. contorta) or contain a mixture of these and other coniferous species. Cottonwood (Populus spp.) and aspen (P. tremuloides) are common in drainage bottoms. Large patches of shrubland dominated by red alder (Alnus rubra) break up the forested areas particularly in the northern half of the linkage. The elevation in this area ranges from ��00 feet to ��00 feet.
The Lake Creek/Bull River area is rich, productive wildlife habitat. A grizzly bear was recently observed crossing Highway �6. There is ungulate movement between winter and summer range in the linkage area. Elk and mule deer regularly use the area. Black bears and wolves have been observed in the Lake Creek drainage. Biologists suspect that rare forest carnivores, such as lynx and wolverine, use the area as well. Bull trout are present in Lake Creek and a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) provides covenants for their habitat needs. The rich, riparian areas are used by rare amphibians, numerous waterfowl, and moose.
There is a high rate of subdivision and growth in Lake Creek and key wildlife habitat is immediately threatened by fragmentation. The Bonneville Power Administration is planning to upgrade their powerline in the linkage area, which is accompanied by timber removal, road building, and other habitat alternations and disturbances. Much of the private land in the Lake Creek linkage area is owned by Stimson Lumber, a private timber company, and a private developer. There is a threat of subdivision in key bottomlands within the corridor.
��
Conservation Opportunities
Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks and other private land conservation groups have worked to secure critical private lands near Bull Lake and they continue to work with willing landowners to secure easements on additional key parcels. Land acquisition is the most important conservation opportunity identified. Living with
wildlife education and prevention of fencing could improve wildlife use in the area. There are habitat conservation plan covenants for bull trout in the linkage which may result in habitat protections for other species. To address transportation threats during the reconstructin of the Bull Lake South project on Highway �6, Montana Department of Transportation has previously minimized vegetation clearing in grizzly bear linkage areas to reduce the distance to cover for wildlife movement. If there are any additional projects or plans in the linkage area, there may be opportunities for wildlife underpasses or other forms of wildlife mitigation to accommodate safe wildlife passage.
Logging has occurred on some of the industrial timberland and State sections. Reconstruction projects and increasing traffic on Highway 56 has increased traffic speeds and the possibilities of animal-vehicle collisions.
SpecieS
��
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Lake Koocanusa
The Lake Koocanusa linkage area includes much of the Lake Koocanusa reservoir. It spans from Black Butte in the north to Warland Creek at the southern end. The Salish Mountains are on the east side of the lake and the Purcells are to the west. There are three campgrounds in the corridor. Highway �7 runs along the east shore and the West Kootenai Road runs along the west shore of the lake.
This linkage connects the Salish Range and the Yaak River drainage. The linkage is largely made up of Forest Service lands. Biologists gave the Lake Koocanusa linkage area a low priority rating.
The dominant feature in this linkage is the �0-mile long Lake Koocanusa with adjoining areas characterized by extensive timber harvest and road networks. Although most of the Kootenai Canyon remains uncut, well over �0% of this linkage away from the river canyon has been logged. The reservoir is bracketed by primary roads designated as Scenic Byways, but there is essentially no shoreline development. Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) is the dominant conifer species, with lesser amounts of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and western larch (Larix occidentalis). South-facing slopes provide drier, open forest habitat while denser stands of trees occur on more moist north-facing slopes. Bitterbrush may be present in the ponderosa pine understory in the Kootenai River canyon, along with serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), chokecherry (Prunus virginiana) and
Woods rose (Rosa woodsii). Large wild fires have left significant areas of standing dead timber in parts of this linkage area. The elevation ranges from approximately ��00 feet at Libby Dam to 7,000 feet on Boulder Mountain.
In the winter, wildlife will walk across the frozen lake. Moose, mule deer and black bear have been observed swimming across Lake Koocanusa during other times of year. Four years ago, a male grizzly bear swan across Lake Koocanusa traveling from the Purcells to the Salish Range. Mule deer move from winter to summer range through the linkage area and regularly swim the reservoir. There is a lynx linkage area between Webb and Beartrap Mountains.
Although the Lake Koocanusa linkage area is largely comprised of U.S. Forest Service land, there are a few parcels of private land which could be further developed. Expansion of the campgrounds on Lake Koocanusa are also a threat. Campgrounds and private land development could lead to increases of human conflicts with black bears. Highway �7 may also threaten wildlife with direct mortality, although traffic volumes are currently relatively low.
Conservation Opportunities
Improvement of sanitation practices at the campground on Lake Koocanusa could eliminate potential wildlife conflicts. There is also an opportunity to work with the Forest Service and participate in the Kootenai Forest Planning process to prohibit dispersed camping in the area.
��
SpecieS
��
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Libby
The Libby linkage area links the West Cabinets, Purcells and Salish Range. The linkage includes the southern portion of Lake Koocanusa, the Kootenai River, the railroad and portions of Highway � and Highway �7. The western Montana town of Libby is located at the west end of the linkage area.
This linkage is an important stepping stone for regional wildlife connectivity between the Cabinets and the Northern Continental Divide ecosystem Topographically, Libby is a natural linkage area since it is the first area south of the Canadian border where wildlife can cross the Kootenai River traveling east or west without having to negotiate a major reservoir. East-west movements are as important as north south movements. Biologists gave the Libby linkage a low priority rating.
This linkage follows the Kootenai River valley from Libby to Lake Koocanusa. The river is bracketed by primary roads on both side accessing dispersed residences and agricultural development. To the north extensive timber harvest and roading have occurred as well as a large open pit mine and haul road. However a large area of intact open forest occurs from the mine south to the Kootenai River. Forests are dominated by a wide variety of conifers including western red cedar (Thuja placata), ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). At the higher elevations subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) and lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) are common. Interspersed within
The Libby linkage area is important for big game winter migration out of the Cabinet Mountains and up Libby Creek. It is regularly used by elk, mule deer and moose. The linkage area is an ecosystem-level connector for grizzly bears, though there is limited knowledge about grizzly bear use of the area. Years ago, a grizzly bear was shot in the Libby linkage area. Currently, a radio-collared grizzly bear regularly crosses below the dam. Wolves have been observed moving through the linkage area.
Plum Creek owns a lot of the land in this linkage area. Subdivision on Plum Creek and other private lands is a potential threat to wildlife connectivity. Subdivision and developments result in increased wildlife-human conflicts, direct habitat loss, and habitat fragmentation from roads and increased traffic. Sanitation and food storage issues threaten carnivores; improperly stored garbage and foods can attract bears and lead to conflicts. Transportation-related threats include animal-vehicle and animal-train collisions on the Fisher highway and railroad. Logging on both private and public lands was also listed as a threat.
these forested habitats are grasslands, agricultural pasture lands, and scattered patches of alder-dominated shrublands (Alnus rubra). Patches of aspen (Populus tremuloides) and cottonwood (Populus spp.) are scattered throughout the conifer forests. The elevation ranges from approximately ��00 feet to over ��00 feet in this linkage area.
��
Conservation Opportunities
Targeted easements where public land comes close to the highways may be a key connectivity opportunity. Biologists suggested targeting the biggest parcels of Plum Creek and private land for conservation easement and acquisition. Other opportunities include education and outreach about sanitation issues. There is an
opportunity for the county to use bear-proof trash containers at garbage dump locations. A wildlife overpass or underpass on the highway or railroad may be an opportunity to address transportation mitigation. There may be some dam mitigation money available to fund some of these opportunities.
SpecieS
�6
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Lolo Pass
The Lolo Pass linkage area includes Lolo Pass on the Montana-Idaho border, the Lochsa River and Highway �� in the Bitterroot Mountains. The Lochsa River is part of the Middle Fork Clearwater Wild and Scenic River corridor. Highway �� runs along the Lochsa River. The northern portion of the linkage area contains Plum Creek and other private lands, the southern portion contain a lot of roadless and Wilderness Forest Service lands.
This linkage area connects some of the best wildlife habitat in Idaho. The highway and the presence of Plum Creek lands are barriers or interior fracture zones within the core area of the Salmon-Selway ecosystem. The Lolo Pass linkage area was given a high priority ranking by biologists.
This linkage is a particularly steep, heavily forested mountain area. Nearly all private lands in the linkage have been heavily logged, and road densities in the linkage area are high. Wilderness and roadless public lands in the southern portion of the linkage are secure and intact forested habitat. Other than Highway �� which bisects the area anad carries heavy seasonal traffic, little other human development is present. Because of high precipitation levels on the west side of the Continental Divide, a significant diversity of coniferous and deciduous forest occurs in this area. Cottonwood (Populus spp.), maple (Acer spp.), and alder (Alnus spp.) communities occur in riparian areas. Moist shrubs including mountain maple (Acer glabrum), redstem ceanothus
Lynx surveys on Lolo Pass several years ago did not reveal lynx presence, al-though biologists believe they may cur-rently be using the linkage area. Moose frequently cross Highway �� near the Pass. A grizzly bear was shot in �007 in Kelly Creek, west of the Lolo Pass link-age. A DNA hair snagging survey in the Upper Lochsa area will seek to determine if there is grizzly bear presence in or near the Lolo Pass area. Wolves, black bear, elk, and deer also inhabit the Upper Loch-sa area. The conservation group Wildlands CPR and its conservation partners have been documenting how these species are using decommissioned roads. Wolverine are suspected in the Lolo Pass area.
Summer home and private land development is a considerable threat to wildlife connectivity in this linkage area. However, the Plum Creek
(Ceanothus sanguineus), ocean spray (Holodiscus discolor), and mock orange (Philadephus lewisii) often occur in the forest understory and as open shrub fields. Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) is the dominant tree species along with ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), western red cedar (Thuja plicata), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), grand fir (Abies grandis), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), and western larch (Larix occidentalis). Some subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) and lodgepole pine (P. contorta) are present at higher elevations. Recent wild fires in the linkage have resulted in extensive areas of standing dead timber. Elevation in the linkage ranges from about �,000 feet in the lower Lochsa to over 7,000 feet on the Continental Divide.
�7
Conservation Opportunities
The greatest opportunity for connectivity in this linkage area is a possible land exchange with Western Pacific Timber and the Forest Service. Several agencies, conservation groups and the Nez Perce tribe are working toward this goal. A moose crossing sign was painted on Highway �� at Lolo Pass. If the highway were to expand, there would be opportunities to work with Montana Department of Transportation on wildlife crossing structures and other mitigation options.
parcels on the Montana side of the pass were purchased by the Legacy Project for Forest Service management. Western Pacific Timber owns the checkerboard lands on the Idaho side and is looking to exchange them with other Forest Service parcels in Idaho. Highway �� is the busiest highway that bisects the Bitterroot Mountain range. Highway expansion, to accommodate growing use, is a threat. Additional highway lanes and increased traffic can create a barrier to wildlife trying to move between blocks of habitat; animals will either avoid the area or risk collision with vehicles. There has been extensive logging on both Plum Creek and Forest Service lands in the
linkage area.
SpecieS
��
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Lookout Pass
The Lookout Pass linkage area is a large connectivity area in the Bitterroot range that extends from Wallace, Idaho in the west and Saltese, Montana in the east. The Couer d’Alene mountains extend north toward Thompson Falls. Lookout Pass is the border between Idaho and Montana. Within the linkage area, the Coeur d’Alene River is located on the Idaho side of Lookout Pass and the Saint Regis River is located in Montana. Interstate �0 and the Montana Rail Link railway bisect the linkage area.
The linkage area contains the Bitterroot Divide and provides a topographically important movement area for wide-ranging wildlife species. The mountains come close together and several major drainages connect within the linkage area. The linkage area is largely made up of public land. Regionally, this is a key linkage between the Cabinet-Yaak and Salmon-Selway ecosystems. The Lookout Pass linkage area received an intermediate priority rating by biologists.
This large linkage provides relatively dense forest habitat in steep mountainous terrain spanning the Continental Divide. Interstate �0 bisects the linkage area. On the Montana side of the Continental Divide, two large power line corridors intersect each other north of the interstate in the linkage. Numerous roads support timber harvest activities throughout the area, but significant large forested areas within this linkage are still intact and unroaded. On the Idaho side, timber harvest and mining have been more widespread with a higher supporting road density. Lookout Pass ski
area is located on the Continental Divide at the pass. A wide diversity of coniferous and deciduous forest occurs in this area. Cottonwood (Populus spp.), maple (Acer spp.), and alder (Alnus spp.) communities occur in riparian areas. Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) is the dominant tree species along with ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), western red cedar (Thuja placata), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), grand fir (Abies grandis), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), and western larch (Larix occidentalis). Some subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) and lodgepole pine (P. contorta) are present at higher elevations. Elevations in the linkage area range from �,�00 feet at Saltese to 6,�00 feet on Stevens Peak on the Continental Divide, and �,000 feet at Wallace.
Lookout Pass is an important topographical linkage for wide-ranging species moving among major rivers and mountain ranges. Biologists believe that it is one of the best locations for future grizzly bear dispersal into the Salmon-Selway ecosystem. The Lookout Pass linkage area is important for daily elk herd movements and connects elk summer and winter range. Elk and deer movement often parallels the interstate, with occasional crossings to the other side. Riparian species move among the major drainages. A current wildlife study near Lookout Pass has documented crossings of I-�0 by black bears, wolves, pine marten, fox, mountain lion, and coyotes. Rare forest carnivores, such as lynx and wolverine, are suspected to use the linkage area. The U.S. Forest Service’s Lynx Management Direction identifies a possible north-south lynx linkage at Lookout Pass.
��
Conservation Threats Conservation OpportunitiesThe major threat in the Lookout Pass linkage is from Interstate 90. Traffic is increasing on the highway. There are cut walls and vertical slopes adjacent to the highway that make wildlife passage difficult. Concrete barriers have been placed between east and westbound lanes of the highway, which creates a sometimes impassable obstacle for wildlife attempting to cross. There is some active logging on private lands in the linkage area. There is also a threat of private lands development, especially in areas near the Lookout Pass ski area.
Interstate �0 between Lookout Pass and St. Regis contains nine sets bridges and numerous interchanges that may allow wildlife movement under the highway. There are opportunities to improve these existing structures to better facilitate wildlife use. This large linkage area contains several locations for possible wildlife crossing structures and/or additional wildlife mitigation on Interstate �0. Topographically, these structures would be better located on the east side of Lookout Pass. Conservation easements on key private lands could be pursued as well.
SpecieS
�0
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Lost Trail-Kenelty
This large linkage area is located in western Montana and connects the Salish and Cabinet mountain ranges. The area includes a portion of the Highway � corridor. The Cabinet Mountains Wilderness is located at the west end of the linkage area. The Pleasant Valley - Fisher River drainage is in the eastern portion of the linkage area.
Regionally, this large linkage area connects the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) and the Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem (CYE). It connects the Salish Range and the Cabinet Mountains. Natural funnels and ridge systems make this linkage area a highly likely movement corridor for wide-ranging species. The Lost-Trail Kenelty linkage area received the highest priority rating of the linkage areas identified in the Cabinet-Purcell conservation area.
This region is characterized by extensive habitat fragmentation from timber harvest and road development. Highway � passes through the western and southern sections of the linkage. Although areas of uncut forest cover are still interspersed between clearcuts and other cutting units, and some old cuts are reforested to an extent, overall forest cover has been significantly reduced. Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) are the dominant tree species along with some patches of western red cedar (Thuja placata), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), grand fir (Abies grandis), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), and western larch (Larix occidentalis).
Some subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) and lodgepole pine (P. contorta) are present at higher elevations. The linkage also contains areas of shrubland, often associated with old clearcuts, that include species such as red alder (Alnus rubra), huckleberry (Vaccinium spp.), snowberry (Symphoricarpos spp.) and western serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia). The elevation varies between �000 feet to over ��00 feet.
Wolves and bears may use this linkage habitat to move between the Cabinet and Salish mountains. Grizzly bears have been increasingly observed in the lower Fisher River drainage and have denned in the linkage area. Lynx and wolves move through the linkage area; wolves have been observed crossing the highway. Some areas have active timber harvest or were heavily logged in the past. Deer and elk move within the linkage area year-round. The Salish range is drier and so many wildlife species move out of the Cabinets to the Salish range for seasonal winter use. Mountain lions, fisher and moose have also been observed in the Lost Trail-Kenelty area.
Conservation Threats
Highway � in this area is a carnivore road kill hotspot. A mountain lion was killed in May �007. Wolves have been killed on the highway as well. Plum Creek timber company is selling many of its industrial timberlands in western Montana for subdivision and development. Their lands in the western half of the linkage area are under conservation easement. There are threats of development of additional private lands, which could lead to loss of wildlife habitat, habitat fragmentation, and human-wildlife conflicts. Sanitation
��
Conservation Opportunities
issues are a problem in the linkage area. Timber harvest has been a past and remains a current threat to wildlife movement and security.
Highway � has been reconstructed and could be further expanded in this linkage area and so there may be an opportunity for wildlife-related mitigation. Overpasses were suggested by biologists with fencing to funnel animals to the structures. Road densities on public land could be decreased to improve habitat security. The Kootenai and Flathead Forest
Plans offer opportunities to plan for wildlife connectivity and security in key areas. There are opportunities to pursue additional Plum Creek and private land easements but they are getting more difficult and expensive to acquire. Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MTFWP) has made the Lost Trail-Kenelty linkage area their top priority for private lands conservation and is working with conservation partners to pursue opportunities for conservation easements in the eastern half of the linkage area. There is an opportunity for a new bear management specialist to identify other conservation opportunities in the linkage area.
SpecieS
��
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Lower Bitterroot
The Lower Bitterroot linkage area is located between the foothills of the Bitterroot and Sapphire Mountains in the upper Bitterroot Valley as it funnels into the city of Missoula. It is bisected by Highway �� and the Bitterroot River and includes the Upper Miller Creek area on its east side.
The Lower Bitterroot linkage area is a topographic linkage with riparian areas that offer wildlife security. The linkage area is used by animals trying to skirt around the city of Missoula’s fracture zone. The linkage area is a last step of linkage habitat between the Northern Continental Divide and Salmon-Selway ecoystems. Biologists gave the Lower Bitterroot a high priority rating.
This linkage is in the foothills directly south of Missoula and bounds the southern portion of the Missoula Valley. This area has become fragmented from subdivision and other human developments. Highway �� and the Bitterroot River bisect the linkage. Dispersed residences and roads, some to support timber harvest, are scattered throughout the mountains in the eastern part of the linkage, while extensive timber harvest has occurred in the western portion. Recent large wild fires in this area have left extensive areas of standing dead timber. Forest habitat is dominated by ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), and western larch (Larix occidentalis) with other species present on specific sites. Where native habitat still occurs in the foothills, it is a combination of grasslands and pockets
of shrubs such as chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), currant (Ribes spp.), and snowberry (Symphoricarpus occidentalis). Noxious weeds, primarily spotted knapweed (Centaurea stoebe) and leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) have become well-established in disturbed areas and have spread into some remaining native habitats. Elevation in this linkage ranges from �,�00 feet to about �,600 feet.
Wolves, black bears, and mountain lions have been killed on Highway �� in the linkage area. Deer and elk move daily and seasonally through the Lower Bitterroot linkage area.
Wildlife movement could be threatened by the Miller Creek Road, if new construction were to connect that developed area with Highway ��. Subdivision and development on the east side of the highway is a significant threat due to the area’s proximity to Missoula. The railroad currently receives little use, but could become a threat if it were to travel frequently through the linkage area.
Conservation Opportunities
Easements are an opportunity to prevent further fragmentation in the linkage area. There are also opportunities for crossing structures and other highway mitigations. Montana Department of Transportation is working on a long-range transportation plan that includes this linkage area. Preventing the Miller Creek Road from extending into the linkage area is important for wildlife movement.
��
SpecieS
��
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Lower Flathead
The Lower Flathead linkage extends north of the Reservation Divide from the National Bison Range in the east to the town of Perma and Highway ��� in the west. It is largely comprised of land on the Flathead Indian Reservation. The Flathead River bisects the corridor, and the Jocko River meets the Flathead near the town of Dixon in the eastern portion of the linkage area. Highways �00 and ��� follow the rivers, as does the Montana Rail Link railway.
The Lower Flathead links the Salish Mountains to Reservation and Ninemile Divides, as well serving as a riparian connection to the Mission Mountains, located east of the linkage area. Biologists gave the linkage area an intermediate priority rating.
This linkage includes the Flathead River valley, foothills grasslands to the north of the river, and a mix of grasslands and forest habitat to the south. Highway �00 and Montana Rail Link railway parallel the river. Extensive logging and road development has occurred in the southern part of this linkage area. Denser forest habitat is limited to north-facing slopes through much of this linkage, with more open dry grassland with scattered Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum), limber pine (Pinus flexilis) and small patches of big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata spp.) on south-facing slopes. Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) are the dominant tree species south of the river along with western hemlock (Tsuga
heterophylla), grand fir (Abies grandis), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), and western larch (Larix occidentalis). Some subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) and lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) are present at higher elevations. Elevations in this linkage range from about �,600 feet to over 7,000 feet.
This linkage area contains big game winter range. Elk and mule deer move seasonally through the linkage area. There have been some known black bear movements through the area, as well. The Lower Flathead serves as both a mountain and riparian connector for wildlife movement.
Traffic is increasing on Highway 200. The highway and railroad are the major threats identified for this linkage area. Paving of forest roads as part of the Forest Highways program could increase development and traffic near the linkage area. There have been some conflicts between black bears and human sanitation practices in the linkage area.
Conservation Opportunities
There may be opportunities for conservation easement or acquisition of a few key parcels of private land, but the Confederated Salish and Kootenai tribes has already acquired a lot of land in this linkage area and there is low development potential. Wild and Scenic River designation for the Flathead River is an opportunity that would help strengthen habitat protections in riparian areas along the river. Joint highway
��
planning between the tribe, county and Montana Department of Transportation could pursue possible highway mitigation opportunities. Zoning could be pursued to prevent new
developments in key linkage habitat. Protection of archeological sites declared sacred by the Confederated Salish and Kootenai tribes could overlap with critical wildlife areas.
SpecieS
�6
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Lower Yaak
This linkage area spans the Yaak River and Yaak River Road in northwestern Montana between Tepee and Saddle Mountains. The Lower Yaak linkage area is located in the Purcell Mountains. Seventeenmile Creek is at the northern boundary of the linkage.
This linkage is used by grizzly bears and contains high quality wildlife habitat on both sides of the river. It is a local-scale linkage with a high threat rating. Biologists gave the Lower Yaak linkage an overall high priority rating.
This small region in the Purcell Mountains is bisected by the Yaak River and is made up predominantly of coniferous forest. Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) are the most abundant tree species but western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), western larch (Larix occidentalis), grand fir (Abies grandis), and western red cedar (Thuja placata) are also well represented here. Amongst the pine trees are small patches of deciduous trees such as aspen (Populus tremuloides), maple (Acer spp.) and cottonwood (Populus spp.). Timber harvest and associated roads are widespread throughout this area. A wild fire in the eastern portion of this linkage has resulted in an area of standing dead timber. This area ranges from ��00 feet to ��00 feet in elevation.
This linkage area is located within a grizzly bear recovery area and widely used by carnivores and ungulates. Elk, mule deer, white-tailed deer and moose move use the Lower Yaak linkage area for daily and seasonal movement. Rare carnivores such as lynx and wolverine are suspected to use the area. Grizzly bears, black bears, and wolves occupy habitat in and adjacent to the Lower Yaak linkage area.
Conservation Threats
Conservation Opportunities
The Forest Service may sell a piece of their land that has old buildings on it. Experts have identified it as a critical piece of land for linkage, however, and consider its loss a threat.
There may be an opportunity to highlight the biological importance of this piece of land and participate in the Kootenai National Forest’s NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) process. The revision of the Kootenai Forest Plan also allows for an opportunity to identify the Lower Yaak area as linkage habitat and retain Forest Service lands within the corridor.
�7
SpecieS
��
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Maclay
The Maclay linkage area is located in the northern Bitterroot valley of western Montana and spans between the foothills of the Sapphire and Bitteroot Mountains. The Bitterroot River runs south to north through the linkage and Lolo Creek enters near the town of Lolo from the west. The linkage is bisected by Highway �� to the west and north-south running Highway ��.
This linkage area was rated as an intermediate priority and is the only relatively-secure linkage area remaining in the northern Bitterroot Valley. It links the Sapphire and Bitterroot Mountains. The area would rank higher if it was not so developed.
The Maclay linkage occupies a narrow ridge between the Missoula Valley and the Bitterroot Valley. Subdivisions are expanding out from Lolo and extending northward toward Missoula, as growth from Missoula is expanding southward. Further to the west, extensive timber harvest and roading has occurred. The Bitterroot River, and Highways �� and �� bisect the linkage. Cumulatively, habitat in this area has been significantly altered and fragmented. Riparian habitat along the Bitterroot River supports narrowleaf cottonwood (Populus angustifolia) communities while uplands support scattered ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) stands, intermixed with grasslands. Foothills forest is dominated by Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), and several other less abundant conifer species, including western larch (Larix occidentalis) Noxious weeds, primarily
spotted knapweed (Centaurea stoebe), have become well-established in disturbed areas and spread into some remaining native habitats. Elevation in this linkage ranges from about �,�00 feet to 6,000 feet.
Elk move through this area to the Bitterroot River. The Maclay linkage is located close to an area in the Sapphires where a grizzly bear has moved through in the last few years. Moose use the wetlands habitat in the linkage area. Black bears have been observed moving through the area, as well. Mule deer and white-tailed deer frequent the area and there is a high rate of animal-vehicle collisions with deer and elk on Highway ��. Biologists suspect that wolverine and lynx may move through the Maclay linkage area occasionally.
Conservation Threats
Conservation Opportunities
The Bitterroot valley is one of the fastest growing valleys in western Montana. There is a great threat of high density development and recreational use on the southwestern portion of the linkage area at the Maclay Ski Resort, as well as on other private lands within the linkage area. Intolerance of carnivores is a threat to wildlife movement. Increasing traffic on Highway 93 threatens wildlife movement and Montana Department of Transportation is currently considering a highway expansion long-term plan.
There are several large ranches remaining within this linkage area and two of them were recently purchased by conservation buyers. There is a great opportunity for additional acquisitions or easements on
��
the remaining large parcels of private land. Zoning is being considered in Ravalli County and is an opportunity to discourage high concentrations of new housing developments in key wildlife linkage areas. The county is also considering zoning provisions adjacent to wildlife crossing structures on the highway.
There are opportunities for additional education and information about sanitation, which may decrease wildlife-human conflicts in the linkage area. There is a long-term option for highway mitigation structures as part of Montana Department of Transportation’s ten year plan on the Missoula to Florence section of Highway ��.
SpecieS
�00
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
McArthur Lake
The McArthur Lake linkage area is located in northern Idaho between Sandpoint and Bonners Ferry. It is bisected by Highway �� and a railroad. McArthur Lake is at its center and the Selkirk Mountains are to the west and the Purcell and Cabinet Mountains are to the east.
McArthur Lake connects the Cabinet-Purcell ecosystem with the Selkirk Mountains and forms a critical link into Canada. It is the place between these ecosystems where public land comes closest together and is used by both ungulates and carnivores for habitat and population connectivity. It is the southernmost location for east-west movement in northern Idaho/Canada and has potential for grizzly bear dispersal. Biologists gave the McArthur Lake linkage area a high priority rating.
This linkage occupies a low foothill area between the Kootenai River Valley to the north and Lake Pend Orielle to the south. The area contains considerable human development in residences, small communities, Highways � and ��, a railroad, major power line corridors and agricultural lands. Forest habitat has been largely fragmented by this development, as well as by some timber harvest and roads. Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) is the dominant tree species along with ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), western white pine (P. monticola), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), and western larch (Larix occidentalis). Patches of western red cedar (Thuja placata) are
mixed throughout the area, but is most prevalent in the northeastern portion of the area. Shrub communities can be diverse and include serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), spirea (Spirea douglasi), and various currants (Ribes spp.). Elevations in this linkage range from about �,�00 feet to over �,000 feet.
Both ungulates and forest carnivores move through the linkage area. Caribou have moved through the area in the past, though there is no use currently. The McArthur Lake linkage area is critical potential habitat for future grizzly bear movements between the Selkirk and the Cabinet-Yaak recovery areas. Grizzly bears have moved between these ecosystems north of McArthur Lake, in the Copeland linkage area. Black bears and wolves have been observed in the linkage area. Deer and elk frequently cross Highway �� and there are high rates of animal-vehicle collisions in the linkage area. Rare carnivores, such as lynx, wolverine and fisher, are suspected of using the McArthur Lake linkage area. The U.S. Forest Service’s Lynx Management Direction identifies a possible northwest to southeast lynx linkage through the McArthur Lake linkage area.
There is increasing traffic on Highway �� and the railroad in the McArthur Lake area. There is a high animal-vehicle collision rate where the railroad and highway come together. Although much of the land in the linkage area is public land, there is a significant threat of subdivision and development on the private lands in the corridor. Forest
�0�
Conservation Opportunities
A wildlife connectivity consultant, working with the Boone and Crockett Club, organized a wildlife connectivity landowner group to identify linkage areas. This group could be pulled together again to address wildlife connectivity issues. A diverse stakeholder group worked on the Deep Creek Bridge design, which included structural mitigation for wildlife movement, but the project was put on hold by Idaho Transportation
Department due to funding issues; an opportunity exists to advocate for bridge construction sooner rather than later. A railroad underpass could facilitate wildlife movement in the corridor. Land trades with the Forest Service and Forest Capital timber company could block up secure habitat in key locations. Conservation easements could be purchased on Forest Capital lands. A good place to focus public land consolidation is at Dawson Ridge. The Dodge Creek easement and Wyman Wildlife Trust are good models for private land conservation. The Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee has identified McArthur Lake as a focus area, as have other conservation groups and individual agencies. The Idaho Panhandle forest planning process can give further recognition and management direction to the linkage area.
Capital, an industrial timberlands group, manages land within the linkage area and like Plum Creek timber company in Montana, they could convert industrial timberlands to housing developments.
SpecieS
�0�
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
McGregor-Thompson
This linkage is located west of Kalispell, Montana and is bisected by Highway �. It includes the Thompson Chain-of-Lakes, McGregor Lake and the Hubbart Reservoir. It also includes the northern portion of the Thompson River and the Thompson River Road. McGregor-Thompson is located largely in the Salish range and connects to the Cabinet Mountains in the west.
This linkage area serves as connectivity habitat between the Cabinet Mountains, Salish range, Flathead Indian Reservation, and Bitterroot Mountains further to the south. The linkage area was given an intermediate priority ranking by biologists.
This region is characterized by extensive habitat fragmentation from timber harvest and road development. Other than Highway � passing through the western and southern sections of the linkage, relatively little other human development occurs in this area. Although areas of uncut forest cover are still interspersed between clearcuts and other cutting units, and some old cuts are reforested to an extent, overall forest cover has been significantly reduced. Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) are the dominant tree species along with western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), grand fir (Abies grandis), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), and western larch (Larix occidentalis). Some subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) and lodgepole pine (P. contorta) are present at higher elevations. The linkage also contains
areas of shrubland, often associated with old clearcuts, that include species such as red alder (Alnus rubra), huckleberry (Vaccinium spp.), snowberry (Symphoricarpos spp.) and western serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia). The elevation varies between �000 feet to over 6,000 feet.
The McGregor-Thompson area is widely used by ungulate species. The area provides seasonal movements for mule deer, white-tailed deer, and elk moving between winter and summer range. The Fish Trap wolf pack has been known to move through the linkage area. The linkage area has a natural ridge complex that is good potential connectivity habitat for both ungulates and carnivores. Mountain lions utilize the linkage area. Moose are frequently observed in the rich riparian areas in the McGregor-Thompson linkage area. Black bears have been observed in the linkage area.
Conservation Threats
Plum Creek timber company owns a large portion of the private lands in the McGregor Thompson linkage area. As the timber company divests itself of its industrial timberlands and sells them for development, there is a great threat of loss of wildlife habitat, habitat fragmentation, and increased human-wildlife conflicts. Additional private lands have recreational housing potential, including some privately owned waterfalls that are currently for sale. Increasing traffic on Highway 2 is another source of habitat fragmentation and the other major threat in this linkage area. As traffic increases on the highway, it becomes more of a barrier to wildlife movement or an area that wildlife avoid.
�0�
Conservation Opportunities
Opportunities include conservation easements or land acquisition of Plum Creek timber lands or other private lands in the linkage area. There is also a potential for wildlife underpasses or overpasses to be incorporated as mitigation
on any future highway improvement projects proposed by the Montana Department of Transportation. The linkage area contains several steep, narrow topographic areas along the highway that could be potential locations for highway overpasses.
SpecieS
�0�
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Moyie River
The Moyie River linkage is located in northern Idaho along the Moyie River. The Canadian border runs along the northern boundary of the linkage area. At its southern edge, the river drains into the Kootenai River. The area includes a portion of Highway �� and the Moyie River Road.
This area provides a key link in habitat connectivity between the Cabinet, Selkirk and Purcell mountains. It also provides habitat linkages into and out of Canada. Biologists gave the Moyie River linkage an intermediate priority rating.
This mountainous area around the Moyie River supports a diverse coniferous forest. Subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) are the most abundant but are joined by many other species including ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), western red cedar (Thuja placata), western larch (Larix occidentalis), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), and Englemann spruce (Picea englemannii). The entire Moyie River basin has sustained widespread timber harvest and road construction which has resulted in a variety of old clearcuts and openings. Residences and small communities occur along the river, along with small tracts of pasture land. Some shrubby areas created by timber harvest are dominated by species such as alder (Alnus spp.) and serviceberry (Amelanchier spp.). The elevation in this area ranges from �600 feet in the drainages to ��00 feet on the hilltops.
Biologists have indicated that all of the wide-ranging ungulates and carnivores in the Cabinets may be using this linkage area. Telemetry data confirms that black bears have used this linkage area. Elk and deer move daily and seasonally through the linkage area. Lynx, wolverine and wolves are suspected to be using linkage habitat in the Moyie River area. The U.S. Forest Service’s Lynx Management Direction identifies two north-south lynx crossing areas on each side of Highway ��.
Threats in the Moyie River linkage area include increasing volumes of traffic along Highway ��, especially summer traffic to Canada. Higher traffic speeds and volumes can make roads barriers to wildlife movement, as animals will either avoid the area or attempt to cross and risk an animal-vehicle collision. The railroad runs through the linkage area, as well, and can lead to direct train-killed mortality. Private land development in the Moyie River linkage area threatens wildlife security and habitat connectivity by increasing habitat fragmentation and human-wildlife conflicts.
Conservation Opportunities
Habitat security could be expanded by conservation easements, land exchanges or land acquisition of key private lands. There are also opportunities for highway mitigation, such as wildlife underpasses or overpasses, when projects or plans are proposed by Idaho Transportation Department in the Moyie River area.
�0�
SpecieS
�06
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Ninemile
The Ninemile linkage area is located in the Ninemile Creek watershed and surrounded by the Bitterroot Mountains, Ninemile Divide and Reservation Divide. At its northwestern boundary is Big Blue Creek and Horsehead Peak and its southern boundary includes the lands just south of the Clark Fork River and Interstate �0.
The Ninemile linkage area is a nexus for topographical habitat connectivity and links the Bitterroots with the Ninemile Divide and Reservation Divide. Regionally, it is a link to the Missions, Bitterroot, Salish Range, and Rattlesnake Wilderness. It is also a major riparian corridor connected to the Clark Fork watershed and in close proximity to the Flathead watershed. Biologists gave the Ninemile linkage area a high priority rating.
This linkage is widely developed with timber harvest and roads, dispersed residences, and subdivisions near the mouth of the Ninemile Creek west of Frenchtown. Agricultural lands are common in the lower third of the linkage. Ninemile Creek supports various willow (Salix spp.) riparian communities in the upper watershed with cottonwood (Populus spp.) communities at lower elevation. Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) are the dominant forest species along with western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), grand fir (Abies grandis), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), and western larch (Larix occidentalis) on specific sites. Some subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) and
lodgepole pine (P. contorta) are present at higher elevations. Elevations in this linkage range from about �,000 feet to 6,000 feet.
There is a potential for lynx connectivity in this linkage area. Lynx tracks have been observed in Quartz Creek and in the Ninemile Divide. There is also elk winter range in the area and seasonal ungulate movements. Elk, mule deer and white-tailed deer have crossed the Clark Fork River. Wolves and black bears are regularly observed in the linkage area and have been killed trying to cross the interstate. In �006, two people were killed in a vehicle collision avoiding a white-tailed deer on the Cayuse Hill section of interstate. There is not much grizzly bear movement yet, but this is a logical topographical location for movement into the Bitterroot. Biologists suspect that wolverine may use the Ninemile linkage area. Moose are frequently observed in the Ninemile’s riparian areas. Mountain lions are frequently observed in the Ninemile area.
The linkage area is highly threatened by a fast rate of development in the Ninemile and Sixmile drainages. Motorized use on public lands may threaten wildlife movement. There have been active timber harvests, such as the Frenchtown Face project, in the linkage area recently and the Forest Service targets the area for additional logging in their forest plan. The Ninemile road could be developed into a Forest Highways road, which could increase traffic and development in the upper part of the valley. Increasing traffic on Interstate 90 threatens wildlife movement through the linkage area. The
�07
Conservation Opportunities
Cayuse Hill area has one of the highest roadkill rates on the interstate between Missoula and Lookout Pass.
some landowners interested in conservation easements. Plum Creek lands in the Ninemile area (except those north of Alberton and south of Frenchtown) will be purchased by the Legacy Project and dispersed to the state or Forest Service for management. They noted, however, that opportunities for wildlife movement are low due to the amount of existing development along the river. There are also opportunities for public land management policies to address wildlife connectivity (such as the Lolo National Forest Plan) and for county policies as well, such as zoning or a wildlife overlay. Biologists also noted the opportunities for highway mitigation on Interstate �0 near Sixmile Creek and the island bend.
There are two bridges under Interstate �0 that provide opportunities for wildlife passage. A group of citizens has formed the Ninemile Wildlife Workgroup and are working on wildlife movement through the area by initiating a sanitation program, collecting data about wildlife movement, educating residents about wildlife-related issues, and working on highway mitigation opportunities. There are opportunities for additional sanitation and education in the area. Biologists have identified
SpecieS
�0�
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Ninepipes
The Ninepipes linkage area is located in the Mission Valley of northwestern Montana. The Mission Mountains Wilderness is to the east and the Salish Mountains, Moiese Hills, and the Flathead River are to the west. The linkage area is bisected by Highway �� and the Montana Rail Link railroad. It extends from Post Creek Road to the southern edge of the town of Ronan. The linkage area includes the Ninepipe Wildlife Refuge, Ninepipe Wildlife Management Area, and the Ninepipe and Kicking Horse Reservoirs.
The Ninepipes linkage area connects the Mission Mountains with the Salish Range. Grizzly bears, however, tend to wander out of the Missions into the Ninepipes area and then back into the Mission Mountains. The linkage area provides stepping stone habitat between all three ecosystems: the Northern Continental Divide, Cabinet-Yaak, and Salmon-Selway. Biologists gave the linkage area an intermediate priority ranking.
This linkage straddles Highway �� in the Flathead Valley between St. Ignatius and Ronan. It includes the Ninepipe National Wildlife Refuge and adjoins the National Bison Range. The area is primarily in agricultural production for pasture land, hay land, and cropland with numerous residences, small farms and roads. Numerous permanent pothole wetlands are scattered in the linkage. Most support tall emergent vegetation such as cattails (Typha latifolia) and hardstem bulrush (Scirpus acutus), along with various sedges (Carex spp.) and grasses.
The linkage area contains an extensive wetlands, pothole, reservoir, riparian network of habitat. There are many amphibians, reptiles, and ducks in the area. Turtles cross the highway and there is a very high rate of road-killed turtles. Grizzly bears and black bears frequently move and wander down through the Post, Crow and Mission Creek areas to the high quality pothole habitat in the middle of the Mission Valley. They are known to use voles as their food source. Three grizzly bears were killed on Highway �� in the Post Creek area from �000-�00�; two of the bears were females. Female grizzly bears may be traveling out of the Mission Mountains to spend time wandering in the Ninepipes area to get away from aggressive males. Deer move daily through the Ninepipes linkage area.
There is a high and increasing volume of traffic on Highway 93, which has resulted in three grizzly bear-vehicle collisions and mortalities. Development pressure is increasing. Many retired birders want to live in the area. With this increasing subdivision and development comes increasing wildlife-human conflicts, many due to sanitation (garbage and food storage) issues.
The extent of shoreline vegetation around these wetlands has been limited by agricultural practices. Post Creek runs through the linkage and supports black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) and willow (Salix spp.) riparian communities. The average elevation of this linkage is �,�00 feet.
�0�
Conservation Opportunities
The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes have negotiated with Montana Department of Transportation for numerous wildlife crossing structures on Highway �� from Evaro to Polson. The Ninepipes area is still in the public decision-making process and is likely to receive numerous crossing structures during
its reconstruction and improvement process. Longer bridges and box culverts are likely to be installed to facilitate large mammal movement. Numerous structures for aquatic species will also be constructed. There are opportunities for tribal acquisition or conservation easement on private property. Many landowners have moved to the area because of their love of birds and/or wildlife and are amenable to conserving their private lands.
SpecieS
��0
Noxon
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
The Noxon linkage area is located in western Montana along the Clark Fork River corridor northwest of Trout Creek and south of Tuscor Hill. The Bitterroot Mountains are located to the south and the Cabinet Mountains are north of the linkage area. The Noxon linkage area includes the southern portion of the Noxon Reservoir, Highway �00, and the Montana Rail Link railroad.
Noxon is a regionally-important habitat link in the north-south connection between the Cabinet-Yaak and Bitterroot ecosystems. The linkage area is a natural topographic corridor and is largely in public ownership. Biologists gave the Noxon linkage area an intermediate priority rating.
This narrow linkage lies across the Clark Fork River valley between Trout Creek and the upper end of Noxon Rapids Reservoir. It represents one of the only narrow crossings of the river valley available for wildlife movement that is not impeded by a reservoir impoundment. Highway �00, a railroad, and a power line and pipeline corridor parallel the river throughout. Residences, small subdivisions and communities occur in the linkage along with agricultural pasture and hay land. Some timber harvest and road development has occurred in the linkage. Lower mountain slopes support large areas of ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) and grasslands bounded at mid-to higher elevation by mixed conifer forest dominated by Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), western larch (Larix occidentalis), grand fir (Abies grandis), western hemlock
(Tsuga heterophylla), lodgepole pine (P. contorta), and subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa). Understory shrubs such as alder (Alnus spp.), huckleberry (Vaccinium spp.), snowberry (Symphoricarpos spp.) and western serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia) are common. The elevation in this area is �600 feet at the river and climbs above ��00 feet in the surrounding mountains.
The linkage area contains spring grizzly bear habitat. Grizzly bears have been observed crossing Highway �00 in this linkage area several times. They are known to cross just north of the linkage area, below the Noxon Rapids Dam. A female grizzly bear with three cubs swam across the Clark Fork River on her travels from the Cabinets toward the Bitterroots. The Noxon linkage area contains elk summer range on the south side of the linkage area. There are daily and seasonal movements through the area by elk and deer. Limited moose activity occurs in the area. Rare forest carnivores, such as fisher and wolverine, are suspected to use the Noxon linkage area.
Highway �00 is a partial barrier between the Cabinet and Bitterroot Mountains. Increasing traffic on the highway threatens wildlife movement with direct mortality or avoidance of key linkage habitat. The railroad also bisects the linkage area and has resulted in train-killed wildlife. The Noxon area is experiencing growth and development, especially near the reservoir. Subdivision and development on private lands fragments wildlife habitat and results in direct habitat loss and increased human-
���
Conservation Opportunitieswildlife conflicts. Development on private lands and increased motorized recreational use are spreading noxious weeds throughout the area. Food storage and sanitation issues threaten carnivore movement. Traffic and activity from the Rock Creek Mine in the Cabinet Mountains may put additional pressures on this linkage area. If completed, the ��-year mining project would build several miles of roads into the Cabinets, as well as railroad stations, pipelines, power lines, a tailings treatment plant and other infrastructure on more than �,�00 acres.
Conservation easements on key private lands are an opportunity to retain wildlife security in linkage habitat. There are opportunities for food-storage orders on public land and outreach and education on sanitation issues for local citizens. Transportation mitigation work, such as constructing underpasses and retrofitting bridges, could be done in collaboration with the railroad to facilitate wildlife passage in key areas. Several conservation groups are exploring opportunities for litigation against the exploration and development of the Rock Creek Mine.
SpecieS
���
Petty Creek
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
The Petty Creek linkage is located west of Missoula, Montana and includes both the Petty Creek and Lolo Creek drainages. The northern boundary of the linkage is the West Fork of Petty Creek and the southern boundary is Lolo Pass on the Montana-Idaho border. The linkage area is located within the Bitterroot Mountains. The linkage is bisected by the Petty Creek Road and Highway ��.
This linkage area extends southwest to the Bitterroot Mountains from the Ninemile drainage and Ninemile Divide. It is largely a linkage area within the Bitterroot Mountains that has significant threats from roads and development. Biologists gave the Petty Creek linkage area a high priority rating.
This large mountainous area is broadly forested with numerous streams and drainages. Although the area has been extensively logged, and has an accompanying high density of roads, large forested areas, particularly near the Continental Divide, are still intact and unroaded. A wide diversity of coniferous and deciduous forest occurs in this area. Cottonwood (Populus spp.), maple (Acer spp.), and alder (Alnus spp.) communities occur in riparian areas at lower elevations. Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) is the dominant tree species along with ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) at lower elevations grading into western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), grand fir (Abies grandis), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii),
and western larch (Larix occidentalis). Some subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) and lodgepole pine (P. contorta) are present at higher elevations. Recent wild fires have left large areas of standing dead timber in this linkage. Elevations in this linkage range from �,000 feet near the Clark Fork to over 7,000 on the Continental Divide north of Lolo Pass.
Bighorn sheep use the Petty Creek road area in several locations. Ungulate species such as moose, elk, and white-tailed deer regularly move through the linkage area. Black bears frequently move through the Petty Creek area. There are historic records of lynx use in and near the Petty Creek linkage area. Wolves and mountain lions use the linkage area. Rare forest carnivores, such as the wolverine, are suspected to use the linkage area as well.
Private land development is the major threat in the linkage area. There is a potential threat that Plum Creek lands along Lolo Creek could be sold and developed, possibly linked to the ski resort and development in the northern Bitterroot valley. There is also a threat that the Petty Creek road will be paved and improved as part of the Forest Highway Program. Paving of the road could facilitate further subdivision and development in the travel corridor, as well as increase traffic speeds on the road. Paving the Petty Creek Road could create a bypass road between the Bitteroot’s Highway �� and Interstate �0 that skirts around Missoula.
���
Conservation Opportunities
Much of the Plum Creek land in this linkage area will be purchased by The Nature Conservancy and Trust for Public Land through the Montana Legacy Project and turned over to the state or Forest Service for their management. There may be opportunities to acquire Plum Creek parcels in the Lolo Creek
drainage, east of Grave Creek. Conservation easements or acquisition of the land by the U.S. Forest Service, would help maintain secure linkage habitat for wildlife movement through the area. An environmental assessment for paving the Petty Creek Road is out for public comment and there are opportunities to stop, alter, or mitigate the project.
SpecieS
���
Pipe Creek
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Conservation Opportunities
The Pipe Creek linkage area in located in the Yaak drainage in the northwestern corner of Montana. The linkage area is located within the Purcell Mountains. Lick Mountain is at the northern end and Turner Mountain is at the southern end. The Yaak River, South Fork of the Yaak River and their associated roads run through the area. The town of Yaak is located at the western end of the linkage area.
The linkage area connects key roadless areas within the Yaak river valley and Purcell Mountains, including Lick Mountain and Zimmerman. It is largely National Forest land and much of it is roadless. Biologists gave the Pipe Creek linkage area a high priority rating.
This linkage area surrounds Pipe Creek and the East Fork of the Yaak River in the Purcell Mountains. It is a heavily forested area of rolling, low mountains. Timber harvest has occurred throughout the linkage creating a variety of openings and clearings. The area is well-roaded with the Yaak Road, the Pipe Creek road and numerous other logging roads. This mixed conifer forest includes western red cedar (Thuja placata), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), western larch (Larix occidentalis), grand fir (Abies grandis), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), and ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa). Shrubland areas with alder (Alnus spp.), huckleberry (Vaccinium spp.), and other species occur throughout the forest. Occasional small grass meadows also break up the forest cover. The elevation in this area ranges from ��00 feet to ��00 feet.
The Pipe Creek linkage area is located within a grizzly bear recovery area and contains spring grizzly bear habitat. Monitored grizzly bears have used this linkage area regularly. Black bears occupy habitat in the linkage zone. Lynx move through the Pipe Creek area and are known to cross the Yaak River Road. Wolves also use linkage area and travel across the Yaak River. There are numerous big game species, such as elk, moose and white-tailed deer, using seasonal habitats in the linkage area.
Further subdivision of private land in grizzly bear spring habitat and along the river bottomlands is a significant threat. Traffic is increasing on the Yaak River Road and leading to increasing numbers of animal-vehicle collisions. There is a threat of the Pipe Creek Road being improved through the Forest Highways program. Poor garbage sanitation further threatens bears’ use of the area by attracting bears close to human habitations and increasing human-wildlife conflicts.
A Forest Service connectivity plan for the area could identify how the area should be maintained for wildlife linkage. Sanitation information and education could be increased to alter resident’s storage of food and garbage. Bear-proof garbage containers and community agreements would also help address sanitation concerns. Conservation easements could be pursued on key private lands to prevent subdivision and development on large properties.
���
Montana Department of Transportation is working on project in the southern Pipe Creek area, though the traffic volume may not warrant any wildlife mitigation.
SpecieS
��6
Purcell Divide
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Conservation Opportunities
The Purcell Divide linkage area is located in the Yaak River Valley in the heart of the Purcell Mountains. Its northern boundary is along the Canadian border and Bunker Hill and Boulder Creek are at the south end. The linkage contains Robinson Mountain and Mount Henry, as well as the headwaters to the East Fork of the Yaak River.
This linkage area offers north-south topographical connectivity between Canada and the Purcell Mountains. Biologists gave the Purcell Divide linkage area an intermediate priority ranking.
The Purcell divide area is a mountainous area characterized mostly by coniferous forests. It is bisected east to west by the East Fork Yaak River, and lies just west of Lake Koocanusa. Extensive past and current timber harvest and road construction has occurred throughout the linkage area. The mixed conifer forest consists primarily of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), and ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) at lower elevations with Englemann spruce (Picea englemannii), subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), and aspen (Populus tremuloides) at higher elevations and on moister sites. Interspersed are homogenous stands of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta), with whitebark pine (Picea albicaulis) and alpine larch (Larix lyallii) at highest elevations. Subalpine meadows are interspersed throughout the area. Occasional mixed
shrublands characterized by alder (Alnus spp.), ceanothus (Ceanothus spp.), and huckleberry (Vaccinium spp.) are scattered throughout the area. This area’s elevation ranges from �600 feet to 7�00 feet.
This linkage area is used by sensitive species, such as grizzly bear, caribou, and lynx. It is deep within the Yaak ecosystem and contains high quality habitat for these rare carnivores and ungulates. Caribou populations are declining and there is very little use in the area any longer. In the U.S., the only current, active caribou use is further west in the Priest Lake area of northern Idaho.
The Purcell Divide linkage area has few connectivity threats. It is largely comprised on public land and far from human development. The main threat in the corridor is the Yaak River Road, which has increasing use and vehicle speeds. The threat was rated fairly low.
No opportunities were listed for this linkage area.
��7
SpecieS
���
Quartz
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
The Quartz linkage area is located between the Ninemile Divide and the Bitterroot Mountains. It is bisected by Interstate �0 and the Clark Fork River between Tarkio and Lozeau. Alberton Gorge, a steep white-water section of the Clark Fork River, is located within the corridor. The Montana Rail Link railway also bisects the linkage area.
This linkage is topographically a natural funnel for movement between the Ninemile Divide and the Bitterroot Mountains. It is an important step in the regional north-south movement between the Canadian Purcells and Selkirks and the Salmon-Selway ecosystem. Biologists gave the Quartz linkage area a high priority rating.
The Clark Fork River is narrowly confined through this linkage, and is bounded by high pre-historic river terraces and moderately steep, heavily forested mountain slopes. Interstate �0, a railroad and major power line corridor all parallel the river corridor, with numerous residences and small communities. More agricultural lands occupy this small linkage than anywhere else in the Clark Fork below Missoula. The area has been heavily logged and has an accompanying high density of roads. Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) are the dominant conifers in this area, with various other conifer species present on more moist sites. Large wild fires have burned in and adjacent to
this linkage recently, and have resulted in large areas of standing dead timber. Elevation in this linkage ranges from �,�00 feet to 6,�00 feet.
Elk cross Interstate �0 in the Quartz linkage area. There is good quality linkage habitat for rare carnivore use. Grizzly bears or lynx may use this linkage area, but there are no known movements. A lynx track was found in Quartz Creek and in the Ninemile Divide. Wolves cross the interstate and mountain lions are present north and south of the highway. Black bears have been eating fruit trees on private land in the Trout Creek drainage, just north of the Quartz linkage area. The linkage area contains winter range for ungulates. There is concentrated wildlife crossings of Interstate �0 in the Cayuse Creek area between mile markers �7 and ��.
Growing traffic volumes on Interstate �0 are a threat to wildlife movement and may lead to increased numbers of animal-vehicle collisions. The railroad may become more of a barrier to wildlife movement as train frequency increases. Private land development threatens connectivity, as well. Subdivision and development of key linkage habitat could diminish wildlife movement opportunities in the Quartz area. There are concerns about Mineral County’s consideration of wildlife in the subdivision approval process. There are increasing levels of recreation on public lands, which can lead to animal avoidance of linkage habitat and other human-wildlife conflicts. Sanitation and food storage are issues near towns and developments.
���
Conservation Opportunities
Conservation easements are an opportunity to retain wildlife security on key properties in this linkage area. If Montana Department of Transportation initiates plans or projects in the area, crossing structures over or under the highway may be a future opportunity. Wildlife mitigation on the highway may also be an opportunity if animal-vehicle collisions increase enough to warrant a human safety study and
mitigation project. Gathering more information about wildlife movement in this area, as well as throughout the I-�0 corridor, may help determine the best locations for wildlife crossing structures and highway mitigation. There are opportunities to work on national forest planning on the Lolo National Forest, which is currently revising its forest plan. The Mineral County Challenge may provide opportunities for restoration or conservation of key lands. Information and education about living with wildlife might decrease conflicts.
SpecieS
��0
Ravalli Hill
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
The Ravalli Hill linkage area is located on the Flathead Indian Reservation between St. Ignatius/Mission Creek to the north and Saddle Mountain to the south. Highway �00 and Highway �� intersect at the town of Ravalli, in the center of the linkage area. The Jocko River travels along the transportation corridor and heads west to meet the Flathead River. The National Bison Range is located in the northwest corner of the linkage, and Ravalli Hill, a steep incline adjoining the bison range, heads north along Highway ��.
This linkage is a topographical connection between the Missions, Jocko River and the Reservation and Ninemile Divides. It is a logical landform connection between the Northern Continental Divide and Salmon-Selway ecosystems. Biologists gave the Ravalli Hill linkage area a high priority rating.
Ravalli Hill is the watershed divide between the Jocko River to the south and Mission Creek to the north. Other than Highway �� that bisects the area, there is relatively little human development that fragments habitat in this linkage between Ravalli and the foothills outside of St. Ignatius. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Bison Range is located in the northwestern portion of the area. Some pasturelands and hay lands are present on the north side of the linkage. The area is open rolling grassland interspersed with patches of chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), currants (Ribes spp.),
snowberry (Symphoricarpos occidentalis), and other shrubs. Scattered patches of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) occupy north-facing slopes, with some Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorm) and limber pine (P. flexilis). Elevations in the area range from �,�00 feet along the Jocko River to �,700 feet in the southeastern hills.
Carnivores and ungulates are moving south of St. Ignatius to the Ravalli Hill linkage area from the Mission Mountains. There has been some grizzly bear movement in this area. In �007, a female grizzly and two cubs used the Ravalli curves wildlife underpass to travel under Highway ��. Mountain lions and black bears are present in the linkage area. Mule deer and elk daily and seasonally cross Highway �� to utilize habitat on the east and west sides of the highway.
Subdivision and private land development is a major threat, especially near Pistol Creek on the eastern side of the linkage area. Increasing development is fragmenting wildlife linkage habitat and increasing human-wildlife conflicts. The Ravalli Hill linkage area is located near the town of St. Ignatius, and its growing population and human conflict/sanitation issues threaten wildlife movement and security. Increasing traffic on Highway ��, Highway �00, and the railroad threaten to create a barrier to wildlife connectivity. The National Bison Range is well fenced and animals can get stuck on the bison range because of the fencing.
���
Conservation Opportunities
The wildlife fencing in conjunction with several crossing structures on Ravalli Hill and curves lead animals under Highway �� and help to mitigate the highway-related
threats. There is an opportunity for conservation easements or land acquisition by the Confederated Salish and Kootenai tribes. Many of the largest land holdings have already been acquired by the tribe.
SpecieS
���
St. Regis
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
The St. Regis linkage area follows the Clark Fork River and Highway ��� between Interstate �0 toward Highway �00 and the Flathead River. The Coeur d’Alene Mountains are located north of the linkage area and the Bitterroot range is in the south. The western Montana town of St. Regis, on I-�0, is located in the southwest portion of the linkage area and Patricks Knob is in the northeastern corner.
The St. Regis linkage area connects the Ninemile Divide and Coeur d’Alene Mountains with the Bitterroot Mountains south of Interstate �0. It is a natural topographic linkage along a major river corridor. Biologists gave the St. Regis linkage area a very low priority rating.
The Clark Fork River, Highway ���, and a railroad all occupy a relatively steep, narrow canyon through the middle of this linkage area. A major power line corridor crosses the linkage midway down the canyon. Scattered residences and small agricultural tracts occur along the river close to St. Regis. Limited timber harvest and roading has occurred north of the river, otherwise forested habitat is relatively intact. Denser forest habitat is limited to north-facing slopes through much of this linkage, with more open dry forest/grassland occurring on south-facing slopes. Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) are the dominant tree species along with western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), grand fir (Abies grandis), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), and western larch (Larix occidentalis).
Some subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) and lodgepole pine (P. contorta) are present at higher elevations. Elevations in the linkage range from �,�00 feet to over 6,000 feet.
There is significant ungulate and black bear use along the Clark Fork River. Mule deer and elk use the St. Regis linkage area seasonally. Elk are crossing Highway ��� where the road crosses the river and at the boat launch/campground. Biologists suspect that rare carnivores, such as lynx and wolverine, are using the linkage area. Bighorn sheep are located in the linkage area. Mountain lions and wolves have been observed in the St. Regis area. There are areas of concentrated wildlife crossings of Interstate �0 and Highway ��� in the Jensen Ranch, Mayo Gulch, Tamarack Hill, and Powder House Springs areas.
Truckers use Highway ��� as a cut-off to head up into the Flathead Valley. The trucking industry is pushing for widening and development of the highway. Highway improvements could increase speeds and traffic volumes, increasing the likelihood that Highway ��� becomes a barrier to wildlife movement. Increasing railroad use is also threatening wildlife movements. Another major threat is the subdivision of the remaining sizable pieces of private land in the St. Regis linkage area. Development of these lands could decrease wildlife security and increase habitat fragmentation and result in the direct loss of habitat and increased human-wildlife conflicts.
���
Conservation Opportunities
Steep highway cuts may impact wildlife movement; mitigation to address these topographic features could accompany any highway work in the corridor. Any highway improvement projects could be opportunities for wildlife mitigation. Wildlife crossing structures are an option, but could be difficult in the linkage area because the highway follows the river closely. Conservation easements on key private lands are opportunities to protect wildlife security on linkage habitat.
SpecieS
���
Superior
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
The Superior linkage area follows the Interstate �0 and Clark Fork River corridors in western Montana. The Bitterroot Range is located to the west and the Ninemile Divide to the east. The town of Superior is in the center of the linkage, which spans from Stowey Creek to Cougar and Second Creeks.
The Superior linkage is a critical stepping stone linking the Bitterroot Mountains and Salmon-Selway ecosystem with lands to the north and regionally with the Cabinet-Yaak and Northern Continental Divide ecosystems. More immediately, the Superior area links the Bitterroot Range with the Ninemile Divide. Biologists gave the Superior linkage area a high priority rating.
The Clark Fork River valley is relatively narrow through this linkage, and is bounded by moderately steep, heavily forested mountain slopes. Interstate �0, a railroad and major power line corridor all parallel the river. Dispersed residences, small communities, and agricultural areas occur through the river corridor. The area has been heavily logged and has an accompanying high density of roads. Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) are the dominant conifers in this area, with various other conifer species present on more moist sites. Large wild fires have burned in this linkage recently, and have resulted in large areas of standing dead timber. Elevation in this linkage ranges from �,�00 feet to 6,�00 feet.
The Superior linkage area is used frequently by black bears, elk and deer. A black bear family has been eating from fruit trees near Trout Creek and getting habituated to human food sources. Biologists believe that rare carnivores, such as lynx and wolverine, may move through the Superior linkage area. Lynx tracks have been found in Quartz Creek to the south and the Ninemile Divide to the east. The linkage accommodates elk herd movements between seasonal habitats. There are areas of concentrated wildlife crossings of Interstate �0 within the Four Mile Dry Creek area between mile markers �7 and �� and �0 and ��. Wolves are known to cross the highway. Grizzly bears are not known to use the linkage area, but there is potential linkage habitat for their dispersal into the Bitterroot Mountains from the north or east.
Private land development is a major threat in the area. Increasing numbers of subdivisions and developments may impact wildlife connectivity by fragmenting linkage habitat, a loss of habitat, and increasing numbers of human-wildlife conflicts. Highway traffic is increasing, as is the volume of roadkill in the linkage area. There are lots of trucks driving through the area and getting into animal-vehicle collisions. Campground food attractants are a problem for bears, as well as additional sanitation issues on private lands. The railroad may also be a source of animal-train collisions. Recreation is increasing on public lands in the area.
���
Conservation Opportunities
Wildlife overpasses and underpasses may be future opportunities to mitigate highway threats. Existing bridges on the highway or railroad may also be retrofitted to better accommodate wildlife movement. There are opportunities to mandate bear resistant
containers at Forest Service campgrounds, if this has not already been accomplished. Conservation easements on private land could also be pursued to block up secure habitat in the linkage area. The Mineral County Challenge is an opportunity for connectivity conservation. There is a lot of local support for this effort.
SpecieS
��6
Swift Creek-Stillwater
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
The Swift Creek – Stillwater linkage is a very large linkage area that spans east-west from Glacier National Park to the Salish Mountains. In the center is the Stillwater State Forest. The eastern portion is located just north of the Apgar Mountains and includes Demers Ridge and the southern portion of the Coal Creek State Forest. To the west is the Whitefish Range; the linkage area is located just north of Whitefish Lake and just south of Upper Stillwater Lake. The western portion contains Wolf Creek and Fortine Creek west of Elk Mountain. The North Fork Road, Highway ��, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railway, and Fortine Creek/Wolf Prairie Road bisect the linkage area. The northwestern Montana town of Olney is located above Lower Stillwater Lake in its center.
This linkage area received one of the highest priority ratings in the Cabinet-Purcell corridor. It is a critical wildlife movement linkage between Glacier National Park through the Whitefish Range to the Salish Mountains. Regionally, it connects the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem with the Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem. It is a highly threatened area due to private land development and Plum Creek property. There is a large parcel of Plum Creek land in the Stillwater State Forest that, if developed, biologists believe may become the deadliest grizzly bear mortality “sink” in the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem.
The eastern part of this linkage includes steep mountains while the western portion occupies rolling foothills. The entire linkage is forested, and has sustained widespread and intensive timber harvest and road development. The North Fork Road, Highway ��, the Burlington Northern-Santa Fe railway, and numerous secondary roads fragment the linkage. Forest habitat at lower elevation in the western area is dominated by ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). As elevation increases, these same tree species grade into a mixed conifer forest of grand fir (Abies grandis), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), lodgepole pine (P. contorta) and subalpine fir (A. lasiocarpa). The highest elevation areas provide some whitebark pine (P. albicaulis), numerous avalanche chutes and alpine meadows. Large wild fires have left significant areas of standing dead timber in parts of this linkage. Elevations in the linkage range from �,�00 feet to about �,000 feet.
The linkage area includes rich and diverse wildlife habitat with undeveloped lakes, meadows and wetlands for numerous wildlife species. Grizzly bears are known to move out of Glacier National Park to the backside of Big Mountain; ten were observed there in the last year. There is a female grizzly bear using the Big Creek area in the eastern part of the linkage area. Grizzly bears are known to cross Highway �� in the Good Creek/Logan Creek area. There are important grizzly bear habitat connections between Stryker Ridge and
��7
Conservation Threats
Conservation Opportunities
Sunday Creek. The Stillwater River area is used by black bears and grizzlies, as well as loons. The area contains important low elevation and riparian habitat for lots of species. To the east, there is a natural funnel across the North Fork road leading to Canyon Creek. There is good quality lynx habitat west of Olney and north of Good Creek. Wolves cross Highway �� frequently and one was killed last year north of Olney. There is a moose roadkill hotspot south of the Point of Rocks on Highway ��. Elk and mule deer move daily and seasonally through the linkage area. On Highway ��, deer, moose and bears frequently cross near Dog Lake (around mile marker ���) and north of Olney near mile marker ��6.
The greatest threat in the Swift Creek-Stillwater linkage area is the possible subdivision and development of the Plum Creek property located on Swift Creek within the Stillwater State Forest. Development on other private and Plum Creek lands also threaten the linkage area with increasing habitat fragmentation and wildlife-human conflicts. Some of the State lands in this corridor have been identified for possible real estate development and there is a significant threat that the State could privatize public lands. Highway expansion on Highway �� could threaten wildlife movement and increase animal-vehicle collisions in this linkage. The
railroad may impede movement. There are numerous gravel roads in this linkage (North Fork Road, Coal Creek, Upper Whitefish Lake, Good Creek, Wolf Prairie, Fortine Creek) that could be widened and/or paved. Upgrading these roads could facilitate development and increase traffic volumes and speeds, fragmenting wildlife linkage habitat. Numerous small livestock farms are expanding in the Trego and Olney area. Such farms, garbage and other attractants are a potential source for human-caused mortalities of bears.
The greatest conservation opportunity is this large linkage area is the purchase of the Swift Creek Plum Creek property for conservation purposes. There are conservation easement, land acquisition, or land exchange opportunities on other Plum Creek parcels and private land throughout the linkage area. Some private landowners in the North Fork are interested in pursuing conservation easements. Landowner sanitation information and education could greatly improve wildlife security and reduce human-wildlife conflicts, although there may be some resistance from local people to this information. There are opportunities to replace livestock fencing with wildlife-friendly fencing. If the Montana Department of Transportation initiates any plans or projects on Highway ��, there may be future opportunities for wildlife crossings, or other wildlife mitigations, on the highway.
See Map of Swift Creek-Stillwater Linkage on Page ���
���
���
Aerial photo of Swift Creek-Stillwater, a Priority linkage area (©www.kestrelaerial.com)
SpecieS
��0
Thompson Divide
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Conservation Opportunities
The Thompson Divide linkage is located on the western boundary of the Flathead Indian Reservation. The Salish Mountains are to the east and the Thompson River is located to the west. Bassoo Peak is in the northern portion of the linkage and Henry Creek and Camas Prairie are located in the south. The linkage is bisected by Highway �� and contains Rainbow Lake and two reservoirs.
This linkage area connects the Salish Mountains with Reservation Divide and the Coeur d’Alene Mountains and north toward the Cabinet Mountains. It contains both tribal and public lands. Biologists gave the Thompson Divide linkage area an intermediate priority rating.
This linear mountain chain is densely forested on steep and rugged terrain. The area has sustained extensive timber harvest and roads are common throughout the linkage except at highest elevations. Relatively little other human development is evident other than Highway �� and a power line corridor in the southern half. The area supports a wide variety of conifer forest types dependent on elevation. Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) is scattered at lower elevations grading into mixed Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) forest including western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), grand fir (Abies grandis), Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), and western larch (Larix occidentalis). Some subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) and lodgepole pine (P. contorta) are present at higher elevations. Highest elevation peaks have small alpine grasslands and meadows, some adjoining small lakes and
ponds. Elevations range from �,�00 feet near Camas Prairie to 7,�00 feet on Baldy Mountain.
Ungulates and forest carnivores use this linkage area. The area between Camas, Boyer and Clark Creeks is suspected habitat for rare carnivores such as fisher and wolverine. Elk, mule deer, and white-tailed deer cross Highway �� and move through the linkage area daily and seasonally. Wolves and black bears have been observed in the Thompson Divide area.
Timber production threatens wildlife security in the area. There has been historic timber harvest in the area and there are threats of additional harvest, which could eliminate security cover in key linkage habitat. There are some private lands that could be further subdivided and developed in the linkage area. Current traffic volumes are relatively low, but increasing traffic on Highway �� may fragment wildlife linkage habitat and lead to increasing numbers of animal-vehicle collisions.
There are opportunities for conservation easements or acquisition, but most of the available private lands have already been acquired by the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes. If the Montana Department of Transportation proposes projects or plans for Highway ��, there will be opportunities for collaboration with the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes to explore options for wildlife mitigation, such as crossing structures and signs.
���
SpecieS
���
Thompson River
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
The Thompson River linkage extends between Thompson Falls and Plains, Montana on Highway �00 and north up the Thompson River and Thompson River Road to Chippy Creek and Richards Peak. The Clark Fork River runs along Highway �00 and the Montana Rail Link Railroad. The area includes the Thompson River Sate Forest.
This area includes the southern end of the grizzly bear recovery peninsula within the southern Cabinets and extends toward the Bitterroot Mountains and Salmon-Selway ecosystem. It is a natural riparian linkage as the Clark Fork and Thompson Rivers come together. Biologists gave the Thompson River linkage area a high priority rating.
This linkage lies across the Clark Fork River valley between Thompson Falls and Plains, and extends up the Thompson River. This lower river section of the valley is somewhat narrower, with steep rocky scree slopes and cliffs on both sides. Highway �00, a railroad, and a power line and pipeline corridor parallel the river throughout. Residences, small subdivisions and communities occur in the linkage along with agricultural pasture and hay land. Roads bracket both side of the Thompson River to the headwaters where extensive logging and road development have occurred. Lower mountain slopes support large areas of ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) and grasslands bounded at mid-to higher elevation by mixed conifer forest dominated by Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), western larch (Larix occidentalis), grand
fir (Abies grandis), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), lodgepole pine (P. contorta), and subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa). Understory shrubs such as alder (Alnus spp.), huckleberry (Vaccinium spp.), snowberry (Symphoricarpos spp.) and western serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia) are common. The elevation in this area is �,�00 feet at the river and climbs above 6,000 feet in the surrounding mountains.
The Thompson Falls linkage are is part of the grizzly bear recovery zone. There are reports of grizzly bear movement across Highway �00 near the islands east of Thompson Falls. Bighorn sheep occupy the cliffs on the north side of the highway between Plains and Thompson Falls. The linkage area contains winter range for ungulates, and is used by mule deer, white-tailed deer and elk for daily and seasonal movements. Thompson Falls is a biologically rich area that contains rare carnivores, such as fisher and wolverine. Wolves, white-tailed deer, and elk have been observed using an existing underpass on the highway. There is a small mountain goat population that winters in small side drainages. The U.S. Forest Service’s Lynx Management Direction identifies a possible north-south lynx linkage east of the Thompson River Road.
A major threat in this linkage is the paving and upgrading of the graveled Thompson River Road through the Forest Highways program. Paving the road could increase traffic volumes and speed, as well as facilitate subdivision and development. The Thompson Falls area is growing. Additional growth could lead to additional habitat fragmentation, avoidance of key
���
Conservation Opportunities
linkage habitat, and wildlife-human conflicts. Sanitation issues may impact carnivores on public and private lands. Increasing traffic on the railroad and highway may impact animal movements. Animal vehicle collisions with bighorn sheep on Highway �00 is threatening the resilience of the local sheep population. Bears and wolves have been hit on Highway �00 between Plains and Noxon. Future recreation developments on public lands need to be monitored. Noxious weeds threaten native vegetation in the area.
overpasses. Pursuing small highway projects, such as rebuilding the bridge across the mouth of the Thompson River for an important bear crossing, could facilitate wildlife connectivity. There are future opportunities with Montana Department of Transportation’s Eddy East project. Significant conservation easements with Plum Creek have been purchased. There is an opportunity to pursue additional easements on key private lands in the area. Reducing open road densities on public land could improve wildlife security. The Lolo National Forest is revising its forest plan. A Wilderness recommendation in the Forest Plan for the Cube-Iron-Silcox area is an opportunity to protect wildlife security in a critical core area adjacent to the Thompson Falls linkage area.
Opportunities include pursuing mitigation options with the railroad and Montana Department of Transportation for wildlife underpasses or
SpecieS
���
Troy
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
This linkage area follows the Kootenai River, Highway �, and railroad corridor from Troy, Montana to Moyie Springs, Idaho. The Cabinet Mountains are to the south and the Purcells are to the northeast of the linkage area. The Troy area also includes the lower Yaak River and Yaak River Road as it enters the Kootenai River. The Montana-Idaho border runs through the middles of the linkage area.
Topographically, this linkage is important because of its close proximity to core areas in the Purcell Mountains and East and West Cabinet Mountains. It is heavily timbered in many locations and provides good cover and security for wildlife movement. Biologists gave the Troy linkage area an intermediate priority ranking.
The Kootenai River valley is mostly forested but with dispersed residences and small communities, agricultural pasture lands. Highway � and a major pipeline corridor parallel the river throughout the valley. Coniferous trees dominate the forested regions with stands of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), western red cedar (Thuja placata), ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), lodgepole pine (P. contorta) and other species. In some areas broadleafed trees such as aspen (Populus tremuloides), cottonwood (Populus spp.) and maple (Acer spp.) are intermixed with the conifers. Areas dominated by shrubs such as alder (Alnus spp.), huckleberry (Vaccinium spp.) and
western serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia) are also widely dispersed throughout the region. Elevations in the area range from about ��00 feet to ��00 feet.
This linkage area contains good quality grizzly bear habitat. It is forested on both sides of the transportation/river corridor. Black bear and elk regularly move through the linkage area from Teepee Mountain to the East Cabinets. There is good potential for grizzly bear use of the area. Bighorn sheep cross through the area and utilize its steep terrain. Moose, mule deer, white-tailed deer and elk cross through the Troy linkage area daily and seasonally. Wolves have been observed in the area. Rare forest carnivores, such as lynx and wolverine, are suspected to use the Troy linkage area. The U.S. Forest Service’s Lynx Management Direction identifies a possible north-south lynx linkage on the Montana-Idaho border.
Threats include the highway and railroad, which have increasing traffic volumes and threaten to become barriers to wildlife movement. There is a potential for loss of wildlife security and key linkage habitat due to the effects of private land development and agriculture. Growth rates increase the likelihood of sanitation problems, which can cause human-bear conflicts, that can result in bear deaths or removal.
���
Conservation Opportunities
Conservation easements on key private lands may retain wildlife security in linkage habitat. If the Montana Department of Transportation initiates any plans or projects on Highway �, there is an opportunity for wildlife mitigation such as wildlife underpasses or overpasses. There are opportunities to work with the
railroad companies to address possible mitigation opportunities. Public outreach and education about sanitation as well as county sanitation ordinances were listed as connectivity opportunities in this corridor. There is Bonneville Power Administration mitigation money available for conservation along the Kootenai River, which might help fund some of these opportunities.
SpecieS
��6
White Pine
Geographic Boundary
Importance of Linkage Area
Ecological Setting
Wildlife
Conservation Threats
Conservation Opportunities
The White Pine linkage is located along the Clark Fork River in northwestern Montana. The Cabinet Mountains are to the north and the Coeur d’Alene Mountains of the Bitterroot Range are to the south. Highway �00, the Montana Rail Link railroad, and the town of White Pine bisect the linkage area.
The linkage area is an important step in the regional corridor between the Cabinet and Bitterroot mountains. Most immediately, this linkage provides connectivity between Seven Point Mountain and White Pine Creek. Biologists gave the White Pine linkage area an intermediate priority rating.
This linkage lies across the Clark Fork River valley between Trout Creek and Thompson Falls. Highway �00, a railroad, and a power line and pipeline corridor parallel the river throughout. Residences, small subdivisions and communities occur in the linkage along with agricultural pasture and hay land. Some timber harvest and road development has occurred in the linkage. Lower mountain slopes support large areas of ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) and grasslands bounded at mid-to higher elevation by mixed conifer forest dominated by Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), western larch (Larix occidentalis), grand fir (Abies grandis), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), lodgepole pine (P. contorta), and subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa). Understory shrubs such as alder (Alnus spp.), huckleberry (Vaccinium spp.), snowberry (Symphoricarpos spp.) and western
serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia) are common. The elevation in this area is �,�00 feet at the river and climbs above 6,000 feet in the surrounding mountains.
This linkage is used by elk to migrate over Highway �00 from winter range to early spring habitat and calving areas. The potential for wildlife movement by numerous wide-ranging carnivores and ungulates is high. The area is considered good quality, biologically rich grizzly bear habitat. The White Pine area contains bighorn sheep habitat and is used by mountain lions. Rare carnivores, such as fisher and wolverine, are suspected to use the area. Elk and mule deer frequently cross Highway �00. Moose are frequently observed in riparian areas. Wolves, mountain lions, and black bears travel through the White Pine area.
Increasing subdivision and development on private land may further fragment linkage habitat and lead to increasing conflicts between bears and humans. There are increasing traffic volumes on Highway �00 and the railroad, which could cause animals to avoid those areas or risk collisions with cars and trains. Noxious weeds are impacting native vegetation in the area and reducing available food sources for wildlife. Paving of the Blue Slide Road would threaten wildlife connectivity by increasing traffic volumes and speeds, fragmenting habitat, and facilitating private lands development.
The linkage area is relatively undeveloped and contains both fields and cover. Fields could be planted to restore cover
��7
and security for migrating animals. The area is not yet heavily subdivided and there is an opportunity to act quickly to secure a number of the bigger parcels with conservation easements, land exchanges, or land acquisitions. There is a key private lands parcel on the north side of the highway that would be a great candidate for conservation. There are landowners
in the linkage area who are interested in conservation easements and working with agency biologists and land trusts. There is a highway reconstruction project being planned by Montana Department of Transportation which could include wildlife mitigation. There are opportunities to work with the railroad on wildlife mitigation measures.
���
Literature Cited
Alerstam, T., A. Hedenstrom and S. Akeson. �00�. Long-distance migration: evolution and determinants. Oikos �0�(�): ��7-�60.
Apps, C.D. and B.N. McLellan. �006. Factors influencing the dispersion and fragmentation of endangered mountain caribou populations. Biological Conservation ��0: ��-�7.
Baker, W. E. Larrions, C. Yocom and I. Baxter. ��6�. Wildlife of the Northern Rocky Mountains. Naturegraph Co., Healdsburg, CA.
Baum, K.A., K.J. Haynes, F.P. Dillemuth, and J.T. Cronin. �00� The matrix enhances the effectiveness of corridors and stepping stones. Ecology ��(�0): �67�-�676.
Beier, P. and R.F. Noss. ����. Do Habitat Corridors Provide Connectivity? Conservation Biology ��(6):����-����.
Belisle, M. �00�. Measuring landscape connectivity: the challenge of behavioral landscape ecology. Ecology �6(�): ����-����.
Belisle, M. and C.C. St. Clair. �00�. Cumulative effects of barriers on the movements of forest birds. Conservation Ecology �(�): �.
Berger, J. �00�. The Last Mile: How to Sustain Long-Distance Migration in Mammals. Conservation Biology ��(�): ��0-���.
Bergerud, A.T., R. Ferguson and H.E. Butler. ���0. Spring migration and dispersion of woodland caribou at calving. Animal Behavior ��: �60-�6�.
Boyce, M.S. ����. Migratory behavior and management of elk (Cervus elaphus). Applied Animal Behavior Science ��: ���-��0.
Brown, C.G. ����. Movement and migration patterns of mule deer in southeastern Idaho. Journal of Wildlife Management �6(�): ��6-���.
Brown, J.H. and A. Kodric-Brown. ��77. Turnover rates in insular biogeography: Effect of immigration on extinction. Ecology ��: ���-���.
Caley, M.J., K.A. Buckley and G.P. Jones. �00�. Separating ecological effects of habitat fragmentation degradation, and loss on coral commensals. Ecology ��(��): ����-����.
Coffman, C.J., J.D. Nichols and K.H. Pollock. �00�. Population dynamics of Microtus pennsylvanicus in corridor-linked patches. Oikos ��:�-��.
Collins, R.J. and G.W. Barrett. ���7. Effects of habitat fragmentation on meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus) population dynamics in experiment landscape patches. Landscape Ecology ��(�): 6�-76.
Crooks, K.R. and M.E. Soule. ����. Mesopredator release and avifaunal extinctions in a fragmented system. Nature �00: �6�-�6�.
Dixon, J.D., M.K. Oli, M.C. Wooten, T.H. Eason, J.W. McCown, and D. Paetkau. �006. Effectiveness of a Regional Corridor in Connecting two Florida Black Bear Populations. Conservation Biology �0(�): ���-�6�.
Elias, S.A. �00�. Rocky Mountains. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington.
Fahrig, Lenore. �00�. Effects of Habitat Fragmentation Biodiversity. Annual Review of Ecological and Evolutionary Systems ��: ��7-���.
Fredrickson, R. and P. Hedrick. �00�. Body size in endangered Mexican wolves: effects of inbreeding and cross-lineage matings. Animal Conservation �: ��-��.
Hale, M.L., P.W.W. Lurz, M.D.F. Shirley, S. Rushton, R.M. Fuller and K. Wolff. �00�. Impact of landscape management on the genetic structure of red squirrel populations. Science ���(����).
���
Harestad A.S., and F.L. Bunnell. ��7�. Home range and body weight - a reevaluation. Ecology 60(�): ���-�0�.
Headwaters Economics, Economic Profile System, Bozeman, MT, http://www.headwaterseconomics.org/eps/index.php
Harris, G. and S.L. Pimm. �00�. Range Size and Extinction Risk in Forest Birds. Conservation Biology ��(�): �6�-�7�.
Hebblewhite, M., E.H. Merrill, L.E. Morgantini, C.A. White, J.R. Allen, E. Bruns, L. Thurston, and T. E. Hurd. �006. Is the Migratory Behavior of Montane Elk Herds in Peril? The Case of Alberta’s Ya Ha Tinda Elk Herd. Wildlife Society Bulletin ��(�): ���0-����.
Hilty, J.A. and A.M. Merenlender. �00�. Use of Riparian Corridors and Vineyards by Mammalian Predators in Northern California. Conservation Biology ��(�): ��6-���.
Hilty, J.A., W.Z. Lidicker and A.M. Merenlender. �006. Corridor Ecology: The Science and Practice of Linking Landscapes for Biodiversity Conservation. Island Press, WA.
Hoehn, M., S.D. Sarre and K. Henle. �007. The tales of two geckos: does dispersal prevent extinction in recently fragmented populations? Molecular Ecology �6: ����-����.
Hoffman, J.D., H.H. Genoways and J.R. Choate. �006. Long-distance dispersal and population trends of moose in the central United States. Alces ��: ���-���.
IGBC Public Lands Wildlife Linkage Task Force, Identifying and Managing Wildlife Linkage Approach Areas on Public Land: A Report to the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee, Missoula, MT, http://www.fs.fed.us/r�/wildlife/igbc/Linkage/Public%�0Lands%�0Linkage/Cover_and_TOC.pdf, June �7, �00�.
James, A.R.C., and A.K. Stuart-Smith. �000. Distribution of caribou and wolves in relation to linear corridors. Journal of Wildlife Management 6�(�): ���-���.
Keller, I. and C.R. Largiader. �00�. Recent habitat fragmentation caused by major roads leads to reduction of gene flow and loss of genetic variability in ground beetles. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London �70: ��7-���.
Kinley, T.A. and C.D. Apps. �00�. Mortality patterns in a subpopulation of endangered mountain caribou. Wildlife Society Bulletin ��(�): ���-�6�.
Laliberte, A.S. and W.J. Ripple. �00�. Range Contractions of North American Carnivores and Ungulates. Bioscience ��(�): ���-���.
Lincoln, R., G. Boxshall and P. Clark. ����. A Dictionary of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, �nd ed. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
Lomolino, M.V. and D.R. Perault. 2007. Body Size Variation of Mammals in a Fragmented Temperate Rainforest. Conservation Biology ��(�) �0��-�06�.
MacArthur, R.H. and E.O. Wilson. ��67. The theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
Mathews, D. �00�. Rocky Mountain Natural History: Grand Teton to Jasper. Raven Editions, Portland, OR.
McGarigal, K. and W.C. McComb. ����. Relationships between landscape structure and breeding birds in the Oregon coast range. Ecological Monographs 6�(�): ���-�60.
Mech, S.G. and J.G. Hallett. �00�. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Corridors: a Genetic Approach. Conservation Biology ��(�): �67-�7�.
Merrill, E.H., T.P. Hemker, K.P. Woodruff, and L. Kuck. ����. Impacts of mining facilities on fall migration of mule deer. Wildlife Society Bulletin ��(�): 6�-7�.
Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Grizzly Bear Management Plan for Western Montana, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Bozeman, MT, December �006.
��0
Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, The Montana Challenge, http://fwp.mt.gov/tmc/default.html
Montana’s Official Website. Montana Field Guides. Retrieved June ��, �00� from the Worldwide Web: http://fieldguide.mt.gov
Neckel-Oliveira, S. and C. Gascon. �006. Abundance, body size and movement patterns of a tropical treefrog in continuous and fragmented forests in the Brazilion Amazon. Biological Conservation ���: �0�-���.
Pardini, R., S.Marques de Souza, R. Braga-Neto and J.P. Metzger. �00�. The role of forest structure, fragment size and corridors in maintaining small mammal abundance and diversity in an Atlantic forest landscape. Biological Conservation ���: ���-�66.
Perrow, M.R. and A.J. Davy. �00�. Handbook of Ecological Restoration. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Pimm, S., P. Raven, A. Peterson, C.H. Sekercioglu, and P.R. Ehrlich. �006. Human impacts on the rates of recent, present, and future bird extinctions. PNAS �0�(��): �0���-�0��6.
Reh, W. and A. Seitz. 1990. The influence of land use on the genetic structure of populations of the common frog Rana temporaria. Biological Conservation ��: ���-���.
Ruefenacht, B. and R.L. Knight. 1995. Influences of corridor continuity and width on survival and movement of deermice Peromyscus maniculatus. Biological Conservation 7�: �6�-�7�.
Sanderson, W.W., M. Jaiteh, M.A. Levy, K.H. Redford, A.W. Wanebo and G. Woolmer. �00�. The human footprint and the last of the wild. BioScience ��: ���-�0�.
Saunders, D.A., R.J. Hobbs and C.R. Margules. ����. Biological Consequences of Ecosystem Fragmentation: A Review. Conservation Biology �(�): ��-��.
Sawyer, H. F. Lindzey and D. McWhirter. �00�. Mule deer and pronghorn migration in western Wyoming. Wildlife Society Bulletin ��(�): ��66-��7�.
Schmidt, N.M. and P.M. Jensen. �00�. Changes in mammalian body length over �7� years - adaptations to a fragmented landscape? Conservation Ecology 7(�): 6.
Schmidt, N.M. and P.M. Jensen. �00�. Concomitant patterns in avian and mammalian body length changes in Denmark. Ecology and Society �0(�): �.
Semlitsch, R.D. �007. Differentiating Migration and Dispersal Processes for Pond-Breeding Amphibians. Journal of Wildlife Management 7�(�): �60-�67.
Servheen, Chris, John S. Waller, and Per Sandstrom. 2001. Identification and Management of Linkage Zones for Grizzly Bears Between the Large Blocks of Public Land in the Northern Rocky Mountains, ICOET Proceedings, http://www.icoet.net/downloads/Process.pdf.
Simberloff, D. and J. Cox. ���7. Consequences and Costs of Conservation Corridors. Conservation Biology �(�): 6�-7�.
Simberloff, D., J.A. Farr, J. Cox, and D.W. Mehlman. ����. Movement Corridors: conservation Bargains or Poor Investments? Conservation Biology 6(�): ���-�0�.
Sutherland, G.D., A.S. Harestad, K. Price, K.P. Lertzman. �000. Scaling of Natal Dispersal Distances in Terrestrial Birds and Mammals. Conservation Ecology �(�): �6 (online).
Taylor, P.D., L.Fahrig, K. Henein, and G. Merriam. ����. Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos 6�(�): �7�-�7�.
Thomas, T.R. and L.R. Irby. ����. Winter habitat use by mule deer with access to wheat fields and planted forb-grassland. Wildlife Society Bulletin ��: ���-�6�.
Tischendorf, L. and L. Fahrig. �000. How should we measure landscape connectivity? Landscape Ecology ��:6��-6��.
���
Trakhtenbrot, A. R. Nathan, G. Perry and D.M. Richardson. �00�. The importance of long-distance dispersal in biodiversity conservation. Diversity and Distributions ��: �7�-���.
Trzcinski, M.K., L. Fahrig, and G. Merriam. ����. Independent effects of forest cover and fragmentation on the distribution of forest breeding birds. Ecological Applications �(�): ��6-���.
USDA Forest Service, Northern Rockies Lynx Management Direction, Figure �-� Northern Rockies Lynx Planning Area Occupied and Unoccupied Lynx Habitat, Missoula, MT. March �007.
Vellend, M., K. Verheyen, H. Jacquemyn, A. Kolb, H.V. Calster, G. Peterken and M. Hermy. �006. Extinction debt of forest plants persists for more than a century following habitat fragmentation. Ecology �7(�): ���-���.
White, P.J., T.L. Davis, K.K. Barnowe-Meyer, R.L. Crabtree and R.A. Garrott. �007. Partial migration and philopatry of Yellowstone pronghorn. Biological Conservation ���: �0�-��0.
Wilson, E.O. and E.O. Willis. ��7�. Applied biogeography. Pages ���-��� in M.L. Cody and J.M. Diamond, editors. Ecology and evolution of communities. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
With, K.A., and T.O. Crist. ����. Critical Thresholds in species’ responses to landscape structure. Ecology 76(�): ��6-����.
Wittmer, H.U., B.N. McLellan, D.R. Seip, J.A. Young, T.A. Kinley, G.S. Watts and D. Hamilton. �00�. Population dynamics of the endangered mountain ecotype of woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in British Columbia, Canada. Canadian Journal of Zoology ��: �07-���.
Wolff, J.O., E.M. Schauber and W. D. Edge. ���7. Effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on the behavior and demography of gray-tailed voles. Conservation Biology ��(�): ���-��6.
���
Table 1Mammals of the Northern Rocky Mountains (excluding bats)
Group Common Name Scientific NameWater shrew Sorex palustrisWandering or Vagrant shrew S. vagransMasked shrew S. cinereusDusky shrew S. monticolusPreble's shrew S. prebleiDwarf shrew S. nanusHayden's shrew S. haydeniMerriam's shrew S. merriamiPygmy shrew S. hoyiCony or Pika Ochotona princepsWhite-tailed jackrabbit Lepus townsendiiSnowshoe hare L. americanusBlack-tailed jackrabbit L. californicusMountain cottontail Sylvilagus nuttalliiPygmy rabbit Brachylagus idahoensisYellow-bellied marmot Marmota flaviventrisHoary Marmot M. caligataWoodchuck M. monaxColumbian ground squirrel Spermophilus columbianusRichardson's ground squirrel S. richardsoniUinta ground squirrel S. armatusGolden-mantled ground squirrel S. lateralisIdaho ground squirrel S. brunneusRed tree squirrel Tamiascurus hudsonicusEastern gray tree squirrel Sciurus griseusBlack-tailed prairie dog Cynomys ludovicianusEastern fox squirrel Sciurus nigerThirteen-lined ground squirrel Spermophilus tridecemlineatusWyoming ground squirrel Spermophilus elegansFlying tree squirrel Glaucomys sabrinusNorthwestern or Yellow-Pine chipmunk Tamias amoenusLeast chipmunk T. minimusRed-tailed chipmunk T. ruficaudusUinta chipmunk T. umbrinusIdaho pocket gopher Thomomys idahoensisNorthern pocket gopher Thomomys talpoidesWestern harvest mouse Reithrodontomys megalotisHouse mouse (exotic) Mus musculusDeer mouse Peromyscus maniculatusWestern jumping mouse Zapus princepsPennsylvania meadow vole Microtus pennsylvanicusLong-tailed meadow mouse/vole M. longicaudusMountain meadow mouse/vole M. montanusHeather mouse/vole Phenacomys intermediusNorthern bog lemming Synaptomys borealisNorthern red-backed mouse/vole Clethrionomys gapperiNorthern grasshopper mouse Onychomys leucogasterPrairie vole Microtus ochrogaster
Chipmunks
Pocket Gopher
Mice
Shrews
Lagomorphs
Marmots
Squirrels
Appendix �.
���
Table 1Mammals of the Northern Rocky Mountains (excluding bats)
Group Common Name Scientific Name
Water vole Microtus richardsoniWhite-footed mouse Peromyscus leucopusGreat Basin pocket mouse Perognathus parvusOlive-backed pocket mouse Perognathus fasciatusSagebrush mouse/vole Lemmiscus curtatusBushy-tailed woodrat or packrat Neotoma cinereaBrown or Norway rat Rattus norvegicus
Beaver Beaver Castor candensisMuskrat Muskrat Ondata zibethicaPorcupine Porcupine Erethizon dorsatumRaccoon Raccoon (exotic) Procyon lotor
Coyote Canis latransGray wolf C. lupusSwift fox Vulpes veloxRed fox Vulpes vulpesBlack bear Ursus americanusGrizzly bear U. arctosFisher Martes pennantiMarten M. americanaLong-tailed weasel Mustela frenataShort-tailed weasel M. ermineaMink M. visonWolverine Gulo guloBadger Taxidea taxusSpotted skunk Spilogale gracilisStriped skunk Mephitis mephitisBlack-footed ferret Mustela nigripesLeast weasel Mustela nivalisRiver otter Lontra canadensisCanada lynx Lynx candensisBobcat Lynx rufusCougar or mountain lion, puma, panther Puma concolorElk or wapiti Cervus canadensisMule deer Odocoileus hemionusWhite-tailed deer O. virginianus or leucurisMoose Alces alcesPronghorn Antilocapra americanaBison Bos bisonMountain goat Oreamnos americanusBighorn sheep Ovis canadensisWoodland Caribou Rangifer tarandus caribou
(Adapted from Baker et al, 1961; Mathews 2003; Elias 2002; Montana's Official State Website)
Bears
Weasels
Felids
Ungulates
Rats
Canids
Mice, cont'd
Appendix � (cont.).
���
Table 2Home Ranges for Mammals of the Northern Rocky Mountains (excluding bats)
Group Common Name Scientific NameHome
Range (ha)Home Range (square km)
Water shrew Sorex palustrisWandering or Vagrant shrew S. vagrans 0.11 0.0011Masked shrew S. cinereusDusky shrew S. monticolus 0.11 0.0011Preble's shrew S. prebleiDwarf shrew S. nanusHayden's shrew S. haydeniMerriam's shrew S. merriamiPygmy shrew S. hoyiCony or Pika Ochotona princeps 0.35 0.0035White-tailed jackrabbit Lepus townsendiiSnowshoe hare L. americanus 5.93 0.0593Black-tailed jackrabbit L. californicus 145.55 1.4555Mountain cottontail Sylvilagus nuttalliiPygmy rabbit Brachylagus idahoensisYellow-bellied marmot Marmota flaviventris 0.31 0.0031Hoary Marmot M. caligataWoodchuck M. monaxColumbian ground squirrel Spermophilus columbianusRichardson's ground squirrel S. richardsoniUinta ground squirrel S. armatusGolden-mantled ground squirrel S. lateralisIdaho ground squirrel S. brunneusRed tree squirrel Tamiascurus hudsonicus 1.1 0.011Eastern gray tree squirrel Sciurus griseus 0.3 0.003Black-tailed prairie dog Cynomys ludovicianusEastern fox squirrel Sciurus nigerThirteen-lined ground squirrel Spermophilus tridecemlineatusWyoming ground squirrel Spermophilus elegansFlying tree squirrel Glaucomys sabrinusNorthwestern or Yellow-Pine chipmunk Tamias amoenusLeast chipmunk T. minimusRed-tailed chipmunk T. ruficaudusUinta chipmunk T. umbrinus 1.87-5.12 0.02-0.05Idaho pocket gopher Thomomys idahoensisNorthern pocket gopher Thomomys talpoides 0.02 0.0002Western harvest mouse Reithrodontomys megalotisHouse mouse (exotic) Mus musculusDeer mouse Peromyscus maniculatusWestern jumping mouse Zapus princepsPennsylvania meadow vole Microtus pennsylvanicus 0.12 0.0012Long-tailed meadow mouse/vole M. longicaudusMountain meadow mouse/vole M. montanusHeather mouse/vole Phenacomys intermediusNorthern grasshopper mouse Onychomys leucogasterPrairie vole Microtus ochrogasterWater vole Microtus richardsoniWhite-footed mouse Peromyscus leucopusGreat Basin pocket mouse Perognathus parvusOlive-backed pocket mouse Perognathus fasciatusNorthern bog lemming Synaptomys borealis
Chipmunks
Mice
Pocket Gopher
Shrews
Lagomorphs
Marmots
Squirrels
Appendix �.
���
Table 2Home Ranges for Mammals of the Northern Rocky Mountains (excluding bats)
Group Common Name Scientific NameHome
Range (ha)Home Range (square km)
Northern red-backed mouse/vole Clethrionomys gapperi 0.25 0.0025Sagebrush mouse/vole Lemmiscus curtatusBushy-tailed woodrat or packrat Neotoma cinereaBrown or Norway rat Rattus norvegicus
Beaver Beaver Castor candensisMuskrat Muskrat Ondata zibethicaPorcupine Porcupine Erethizon dorsatum 11.29 0.1129Raccoon Raccoon (exotic) Procyon lotor 113.73 1.1373
Coyote Canis latrans 7597.57 75.9757Gray wolf C. lupus 78000 780Swift fox Vulpes veloxRed fox Vulpes vulpes 387.34 3.8734Black bear Ursus americanus 2413.09 24.1309Grizzly bear U. arctos 10000-70000 100-700Fisher Martes pennanti 1000-10000 10-100Marten M. americana 209.31 2.0931Long-tailed weasel Mustela frenata 111.29 1.1129Short-tailed weasel M. erminea 20.64 0.2064Mink M. vison 14.1 0.141Wolverine Gulo gulo 10000-50000 100-500Badger Taxidea taxus 849.87 8.4987Spotted skunk Spilogale gracilisStriped skunk Mephitis mephitis 294.67 2.9467Black-footed ferret Mustela nigripes 40.47 0.4047Least weasel Mustela nivalisRiver otter Lontra canadensisCanada lynx Lynx candensis 1852.4 18.524Bobcat Lynx rufus 5860/8330 58.6(f)/83.3(m)Cougar or mountain lion, puma, panther Puma concolor 29733.33 297.3333Elk or wapiti Cervus canadensis 1292.54 12.9254Mule deer Odocoileus hemionus 285.27 2.8527White-tailed deer O. virginianus or leucuris 196.06 1.9606Moose Alces alces 1609.53 16.0953Pronghorn Antilocapra americana 1060.47 10.6047Bison Bos bisonMountain goat Oreamnos americanusBighorn sheep Ovis canadensis 1433.4 14.334Woodland Caribou Rangifer tarandus caribou
(Adapted from Baker et al, 1961; Mathews 2003; Elias 2002; Harestad and Bunnell, 1979; Montana's Official State Website)
Bears
Felids
Ungulates
Weasels
Weasels,cont'd
Rats
Canids
Mice, cont'd
Appendix � (cont.).
��6
Table 3Migration Distances for Mammals of the Northern Rocky Mountains (excluding bats)
Mean LongestWater shrew Sorex palustrisWandering or Vagrant shrew S. vagransMasked shrew S. cinereusDusky shrew S. monticolusPreble's shrew S. prebleiDwarf shrew S. nanusHayden's shrew S. haydeniMerriam's shrew S. merriamiPygmy shrew S. hoyiCony or Pika Ochotona princepsWhite-tailed jackrabbit Lepus townsendiiSnowshoe hare L. americanusBlack-tailed jackrabbit L. californicusMountain cottontail Sylvilagus nuttalliiPygmy rabbit Brachylagus idahoensisYellow-bellied marmot Marmota flaviventrisHoary Marmot M. caligataWoodchuck M. monaxColumbian ground squirrel Spermophilus columbianusRichardson's ground squirrel S. richardsoniUinta ground squirrel S. armatusGolden-mantled ground squirrel S. lateralisIdaho ground squirrel S. brunneusRed tree squirrel Tamiascurus hudsonicusEastern gray tree squirrel Sciurus griseusBlack-tailed prairie dog Cynomys ludovicianusEastern fox squirrel Sciurus nigerThirteen-lined ground squirrel Spermophilus tridecemlineatusWyoming ground squirrel Spermophilus elegansFlying tree squirrel Glaucomys sabrinusNorthwestern chipmunk Tamias amoenusLeast chipmunk T. minimusRed-tailed chipmunk T. ruficaudusUinta chipmunk T. umbrinusIdaho pocket gopher Thomomys idahoensisNorthern pocket gopher Thomomys talpoidesWestern harvest mouse Reithrodontomys megalotisHouse mouse (exotic) Mus musculusDeer mouse Peromyscus maniculatusWestern jumping mouse Zapus princepsPennsylvania meadow vole Microtus pennsylvanicusLong-tailed meadow mouse/vole M. longicaudusMountain meadow mouse/vole M. montanusNorthern grasshopper mouse Onychomys leucogasterPrairie vole Microtus ochrogasterWater vole Microtus richardsoniWhite-footed mouse Peromyscus leucopusGreat Basin pocket mouse Perognathus parvusOlive-backed pocket mouse Perognathus fasciatusHeather mouse/vole Phenacomys intermediusNorthern bog lemming Synaptomys borealisNorthern red-backed mouse/vole Clethrionomys gapperiSagebrush mouse/vole Lemmiscus curtatusBushy-tailed woodrat or packrat Neotoma cinereaBrown or Norway rat Rattus norvegicus
Beaver Beaver Castor candensis non-migratory or no data availableMuskrat Muskrat Ondata zibethica non-migratory or no data availablePorcupine Porcupine Erethizon dorsatum non-migratory or no data availableRaccoon Raccoon (exotic) Procyon lotor non-migratory or no data available
Coyote Canis latrans Jackson Hole, WY 70 80Brooks Range, AK 370Bathhurst region, NWT 743
Swift fox Vulpes veloxRed fox Vulpes vulpesBlack bear Ursus americanusGrizzly bear U. arctosFisher Martes pennantiMarten M. americana
Weasels
Canids
Pocket Gopher
Mice
Bears
Marmots
Squirrels
Chipmunks
Rats
Round Trip Migration Distance
(km)Group Common Name Scientific Name Location
non-migratory or no data available
non-migratory or no data available
non-migratory or no data available
Gray wolf C. lupus
Shrews
Lagomorphs
non-migratory or no data available
non-migratory or no data available
non-migratory or no data available
non-migratory or no data available
non-migratory or no data available
non-migratory or no data available
non-migratory or no data available
non-migratory or no data available
Appendix �.
��7
Table 3Migration Distances for Mammals of the Northern Rocky Mountains (excluding bats)
Mean Longest
Round Trip Migration Distance
(km)Group Common Name Scientific Name Location
Long-tailed weasel Mustela frenataShort-tailed weasel M. ermineaMink M. visonWolverine Gulo guloBadger Taxidea taxusSpotted skunk Spilogale gracilisStriped skunk Mephitis mephitisBlack-footed ferret Mustela nigripesLeast weasel Mustela nivalisRiver otter Lontra canadensisCanada lynx Lynx candensisBobcat Lynx rufusCougar, mountain lion, panther Puma or Felis concolor Sierra Nevada, CA 60
Banff, AB, Canada 73 138Yellowstone, WY 70 220Olympic, WA 60Selway Drainage, ID 64Sun River, MT 96Absaroka Divide, WY 90Jackson Hole, WY 200 220Green River Basin, WY 168 288Salmon-Trinity Alps, CA 42 70Cheery Creek, MT 11Missouri River Breaks, MT 12Klickkitat Basin, WA 56Great Basin, NV 141 280Silver Lake, OR 60 256Piceance Basin, CO 65 220Lory State Park, CO 58Transverse Rangers, ID 52Paunsaugunt Plateau, UT 102 144Kaibab Plateau, AZ 45 116Round Valley, CA 134 192San Bernadino Mtns, CA 23
Algonquin, ON 60Cheery Creek, MT 14 26Hiawatha Forest, MN 10Superior Forest, MN 34Old Crow, YT 246 392Lower Koyukuk, AK 84 136Upper Susitna, AK 96 186White Mountains, AK 130 204Nelchina Basin, AK 70 220North Slope, YT 194 276Tanana Flats, AK 120 280Northeast Alberta 40Mooseleuk and St. Croix, ME 14Northwest Minnesota, MN 20Northwest Minnesota, MN 12Gravelly Mountains, MT 14Tetons, WY 61 114Upper Snake River Plain, ID 89Wupatki, AZ 30Cordes Junction, AZ 30 80Mingus Mountain, AZ 26 40Saskatchewan 220Red Desert, WY 128 164Tetons, WY 434 548Yellowstone, WY 44Grand Teton, WY 70 75Henry Mountains, UT 50Mount Baker, WA 12Barometer Mountain, WA 29 29
McCullough Mountains, NV 60 64River Mountains, NV 7Highland Mountains, MT 19Salmon River Moutains, ID 74 75Sheep Range, NV 32Grand Cache, AB 136 300Birch Mtn, Alberta 56 142Lake Nipigon, ON 92 160Aikens Lake, Manitoba 0
(Adapted from Baker et al, 1961; Mathews 2003; Elias 2002; Berger, 2004; Montana's Official State Website)
Felids
Weasels, cont'd
White-tailed deer O. virginianus or leucuris
Mule deer Odocoileus hemionus
Moose Alces alces
Pronghorn Antilocapra americana
Ungulates,cont'd
Ungulates,cont'd
Bighorn sheep Ovis canadensis
Woodland Caribou Rangifer tarandus caribou
Bison Bos bison
Mountain goat Oreamnos americanus
Ungulates
Elk or wapiti Cervus canadensis (elaphus?)
non-migratory or no data available
non-migratory or no data available
Appendix � (cont.).
���
Table 4Dispersal Distances for Mammals of the Northern Rocky Mountains (excluding bats)
Group Common Name Scientific NameNatal Dispersal Maximum
Distance (km)Water shrew Sorex palustrisWandering or Vagrant shrew S. vagransMasked shrew S. cinereusDusky shrew S. monticolusPreble's shrew S. prebleiDwarf shrew S. nanusHayden's shrew S. haydeniMerriam's shrew S. merriamiPygmy shrew S. hoyiCony or Pika Ochotona princepsWhite-tailed jackrabbit Lepus townsendiiSnowshoe hare L. americanus 20.1 male/femaleBlack-tailed jackrabbit L. californicus 45 male/femaleMountain cottontail Sylvilagus nuttalliiPygmy rabbit Brachylagus idahoensisYellow-bellied marmot Marmota flaviventrisHoary Marmot M. caligataWoodchuck M. monaxColumbian ground squirrel Spermophilus columbianusRichardson's ground squirrel S. richardsonii 0.975 male/ 0.525 femaleUinta ground squirrel S. armatusGolden-mantled ground squirrel S. lateralisIdaho ground squirrel S. brunneusRed tree squirrel Tamiascurus hudsonicus 0.60 male/femaleEastern gray tree squirrel Sciurus griseusBlack-tailed prairie dog Cynomys ludovicianus up to 9.66Eastern fox squirrel Sciurus nigerThirteen-lined ground squirrel Spermophilus tridecemlineatusWyoming ground squirrel Spermophilus elegansFlying tree squirrel Glaucomys sabrinusNorthwestern or Yellow-Pine chipmunk Tamias amoenusLeast chipmunk T. minimusRed-tailed chipmunk T. ruficaudusUinta chipmunk T. umbrinusIdaho pocket gopher Thomomys idahoensisNorthern pocket gopher Thomomys talpoidesWestern harvest mouse Reithrodontomys megalotisHouse mouse (exotic) Mus musculusDeer mouse Peromyscus maniculatusWestern jumping mouse Zapus princepsPennsylvania meadow vole Microtus pennsylvanicusLong-tailed meadow mouse/vole M. longicaudusMountain meadow mouse/vole M. montanusHeather mouse/vole Phenacomys intermediusNorthern grasshopper mouse Onychomys leucogasterPrairie vole Microtus ochrogasterWater vole Microtus richardsoniWhite-footed mouse Peromyscus leucopusGreat Basin pocket mouse Perognathus parvusOlive-backed pocket mouse Perognathus fasciatusNorthern bog lemming Synaptomys borealisNorthern red-backed mouse/vole Clethrionomys gapperiSagebrush mouse/vole Lemmiscus curtatus
Shrews
Lagomorphs
Marmots
Squirrels
Chipmunks
Pocket Gopher
Mice
Appendix �.
���
Table 4Dispersal Distances for Mammals of the Northern Rocky Mountains (excluding bats)
Group Common Name Scientific NameNatal Dispersal Maximum
Distance (km)Bushy-tailed woodrat or packrat Neotoma cinereaBrown or Norway rat Rattus norvegicus
Beaver Beaver Castor candensis 40.6 male/femaleMuskrat Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus 3.37 male/femalePorcupine Porcupine Erethizon dorsatumRaccoon Raccoon (exotic) Procyon lotor 265.5 male/female
Coyote Canis latrans 176.0 male/232.2 femaleGray wolf C. lupus 432.0 male/79.0 femaleSwift fox Vulpes velox 11.0 male/femaleRed fox Vulpes vulpes 394.5 male/302.0 femaleBlack bear Ursus americanus 225.0 male/28.8 femaleGrizzly bear U. arctos 134.0 male/82.0 femaleFisher Martes pennanti 23 male/22.6 femaleMarten M. americana 61.0 male/femaleLong-tailed weasel Mustela frenataShort-tailed weasel M. erminea 5.6 male/1.0 femaleMink M. vison 45.1 male/45.0 femaleWolverine Gulo gulo 300.0 male/femaleBadger Taxidea taxus 110.0 male/52.0 femaleSpotted skunk Spilogale gracilisStriped skunk Mephitis mephitis 10.1 male/21.7 femaleBlack-footed ferret Mustela nigripesLeast weasel Mustela nivalisRiver otter Lontra canadensis 42.0 maleCanada lynx Lynx candensis 90-616Bobcat Lynx rufus 56.0 femaleCougar or mountain lion, puma, panther Puma concolor 274.0 male/155.0 femaleElk or wapiti Cervus canadensis 18.5 male/femaleMule deer Odocoileus hemionus 7.34 male/8.22 femaleWhite-tailed deer O. virginianus or leucuris 11.74 femaleMoose Alces alces 118.0 male/femalePronghorn Antilocapra americanaBison Bos bisonMountain goat Oreamnos americanusBighorn sheep Ovis canadensisWoodland Caribou Rangifer tarandus caribou
(Adapted from Baker et al, 1961; Mathews 2003; Elias 2002; Sutherland et al, 2000; Montana's Official State Website)
Felids
Ungulates
Rats
Canids
Weasels
Weasels,cont'd
Bears
Appendix � (cont.).
��0
Studies Demonstrating the Positive Effects of ConnectivityAuthor(s) Article Title Effect
Baum, K.A., K.J. Haynes, F.P. Dillemuth and J.T. Cronin
The matrix enhances the effectiveness of corridors and stepping stones
Corridors increased dispersal, but the degree of increase was dependent upon the matrix
Coffman, C.J., J.D. Nichols and K.H. Pollock
Population dynamics of Microtuspennsylvanicus in corridor-linked patches
Movement increased when corridors were constructed between fragmented patches
Crooks, K.R. and M.E. SouleMesopredator release and avifaunal extinctions in a fragmented system
Predation changes: fragmentation introduced a mesopredator to the habitat
Dixon, J.D., M.K. Oli, M.C. Wooten, T.H. Eason, J.W. McCown, and D. Paetkau
Effectiveness of a regional corridor in connecting two Florida black bear populations
Corridors facilitated genetic flow between subpopulations.
Hale, M.L., P.W.W. Lurz, M.D.F. Shirley, S. Rushton, B.M.Fuller, K. Wolff
Impact of landscape management on the genetic structure of red squirrel populations
Fragmentation led to a genetic drift in populations; introduction of a corridor to the landscape showed population genetics returning to original state
Hilty, J.A. and A.M. MerenlenderUse of riparian corridors and vineyards by mammalian predators in northern California
Predators were much more likely to traverse the landscape using corridors than nearby vineyards
James, A.R.C. and A.K. Stuart-SmithDistribution of caribou and wolves in relation to linear corridors
Predation changed due to fragmentation
Keller, I. and C.R. Largiader
Recent habitat fragmentation caused by major roads leads to reduction of gene flow and loss of genetic variability in ground beetles.
Decreased genetic flow between populations fragmented by highways
Kinley, T.A. and C.D. AppsMortality patterns in a subpopulation of endangered mountain caribou
Predation changed due to fragmentation
Lomolino, M.V. and D.R. PeraultBody size variation of mammals in a fragmented temperate rainforest
Decreased body size due to fragmentation
Mech, S.G. and J.G. HallettEvaluating the effectiveness of corridors: a genetic approach
Corridors facilitated genetic flow between subpopulations for habitat specialists
Studies Demonstrating the Positive Effects of ConnectivityAuthor(s) Article Title Effect
Neckel-Oliveira, S. and C. Gascon
Abundance, body size and movement patterns of a tropical tree frog in continuous and fragmented forests in the Brazilian Amazon
Decreased body size due to fragmentation
Pardini, R., S. Marques de Souza, R. Braga-Neto, J.P. Metzger
The role of forest structure, fragment size and corridors in maintaining small mammal abundance and diversity in an Atlantic forest landscape
Decreased species' abundance due to fragmentation
Reh, W. and A. SeitzThe influence of land use on the genetic structure of populations of the common frog Rana temporaria
Decreased genetic flow between populations fragmented by highways
Ruefenacht, B. and R.L. KnightInfluences of corridor continuity and width on survival and movement of deer mice
Choice of corridor travel was based on vegetation rather than corridor width or continuity
Appendix �.
���
Studies Demonstrating the Positive Effects of FragmentationAuthor(s) Article Title Effect
Belisle, M. and C.C. St. ClairCumulative effects of barriers on the movements of forest birds
Fragmentation facilitated the movement of red-breasted nuthatches
Caley, M.J., K.A. Buckley and B.P. Jones
Separating ecological effects of habitat fragmentation degradation and loss on corral commensals
Abundance of trapezid crabs increased in response to habitat fragmentation
Collins, R.J. and G.W. Barrett
Effects of habitat fragmentation on meadow vole (Microtuspennsylvanicus ) population dynamics in experiment landscape patches
Female vole numbers were higher in fragmented landscapes than in continuous landscapes
McGarigal, K. and W.C. McCombRelationships between landscape structure and breeding birds in the Oregon coast range
Abundance of birds was higher in fragmented landscapes than in continuous landscapes
Neckel-Oliveira, S. and C. Gascon
Abundance, body size and movement patterns of a tropical tree frog in continuous and fragmented forests in the Brazilian Amazon
Increased movement and increased interbreeding occurred between fragmented subpopulations
Trzcinski, M.K., L.Fahrig and G. Merriam
Independent effects of forest cover and fragmentation on the distribution of forest breeding birds
Habitat fragmentation's effects varied by bird species with 2 species showing increased abundance with increased habitat fragmentation
Wolff, J.O., W.M. Schuaber and W.D. Edge
Effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on the behavior and demography of gray-tailed voles
Gray-tailed vole populations increased following fragmentation of their habitat
Appendix � (cont.).
American Wildlands ~ Summer 2008