RIVER FISHERIES STUDY — 1981
RESEARCH CONDUCTED BY MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF FISH, WILDLIFE & PARKS
SPONSORED BY ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
-------
U.S. Et^A Region 8 Library
BOC-L.
999 18lh Sf , Suilc 500
Denver, CO 80202-2466
FLATHEAD RIVER FISHERY STUDY
April 1981
Prepared By:
John Fraley - Middle Fork Project Biologist
Don Read - North Fork Project Biologist
Pat Graham - Project Leader
Sponsored By:
Environmental Protection Agency
Region VIII, Water Division
Denver, Colorado
Through the Steering Committee for the
Flathead River Basin Environmental Impact Study
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This fishery study is a baseline environmental assessment of the
North and Middle Forks of the Flathead River drainage, which began in
1978 and will be completed in 1982. This report concerns the analysis
of cutthroat and bull trout distribution and abundance, movement, age
and growth, fish habitat, spawning, and food habits. The bull trout provide
a trophy fishery (18-36 inches in length) in the lake and rivers. West-
slope cutthroat trout provide a good fishery throughout the study area.
Fish distribution and abundance was studied in the North and Middle
Fork drainages during 1979 and 1980 to determine the relative importance
of the tributaries as rearing areas for juvenile trout, and for long-
term monitoring of'trout populations. Westslope cutthroat were found
in 19 (50%) of the tributaries in the North Fork drainage, and 18 (75%)
of the tributaries in the Middle Fork drainage. Fish population estimates
were made by snorkeling in 142 tributary reaches. A total of 4,199 cutthroat,
413 juvenile bull trout, and 411 mountain whitefish were recorded by observers.
The average density of cutthroat trout in the 112 reaches in which they
were found was 7.2 fish per 100 m2 surface area. Juvenile bull trout
densities average 1.7 fish per 100 m2 for 52 reaches in which they were
observed. Critical rearing areas for cutthroat trout were identified,
and included 17 reaches in the North Fork drainage and nine reaches in
the Middle Fork drainage. Critical rearing areas for juvenile bull trout
included seven North Fork reaches and nine Middle Fork reaches. Comparisons
of cutthroat population estimates made by snorkeling and electrofishing
in 12 North Fork tributary reaches indicated no significant difference
(p<.05) between the two methods. Fish density estimates made in the North
and Middle Forks of the Flathead River indicated Mountain whitefish densities
were 10 times larger than total trout densities.
A total of 1,990 juvenile cutthroat, 167 juvenile bull trout, and
44 juvenile rainbow trout were tagged with dangler tags during 1980 to
assess movement of juvenile trout in the Flathead drainage. Recovery
of trout tagged by angling, trapping and electrofishing can provide inform-
ation on the timing and distribution of spawning and smolt migrations.
Fisherman tag return rates are an indication of the harvest of the fish
population. The majority of the 3.5 percent of the tagged trout recovered
had moved downstream. Maximum distance moved was 135 kilometers by a
cutthroat tagged in the upper Middle Fork and recovered from the Flathead
River near Columbia Falls. The return rates for the 177 adult cutthroat
and 90 adult bull trout tagged were 12 and three percent, respectively.
A total of 1,061 fish were trapped in the North Fork of the Flathead River
and tributaries. The catch was dominated by westslope cutthroat and mountain
whitefish. Adfluvial cutthroat were trapped in Langford, Cyclone, Trail,
and Red Meadow creeks. Outmigrating juvenile bull trout were captured
in Trail, Red Meadow, Moose, and Moran creeks.
Age and growth information is necessary to determine the relative
capability of tributaries for trout production. Analysis of growth patterns
on scales can provide information concerning the rearing patterns of fluvial
i i
-------
and adfluvial trout. Scales were collected from 1,267 cutthroat trout
in 18 North and Middle Fork tributaries. Most of the fish (87%) were
0-3 years old. The majority (86%) of the 309 cutthroat collected from
the North and Middle Forks of the Flathead River were 3-5 years old. Calculated
lengths for annuli 1-5 were generally larger for river cutthroat than
for tributary cutthroat. It was determined from growth patterns on the
scales that 73 percent of the river cutthroat had reared two or three
years in the tributaries, while most of the remainder had reared one year
in the tributaries. Scale samples from 196 juvenile and 35 mature bull
trout were collected. The juveniles were 0-3 years old and the adult
spawners ranged from 5-8 years old.
A major objective of this study was to assess existing fish habitat
of tributaries in the North and Middle Fork drainages and to identify
important habitat components which affect fish densities. Fish habitat
was evaluated for a total of 142 tributary reaches in the North and Middle
Fork drainages comprising 675 stream kilometers. Of the 41 physical habitat
variables tested for their relationships to total trout densities, trout
cover, stream order, D-90, and percent run formed the best significant
combination or model (p<.001). Fish densities predicted for 110 reaches
based on the measurements of these four habitat components had a highly
significant correlation (r=.653, p<.001) with measured trout densities.
Model precision was limited by the low trout densities and multiple trout
populations of tributaries in the North and Middle Fork drainages.
A survey of bull trout spawning sites (redds) was conducted to provide
information on the importance of each tributary for spawning and long
term trends in population abundance and stability. A total of 568 redds
were located; 268 in the North Fork drainage (168 in the U.S. and 100
in Canada), and 300 in the Middle Fork drainage. This represents nearly
a basin-wide survey with an estimated 80 percent of all redds in the North
Fork (U.S. portion) and the Middle Fork drainages counted. An estimated
60 percent of all redds in the Canadian portion of the North Fork drainage
were counted. The largest number of redds (89) were found in the Morrison
Creek drainage of the Middle Fork. The Coal Creek drainage contained
60 redds, the highest number counted in the North Fork. An estimated
2,400 - 2,925 mature bull trout reached tributary or mainstem areas to
spawn in the North and Middle Fork drainages.
Food habits of cutthroat and bull trout were studied to determine
the relationship between trout diet and the available insect food supply.
Analysis of the food habits of cutthroat and bull trout indicated these
fish were opportunistic feeders in the North and Middle Fork drainages.
Ephemeroptera and Diptera were the most abundant insect order in both
the benthic community and in the diets of the trout. Cutthroat trout
in the Middle Fork drainage consumed more winged insects taken from the
water's surface than cutthroat in the North Fork drainage.
The cutthroat and bull trout populations in the Flathead Lake-River
system represent a valuable resource for the Flathead Valley. Regulations
have been established in the past, such as stream closing and size limits,
in an effort to afford added protection for the adfluvial trout populations
i i i
-------
in the upper North and Middle Fork drainages. More restrictive regulations
will be necessary to maintain a viable fishery due to accelerated development
of resources in these drainages.
More restrictive regulations alone will not be enough to protect
the fishery. A cumulative impact overview is presented for the North
Fork the Flathead River using bull trout spawning as an example. At least
72 percent of the prime spawning and over 30 percent of the critical rearing
areas in the North Fork could be directly affected by planned development
in the U.S. and Canada. Oil and gas exploration is also being considered
in wilderness areas in the Middle Fork drainage, which presently contributes
half of the total bull trout spawning in the Flathead drainage. This
study has made it possible for the first time to adequately present the
threat on the bull trout fishery in a basin-wide perspective.
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Robert E. Schumacher is the Regional Fisheries Manager and was an
integral part of the conception of this study. Steve Bartelt, Ken Frazer,
and Jay Lanza assisted in data collection and manuscript preparation.
Burwell Gooch, George Holton and Bob McFarland provided invaluable
assistance in data processing and statistical analyses. We would like
to thank all those people who participated in field activities this year
including Rick Adams, Tom Blood, Dan Burns, Dana Fraley, Mark Gaub, Bill
Johnston, Steve Marshall, John Miller, Dale Pier, Tom Weaver, and Thea
Zander. Student Interns from the University of Montana who assisted in
the field included Gary Burnett, Buddy Drake, Susan Kraft and Mark
Schollenburger. We thank personnel of the U.S. Forest Service for their
cooperation, particularly Hank Dawson, Merrill Greeman, a'nd Don Hauth.
U.S. Park Service personnel who cooperated in the study were Robin Cox,
Jerry DeSanto and Matt Wilkens. Cathy Turley and Marty Watkins typed final
and preliminary drafts of thi's report.
The Environmental Protection Agency provided funds for the project
which were allocated by the Flathead River Basin Steering Committee in
cooperation with Study Area Manager, Ron Cooper.
v
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v
LIST OF TABLES x
LIST OF FIGURES xiv
INTRODUCTION 1
STUDY OBJECTIVES 1
DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA 2
NORTH FORK OF THE FLATHEAD RIVER 2
Geology 4
Temperatures and Flows in North Fork Tributaries 4
MIDDLE FORK OF THE FLATHEAD RIVER 5
Geology 7
Water Chemistry 7
METHODS 8
UNDERWATER CENSUS OF FISH POPULATIONS 8
North and Middle Fork Tributaries 8
North and Middle Fork Rivers 10
MARK AND RECAPTURE OF FISH 10
TRAPPING FISH 11
AGE AND GROWTH 13
HABITAT EVALUATION 14
Habitat Characteristics of North and Middle Fork
Tributaries 14
INVENTORY OF BULL TROUT SPAWNING SITES 15
FOOD HABITS OF CUTTHROAT AND BULL TROUT 17
Major Fish Food Organisms 17
Analysis of Cutthroat and Bull Trout Stomach Contents ... 17
MIDDLE FORK CREEL CARD SURVEY 18
vi
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS CONT.
Paqe
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ..... 18
FISH DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE 18
North and Middle Fork Tributaries 18
Fish Distribution and Density Estimates 18
Densities of Cutthroat and Bull Trout by Stream
Feature 31
Biomass Estimates 31
Snorkeling - Electrofishing Comparisons 31
North and Middle Fork Rivers 40
Middle Fork . 40
North Fork 47
Fish Movement 47
Tag Returns 47
Juvenile Tag Returns .50
Adult Tag Returns 50
Stream Trapping 54
Langford Creek 54
Cyclone Creek 54
Moran Creek 54
Moose Creek 54
Logging Creek 55
Red Meadow Creek ......... 55
Trail Creek 55
North Fork Flathead 55
Smolt Migration 56
AGE AND GROWTH 56
Cutthroat Trout 56
vi i
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS CONT.
Page
Bull Trout 64
FISH HABITAT EVALUATION 77
Fish Habitat Characteristics of North and Middle Fork
Tributary Reaches 77
Relationships Between Habitat Variables and Fish
Densities 77
Simple Correlation of Habitat and Fish Densities. ... 79
Multiple Regression Analysis of Habitat Variables
and Fish Densities 81
Age I and Older Cutthroat and Bull Trout 81
Age I and Older Cutthroat Trout 84
Age I and Older Bull Trout 84
Testing of Model Performance: Predicting the Potential
Fish Densities of Each Reach Based on Habitat Quality . 85
INVENTORY OF BULL TROUT SPAWNING SITES 87
Distribution and Abundance of Spawning Sites 87
Timing of Spawning 88
Spawning Site Preference 92
Spawning Reach Classification 96
FOOD HABITS OF CUTTHROAT AND BULL TROUT 100
Major Fish Food Organisms 100
Analysis of Cutthroat and Bull Trout Stomachs 104
Cutthroat 104
Bull Trout 113
MIDDLE FORK CREEL CARD SURVEY 118
Creel Card Returns 118
Incidental Hook and Line Sampling 118
CUMULATIVE IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE NORTH FORK OF THE FLATHEAD
RIVER: AN OVERVIEW 122
v i i i
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS CONT.
Page
RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT 122
Coal 122
Cabin Creek Coal Mine 122
Lodgepole and Lily Bird Mine Sites 122
Timber 122
Glacier National Park 124
U.S. Forest Service (Flathead National Forest) 124
B.C. Forest Service 125
Oil and Gas 125
Roadways 125
CUMULATIVE IMPACT ON THE BULL TROUT FISHERY: NORTH AND MIDDLE
FORK DRAINAGES 126
LITERATURE CITED 129
APPENDIX A. A1
APPENDIX B B1
APPENDIX C • CI
APPENDIX D D1
APPENDIX E El
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Alkalinity, conductivity, and flows measured at points on the
Middle Fork of the Flathead River, 1980 9
2. Current information on fish distribution in west bank North Fork
creeks: + = species present, - = species absent, ? = unknown,
needs further study 20
3. Current information on fish distribution in Glacier Park and
Canadian creeks: + = species present, - = species absent, ? =
unknown, needs further study 21
4. Current information on fish distribution in Middle Fork creeks:
+ = species present, - = species absent, ? = unknown, needs further
study 22
5. Mean densities (No./100 m2) of cutthroat and juvenile bull trout
by age class in North Fork tributaries surveyed during the summers
of 1979 and 1980. Total for each species refers to age classes
I, II, and 111+ combined 23
6. Mean densities (No/100 m2) of cutthroat and juvenile bull trout
in Middle Fork tributaries surveyed during the summer of 1979 and
1980. Total for each species refers to age classes I, II, and
111+ combined 27
7. Current information on sculpin distribution in west bank North
Fork creeks: by method of species identification used: + =
species present, - = species absent, ? = unknown 32
8. Current information on sculpin distribution on east bank North
Fork creeks by method of species identification used: + =
species present, - = species absent, ? = species unknown 33
9. Mean densities (No. fish/100 m2) by age class of westslope cut-
throat and bull trout in run, riffle, pool and pocket water
habitat units (features) snorkeled in 1979 and 1980. Number of
features snorkel ed is in parentheses 34
10. Mean biomass estimates (g/100 m2) for cutthroat and bull trout
of each age class in North and Middle Fork tributary reaches.
Total refers to age I, II and II1+ combined 34
11. Comparison'between snorkel and electrofishing counts of age 0
cutthroat in 12 North Fork tributary reaches 35
12. Comparison between snorkeling and electrofishing counts of age
I cutthroat in 12 North Fork tributary reaches 36
x
-------
LIST OF TABLES CONT.
Page
13. Comparison between snorkel and electrofishing counts of age II
cutthroat in 12 North Fork tributary reaches 37
14. Comparison between snorkel and electrofishing counts of age
II1+ cutthroat in 12 North Fork tributary reaches 38
15. Comparison between snorkel and electrofishing counts of age I
and older cutthroat in 12 North Fork tributary reaches 39
16. Comparison between snorkel and electrofishing counts of age 0
and age I bull trout in five North Fork tributary reaches .... 41
17. Comparison between snorkel and electrofishing counts of age II
and 111+ bull trout in five North Fork tributary reaches 42
18. Comparison between snorkel and electrofishing counts of age I
and older bull trout in five North Fork tributary reaches .... 43
19. Fish densities (No./lOO m2) by age class in pool and run habitat
units of the Middle Fork of the Flathead River during mid-
summer, 1980. Numbers of each feature snorkeled and numbers
of fish observed are in parentheses 45
20. Fish densities by age class for pool, riffle, run, and pocket
water habitats in 10 km sections of the Middle Fork of the
Flathead River above and below Schafer Meadows during late
summer, 1980. Number of features snorkeled and numbers of
fish observed in each age class are in parentheses 46
21. Estimates of number of cutthroat trout, bull trout, and mountain
whitefish in 10 km sections of the Middle Fork of the Flathead ;
River above and below Schafer Meadows. Estimates are based on
snorkel runs made in late summer 48
22. Estimated densities (No./lOO m2) of fish by age class in run
habitats of two sections of the North Fork River during the
summer of 1980. Numbers of fish of each age class observed
and numbers of features snorkeled are in parentheses 49
23. Comparisons of mean densities of fish per 100 m2 in North Fork
River run habitats and Middle Fork River Run-Pool habitats.
Number of features snorkeled and number of fish observed are in
parentheses 49
24. Percent return of juvenile westslope cutthroat and bull trout
in 1980 51
25. Summary of juvenile westslope cutthroat trout movement from
designated tagging locations 51
26. Percent return of adult westslope cutthroat and bull trout in
1980 53
xi
-------
27
28
29,
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
LIST OF TABLES CONT.
Page
Number of cutthroat trout of each age class rearing 1,2,3
and 4 years in the tributaries before entering the North and
Middle Forks of the Flathead River 57
Average backcalculated lengths of cutthroat trout having the
first annul us, missing the first annul us, and combined from
the North and Middle Fork drainages 60
Calculated lengths and increments of length for cutthroat trout
collected in the North and Middle Forks of the Flathead River
in 1980 61
Calculated lengths and increments of length for cutthroat from
nine North Fork and eight Middle Fork tributaries 62
Grand mean calculated lengths of cutthroat from individual
North and Middle Fork tributaries with adequate sample sizes
(number of fish are in parentheses) 63
Mean condition factors by month for North and Middle Fork
River cutthroat trout (standard deviations in parentheses). ... 68
Backcalculated lengths of juvenile bull trout collected in
North and Middle Fork tributaries 71
Backcalculated lengths at annulus formation for juvenile and
adult bull trout collected in the Middle Fork drainage in
1980 72
Comparison of lengths of adult bull trout collected in the Middle
Fork drainage with previous studies in the Flathead River
system 75
Chemical parameters of the lower reaches of major tributaries of
the North and Middle Forks of the Flathead River in October
1980. Total alkalinity and conductivity were measured in the
field. BDL indicates the value for the parameter is below the
detection limit 78
Physical habitat variables or variable combination. Significant
relationships (p <.01) with fish densities in North and Middle
Fork tributary reaches (N = 110) 80
The mean and range (in parentheses) of major habitat parameters
of 110 North and Middle Fork tributary reaches analyzed by
stream order 82
Physical habitat variables which formed the best mutual relation-
ship with trout densities (age I and older cutthroat and bull
trout) in 110 North and Middle Fork tributary reaches (r =
.653, r2 = .430, N = 110) 83
xi i
-------
LIST OF TABLES CONT.
Page
40. Estimated number of spawning bull trout in five North Fork
tributaries in 1977, redd counts for those tributaries from
1977 to 1980, and a ratio of the number of spawners to the
largest redd count during the four year period 89
41. Numbers and densities of bull trout redds (by reach) in North
Fork tributaries surveyed in 1979 and 1980 90
42. Numbers and densities of bull trout redds by reach in Middle
Fork tributaries surveyed in 1979 and 1980 91
43. Average measurements of bull trout redds in tributaries of
the North and Middle Forks of the Flathead River during
1980 93
44. Number of aquatic insects in benthic samples collected on the
Middle Fork of the Flathead River during the summer of 1980.
Total volume (ml) by family is in parentheses. Family totals
include insects (small instars) from second picking of a
1/8 sub-sample. Type of substrate from which each sample
was collected is indicated 101
45. Adult aquatic insects collected from the Middle Fork of the
Flathead River and its tributaries during the summer of
1980 105
46. Catch information from 15 voluntary creel cards returned in
1980 and 18 returned in 1979. Number of fish caught are in
parentheses 119
47. Catch information from hook and line sampling by Fish, Wild-
life and Parks personnel on the North and Middle Forks of
the Flathead River during the summers of 1980, 1962 and 1961.
The number of fish caught of each species is in parentheses ... 120
48. Catch information from hook and line sampling by Fish, Wild-,
life and Parks personnel in North and Middle Fork tributaries
during the summer of 1980. Number of fish caught are in
parentheses 120
xi i i
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Drainage map of the upper Flathead River Basin (adapted from
Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation,
1977) 3
2. Map of the upper Middle Fork'of the Flathead drainage 6
3. North Fork trap sites for 1980 12
4. Date and location of juvenile westslope cutthroat tagged (•) in
the North Fork of the Flathead River and recaptured (->-) at various
points in the drainage. All movements are for fish tagged and
recaptured within a six month period 52
5. Body length-scale radius regressions for total North Fork
drainage cutthroat (NF), total Middle Fork drainage cutthroat
(MF), North and Middle Forks combined (NF-MF), and total
Flathead drainage cutthroat (TFD) 59
6. Length frequency for North and Middle Fork River cutthroat.
Mean length of fish in each age class assigned by scale
reading is indicated by an arrow 65
7. Length frequencies for North and Middle Fork tributary cutthroat.
The mean length of fish in each age class assigned by scale
reading is indicated by an arrow 66
8. Length-weight regressions for cutthroat from the North Fork River
(NFR), Middle Fork River (MFR), North Fork tributaries (NFT),
and Middle Fork tributaries (MFT) 67
9. Body length-scale radius regressions for North Fork juvenile
bull trout (NF-J), Middle Fork juveniles (MF-J), Middle Fork
juveniles and adults (MF-J+A), and total Flathead drainage
juveniles and adults (TFD-J+A) 69
10. Length frequency of 93 juvenile bull trout collected from North
Fork tributaries and 103 juveniles and 35 adult bull trout
collected from the Middle Fork of the Flathead River and
tributaries in 1980. Mean lengths of fish in each age class
assigned by scale reading are indicated by an arrow 73
11. Length frequency of juvenile bull trout collected from Trail
Creek in 1979 and 1980 74
12. Length-weight regressions for North Fork juvenile bull trout
(NF) and Middle Fork juvenile bull trout (MF) collected in
1980 76
xiv
-------
LIST OF FIGURES CONT.
Figure Page
13. Relationship between measured trout densities and densities
predicted by the four variable habitat model for 100 North
and Middle Fork tributary reaches 86
14. Velocities recorded at the head of 37 North and Middle Fork
bull trout redds in 1979, and 43 North Fork bull trout redds
in 1980. Velocities were determined proportionally 0.4 of
the distance from the stream bottom. All measurements were
taken with either Pygmy, Price AA, or Marsh McBirney current
meters 94
15. Depths recorded at the sites of 37 North and Middle Fork bull
trout redds in 1979, and 43 North Fork bull trout redds in
1980 95
16. Bull trout gravel samples collected from North Fork tributaries
in 1980. Each size gravel is expressed as percent of total
gravel weight 97
17. Size of gravels present in bull trout redds combined for
1977, 1978, and 1979 98
18. Cutthroat trout gravel samples collected from North Fork
tributaries in 1980. Each size gravel is expressed as a
percent of total gravel weight 99
19. Relative importance (IRI) of insect orders in the diets of
cutthroat trout _< 110 mm and > 110 mm in length from North and
Middle Fork tributaries and cutthroat > 110 mm from the Middle
Fork River. Shaded areas indicate winged adults. Stomachs
were collected during the summer of 1980 112
20. Relative importance (IRI) of Ephemeroptera nymphs by family and
Ephemeroptera adults in the diet of cutthroat _< 110 mm and
> 110 mm in length from North and Middle Fork tributaries.
Stomachs were collected during the summer of 1980 114
21. Relative importance (IRI) of Trichoptera larvae by family and
Trichoptera adults in the diet of cutthroat trout £ 110 mm and
> 110 mm in length from North and Middle Fork tributaries.
Stomachs were collected during the summer of 1980 115
22. Relative importance (IRI) of insects by order in the diet of
bull trout £ 110 mm and > 110 mm in length from North Fork
tributaries and bull trout £ 110 mm in length from Middle Fork
tributaries. Shaded areas indicate winged adults. Stomachs
were collected during the summer of 1980 116
23 Relative importance (IRI) of Ephemeroptera by family in bull
trout _< 110 mm and > 110 mm in length from the North Fork
xv
-------
LIST OF FIGURES CONT.
Figure Page
tributaries and bull trout £ 110 mm in length from Middle
Fork tributaries. Stomachs were collected during the summer
of 1980 117
24. Drainage map of the upper North Fork of the Flathead River
(adapted from Montana Dept. Natural Resources and Conser-
vation (1977) 123
25. Proposed route of seismic exploration in the Bob Marshall
Wilderness (U.S.F.S. Progress Report; Consolidated Georex
Geophysics Prospecting Permit Environmental Analysis) 128
xv i
-------
INTRODUCTION
This study is part of a baseline environmental assessment funded
by the EPA under the direction of the Flathead River Basin Steering Commit-
tee, a fifteen-member group representing land management agencies, political
bodies, and private citizens or groups in the area.
This is the third Annual Progress Report, and presents a large amount
of data collected during the preceeding year. Two separate reports were
prepared this year. This report covers work in the North and Middle Forks
of the Flathead River. In general, this report presents baseline data
that will be useful to identify, quantify, and monitor the affects of
perturbations in the upper watershed of the Flathead River Basin. The
river-lake ecosystem is nationally recognized for its uniqueness including
its Wild and Scenic Rivers, Flathead Lake, Glacier National Park, and
the Bob Marshall Wilderness area, which comprise a valuable recreation
resource and symbolize the quality of life in the Flathead River Basin.
It should be noted that data are reported in metric units except
for stream flows. These are reported in English units because most „stream
discharge information collected by other agencies is reported in English
units. Also, agencies responsible for adjudicating water rights do so
in English units. A separate report is being prepared on instream flow
requirements for maintenance of the native cold water fisheries in the
Flathead River system. This will include the North Fork, Middle Fork,
South Fork upstream from Hungry Horse Reservoir, and the main Flathead
River downstream to Flathead Lake.
This report also contains a section concerning cumulative impact
assessment which exemplifies how and why this baseline data collection
is being and will continue to be used in basin-wide impact analysis.
STUDY OBJECTIVES
A. North Fork of the Flathead River Funded Projects
1. Assess relative importance of tributary streams for producing
migratory and resident populations of westslope cutthroat and
bull trout.
2. Develop a long-term monitoring index for juvenile trout in major
tributaries and the main river for correlation with habitat inventories
and to monitor changes in environmental quality.
3. Identify the timing and distribution of spawning, feeding, and
"smolt" migrations for major fish species.
4. Assess existing aquatic habitat in major tributary streams and
the main river. Habitat components will be assessed to determine
their importance in maintaining the existing cutthroat trout,
bull trout, and sculpin community. Stream reaches will be ranked
in relation to relative importance for providing spawning and
rearing areas.
-1-
-------
5. Determine habitat requirements and species interaction for juvenile
bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout.
6. Quantify instream flows for maintenance of native fish species
in the North Fork of the Flathead River.
B. Middle Fork of the Flathead River Fisheries Study
1. Assess relative importance of tributary streams for producing
migratory and resident populations of westslope cutthroat and
bull trout. To compare the potential contribution of juvenile
fish from the North and Middle Forks to Flathead Lake.
2. Develop a long-term monitoring index for juvenile trout in major
tributaries and the main river for correlation of habitat inventories
and to monitor changes in environmental quality in a natural
system in the event development continues in the North Fork drainage.
3. Identify the timing and distribution of spawning, feeding, and
"smolt" migrations for major fish species.
DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA
A more complete description of the upper Flathead River system was
presented in Graham et. al. (1980b). Sections reported in that Description
of Study Area, but not included or expanded on in this report, include
Fish Species and Land Use Patterns.
NORTH FORK OF THE FLATHEAD RIVER
A comprehensive description of the North Fork drainage was written
in the 1980 Annual Report (Graham et. al. 1980b). The following description
will be limited to that portion of the North Fork studied in 1980.
Most tributaries along the west bank of the North Fork of the Flathead
River were studied in 1979. The four drainages that remained to be inventoried
in 1980 were Moose, Hay, Moran, and Canyon creeks (Figure 1). All four
were small drainages compared to most other west side tributaries. Drainage
areas ranged from 78.2 km2 for Hay Creek to 23.6 km2 for Moran Creek (Appendix
A, Table l). Hay Creek, the largest of the four, had a late summer flow
of 21.3 cubic feet per second (cfs) which was comparable to Red Meadow
Creek, the smallest drainage inventoried in 1979 (Appendix A, Table 1 ).
Canyon Creek had a permanent barrier to adfluvial fish one kilometer from
its mouth. McGuiness Creek, a tributary of Canyon which entered below
the barrier, had a six meter waterfall two kilometers upstream. These
were the only streams worked in 1980 with complete barriers to upstream
fish movement although three other streams had partial barriers in the
form of beaver dams. All four drainages have been heavily logged. Some
areas were clear cut to the water's edge.
All or part of 12 east bank drainages which lie in Glacier National
Park were worked in 1980. Sage, Spruce, Kishenehn, and Starvation creeks
-2-
-------
UPPER FLATHEAD
RIVER BASIN
Figure 1 . Drainage map of the upper Flathead River Basin (adapted from
Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation,
1977).
-3-
-------
originate in British Columbia and most of the study on these drainages
was limited to that part in Montana. Kintla, Bowman, Quartz, and Logging
creeks all drain large deep lakes which noticeably affects their flow
and thermal characteristics. Surveys on these creeks were restricted
to the portion downstream from the lakes. Ford, Akokala, Anaconda, and
Camas creeks are also located in Glacier National Park, but do not have
large lakes in their drainages. Dutch Creek, a major tributary to Camas,
was also surveyed and was morphologically similar to Anaconda Creek. Drainage
areas ranged from 178 km2 for Bowman Creek to 7.6 km2 for Spruce Creek
(Appendix A, Table l). Late summer flows ranged from 125.5 cfs in Kintla
Creek to 2.4 cfs in Spruce Creek.
A limited amount of time was spent on Howell, Cabin, Couldrey, Sage,
and Kishenehn creeks in Canada. This activity was primarily directed
toward collection of water samples for water quality analysis and counting
bull trout redds. Howell and Cabin creeks may be directly affected by
coal development while the others have been subjected to concentrated
logging of beetle infested lodgepole pine.
Water quality information collected on North Fork tributaries in
1980 is presented in the Fish Habitat Evaluation section of this report.
Geology
In 1980, the U.S. Forest Service began a soils classification program
in the North Fork that should be completed in 1981. The geology of the
west and east side of the North Fork drainage differs considerably. The
west side is a dip slope that is primarily of late Precambrian origin
overlain by tertiary siltstone. The upper ends of west side tributaries
meander through bedrock benches while the lower reaches flow through silt-
stone. The east side of the drainage is a scarp slope that has been uplifted
resulting in a plateau that is early Precambrian in origin and contains
soil similar to that in the south-eastern United States which has been
subjected to less glaciation. The soils on the west side have a gravel
content of 35-60 percent compared to approximately 15-20 percent for soils
on the east side (A1 Martinson, Flathead National Forest, Kalispell, personal
communication 1981). This may be one reason why most of the better spawning
streams are on the west side of the North Fork. The constant water flow
provided by underground water sources during late summer in some larger
west side tributaries is also beneficial for maintaining fish habitat.
Temperatures and Flows in North Fork Tributaries
Monthly summaries of temperature information collected in 1980 have
been compiled from selected locations in five tributaries (Appendix A,
Table 3 ). Data were obtained from either seven-day continuous recording
thermographs or maximum-minimum thermometer readings.
All locations attained maximum temperatures during July. West side
streams reached maximum temperatures of 11-13° C and mean monthly maximum
temperatures exceeded 10° C only during July and August. The North Fork
River at Polebridge reached a maximum of 18° C which was considerably
-4-
-------
warmer than any west side tributary. Logging Creek attained the highest
mean maximum of 19° C in July. Higher water temperatures are generally
characteristic of most streams draining Glacier Park (Graham et. al. 1980b).
Water levels of nine west side tributaries were again monitored by
reading permanent gauges where the creeks cross the North Fork road. Results
of these gauge readings are presented in the Appendix (Appendix A, Figure l
through 5). Peak flows generally occurred during the end of May. Late
summer flows for all creeks except Hay Creek were generally higher in
1980 than in 1979.
A high and low flow were measured in 1980 and calculated for most
west side tributaries (Appendix A, Table 4 ). High flows were taken
near the peak discharge but limitations of equipment made it difficult
to obtain peak flows for some larger creeks.
Intermediate flows gathered in 1980 enabled the construction of gauge
height-stream flow relations (Appendix A, Figures 6 through 13). Gauges
were left in the streams for continued monitoring. Sufficient data on
Coal Creek were not available to depict a similar relationship.
MIDDLE FORK OF THE FLATHEAD RIVER
The Middle Fork of the Flathead River is formed by the confluence
of Strawberry and Bowl creeks in the Bob Marshall Wilderness Area below
the western slopes of the Continental Divide (Figure 2). From its origin,
the river flows northwest for approximately 144 kilometers to meet the
North Fork of the Flathead River below West Glacier. The drainage area
of the Middle Fork is 2922 km2 (Pacific Northwest River Basins Commission,
1976) and the average annual discharge is 2,956 cfs (U.S.G.S. 1979).
The 74 kilometer portion of the Middle Fork above Bear Creek is within
the Bob Marshall and Great Bear Wilderness Areas and was classified as
a Wild River under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1976. This upper
portion of the river flows from its headwaters through a timbered valley
to Schafer Meadows, where the flood plain widens to approximately 2 kilo-
meters. From 3 kilometers below Schafer Meadows to Bear Creek, the Middle
Fork flows through a steep, rocky canyon. The Middle Fork drops an average
of 6.1 meters per kilometer from its origin to where it meets U.S. Highway
2 at Bear Creek.
The river upstream from Bear Creek is bound by the Lewis and Clark
Range of the Rocky Mountains to the east and the Flathead Range to the
west. Major tributaries to the upper Middle Fork are Gateway, Trail,
Strawberry, Bowl, and Clack creeks above Schafer Meadows and Schafer and
Dolly Varden creeks in the Schafer Meadows area. From below Schafer Meadows
to Bear Creek the major tributaries are Morrison, Lake, Granite, and Long
creeks.
From Bear Creek to where it meets the North Fork, the river flows
for 70 km, mainly through a steep canyon, except for the Nyack Flats area
where the flood plain is up to 3 kilometers wide. This lower portion
-5-
-------
Figure 2 . Map of the upper Middle Fork of the Flathead drainage.
-------
of the Middle Fork is classified as a recreational river. The Middle
Fork drops an average of 3.1 meters per kilometer along this lower portion.
The lower Middle Fork is bound by the Flathead Range to the southwest
and the Livingston Range to the northeast. The northeast bank of the
Middle Fork forms a large portion of the southern boundary of Glacier
National Park. Major tributaries to the river below Bear Creek entering
from the Flathead Range are Java, Essex, Paola, Stanton, and Deerlick
creeks. These creeks are small with relatively steep gradients. Major
tributaries entering from the Livingston Range on the Glacier Park side
are larger with flatter gradients and include Ole, Park, Muir,'Coal, Nyack,
Harrison, Lincoln, and McDonald creeks.
Research conducted by the Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks
in 1980 was concentrated on the river and all the major tributaries above
Bear Creek.
Geology
The portion of the Middle Fork drainage downstream from Bear Creek
is almost entirely underlain by Precambrian rock of the Helena, Snowslip,
Sheppard, and Mt. Shields groups (Johns 1970, Mudge et. al. 1977). These
formations contain about 25 percent Precambrian limestone which is relatively
low in carbonate content (Al Martinson, U.S. Forest Service, personal
communication).
The geology of the Middle Fork drainage above Bear Creek is more
complex. A major fault called the Lewis Overthrust passed through the
upper portion of the drainage and caused layers of old Precambrian rock
to overlay more recent Paleozoic and Cretaceous limestones, dolomites, shales,
and sandstones. About 60 percent of the Middle Fork drainage above Bear
Creek is underlain by Precambrian rock. Cretaceous and Paleozoic rocks
comprise 25 and 15 percent of the upper drainage, respectively (Phyllis
Marsh and Al Martinson, U.S. Forest Service, personal communication).
These Paleozoic and Cretaceous formations are relatively high in carbonate
content.
Lake and Schafer creeks drain the Precambrian McNamara formation,
which is very low in carbonate content. The Dolly Varden and Clack creek
drainages are dominated by carbonate rich Paleozoic limestones. The headwaters
area of the Middle Fork (Gateway, Strawberry, Trail, and Bowl creeks)
is underlain by the Kootenai Formation of the Cretaceous Period, which
is also relatively high in carbonate content. The water chemistry of
the Middle Fork drainage is directly related to this varied geologic pattern.
Water Chemistry
Water chemistry information concerning the Middle Fork of the Flathead
River below Bear Creek has been reported by Nunnalee (1976), the Flathead
Drainage 208 Project (1976), and Stanford et. al. (1979 and 1980). The
river above Bear Creek has been less studied. The Montana Department
of Health sampled the river near Schafer Meadows in 1976. The Flathead
-7-
-------
Research Group collected water samples from the river in the Schafer Meadows
area in 1980. Alkalinity, conductivity and flows measured by Fish, Wildlife
and Parks personnel during 1980 are presented in Table 1. The maximum water
temperature of the Middle Fork at Schafer meadows during the summer of 1980 was 20°C.
Water chemistry data concerning Middle Fork tributaries has been
limited. Stanford et. al. (1979) reported chemical parameters for McDonald
Creek. The U.S. Forest Service measured water chemistry parameters in
Challenge, Puzzle, Skyland, and Morrison creeks during 1980. Chemical
parameters measured for water samples collected by Fish, Wildlife and
Parks personnel during October, 1980 for ten tributaries of the Upper
Middle Fork are presented in the Fish Habitat Evaluation section of this
report. The highest ion concentrations were measured in the tributaries
of the upper portion of the drainage.
METHODS
UNDERWATER CENSUS OF FISH POPULATIONS
North and Middle Fork Tributaries
Fish population estimates were made on a randomly chosen 100-150
m long section of each North and Middle Fork tributary reach. Observers
wore a wet suit, diving mask and snorkel and estimated the number of fish
in each age class for pools, runs, riffles, and pocket water habitat types
as they pulled themselves upstream.
The numbers of fish in each age class were estimated by a predetermined
length frequency for each species. Cutthroat trout of age classes 0,
I, and II had maximum lengths of 40, 80 and 130 mm, respectively. Cutthroat longer
than 130 mm were classed age III or older. The upper size limits for
juvenile bull trout were 50, 90 and 140 mm for age classes 0, I, and II.
Juvenile bull trout longer than 140 mm were age III or older. Each stream
feature snorkeled was measured to determine fish density by surface area.
Biomass estimates (g/100 m2 surface area) were made by multiplying the
measured density times the length-weight relationship determined for each
speci es.
Snorkeling was preferrable to electrofishing because of the clarity,
low conductivity, and inaccessibility of many waters in the Flathead drainage.
In wilderness areas and Glacier National Park where regulations prohibit
electrofishing equipment, snorkeling was an effective and practical method
for obtaining fish population estimates. This method had been used with
success in other drainages of high water clarity as reported in Graham
et. al. (1980b).
Thirteen 100 meter sections of North Fork and Middle Fork tributaries
were sampled to compare the effectiveness of the snorkeling and electrofishing
methods of estimating fish populations. The sections were snorkeled and
fish numbers in each age class were estimated. In North Fork sections,
two passes were made (upstream and downstream) using a gasoline powered
backpack shocker. A population estimate consisted of the total number
of fish captured in both passes. The sections were blocked at the upper
-8-
-------
Table 1. Alkalinity, conductivity, and flows measured at points on
the Middle Fork of the Flathead River, 1980.
Site
Date
Alkali nity
(mg/1 CaCOg)
Conducti vi ty
(umhos/cm)
Flow(cfs)
Middle Fork
at Gooseberry
Park
10/7
150
220
44.1
Middle Fork
at Schafer
Meadows
10/10
152
220
56.0
Middle Fork
at Granite
Creek
10/16
117
185
Middle Fork*
at Bear Creek
9/18
114
210
198
1: Alkalinity and conductivity are from measurements made by the Montana
Bureau of Mines and Geology, September 13, 1980 (U.S. Forest Service,
unpublished data)
-9-
-------
and lower ends using nets.
In Middle Fork sections, two passes were made with electrofishing
gear to mark fish after the section was snorkeled. In two days, two passes
were made to recapture fish and fish populations were estimated by the
Peterson mark-recapture method reported in Vincent (1971). The section
was blocked using nets to stop fish movement between the mark and recapture
runs.
North and Middle Fork Rivers
Individual pool, run, riffle, and pocket water habitats were snorkeled
on each reach of the North and Middle Fork Rivers during the summer of
1980. On the North Fork, two observers made underwater fish counts for
each feature. Each observer worked up one side and then down the center
of each feature snorkeled. Features snorkeled on the North Fork consisted
almost entirely of runs and were selected at random for each of the two
river reaches.
A more extensive fish population census was conducted on the Middle
Fork, a small river where stream features are more easily defined. Pool
and run habitat units were snorkeled on a 23 km section of river from
the headwaters to Schafer Meadows, and a 48 km section from Schafer Meadows
to Bear Creek, during mid-summer 1980. Fish counts were made in at least
every third pool and fewer randomly selected runs in both river sections
by a single observer. The observer snorkeled up each side and then down
the center of each feature.
In late summer, fish density estimates were made on two 10 km sections
of the Middle Fork. One section was located upstream from Schafer Meadows
(headwaters to Cox Creek) and one was located downstream (3 km below
Schafer Meadows to Granite Creek). In these two sections, observers made
fish population estimates in every third pool, run, and pocket water feature
and every fifth riffle feature. Surface areas for each feature snorkeled
were calculated and average densities per 100/m2 surface areas by species
for each age class were estimated. The total numbers of each feature
or habitat unit in each 10 km section were counted and population estimates
for each species by age class were made for the 10 km survey sections.
MARK AND RECAPTURE OF FISH
Tag return information from fish recaptured by anglers and department
personnel during 1980 has been included in this report. Returns from
previous years were assessed using the sorting program developed by
Graham et. al. (1980a). Movements were analyzed with emphasis on
juvenile westslope cutthroat. Only fish which moved at least two miles
or were recaptured 30 days after initial tagging were included in the
analysis. Data derived from the tagging program has helped to assess
the importance of tributaries for production of cutthroat and bull trout
as well as identifying the timing and distribution of spawning, feeding,
and smolt migrations for major fish species.
-10-
-------
Cold branding with liquid nitrogen was used prior to 1980 to mark
juvenile fish for movement studies. While a large number of fish could
be marked with this method, the brands were not easily identified by fishermen.
The return rate for branded fish was less than one percent based on a
sample size of over 5,000 bull trout and cutthroat trout. In an attempt
to achieve a better return, we marked juveniles with individually numbered
fingerling or "dangler" tags. Dangler tags have been successfully used
in other areas (Lestelle 1978). The tag is oblong, 5 mm at the widest
diameter, and attached with elastic thread. The thread is sewn under-
neath the skin between the first and second rays of the dorsal fin, tied
off, and trimmed so there are no trailing ends. Tags were placed on fish
from 75 to 250 mm in length. Floy tags were attached to fish over 250
mm in length.
An experiment was run on hatchery fish to assess tag loss and tag
related mortality using dangler tags. One hundred age-one westslope cutthroat
trout 95-110 mm in length were divided into two equal groups; only one
group was tagged. Both were subjected to the same amount of handling
and released into the same tank. After 45 days, five fish lost tags,
no fish died, and the growth rate was the same for both groups.
The distribution of major fish species within the Flathead drainage
has been determined using snorkeling, electrofishing, stream trapping,
and hook and line sampling. Presence of adfluvial cutthroat trout in
streams was assessed by trapping emigrating juveniles in early summer
or marking them with individually numbered tags.
TRAPPING FISH
The primary objective of trapping fish in tributaries was to determine
the presence and the relative importance of migratory trout populations
in each stream. Trapping of fish also provided an opportunity to tag
juvenile westslope cutthroat, whitefish, and bull trout to study fish
movement. Streams were generally trapped in mid-summer after spring run-
off had subsided. Traps were maintained for two weeks. Previous experience
in trapping indicated that many fish had moved downstream during run-
off and precluded a total count of out-migrants. Trap records also indicated
that few fish migrated downstream from late July through September. Limitations
in man-power necessitated maximizing fish catch and minimized length of
the trapping period.
Two streams which had high densities of juvenile cutthroat trout
were trapped during spring run-off. Upstream and downstream traps were
placed in Langford and Cyclone creeks during May to monitor spawning migration
of cutthroat trout and were operated until volcanic ash caused a shutdown
May 18, 1980. During July, two-way traps were positioned in Trail and
Logging creeks while downstream traps were placed in Moose, Red Meadow,
Moran creeks and the North Fork near Polebridge (Figure 3 ). All traps
remained in operation for 14 days, with the exception of the river trap
which was operable for 38 days. Traps and leads were constructed of wire
mesh (13 mm square) similar to that used in 1979. Traps were checked
twice a day beginning at 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.. Bull trout, cutthroat
-11-
-------
Figure 3 . North Fork trap sites for 1980.
-12-
-------
trout, and whitefish were weighed, measured and tagged. Juvenile fish
less than 250 mm were marked with dangler tags and adult fish were floy
tagged.
AGE AND GROWTH
Westslope cutthroat and bull trout were captured by electrofishing
equipment, traps and hook and line. Total length was recorded for each
fish and weights were taken on most fish. Scales were taken between the
dorsal fin and adipose fin above the lateral line. This area of the fish
was chosen for scale collection because of the pattern of scale formation
in juvenile trout. Some otoliths were taken for age confirmation following
methods in Ricker (1971).
Cellulose acetate impressions of the scales were examined at 67X
magnification and ages were assigned. Measurements (in mm) were made
to each annulus and to the anterior edge from the center of the scale.
An attempt was made to determine the number of years each fish collected
in the North and Middle Fork rivers has reared in tributaries. This was
accomplished by analyzing changes of growth increments on the scales.
The lengths, weights, ages, and scale measurements were entered in
files on the Montana State University Sigma 7 computer in Bozeman. The
FIRE I age and growth program (Hesse 1977) was used to calculate length-
weight relationships, condition factors (W xlO^ f |_3), length-frequencies,
and lengths at previous annuli. The program calculates lengths at annulus
formation using three linear methods and one logrithmic method of back-
calculation described in Ricker (1971). The Monastyrsky logrithmic method
calculated lengths at previous annuli based on a log-log plot of fish
length and scale radius. This method expressed the relationship between
fish length and scale radius as well or better than the linear methods
as indicated by correlation coefficients of the regression equations.
Also, backcalculated lengths from the Monastyrsky method agreed more closely
than the other methods with lengths of fish in assigned age classes collected
in late fall or early spring. All backcalculations presented in this
report were generated using the Monastyrsky method.
Validity of the aging and backcalculation techniques was indicated
by the following:
1. Ages assigned to scales agreed closely with ages assigned to
otoliths of the same fish.
2. Mean lengths of fish in assigned age classes closely approximated
age groups identified by length frequency.
3. There was a highly significant relationship between body length
and scale radius.
4. Calculated lengths at each annulus were very similar to mean
lengths of fish in assigned age classes collected in the spring.
-13-
-------
It was found that 61 percent of the juvenile cutthroat in the North
and Middle Fork drainages did not have an annul us at age I. The first
annul us was absent because the scale had not formed after the first growing
season or was too small to show the slow overwinter growth (Graham et.
al. 1980b). Seven or more circuli before the first discernible annul us
was indication of a missing first annulus. For these fish, location of
the first annulus was estimated at the first complete circulus out from
the scale focus. Backcalculations were made including and excluding fish
with missing annuli and results were compared.
Missing annuli were also reported in westlsope cutthroat populations
in the Kootenai drainage, Montana (Bruce May, personal communication,
Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, Libby, 1980), and in the Clearwater and
St. Joe drainages in Idaho (Johnson and Bjornn 1978). Carlander (1969)
reported missing annuli in stream populations of cutthroat from Utah
and Colorado.
Juvenile bull trout scales from North and Middle Fork tributaries
generally had an annulus at age I. In the upper reaches of two Middle
Fork tributaries, 10 percent of the juvenile bull trout appeared to lack
a first annulus on their scales. This could be due to late emergence
or slow growth.
HABITAT EVALUATION
Habitat Characteristics of North and Middle Fork Tributaries
Stream habitat was evaluated using a modification of the system developed
by the Resource Analysis Branch of the British Columbia Ministry of the
Environment (Graham et. al. 1980b).
Each tributary to be surveyed was flown by helicopter and divided
into one or more reaches. Reaches were identified as portions of the
stream having distinct associations of physical habitat characteristics.
Changes in stream gradient resulted in differences in bed material, stream
pattern, and channel morphology, and was the major factor considered in
reach delineation. Major stream features such as log jams, barriers,
and mass wasted banks were also recorded during helicopter surveys.
Measurements of 30 individual physical habitat parameters were made
by ground survey crews for each tributary reach. Major categories of
habitat parameters measured were stream hydraulics, channel morphology,
bed material, bank material, stream pattern, stream cover, pool, pool
class, riffle, run, and pocket water ratios. Log jams, fish barriers,
bank and bed stability, and debris were also measured and recorded.
These physical habitat parameters were measured on a 0.8 to 2.5 km
(0.5 - 1.5 mi.) portion of each reach, depending on reach length. A total
of 25 randomly selected points per kilometer were chosen in each subreach
where measurements were made of selected habitat parameters. On a typical
1.6 km (1 mi) habitat survey section, 15 measurements were made of bed
material compaction and inbededness, D-90, canopy, overhang, debris,
-14-
-------
channel width and average cross-sectional depth. The type of feature
(pool, riffle, run, or pocket water) was recorded at 40 points and the
wetted width was measured at 20 points. Bank material, bed material,
and other parameters were assessed at least three times and the U.S. Forest
Service stream stability form was completed for the section.
Chemical parameters and flows were measured once during late summer
on the lowermost reach of major tributaries. Alkalinity, conductivity,
and flow were measured in the field. Water samples were collected and
returned to the University of Montana Biological Station for analysis
of nitrate (NO3-), total phosphorus (TP), total organic carbon (TOC),
calcium (CA++), magnesium (Mg++), potassium (K+), and sodium (Na+).
All physical-chemical habitat parameters measured for each tributary
reach were entered on standard Montana Interagency Stream Fishery Data
forms (Fish, Wildlife & Parks, Helena 1980). A new portion of the form
was developed to include additional physical-chemical habitat data and
fish population data from North and Middle Fork tributaries. The data
from the completed forms were keypunched and entered in the statewide
data base administered through the Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks
in Helena. The instructions for entering physical-chemical habitat para-
meters and fish population data, including definitions for each parameter
for cards 1-22 of the Standard form, appear in Appendix B. Instructions
and definitions concerning the additional cards added to the forms
(cards 30-38) and an example of the form for these cards is also presented
in Appendix B.
A "dictionary" defining locations of each habitat and fish population
variable in the data base was constructed on the Montana State University
CP-6 Interactive Data Base Processing System. The dictionary enabled
the user to request reports of any physical, chemical, or biological parameter
available for each stream reach.
A regression analysis of physical-chemical habitat parameters and
fish densities was conducted. A total of 40 physical and chemical habitat
parameters were tested for their relationships to fish densities through
the use of simple linear correlation. The step-up and step-down methods
of multiple regression (Snedecor and Cochran 1969) were then utilized
to identify the most significant combination of habitat variables which
interacted to affect fish population densities. All correlation and regression
calculations were made using the "Mregress", "Sumstat", and "Biplot" computer
programs of the Montana State University Statistical Library.
INVENTORY OF BULL TROUT SPAWNING SITES
Eleven major North Fork tributary drainages and 14 Middle Fork drainages
were surveyed for bull trout redds (spawning sites) during September and
October, 1980. The North Fork survey in Montana was conducted from October
6 through 10. In the Middle Fork, the survey began on October 3, and
continued to October 31. Canadian consultants (B.C. Research, Vancouver,
B.C.) contracted by Sage Creek Coal Limited, surveyed five of the North
-15-
-------
Fork drainages above the border and parts of the Flathead River above
Howell Creek on September 29 and October 27, 1980. Their survey was a
combination of low level helicopter flights and selected ground verifications.
Parts of Howell, Kishenehn, and Sage creeks in British Columbia were also
walked by fisheries personnel from Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife,
and Parks late in October. Ground surveys in Montana conducted by Department
personnel covered those sections of stream known to be used for spawning
from previous redd surveys and included the entire length of stream below
the uppermost barrier to spawning bull trout in streams not previously
surveyed.
Timing of these surveys was critical. Observations made during the
spawning season may result in lower counts, and delaying observations
until long after spawning results in siltation of redds, making them difficult
to find. During the spawning season, trips to known spawning areas were
made periodically and surveys were begun when redds were completed and
all fish were off the redds. Other studies indicate spawning activity
continues for four to six weeks (McPhail and Murray 1979) but the peak of
redd construction occurs in less than two weeks in the Flathead drainage.
To be classified as a redd the site must be excavated (Dit) with
a mound of gravel (tailspill) piled to the rear (Reiser and Bjornn 1979).
The tailspill is made up of loosely compacted gravel which is easily moved
by digging with fingers. The location of the redd was carefully checked
so the depression did not result from a flow deflector such as a rock
or a log. In areas of concentrated spawning multiple redds may occur.
The female may begin excavating a redd then move slightly and complete
the redd. As a complicating factor, a pair of bulls may finish spawning
and move out while a different pair moves in and excavates a redd which
overlaps part of the first. These are counted as separate redds only
where there are well defined pits and tailspills for each redd. Some
bulls move around extensively while spawning and create redds that are
extremely long (over 4 m) and/or wide (over 3 m). Most redds were easily
recognized by the clean appearance of the disturbed area. However, some
redds had already become dark with silt or algae by the time surveys were
commenced.
The parameters measured for each redd were length, width, depth,
distance to nearest cover, and location in the stream. Eight gravel samples
were collected from bull trout redds in four North Fork streams. These
were oven dried and shaken through a series of graduated sieves. The
sieve sizes we used constitute the Wentworth scale. Velocities were recorded
at the head of each redd at a height of 0.4 of the distance from the stream
bottom using a Marsh McBirney current meter. Areas of numerous redd sites
were indexed on topographic maps and compared with previous year's locations.
A stepwise method of multiple regression was used to identify relationships
between redd numbers and various habitat parameters. Parameters analyzed
included stream order, percent riffle, percent run, stream stability score,
D-90, elevation, gradient, percent fines, percent gravel, overhang and
wetted width.
-16-
-------
A complete survey of cutthroat trout spawning sites is impossible
in most streams because of the high water conditions during the spawning
season. Identification of general spawning areas can be made through
observation of young-of-the-year fish, but this is also difficult to do
on a basin-wide scale. Spawning sites were observed in Langford and Yakinikak
creeks May 5, and June 18, 1980, respectively. Six gravel samples were
collected in the two North Fork tributaries and analyzed as described
for bull trout.
FOOD HABITS OF CUTTHROAT AND BULL TROUT
Major Fish Food Organisms
In order to effectively analyze trout food habits information, the
composition of the available benthic insect food supply must be determined.
Studies of the benthic insect communities in the North Fork drainage were
made during 1975 and 1976 by personnel of the Flathead 208 project. Further
studies have been conducted by the Flathead Research Group (Stanford et.
al. 1979 and 1980), particularly concerning Trichoptera and Plecoptera.
Peterson et. al. (1977) reported benthic insect community compositions
in some North Fork tributaries.
Little information has been published concerning the benthic community
of the Middle Fork drainage. The Flathead 208 personnel sampled the lower
Middle Fork in 1975-1976. Stanford et. al. (1979 and 1980) have studied
the insect conmunities, particularly Plecoptera and Trichoptera, in the
lower and middle portions of the drainage.
Benthic insect samples were collected from the Middle Fork of the
Flathead River near Bear Creek and the headwaters area of the Middle Fork
(Strawberry Creek) to determine the nature of the benthic community in
the upper drainage. These samples were collected from a 0.33 m2 portion
of the stream bottom with a modified kick net and processed following
methods in Graham et. al. (1980c).
Adult aquatic insects were also collected by field crews throughout
the drainage. These insects were preserved in 75 percent ethanol at time
of collection. Identifications to species were provided by Dr. George
Roemhild, Montana State University (Plecoptera, Ephemeroptera) and Dr.
D.G. Denning (Trichoptera).
Analysis of Cutthroat and Bull Trout Stomach Contents
Stomachs were collected from fish taken incidental to other operations
in the North and Middle Fork drainages in 1980. Trapping of tributaries
and fishing during the summer accounted for nearly all samples in the
North Fork drainage. Most samples in the Middle Fork were taken by hook
and line sampling or electrofishing with a backpack shocker. Stomachs
were sectioned from the base of the esophagus to the pylorus and placed
directly into labeled vials of 10 percent formalin.
During the winter, the preserved stomachs were emptied and analyzed
-17-
-------
in the lab. The contents were identified, counted, and volumes were measured.
Most aquatic insects were identified to family and most terrestrial insects
were keyed to order. Since many insects were dismembered, head capsules
were counted to determine numbers. A 10 milliliter graduated centrifuge
tube was used to determine volumes by displacement. Any volume less than
0.05 ml was assigned a value of 0.01 ml.
Stomach contents were expressed in percent number, percent volume,
or frequency of occurrence (Graham et. al. 1980b). The Index of Relative
Importance (IRI) combines these three values into an arithmetic mean.
No caloric analysis of stomach contents was undertaken this year since
no acceptable caloric values for the various families identified were
available.
MIDDLE FORK CREEL CARD SURVEY
Voluntary creel cards described in Graham et. al. (1980b) were distributed in
the summer of 1980 on the Middle Fork above Bear Creek. Card distribution
boxes were located at Bear Creek, Twenty-Five Mile Creek and Granite Creek
trailheads, Schafer Meadows airstrip, and Gooseberry and Gateway U.S.
Forest Service cabins. The cards were also distributed to fishermen by
Fish, Wildlife and Parks field crews and U.S. Forest Service personnel.
The creel cards were addressed and stamped and could either be mailed
or placed in any of the card distribution boxes by the fishermen. Data
from returned cards were used to calculate percent composition and catch
per hour of each species.
Incidental hook and line sampling by department personnel was conducted
in the Middle Fork drainage above Bear Creek and in the North Fork drainage
during the summer of 1980 for the purpose of scale collection, fish tagging
and indication of species composition. Fly fishing was the major method
used in sampling cutthroat and mountain whitefish. Spin fishing with
bait or lure and fly fishing with large streamers were the methods used
to sample mature bull trout. The calculated percent composition and catch
rate for each species were calculated and compared to results from previous
years.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
FISH DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE
North and Middle Fork Tributaries
Fish Distribution and Density Estimates
Fish population estimates were made on 59 North Fork and 48 Middle
Fork tributary reaches during the summer of 1980. These estimates were
made to obtain baseline information on the fishery resource and to identify
and quantify critical rearing areas for westslope cutthroat and bull trout.
Fish density estimates in snorkel sections were considered representative
of the reach because the randomly picked snorkel sections were very similar
in stream feature ratio to the entire reach.
-18-
-------
By analyzing these fish density estimates and related habitat measurements,
important components of the habitat which influence fish populations can
be identified. The potential rearing capacity of each tributary and its
importance to the Flathead system can then be assessed.
Westslope cutthroat trout have been found in all 62 tributaries of
the Middle Fork and the U.S. portion of the North Fork. Presence of adfluvial
cutthroat in many tributaries to the Middle Fork remains unknown due to
the relatively small amount of trapping and tag return information available.
Bull trout have been observed in 19 (50%) of the major North Fork tributaries
below the Canadian border and 18 (75%) of the tributaries of the Middle
Fork surveyed to date (Tables 2 - 4).
The contribution by large lakes in Glacier Park to fish populations
downstream from the lakes in both the lower North Fork and Middle Fork
is unknown. All the lakes contain established populations of westslope
cutthroat and bull trout (Peterson et. al. 1977).
Estimates have been made for a total of 142 tributary reaches during
the summers of 1979 and 1980. In the 117 reaches surveyed which contained
fish, observers recorded a total of 4,109 cutthroat, 413 juvenile bull
trout, and 411 mountain whitefish. Cutthroat were present in 112 of the
reaches while bull trout were observed in 52 reaches. Mountain whitefish
were observed in 31 tributary reaches.
Cutthroat were the only trout species observed in 67 of the tributary
reaches while only five reaches contained bull trout exclusively. A total
of 45 reaches contained both cutthroat and bull trout.
Of the 14 major tributary drainages surveyed in the Middle Fork,
13 contained juvenile bull trout. However, they were found in fewer reaches
of those major tributary drainages than were cutthroat trout. Juvenile
bull trout were found in 13 of the 20 major North Fork tributary drainages.
In the major North Fork tributary drainages in which they were found,
they were present in fewer reaches than were cutthroat trout. Juvenile
bull trout were present in a total of 33 Middle Fork tributary reaches
and 19 North Fork tributary reaches.
This restricted distribution may be due to the selectivity of adfluvial
bull trout spawners for certain types of reaches. However, juvenile bull
trout were observed in some reaches where adults probably would not spawn
due to the large size of bed material. Juvenile bull trout were also difficult
to observe and may have been overlooked in some reaches.
Cutthroat and bull trout densities have been calculated by age class
for 117 North and Middle Fork tributary reaches to date (Tables 5 and 6 ).
Total density for each species refers to age I and older trout. Estimates
of age 0 trout were not considered as accurate as other age classes due
to difficulty in observation.
Densities of age I and older cutthroat in the 112 reaches in which
they were present ranged from 0.1 to 74.2 fish per 100 m2 surface area.
-19-
-------
Table 2. Current information on fish distribution in west bank North
Fork creeks: + = species present, - = species absent,
? = unknown, needs further study.
Cutthroat
Creek
Adfluvial
Resident
Bull trout
Canyon
.
+
&
&
McGi nnis
+
+
Bi g
+
+
+
Langford
+
+
+
Lookout
-
+
-
Elelehum
-
+
-
Hallawat
+
+
+
Skookoleel
?
+
+
Nicola
-
+
+
Kletomus
+
+
+
Werner
+
+
+
Coal
+
+
+
Cyclone
+
+
-
Deadhorse
?
+
-
South Fork Coal
+
+
+
Mathias
+
+
4/
Moran
+
+
Hay
?
+
Red Meadow
+
+
+
Moose
+
+
+
Whale
+
+
+
Shorty
+
+
+
Ninko
-
+
-
Teepee
-
+
-
Trail
+
+
+
Ketchi kan
+
+
-
Yaki ni kak
+
+
+
Antley
-
+
-
Nokio
-
+
-
Tuchuck
+
+
-
Colts
-
+
-
1/ - Possible resident population
y - Bulls present below falls 1/4 mile from mouth
-20-
-------
Table 3. Current information on fish distribution in Glacier Park and
Canadian creeks: + = species present, - = species absent,
? = unknown, needs further study.
Cutthroat
Creek
Adfluvi al
Resident
Bull "
Glacier Park
Camas
+
+
Anaconda
+
+
-
Dutch
+
+
-
Logging
?
+
+
Quartz
?
+
+
Bowman
?
+
-
Akokala
+
+
-
Ford
?
+
-
Ki ntla
?
+
-
Spruce
+
+
-
Starvation
+
+
+
Kishenehn
+
+
+
Sage
+
V
+
+
British Columbia
Howell
+
+
+
Cabi n
+
+
+
Couldrey
+
+
+
-21-
-------
Table 4. Current information on fish distribution in Middle Fork creeks:
+ = species present, - = species absent, ? = unknown, needs
further study.
Cutthroat
Creek
Adfluvial
Resident
Bull trout
Sculpin
Argosy
?
+
+
7
Bowl
7
+
+
+
Basin
7
+
+
+
Calbic
1
+
+
7
Clack
?
+
+
7
Cox
7
+
-
+
Dolly Varden
?
+
+
7
Gateway
?
+
+
?
Grani te
7
+
+
7
Lake
?
+
+
7
Long
?
+
+
7
Lodgepole
?
+
+
+
Miner
-
+
-
7
Morri son
?
+
+
7
Schafer
7
+
+
+
W. Fork Schafer
?
+
7
7
Strawberry
?
+
+
+
E. Fork Strawberry
7
+
+
7
Trail
7
+
+
7
S. Fork Trai1
7
+
-
7
Whistler
7
+
+
?
Char!ie
7
+
+
?
Bergsicker
7
+
+
7
Twenty-five Mile
7
+
-
7
Challenge
7
+
+
7
-------
Table 5. Mean densities (No./lOO m2) of cutthroat and juvenile bull trout by age class in North
Fork tributaries surveyed during the summers of 1979 and 1980. Total for each species
refers to age classes I, II, and 111+ combined.
Fish
per 100 m2
surface
area
Cutthroat
trout
Bull trout
Stream
Reach
No.
Age
0
Age
I
Age
II
Age
II1 +
Total
Age
0
Age
I
Age
II
Age
II1 +
Total
Canyon Cr.
001
—
—
0.2
0.8
1.0
—
McGinnis Cr.
0011
—
—
0.7
2.3
3.0
—
—
—
1.5
1.5
Kimmerly Cr.
0011
—
—
1.9
5.3
7.2
—
—
—
—
—
Big Cr.
001
002
______
—
_ _ _
0.1
0.1
0.7
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.3
Langford Cr.
001J
002
2.7
5.0
1.8
13.5
38.6
60.9
40.4
74.4
—
—
—
—
Hallowatt Cr.
001
002
—
—
0.2
0.2
0.6
—
0.4
0.8
0.8
0.4
Werner Cr.
0011
—
—
0.5
1.7
2.2
—
—
—
—
—
Kletomus Cr.
0011
—
—
—
0.3
0.3
—
—
—
—
—
Camas Cr.
002
—
—
0.2
0.7
0.9
—
—
—
—
—
Dutch Cr.
001
002
003
2.1
10.6
0.7
1.5
5.7
2.3
3.8
1.3
5.2
2.7
1.6
9.0
12.2
2.9
—
—
_____
Anaconda Cr.
001
002
3.2
3.6
3.8
0.5
3.1
2.6
10.5
3.1
—
—
—
_ _
—
Coal Cr.
001
003
004
0.7
0.2
1.2
0.9
2.4
1.0
3.4
1.2
0.9
7.0
2.2
—
1.2
1.4
0.4
—
1.6
1.4
-------
Table 5. (Continued)
Fi sh
per 100 m2
surface
area
Cutthroat
trout
Bull trout
Stream
Reach
No.
Age
0
Age
I
Age
II
Age
III +
Total
Age
0
Age
I
Age
II
Age
III +
Total
Cyclone Cr.
001
34.9
2.9
5.1
4.9
12.9
Dead Horse Cr.
OOlJ
002
1.7
0.6
0.6
0.3
1.2
0.9
1.8
_ _ _
_ _ _
S.F. Coal Cr.
0011
—
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.7
Mathias Cr.
001
—
—
1.5
—
1.5
—
—
0.5
0.2
0.7
Logging Cr.
001
3.2
0.9
1.0
0.7
2.6
—
—
—
Quartz Cr.
001
—
1.9
1.1
1.5
4.5
—
—
—
Cummings Cr.
001
0.5
0.7
1.5
3.7
5.9
—
—
—
—
Moran Cr.
001
002
003
0.6
4.2
9.8
0.5
0.2
6.9
3.6
0.2
20.9
4.1
0.4
0.2
—
0.2
0.6
0.8
Hay Cr.
001
002
003
004
1.2
0.7
0.1
1.7
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.6
1.1
2.9
7.0
3.5
2.3
3.4
7.6
4.3
4.0
—
—
—
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.3
Bowman Cr.
001
—
0.1
0.1
11.0
11.2
—
—
—
—
Akokala Cr.
001
002
0.6
0.4
0.7
0.1
1.3
1.3
4.8
1.8
6.8
—
—
—
—
—
Parke Cr.
001}
002
2.1
1.9
1.2
2.2
2.1
3.2
1.7
7.3
5.0
—
_ _ _
_ _ _
—
Long Bow Cr.
0011
—
0.3
2.6
3.8
6.7
—
-------
Table 5. (Continued)
Fi sh
per 100 m2
surface
area
Cutthroat
trout
Bull trout
Stream
Reach
No.
Age
0
Age
I
Age
II
Age
III +
Total
Age
0
Age
I
Age
II
Age
III +
Tota'
Red Meadow Cr.
001
002
003
4.5
7.9
1.1
2.8
3.8
1.2
0.5
9.7
3.4
11.2
14.6
4.6
—
1.1
0.4
4.4
3.4
1.6
0.8
0.4
7.1
4.2
Moose Cr.
001
002
003
3.4
0.4
2.4
9.4
5.9
5.3
12.4
10.1
3.1
5.6
46.0
10.8
27.4
62.0
—
—
—
Whale Cr.
001
002
—
—
—
0.6
0.6
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.3
1.3
0.4
1.6
Shorty Cr.
001
—
0.3
-.4
0.4
1.1
0.7
0.4
0.7
0.5
1.6
Ford Cr.
001,
002
003
5.0
3.9
0.3
5.0
0.7
0.9
4.7
2.7
9.8
4.7
3.7
—
—
—
—
Kintla Cr.
001
0.1
0.2
1.0
0.7
1.9
—
—
—
—
Trail Cr.
001
—
—
—
0.6
0.6
1.6
0.1
0.9
0.7
1.7
Ketchikan Cr.
OOlJ
002
003
29.8
1.7
8.1
4.8
3.8
4.1
11.5
4.7
4.1
17.3
8.6
8.9
33.6
17.1
17.1
—
— — —
— — —
— — —
— — —
Yakinikak Cr.
004
005
—
0.4
0.1
5.7
0.7
6.1
0.8
—
—
Tuchuck Cr.
001
2.3
2.8
6.9
9.3
19.0
—
—
—
—
—
Starvation Cr.
001
002
3.2
0.3
0.9
0.3
1.1
0.4
2.0
1.0
1.6
1.5
0.7
1.0
0.6
1.0
1.3
3.5
-------
Table 5. (Conti nued)
Fi sh per 100 m2
surface area
Cutthroat
trout
Bull trout
Stream
Reach
No.
Age
0
Age
I
Age
II
Age
II1+ Total
Age Age
0 I
Age Age
II III+
Total
Spruce Cr.
001
002
—
2.2
1.0
5.8
2.6 3.6
1.8 9.8
— —
_
—
Sage Cr.
001
0.4
0.1
—
11.0 11.1
— —
— —
—
1: Based on 75 m snorkel section
I
ro
CTi
-------
Table 6. Mean densities (No./lOO m2) of cutthroat and juvenile bull trout in Middle Fork tributaries
surveyed during the summer of 1979 and 1980. Total for each species refers to age classes
I, II, and 111+ combined.
Fish per 100 m2 surface area
Cutthroat trout Bull trout
Stream
Reach
No.
Age
0
Age
I
Age
II
Age
III +
Total
Age
0
Age
I
Age
II
Age
II1 +
Total
Charlie Cr.
001
0.5
1.0
2.0
1.0
4.0
1.5
5.6
0.7
6.3
002
—
—
—
0.3
0.3
4.5
4.2
—
8.7
Long Cr.
001
0.2
0.2
002
0.2
—
0.2
0.5
0.7
0.2
0.7
0.3
1.2
003
—
0.2
0.5
0.1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.9
1.9
Bergsicker
001
—
—
—
0.6
0.6
—
0.4
—
0.4
Twenty-Fi ve
003
5.7
5.0
3.0
13.7
Mile Cr.
Granite Cr.
001
0.5
0.5
0.7
1.4
2.1
002
0.2
1.3
1.5
0.1
0.2
—
0.2
Challenge
001
1.3
3.8
6.6
3.5
13.9
—
—
0.25
0.25
Lake Cr.
001
0.3
2.1
2.4
_ _ _
_ — —
_ _ _
002
—
0.5
0.5
—
—
Miner Cr.
001
__ _ _
1.3
1.3
_ _ _
_
_ _ _
_ _ _
002
2.8
2.8
—
—
Morrison Cr.
001
0.2
0.2
_ _ _
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.8
002
0.7
0.7
0.5
1.1
2.4
4.0
003
0.6
3.0
3.6
—
2.7
5.1
7.8
004
—
—
—
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.3
1.3'
-------
Table 6. (Continued)
Fish per 100 m2 surface area
Cutthroat trout Bull trout
Reach
Age
Age
Age
Age
Age
Age
Age
Age
Stream
No.
0
I
II
111 +
Total
0
I
II
II1 +
Total
Lodgepole Cr.
001
__ _ _
_____
0.1
0.4
0.5
...
0.3
___
0.4
002
0.2
0.8
2.3
1.2
4.3
—
0.2
—
0.2
0.4
Whistler Cr.
001
—
—
0.2
1.2
1.4
—
0.5
5.5
1.2
7.2
Schafer Cr.
001
0.1
0.1
0.1
_ _ _
_
0.1
002
—
0.1
0.5
1.1
1.7
—
—
—
003
—
0.8
3.1
3.9
—
004
—
1.3
1.7
0.9
3.9
—
—
W.F. Schafer Cr
.001
—
0.7
2.2
2.6
5.5
—
—
—
—
Dolly Varden Cr.
001
—
—
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
—
—
0.1
Argosy Cr.
001
—
0.2
1.0
1.2
0.4
0.4
002
—
2.2
7.9
1.3
11.4
—
0.9
0.2
—
1.1
Calbic Cr.
001
—
2.4
4.1
0.6
7.1
—
0.6
—
0.6
Cox Cr.
001
...
0.1
0.3
0.4
_ _ _
_ _ „
_ _ _
_ _ _
002
1.1
1.1
2.7
6.5
10.3
—
—
—
—
—
Clack Cr.
003
—
—
0.6
0.6
—
—
—
—
Bowl Cr.
001
0.2
0.2
_ _ _
_ _ _
_ _ _
_ _ _
___
002
—
—
0.3
0.3
—
003
0.1
1.0
1.2
2.4
4.6
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.8
004
—
0.3
—
0.6
0.9
—
0.1
0.3
0.4
005
—
—
0.2
—
0.2
—
—
0.2
0.2
-------
Table 6. (Continued)
Fish per 100 m2 surface area
Cutthroat trout Bull trout
Stream
Reach
Age
Age
Age
Age
Age
Age
Age
Age
No.
0
I
II
III +
Total
0
I
II
III +
Total
Basin Cr.
001
0.4
3.0
4.2
4.5
11.7
0.1
0.1
002
1.2
1.3
3.4
2.0
6.7
0.5
0.1
0.6
003
—
0.2
1.4
11.9
13.5
—
0.7
0.7
Strawberry Cr.
001
0.1
0.1
_
_ _ _
_ _ _
0.1
0.1
002
—
0.7
2.6
2.0
5.3
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.7
003
—
—
0.1
0.1
—
0.2
—
0.2
004
—
0.2
0.4
—
0.6
0.2
3.1
—
3.3
E~F.Strawberry
001
—
—
2.1
9.6
11.7
—
0.6
0.8
1.4
Trail Cr.
001
—
—
0.3
0.3
0.7
0.4
0.7
0.5
1.6
002
—
0.3
—
0.8
1.1
—
—
0.3
0.3
Gateway Cr.
001
—
0.5
0.3
0.8
0.4
0.5
0.2
1.1
002
—
0.4
1.3
1.7
—
003
0.6
3.3
4.0
3.2
10.5
—
_ _ _
004
2.0
1.8
18.7
6.7
27.2
—
—
-------
Mean age I and older cutthroat density was 7.2 fish per 100 m2. This
is equivalent to approximately 44 fish per 100 linear meters of stream.
Horner (1978) reported densities of 5.5 age I and older cutthroat and
rainbow trout per 100 m2 surface area in Big Spring Creek, Idaho during
1976. Densities of juvenile bull trout were much small than cutthroat
densities. In the 50 reaches where bull trout were observed, the densities
of age I and older fish ranged from 0.1 to 8.7 and averaged 1.7 juvenile
bull trout per 100 m2 surface area. This is equivalent to approximately
10 bull trout per 100 linear meters of stream. Adult adfluvial bull trout
were observed in some tributary reaches but were not included in density
estimates. Densities of trout and char in small northern Idaho streams
draining the Gospel Hump Wilderness Area were similar to those found in
the Flathead tributaries (Idaho Coop. Fish, Res. Unit, Moscow unpub.
data).
Total cutthroat densities average 10.1 fish per 100 m2 in North Fork
tributaries and 4.2 per 100 m2 in Middle Fork tributaries. Mean total
bull trout densities were 1.5 fish per 100 m2 in North Fork tributaries
and 1.7 fish per 100 m2 in Middle Fork tributaries.
Relatively large densities of cutthroat or juvenile bull trout in
a reach indicate the high value of that reach as a rearing area for that
species. These rearing areas and the stream corridors leading to them
are critically important for maintaining populations of cutthroat and
bull trout in the Flathead River-Lake system. Critical rearifig areas
for cutthroat identified in the North Fork drainage include 17 reaches
in Langford, Moose, Ketchikan, Moran, Cyclone, Tuchuck, Bowman, Red Meadow,
Sage, Dutch, and the South Fork of Coal creeks. Critical cutthroat rearing
areas in the Middle Fork drainage identified to date include nine reaches
in Gateway, Basin, Challenge, Twenty-five Mile, Argosy, Cox, and the East
Fork of Strawberry creeks. This is not a complete list because one-third
of the Middle Fork drainage has not been surveyed.
Critical rearing areas identified in the North and Middle Fork drainages
all supported densities of age I and older cutthroat larger than 10 fish/100
m2. Many other reaches supporting somewhat smaller densities are also
important as rearing areas for cutthroat.
Critical areas for bull trout rearing as indicated by total densities
larger than 1.5 fish per 100 m2 were 7 reaches in Red Meadow, Starvation,
Trail, Coal, Whale, Shorty, and McGinnis creeks in the North Fork drainage.
A total of nine reaches in Whistler, Morrison, Charlie, Strawberry, Granite,
Long, and Trail creeks were identified as critical rearing areas for bull
trout in the portion of the Middle Fork drainage surveyed to date.
At least two, and possibly three species of sculpins have been identified
during a taxonomic study in two North Fork drainages (Fish, Wildlife and
Parks unpub. data 1980). Fresh sculpins were keyed out on the basis of
ten morphological characteristics and then subjected to electrophoretic
analysis. Presence or absence of palatine teeth appeared to be the most
reliable meristic characteristic. The slimy sculpins C. cogn&tu* and
shorthead sculpin C. were most abundant. Only shorthead sculpins
-30-
-------
were found in Trail Creek. Thirteen of twenty sculpins from the Coal
Creek drainage were identified as slimy sculpins, five were shorthead
sculpins, and two had characteristics of both. A few preserved specimens
were identified as mottled sculpins, C bcuji&L, but further electrophoretic
verification is needed. The distribution of sculpins in the North Fork
with species identification for certain streams is presented in Tables 7
and 8. Information about sculpins throughout the Flathead drainage is
limited and further study on the life history, distribution, and importance
in the food chain would be beneficial.
Densities of Cutthroat and Bull Trout by Stream Feature
A total of 333 pools, 425 runs, 441 riffles, and 108 pocket water
areas were snorkeled in 1979 and 1980. Mean fish densities by age class
for each species is presented in Table 9. Densities of age II and III+
cutthroat were largest in pools, followed by runs, pocket water areas,
and riffles in order of decreasing abundance. Age 0 cutthroat densities
were largest in runs, while age I densities were about equal in runs and
pools.
Bull trout densities varied little between features, except for age
II fish which had substantially larger densities in pools than in other
features (Table 9).
Biomass Estimates
Biomass estimates for cutthroat, bull trout, and mountain whitefish
were made for the purpose of estimating fishery productivity of North
and Middle Fork tributaries. Mean biomass estimates for cutthroat and
bull trout in 117 reaches in which trout were found are given in Table 10.
Mean total biomass of age I and older cutthroat was 224.9 g per 100 m2
surface area or 1.4 kg per 100 linear meters of stream. The mean biomass
of bull trout in the 52 reaches in which they were present was 104.3 g
per 100 m2 surface area or 0.65 kg per 100 linear meters of stream.
Mean biomass of mountain whitefish in the 31 reaches in which they
were present was 80.1 g per 100 m2 surface are or .5 kg per 100 linear
meters of stream.
Snorkeling - Electrofishing Comparisons
Population estimates for cutthroat by age class were made by snorkeling
and electrofishing in 12 North Fork tributary reaches (Tables 11 - 15).
Numbers of age 0 fish estimated by snorkeling were generally higher than
numbers estimated by electrofishing. Numbers of age 0 fish are difficult
to estimate by any method which makes these results questionable. Graham
(1977) reported difficulties in observing age 0 fish because of their
size and habitat associations. Snorkeling estimates for age I cutthroat
were larger than electrofishing estimates, while estimates of mean numbers
of age II and III+ fish were similar between methods. Total estimates
of age I and older cutthroat made by snorkeling averaged 25 percent higher
than electrofishing estimates for the 12 sections. The differences between
-31-
-------
Table 7. Current information on sculpin distribution in west bank North
Fork creeks: by method of species identification used: + =
species present, - = species absent, ? = unknown.
Sculpin C. con^a6Lt6 C. cognatiu C. baoixLi
Creek present Morph Electro Morph Electro Morph only
Canyon
?
McGinnis
?
Big
+
Langford
+
Lookout
-
Elelehum
-
Hallawat
+
Skookoleel
-
Nicola
-
Kletomus
-
Werner
-
Coal
+
Cyclone
+
Deadhorse
-
South Fork Coal
-
Mathias
-
Moran
+
Hay
+
Red Meadow
+
Moose
+
Whale
+
Shorty
-
Ninko
?
Teepee
?
Trail
+
Ketchi kan
-
Yaki ni kak
-
Antley
-
Noki o
-
T uchuck
-
Colts
?
-32-
-------
Table 8. Current information on sculpin distribution on east bank North
Fork creeks by method of species identification used: + =
species present, - = species absent, ? = species unknown.
Sculpin C. confiUAUA C. cogncutui, C. bcuAdi
Creek present Morph Electro Morph Electro Morph only
Glacier Park
Camas + +
Anaconda +
Dutch +
Logging + +
Quartz +
Bowman +
Akokala + +
Ford + + +
Spruce +
Starvation + +
Kishenehn + + + ?
Sage +
British Columbia
Howell +
Cabin +
Cauldrey +
-33-
-------
Table 9. Mean densities (No. fish/100 m2) by age class of westslope
cutthroat and bull trout in run, riffle, pool & pocket water
habitat units (features) snorkeled in 1979 and 1980. Number
of features snorkeled is in parentheses.
Feature or habitat use
Species
Pool
(333)
Run
(425)
Riffle
(441)
Pocket water
(108)
Cutthroat trout
Age 0
Age I
Age II
Age III+
Ages I and
older
Bull trout
Age 0
Age I
Age II
Age 111 +
Ages I and
older
.8
1.6
4.8
12.3
18.7
.2
.6
1.7
.1
2.3
1.7
1.9
2.9
4.8
9.7
.5
.7
.5
.2
1.6
.7
.4
.5
1.5
2.1
.1
.6
.4
.1
1.2
.6
.9
2.9
3.1
6.9
.1
.1
.3
.3
.7
Total trout
22.0
13.5
4.1
8.3
Table 10. Mean biomass estimates (g/100 m2) for cutthroat and bull
trout of each age class in North and Middle Fork tributary
reaches. Total refers to ages I, II and III+ combined.
Number of
Age class
Species
reaches
0
I
II
111 +
Total
Cutthroat trout
112
2.1
10.5
44.7
169.7
224.9
Bull trout
52
n. 3
3.7
17.9
82.6
104.2
-34-
-------
Table 11. Comparison between snorkel and electrofishing counts of age
0 cutthroat in 12 North Fork tributary reaches.
Electrofishing Snorkel Difference
Stream
Reach
Date
count
count
(Percent)
Red Meadow
1
8/79
3
35
-32(91)
Red Meadow
2
8/79
4
6
-2(33)
Red Meadow
2a
8/79
1
0
-
Red Meadow
3
8/79
0
0
Yaki ni kak
1
8/79
0
0
-
Yaki ni kak
2
8/79
0
0
-
Tuchuck
1
8/79
0
10
-
Coal
1
9/79
2
5
-3(60)
Moose
2-/
7/80
6
1
+5(500)
Moose
3^
8/80
0
0
Kimmerly
1-1/
9/80
2
0
Hay
3^
8/80
0
0
-
Mean^ 1.5 4.75 -3.25(68)
1: 75 m section
2: Paired T test indicates no significant difference between means
at the 95% level (P=.272 T=1.16).
-35-
-------
Table 12. Comparison between snorkeling and electrofishing counts of
age I cutthroat in 12 North Fork tributary reaches.
Electrofishing
Snorkel
Difference
Stream
Reach
Date
count
count
(Percent)
Red Meadow
1
8/79
10
69
-59(86)
Red Meadow
2
8/79
1
3
-2(67)
Red Meadow
2a
8/79
2
11
-9(82)
Red Meadow
3
8/79
0
0
-
Yakini kak
1
8/79
8
0
Yaki ni kak
2
8/79
0
0
-
Tuchuck
1
8/79
7
13
-6(46)
Coal
1
9/79
17
11
+6(55)
Moose
2-1/
7/80
12
32
-20(63)
Moose
$
8/80
12
15
-3(20)
Kimmerly
iy
9/80
6
0
-
Hay
&
8/80
7
0
-
Mean-' 6.8 12.83 -6.03(47)
1: 75 m section
2: Paired T test indicates no significant difference between mean
at the 95% level (P=.285 T=1.28).
-36-
-------
Table 13. Comparison between snorkel and electrofishing counts of
age II cutthroat in 12 North Fork tributary reaches.
Electrofishing
Snorkel
Difference
Stream
Reach
Date
count
count
(Percent)
Red Meadow
1
8/79
18
25
-7(28)
Red Meadow
2
8/79
11
2
+9(450)
Red Meadow
2a
8/79
8
17
-9(53)
Red Meadow
3
8/79
3
5
-2(40)
Yaki ni kak
1
8/79
2
2
-
Yakinikak
2
8/79
2
1
+1(0)
Tuchuck
1
8/79
20
29
-9(31)
Coal
1
9/79
15
18
-3(17)
Moose
2—
7/80
15
21
-6(29)
Moose
3^
8/80
20
29
-9(31)
Kimmerly
1-1/
9/80
18
6
+12(200)
Hay
3^
8/80
11
4
+7(175)
Mean^ 11.9 13.25 -1.35(10)
1: 75 m section
2: Paired T test indicates no significant difference between means
at the 95% level (P=.543 T=.628).
-37-
-------
Table 14. Comparison between snorkel and electrofishing counts of
age 111+ cutthroat in 12 North Fork tributary reaches.
Electrofishing
Snorkel
Difference
Stream
Reach
Date
count
count
(Percent)
Red Meadow
1
8/79
10
11
-1(9)
Red Meadow
2
8/79
5
9
-4(44)
Red Meadow
2a
8/79
7
25
-17(68)
Red Meadow
3
8/79
7
17
-10(59)
Yaki ni kak
1
8/79
11
30
-19(63)
Yakinikak
2
8/79
4
5
-1(20)
Tuchuck
1
8/79
22
39
-17(44)
Coal
1
9/79
33
17
+16(94)
Moose
2—
7/80
8
19
-11(58)
Moose
3^
8/80
10
23
-13(57)
Kimmerly
l-7
9/80
31
16
+15(94)
Hay
8/80
23
8
+15(188)
Meart^
14.25
18.25
-4(22)
1: 75 m section
2: Paired T test indicates no significant difference between means
at the 95% level (P=.314 T=1.06).
-38-
-------
Table 15. Comparison between snorkel and electrofishing counts of
age I and older cutthroat in 12 North Fork tributary reaches.
Electrofishing
Snorkel
Difference
Stream
Reach
Date
count
count
(Percent)
Red Meadow
1
8/79
38
104
+66(63)
Red Meadow
2
8/79
17
14
+3(21)
Red Meadow
2a
8/79
17
53
-36(68)
Red Meadow
3
8/79
10
22
-12(55)
Yakinikak
1
8/79
21
32
-11(34)
Yaki nikak
2
8/79
6
6
0( )
Tuchuck
1
8/79
49
81
-32(40)
Coal
1
9/79
65
46
+19(41)
Moose
2-/
7/80
35
72
-37(51)
Moose
3^
8/80
42
67
-25(37)
Kirrenerly
&
9/80
57
22
+35(159)
Hay
3^
8/80
41
12
+29(242)
Mean-
33.2
44.3
-11.1(25)
1: 75 m section
2: Paired T test indicates no significant difference between means
at the 95% level (P=.227 T=1.28)
-39-
-------
the mean estimates by each method were tested (paired t test) for each
age class and for age I and older cutthroat combined. There was no significant
difference in the estimates made by the two methods at the 95 percent
level.
Electrofishing and snorkeling estimates were made for cutthroat on
one Middle Fork tributary. The electrofishing estimate was made by the
mark and recapture method and was 20 percent higher than the snorkeling
estimate for age I and older cutthroat. Comparison of the two methods
indicates that snorkeling and electrofishing estimates of cutthroat trout
numbers in North and Middle Fork tributaries-are reasonably comparable,
although snorkeling provided a better estimate of the number of age I
and older cutthroat trout then the two pass method of electrofishing.
Estimates of cutthroat by the two methods varied between streams, probably
due to differences in physical habitat characteristics of the sections.
It appears that snorkeling is more effective than electrofishing for estimating
cutthroat numbers in streams where levels of debris and turbulence are
not great. However, in sections which have large amounts of debris or
water turbulence, electrofishing is probably a more effective method than
snorkeli ng.
Graham and Sekulich (in preparation) reported snorkeling estimates
of cutthroat numbers were comparable to estimates made by various methods
of removal. Northcote and Wilkie (1963) found snorkeling to be an effective
irethod of estimating numbers for several species of fish.
Estimates of bull trout numbers for each age class made by snorkeling
and electrofishing in four 100 m sections of North Fork tributary reaches
are given in Tables 16 - 18. Electrofishing estimates for age 0 and
age I bull trout were considerably higher than snorkeling estimates while
estimates of age II and age III+ bull trout by both methods were similar.
Electrofishing estimates of age I, II, and 111+ bull trout combined was
27 percent larger than snorkeling estimates for the five sections. Paired
t tests indicated no significant difference between the means of the estimates
for each age class made by snorkeling and electrofishing, but the sample
size was small. We believe the habits of juvenile bull trout make them
more difficult to observe while snorkeling than cutthroat trout. A better
evaluation of snorkeling as a method to estimate juvenile bull trout numbers
will be made in 1981 when more sections have been sampled.
North and Middle Fork Rivers
Middle Fork
Fish populations in the Middle Fork above Bear Creek were censused
to obtain baseline information on fish densities in a natural river system.
This information will form the basis of a long-term monitoring system
as development continues in the Middle Fork and North Fork drainages.
Underwater fish counts were made in 120 pool, 41 run, 22 riffle,
and 10 pocket water habitat units in the wilderness portion of the
-40-
-------
Table 16. Comparison between snorkel and el ectrofi siring counts of
age 0 and age I bull trout in five North Fork tributary
reaches.
Stream
Reach
Date Electrofishing
count
Snorkel
count
Difference
(Percent)
Age 0
Red Meadow
1
8/79
0
0
-
Red Meadow
2
8/79
1
4
-3(75)
Red Meadow
3
8/79
1
0
-
Coal
1
9/79
11
0
-
Hay
3^
8/80
0
0
-
Mean^
2.6
.80
-1.8(225)
Age I
Red Meadow
1
8/79
0
0
-
Red Meadow
2
8/79
6
0
-
Red Meadow
3
8/79
8
0
-
Coal
1
9/79
18
13
+5(39)
Hay
&
8/80
0
0
-
Meari^
6.4
2.6
+3.8(146)
1: 75 m section
2: Paired T test indicates no significant difference between means
at the 95% level (P=.494 T=-.751)
3: Paired T test indicate no significant differences between means
(P=.080 T=-2.34)
-41-
-------
Table 17. Comparison between snorkel and electrofishing counts of
age II and 111+ bull trout in five North Fork tributary
reaches.
Electrofishing Snorkel
Stream
Reach
Date
count
count
Age II
Red Meadow
1
8/79
1
3
Red Meadow
2
8/79
3
4
Red Meadow
3
8/79
12
17
Coal
1
9/79
4
3
Hay
3^
8/80
0
0
Mean^
4.0
5.40
Age III+
Red Meadow
1
8/79
5
2
Red Meadow
2
8/79
0
1
Red Meadow
3
8/79
5
2
Coal
1
9/79
0
0
Hay
3^
8/80
1
2
Difference
(Percent)
Mean-
3/
2,2
1.40
-2(67)
-1(25)
-5(29)
+1(33)
-1.4
+3(150)
+3(150)
-1(50)
+8.57
1: 75 m section
2: Paired T test indicates no significant difference between means
at the 95% level (P=.245 T=1.36)
3: Paired T test indicates no significant difference between means
at the 95% level (P=.4320 T=-.873)
-42-
-------
Table 18. Comparison between snorkel and electrofishing counts of
age I and older bull trout in five North Fork tributary reaches.
Electrofishing
Snorkel
Difference
Stream
Reach
Date
count
count
(Percent)
Age I and older
Red Meadow
1
8/79
6
5
+ 1(20)
Red Meadow
2
8/79
9
4
+5(125)
Red Meadow
3
8/79
25
19
+6(32)
Coal
1
9/79
22
16
+6(38)
Hay
8/80
1
2
-1(50)
Mean^
12.6
9.2
3.4(37)
1: 75 m section
2: Paired T test indicates no significant difference between means
at the 95% level (P=.077 T=2.369)
-43-
-------
Middle Fork above Bear Creek during the summer of 1980. A total of 993
westslope cutthroat, 18 juvenile bull trout, 132 mature bull trout, and
5,762 mountain whitefish were counted by observers during fish density
estimates.
Density estimates were made in mid-summer for pool and run habitat
units in a 23 km section of the Middle Fork above Schafer Meadows and
a 48 km section below Schafer Meadows (Table 19). Total densities of
cutthroat were 1.55 fish per 100 m2 in pools and runs in the river upstream
from Schafer Meadows and 0.97 fish per 100 m2 downstream. Only two juvenile
bull trout were seen during these mid-summer estimates. River densities
of mature bull trout on their spawning migration from Flathead Lake were
0.06 fish per 100 m2 in the upper section and 0.12 fish per 100 m2 in
the lower section. Mountain whitefish densities were relatively high,
averaging 2.84 fish per 100 m2 surface area in the upper section and 7.76
fish per 100 m2 in the lower section.
Density estimates by species were made in late summer in the same
two areas of the Middle Fork. These estimates were made to determine
seasonal differences in fish populations of the river and to determine
densities of fish by stream feature. These estimates were concentrated
on 10 km of the river above Schafer Meadows (Gooseberry Park downstream
to Cox Creek) and a 10 km section downstream from Schafer Meadows (from
three km below Schafer Meadows downstream to Granite Creek). Fish densities
were estimated in every third pool, run, and pocket water habitat unit,
and every fourth riffle habitat unit. The density estimates by species
for each feature are presented in Table 20.
Late summer density of cutthroat in pool and run habitats was less
than half of that found in mid-summer estimates. Smaller densities in
late summer may be due to oversummer mortality, movement of trout into
tributary streams or out-migration to the lower Flathead River or Flathead
Lake.
More juvenile bull trout were observed in late summer than in early
summer. Densities of mature bull trout spawners was twice as large in
the upper section and similar in the lower section in the mid-summer and
late summer estimates.
Densities of cutthroat and juvenile bull trout in pocket water habitat
units in both sections was similar to that found in run habitats and slightly
lower than pool densities. No cutthroat trout and very few juvenile bull
trout were seen in riffle habitats. Riffles were dominated by mountain
whitefish in both river sections averaging just over one fish per 100
m2 surface area. The average density of mountain whitefish in all features
combined was more than 10 times larger than the average total trout density.
An estimate of total surface area of each feature was calculated.
The estimate was based on the total number of each habitat unit in two
10 km sections and average feature size measured on randomly selected
features in each reach. A population estimate for each species in the
-44-
-------
Table 19. Fish densities (No./lOO m2) by age class in pool and run habitat units of the Middle Fork
of the Flathead River during mid-summer, 1980. Numbers of each feature snorkeled and
numbers of fish observed are in parentheses.
Cutthroat trout
Bull
trout
Mountain
whitefish
Age
Age
Age
Age
Age
Age
Feature
I
II
III+
I
II
III+
Mature
<152mm
>152mr
Middle Fork above
Schafer
Meadows
(7/24 -
¦ 7/29)
Pool (42)
.04
1.19
.41
— - —
.. — —
.007
.06
.33
2.53
(13)
(342)
(119)
(2)
(18)
(96)
(727)
Run (7)
.09
.51
.33
— - —
_ _ _
— — —
.02
.49
2.21
(4)
(22)
(14)
(1)
(21)
(95)
Combined (49)
.05
1.10
.40
- - -
— - —
.006
.06
.35
2.49
(17)
(365)
(133)
(2)
(19)
(117)
(822)
Middle Fork below
Schafer
Meadows
(8/5 -
8/12)
Pool (56)
— — —
.01
.98
— — —
— _ _
_ __
.11
.26
7.32
(3)
(330)
(37)
(86)
(2475)
Run (3)
_ _ _
.59
_ ~ —
_ _ _
.29
11.46
(10)
(5)
(195)
Combined (59)
.01
.96
_ _ _
_ _ _
.12
.24
7.52
(3)
(340)
(42)
(86)
(2670)
-------
Table 20 . Fish densities by age class for pool, riffle, run, and pocket water habitats in 10km
sections of the Middle Fork of the Flathead River above and below Schafer Meadows
during late summer, 1980. Number of features snorkeled and numbers of fish observed
in each age class are in parentheses.
Fish per 100 m2 surface area
Cutthroat trout Bull trout
Feature
Age Age
I II
Age
III +
Age
I
Age
II
Age
III +
Mature
Mountai n
<152mm
whi tefish
>lb^mm
Middle Fork above
Schafer Meadows
(8/23 - 8/27)
Pool (12)
.01
.38
.02
.19
.43
2.30
(1)
(44)
(2)
(22)
(50)
(269)
Run (15)
.03
.26
.01
.04
.03
.15
.15
2.50
(2)
(19)
(1)
(3)
(2)
(11)
(11)
(185)
Riffle (11)
.03
.06
.15
.98
(1)
(2)
(5)
(33)
Pocket water (6)
.07
.22
.13
.04
.13
2.43
(2)
(6)
(3)
(1)
(3)
(66)
Combined (44)
.004 .016
.27
.02
.012
.027
.12
.27
2.17
(1) (4)
(69)
(5)
(3)
(7)
(33)
(69)
(553)
Middle Fork below
Schafer Meadows
(9/5 - 9/8)
Pool (10)
.01
.40
.24
.01
10.91
(1)
(30)
(18)
(1)
(820)
Run (16)
.01
.09
.004
.07
.04
2.1
(2)
(24)
(1)
(20)
(11)
(583)
Riffle (11)
.20
.86
(14)
(59)
Pocket water (4)
.07
.34
.27
3.78
(1)
(5)
(4)
(56)
Combined (41)
.01
.13
.002
.10
.07
3.48
(4)
(59)
(1)
(38)
(30)
(1518)
-------
10 km sections was based on the average density of species in a randomly
selected sample of each feature or habitat unit (Table 21). The number
of mature adfluvial bull trout was estimated by actual counts of all likely
looking habitat in each 10 km section.
Mountain whitefish dominated the river fish population, outnumbering
trout by more than ten to one. Cutthroat trout in the two sections averaged
575 fish per 10 km. This estimate represents late summer numbers of the
resident fluvial population of cutthroat after summer mortality or migration
had occurred. Mid-summer population numbers of cutthroat were probably
much larger. Accurate estimates of juvenile bull trout numbers, especially
age I, were difficult to make in the river due to their secretiveness
and association with the rocky substrate. They were common under rocks
along the river margin, but very few were seen in snorkeling estimates.
Mature bull trout were generally easy to observe because of low flows
and good water clarity. They were observed mainly in pools and runs.
Numbers were generally largest in areas just below the mouths of major
bull trout spawning tributaries. Areas in the river with relatively large
concentrations of adfluvial bull trout were Dryad Creek to Morrison Creek
in the lower river section," and Clack Creek to Bowl Creek in the upper
section. Late summer estimates could be an effective long-term monitoring
procedure to assess fluctuations of fluvial cutthroat populations and
adfluvial bull trout numbers in this system.
North Fork
Limited fish density estimates were made for two sections of the
North Fork River. The lower section was located between Big Creek and
Red Meadow Creek, and the upper section was located between Red Meadow
Creek and the Canadian Border. Observers counted a total of 262 cutthroat,
4 bull trout, and 664 mountain whitefish in 11 run habitat units considered
representative of the two sections. Calculated cutthroat densities (Table
22) were larger in the river upstream from Red Meadow Creek than below,
and averaged 0.59 fish per 100 m2 in the two sections. Mountain whitefish
densities averaged 1.74 fish per 100 m2 surface area in the two sections.
A comparison of fish densities in North Fork run and Middle Fork
run-pool habitats is presented in Table 23. Mean densities of cutthroat
were considerably larger in Middle Fork run-pool habitats than in North
Fork runs. The density of mature bull trout was much larger in the Middle
Fork River. They may be due to the small sample size of features snorkeled
and greater difficulty in observation in the North Fork. Mountain whitefish
densities averaged three times larger in runs and pools in the Middle
Fork than in runs in the North Fork.
Fish Movement
Tag Returns
Data on the temporal and spatial distribution of migrating fish in
the Flathead River system is necessary to identify factors which may affect
-.47-
-------
Table 21 . Estimates of number of cutthroat trout, bull trout, and mountain whitefish in 10 km
sections of the Middle Fork of the Flathead River above and below Schafer Meadows.
Estimates are based on snorkel runs made in late summer.
Number of fish per 10 km
Cutthroat trout Bull trout Mountain whitefish
Age Age Age Age Age Age . ,
Area I H III"1" I H III"1" Mature—' <150mm >150mm
Above Schafer 10 41 670 61 29 6 42 720 5,850
Meadows
Below Schafer 28 1 401 <1 55 <1 58 220 10,620
Meadows
1: Estimated numbers per km is based on actual counts.
-------
Table 22 . Estimated densities (No./lOO m2) of fish by age class in run
habitats of two sections of the North Fork River during the
summer of 1980. Numbers of fish of each age class observed
and numbers of features snorkeled are in parentheses.
Fish per 100 m2 surface area
Cutthroat trout Bull trout Mountain whitefish
Age Age Age Age
Feature I II III III Mature 150mm 150mm
North Fork above Red Meadow Creek (7/23 - 7/25)
Runs (5) .01 .50 .50 .01 .004 .50 1.09
(3) (115) (113) (3) (1) (114) (248)
North Fork below Red Meadow Creek (8/12 - 8/13)
Runs (6) --- .02 .26 --- --- .95 1.76
(2) (29) (106) (196)
Table 23. Comparisons of mean densities of fish per 100 m2 in North
Fork River run habitats and Middle Fork River Run-Pool habitats.
Number of features snorkeled and number of fish observed are in
parentheses.
Fish per 100 m2 surface area
Cutthroat trout Bull trout Mountain whitefish
Age Age Age Age
Feature I II 111+ 111+ Mature 150mm 150mm
North Fork average
Run (11) .01 .31 .37 .01 <.01 .59 1.18
(3) (117) (113) (3) (1) (220) (444)
Middle Fork average
Run-Pool .02 .41 .66 .01 .14 .31 5.95
(161) (21) (369) (590) (7) (122) (276) (5349)
-49-
-------
their survival. Although general patterns of movement by juvenile and
adult cutthroat and bull trout has been documented (Graham et. al. 1980b),
the length of time juvenile cutthroat and bull trout spend in the river
before entering Flathead Lake remains unclear.
Juvenile Tag Returns
During the field season, a total of 1,986 juvenile westslope cutthroat,
167 bull trout, 44 rainbow trout, and 4 Yellowstone cutthroat trout were
marked with dangler tags. The overall return for juveniles was 3.5 percent
(Table 24). The higher rate of return for juvenile cutthroat-tagged in
the North Fork drainage was possibly due to a more intense recovery program
in the North Fork by department personnel using traps, electrofishing,
and hook and line sampling. Of 16 juvenile cutthroat that displayed movement,
three moved upstream and 13 migrated downstream (Table 25). Maximum distance
moved was 135 Km by a 220 mm cutthroat tagged in the upper Middle Fork
near Schafer Meadows and recovered at Columbia Falls. There was a net
downstream movement of cutthroat trout tagged in the North Fork drainage
(Figure 4). It appears the movement of juvenile cutthroat trout downstream
toward Flathead Lake occurs over a period of several months.
Only two juvenile bull trout have been recovered to date. A lower
percent return for these fish may be due to reduced susceptibility to
angling, the relatively small number of tagged fish, and the 18 inch minimum
size restrictions. Efforts to mark and recover tags will be continued
to determine the period of time these juveniles remain in the larger rivers.
Adult Tag Returns
During 1980, 90 mature bull trout were tagged in the Flathead drainage.
Forty of these were tagged in the upper Middle and North Forks and 52
were tagged in the main stem above Flathead Lake. A total of 102 westslope
cutthroat over 25 centimeters were tagged in the upper forks and 75 in
the lower Flathead River. The percent recapture for bull trout tagged
and returned in 1980 was three percent, compared with six percent in 1979
(Table 26). The combined return for tagged adult cutthroat trout was
12 percent compared with 14 percent in 1979 and 11.4 percent from 1953-
1965 (Hanzel, 1966). The rate of return for cutthroat tagged in the North
Fork remained high at 21 percent, as compared to 29 percent in 1979. Movements
of adult bull trout and cutthroat trout were similar to those described
previously (Graham et. al. 1980b).
A total of 491 mountain whitefish was tagged in the Flathead drainage
in 1980. Most of these were tagged in the main stem of the Flathead River.
Twelve whitefish were recaptured, a two percent return. Ten of the 12
were recaptured near the point of tagging and two moved a short distance
downstream. Two whitefish were recovered in Red Meadow Creek, a tributary
to the North Fork, in July. Both were tagged emigrating from Red Meadow
Creek in July 1979.
-50-
-------
Table 24. Percent return of juvenile westslope cutthroat and bull trout
in 1980.
Westslope cutthroat Bull trout
Number Number Percent Number Number Percent
Drainaqe
tagged
returned
return
tagged
returned
return
North Fork
1570
61
4
117
1
1
Middle Fork
315
3
1
31
0
0
Main Flathead
101
5
7
19
1
5
Combi ned
totals
1986
69
3.5
167
2
1
Table 25. Summary of juvenile westslope cutthroat trout movement from
designated tagging locations.
Percent Average (km)
Tagging Number Up- Down- No Up- Down- Range
location recovered stream stream movement stream stream (Km)
Upper
North Fork 61 3 30 67 2 26 0-101
Upper
Middle Fork 3 33 33 33 14 135 0-135
-51-
-------
100
Y
50
Flathead
Lake
Confluence
50 100km
North Fork Fork lupstreaml
Flathead River (downstreaml
Figure 4. Date and location of juvenile westslope cutthroat tagged (•) in the North Fork of the Flathead
River and recaptured (-»•) at various points in the drainage. All movements are for fish tagged
and recaptured within a six month period.
-------
Table 26. Percent return of adult westslope cutthroat and bull trout in
1980.
Westslope cutthroat Bull trout
Drai nage
Number
tagged
Number
returned
Percent
return
Number
tagged
Number
returned
Percent
return
North Fork
14
3
21
2
0
0
Middle Fork
88
9
10
35
1
3
Main Flathead
75
10
12
52
2
4
Combi ned
totals
177
22
12
90
3
3
-53-
-------
Stream Trapping
A combined total of 1061 westslope and Yellowstone cutthroat,
bull trout, Arctic grayling, mountain whitefish, and a variety, of non-
game species were trapped in the North Fork drainage during 1980. A break-
down of the total catch by creek is shown in Appendix C, Figures 1 through
10.
Langford Creek
Langford and Cyclone creeks were both trapped in May to monitor upstream
movements of spawning westslope cutthroat and downstream movement of juveniles,
(the Langford trap was installed on April 29). Langford is a small tributary
to Big Creek and contained mainly cutthroat (Appendix C , Figure 1 ).
Part of the catch of cutthroat in the downstream trap probably consisted
of resident fish, but a number of tagged fish were subsequently recovered
in the North Fork River. The reach of this creek downstream from Mud
Lake has excellent spawning and rearing habitat for resident and migratory
cutthroat.
Cyclone Creek
Cyclone is the first tributary to Coal Creek upstream from the mouth.
The reach downstream from Cyclone Lake is used for spawning and rearing
by cutthroat trout. Large densities of age 0 and age 1 cutthroat were
found in both 1979 and 1980. During late summer, the mouth of Cyclone
Creek goes dry which prevents movement of spawning bull trout into the
creek. This may serve as a type of refuge to the large numbers of young
cutthroat in the stream. Although the trapping period was cut short (7
days) due to the hazard of volcanic ash to field personnel, six mature
adfluvial cutthroat were caught in the upstream trap (Appendix C , Figure
2 ).
Moran Creek
A downstream trap was operated in Moran Creek from 7 July to 24 July.
Moran Creek had been trapped in 1976 and no fish were caught. The larger
catch in 1980 was probably the result of the smaller mesh size of the
leads. The most abundant emigrants were cutthroat trout, all less than
200 mm (Appendix C, Figure 3 ). There were also a number of longnose
suckers less than 150 mm. The presence of six juvenile bulls indicates
bull trout may use Moran Creek for spawning .
Moose Creek
A downstream trap was operated in Moose Creek from 7 July to 24 July.
The majoritiy of fish caught in Moose Creek were westslope cutthroat
(Appendix C , Figure 4 ). A series of beaver dams at the mouth normally
prevents the movement of spawning bulls upstream which may account for
the small number of juvenile bulls. However, it is quite probable that
adfluvial cutthroat can move into Moose Creek during spring run-off when
water flows over the dams. There is a moderate amount of suitable spawning
-54-
-------
gravel in reaches 1 and 2 of Moose Creek which may be used by resident
and migrant westslope cutthroat. Although no mature adfluvial cutthroat
were trapped, several emigrating juveniles have been recovered in the
North Fork River.
Logging Creek
Logging Creek was the only stream in Glacier National Park trapped
in 1980. Downstream and upstream traps were operated from 11 July to
24 July. The water temperature averaged nearly 7° C higher than west
side tributaries, and Logging Creek also had the larges number of non-
game fish in the catch (81 percent) (Appendix C , Figure 5 ). Most of
these were longnose suckers but coarse scale suckers, redside shiners,
and northern squawfish were also collected. The most abundant game fish
in the catch was westslope cutthroat (Appendix C , Figure 6 ). One mature
bull (75.4 cm) was caught in the downstream trap. Whether this fish was
from Flathead Lake or Logging Lake could not be determined. The movements
of cutthroat and bull trout into and out of Logging, Quartz, Kintla, and
Bowman lakes is poorly understood. As a case in point, two mature cutthroat
tagged in tributaries to the North Fork of the Flathead River upstream
from Kintla Lake were later recovered in Kintla Lake (Graham et. al. 1980b).
Red Meadow Creek
A downstream trap was operated in Red Meadow Creek from 7 July through
24 July. Red Meadow Creek had the largest variety of game fish species
with westslope cutthroat being most abundant (Appendix C , Figure 7 ).
Arctic grayling and Yellowstone cutthroat in the catch resulted from downstream
movement out of Red Meadow Lake where these species had historically been
stocked. In addition to resident cutthroat, there are also established
populations of adfluvial cutthroat and bull trout in Red Meadow (Graham
et. al. 1980b). Cutthroat trout comprised a slightly larger percentage
of the combined catch of bull and cutthroat trout in 1980 (86%) than in
1979 (73%).
Trail Creek
Downstream and upstream traps were operated in Trail Creek from 10
July to 24 July. Bull trout, cutthroat trout, and mountain whitefish
were the primary species caught in Trail Creek. The majority of bulls
and cutthroat were moving downstream; however, the net movement of whitefish
was upstream (Appendix C, Figures 8 and 9 ). The Trail Creek drainage
is used extensively by adfluvial cutthroat and bull trout as well as mountain
whitefish. Westslope cutthroat trout constituted 58 percent of the total
trout catch in 1979 and 1980.
North Fork Flathead
The downstream trap near Polebridge was placed in the main river
on 21 July as the tributary traps were taken down, and was operated through
24 August. The catch consisted mostly of cutthroat trout (Appendix C ,
Figure 10). In addition to cutthroat and bull trout, eight suckers,
-55-
-------
four mountain whitefish, four sculpins, and one Arctic grayling were present
in the catch.
Smolt Migration
Length frequencies of cutthroat emigrating from Trail and Red Meadow
creeks in 1980 we,re similar to those in 1979 with fish in the 126-151
mm and 152-176 mm size classes comprising most of the catch (Appendix C,
Figure 11). Length frequency of cutthroat caught in Moose, and Moran
creeks and the North Fork River trap are also presented. Cutthroat trout
152-176 mm in length predominated the catch in the river trap.
Length frequencies of emigrating bull trout revealed much the same
pattern for Trail and Red Meadow creeks as occurred in 1979. Bulls 101-
125 mm in length made up the largest percentage in Trail Creek and bulls
152-176 mm in length made up the largest percentage in Red Meadow Creek
(Appendix C, Figure 12). The catch of bull trout in the river trap was
comprised mainly of fish 152-176 mm in length.
AGE AND GROWTH
Age and growth characteristics are important descriptors of the health
and structure of trout populations. These data are necessary to assess
the potential capacity of the individual tributaries and the rivers of
the North and Middle Fork drainages for trout growth and production. Age
and growth information is helpful in studying the dynamics of trout rearing
and outmigration of the tributaries and river of the two drainages.
Cutthroat trout
Scales collected from 1267 cutthroat trout in 18 North and Middle
Fork tributaries and 309 cutthroat from the North and Middle Fork rivers
were used for age and growth determinations. Scales were collected from
May to October, 1980, and May to September, 1979. Annulus formation occurred
in May and June, except that 61 percent of the age I fish failed to form
a first annulus.
Eighty-seven percent of the cutthroat trout caught in tributary streams
were 0-3 years old at time of aging, while 86 percent of the fish caught
in the river were 3-5 years old. It was determined that 73 percent of
the fish collected in the North and Middle Fork rivers had reared two or
three years in the tributaries before entering the river (Table 27). About
22 percent had reared one year in tributaries. The pattern of tributary
rearing and outmigration to the river for age classes I-IV was very similar
in the two drainages.
The age structure of outmigrating juvenile cutthroat from traps placed
in North Fork tributaries in 1979 was also dominated by age II and III
fish (Graham et. al. 1980b). There were very few age I and younger fish
captured, possibly because they could escape through the trap mesh. Also,
it is probable that fewer trout leave the tributaries at age I or younger.
-56-
-------
Table 27. Number of cutthroat trout of each age class rearing 1, 2, 3
and 4 years in the tributaries before entering the North and
Middle Forks of the Flathead River.
Years in Age class
tributary Lt Hi _LX V Tnt.al (1)
North Fork of the Flathead River
1 13 11 2 27 (21)
2 14 26 2 44 (33)
3 40 9 1 50 (39)
.4 7 1 8(6)
Middle Fork of the Flathead River
1 2 22 14 5 41 (22)
2 14 20 18 3 58 (33)
3 40 32 7 78 (42)
4 5 1 6(3)
5 1 1 (<1)
-57-
-------
Analysis of scales of cutthroat from Flathead Lake indicates few juvenile
cutthroat trout reach the lake at age I (Montana Dept. of Fish, Wildlife
& Parks, unpublished data, 1981). May and Huston (1975) found that 82
percent of the outmigrating cutthroat from Youngs Creek in the Kootenai
drainage from 1972 to 1974 were two and three years old. About 18 percent
of the outmigrants were one year old. Huston (1972) reported a similar
age structure of outmigrants from Hungry Horse Creek in the South Fork
of the Flathead drainage.
The relationships between fish length and scale radius for North
and Middle Fork cutthroat are presented in Figure 5. A somewhat different
relationship, as indicated by the regression lines, appeared to be present
in the two drainages. Slopes for individual tributaries and the river
varied from 0.604 to 0.754 in the North Fork drainage, and 0.747 to 0.897
in the Middle Fork drainage. The Y intercepts ranged from 11.63 to 19.01
in the North Fork drainage and from 7.79 to 10.75 in the Middle Fork drainage.
A relationship calculated for 1724 cutthroat collected from the North
and Middle Fork drainages, the mainstem Flathead River, and Flathead Lake
was similar to the relationship found for the combined North and Middle
Fork drainages (Figure 5 ).
Backcalculated lengths at annul us formation for all cutthroatl collected
were made with fish missing a first annulus, fish having a first annulus,
and the combined sample (Table 28). The slope and Y intercept of the
body length-scale radius regressions for the three groups differed by
less than three percent. Calculated lengths of fish missing a first annulus
were smaller at each age class, indicating these fish had slower growth
rates than fish that had formed a first annulus. It appeared that backcalcula-
tions from the combined sample gave the best indication of the average
growth rates of the population.
Calculated lengths and increments of growth for cutthroat collected
in the river are presented in Table 29. Calculated lengths of cutthroat
at ages 3-5 were larger in the Middle Fork than in the North Fork. In
the Middle Fork, the length increments increased after age II reflecting
the increased growth rates of fish as they entered the river from the
tributaries. The increase was not as apparent in the North Fork fish,
suggesting cutthroat growth did not increase as much when the fish entered
the North Fork River from tributaries as in the Middle Fork drainage.
Backcalculated lengths and increments of length for cutthroat from
North and Middle Fork tributaries are given in Table 30. Calculated lengths
for ages 1-3 were similar in North and Middle Fork tributaries. Increments
of growth of cutthroat decreased from age 1-5 in the North Fork tributaries.
Increments of growth of cutthroat increased for ages 3-5 in Middle Fork
tributaries, indicating that many of these fish were probably fluvial
cutthroat that had entered the lower portions of the tributaries during
late summer for feeding or some other purpose.
Grand mean calculated lengths of cutthroat in age classes 1-3 for
individual North and Middle Fork tributaries are presented in Table 31.
Calculated lengths at annuli 4 and 5 are excluded so only growth in
-58-
-------
440
420-
400-
380
360-
340-
320
300
280
260
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
5
MF
/
/ JFD
/' . 'mf+nf
—I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
SCALE RADIUS ImmI
Body length-scale radius regressions for total North Fork
drainage cutthroat (NF), total Middle Fork drainage cutthroat
(MF), North and Middle Forks combined (NF-MF) and total Flathead
drainage cutthroat (TFD).
-59-
-------
Table 28. Average backcalculated lengths of cutthroat trout having the
first annulus, missing the first annulus, and combined from
the North and Middle Fork drainages.
Age at annulus
1
2
3
4
5
With annulus 1
56
105
148
203
261
Number of fi sh
(554)
(491)
(297)
(53)
(11)
Missing annulus 1
49
91
136
188
257
Number of fish
(858)
(828)
(527)
(158)
(15)
Combined sample
53
97
141
192
258
Number of fish
(1412)
(1319)
(824)
(211)
(26)
-60-
-------
Table 29. Calculated lengths and increments of length for cutthroat trout
collected in the North and Middle Forks of the Flathead River
in 1980.
Number Length at annulus
Age of fish
1
2
3
4
5
North Fork River
1 0
- _
2 28
63
116
3 78
64
107
154
4 19
64
96
136
179
5 2
66
100
127
183
213
Grand mean calculated
length
64
108
150
180
213
Number of fish
(127)
(127)
(99)
(21)
(2)
Length increment
64
44
44
44
30
Number
Length at annulus
Age of fish
1
2
3
4
5
Middle Fork River
1 0
_ _
2 16
51
95
3 82
49
99
154
4 69
50
97
156
217
5 17
51
107
161
217
269
Grand mean calculated
length
50
99
156
217
269
Number of fish
(184)
(184)
(168)
(86)
(17)
Length increment
50
49
57
6
52
-61-
-------
Table 30. Calculated lengths and increments of length for cutthroat from
nine North Fork and eight Middle Fork tributaries.
Number Length at annulus
Aqe of fish
1
2
3
4
5
North Fork tributaries
1 48
53
2 323
52
95
3 296
55
97
132
4 60
57
96
135
164
5 3
64
106
159
188
202
Grand mean calculated
length
54
96
135
166
202
Number of fish
(730)
(682)
(359)
(63)
(2)
Length increment
54
42
36
29
14
Number
Length at annulus
Age of fi sh
1
2
3
4
5
Middle Fork tributaries
1 45
49
2 135
51
95
3 164
51
95
138
4 24
48
90
141
191
5 4
59
101
139
204
251
Grand mean calculated
length
51
95
139
193
251
Number of fish
(377)
(327)
(191)
(28)
(4)
Length increment
51
44
44
52
47
-62-
-------
Table 31. Grand mean calculated lengths of cutthroat from individual North
and Middle Fork tributaries with adequate sample sizes (number
of fish are in parentheses).
Stream
Length at annulus
North Fork drainage
Red Meadow Creek 56 104 142
(127) (113) (76)
Langford Creek 65 108 144
(126) (126) (63)
Hay Creek 50 93 135
(116) (110) (83)
Moose Creek 55 89 119
(114) (107) (65)
Trail Creek 53 96 131
(78) (78) (19)
Moran Creek 58 92 117
(70) (70). (30)
Middle Fork drainage
Challenge Creek 49 94 136
(161) (127)- (65)
Basin Creek 57 94 129
(77) (67) (34)
-63-
-------
tributary streams is reflected. Cutthroat in Moose and Moran creeks had
the slowest growth rates, while cutthroat from Red Meadow and Langford
creeks had the fastest growth rates. The average growth rate of cutthroat
in nine North Fork tributaries was similar to the average for the eight
Middle Fork tributaries through age class 3 (Table 30). These growth
rates are at the lower end of the range reported by Carlander (1969) for
cutthroat from various Western streams.
A total of 108 otoliths of cutthroat from North and Middle, Fork tributaries
were aged. Agreement between ages assigned otoliths and scales from the
same fish was 72 percent.
Length frequencies of cutthroat collected from the North and Middle
Fork rivers are presented in Figure 6. Average lengths of cutthroat
were 186 mm in the North Fork River, and 247 mm in the Middle Fork River.
Cutthroat trout collected in tributaries averaged 130 mm in the North
Fork drainage and 142 mm in the Middle Fork drainage (Figure 7). Average
size of age groups identified by length frequency corresponded closely
to the average length of fish in assigned age classes.
The length-weight relationships for cutthroat from the two drainages
are presented in Figure 8. The relationships for the North and Middle
Fork rivers are similar except that the Middle Fork River line extends
past 280 mm to include the larger fish that were collected there. The
relationship for the tributary cutthroat was similar to the rivers for
fish up to about 140 mm in length. At lengths greater than 140 mm, the
Middle Fork tributary cutthroat weighed more at a given length and the
North Fork tributary cutthroat weighed less. These tributary relationships
may be affected by movements of river fish into the tributaries.
Condition factors for cutthroat averaged .95, 1.02, 1.09, and 1.09
in the North Fork River, North Fork tributaries, Middle Fork River, and
Middle Fork tributaries, respectively. Mean condition factors by month
for cutthroat collected in the North and Middle Fork Rivers are presented
in Table 32.
Bull trout
Scale samples for age and growth determinations were collected from
196 juvenile bull trout from Trail and Red Meadow creeks in the North
Fork drainage, and Morrison, Puzzle, Granite and Strawberry creeks in
the Middle Fork drainage. Scales were collected from 35 adult spawners
taken in the Middle Fork River and tributaries to determine the age structure
of the spawning population. All scales were collected from June to September,
1980. Juvenile bull trout were 0-3 years old at time of collections,
while adults ranged from 5-8 years old.
The relationships between fish length and scale radius for North
and Middle Fork juvenile bull trout was similar (Figure 9 ). The relationship
for combined juvenile and adult fish was similar up to about 150 mm fish
length, where the relationships diverged. The relationship for Middle
Fork juveniles and adults combined was very similar to a relationship
generated for a combined sample of 840 juvenile and adults from the Middle
-64-
-------
30
70
It
It
14
11
vy
+
4'
1
6.
NORTH FORK
RtVER
II
III
t
IV
I
V
4
¦ nfh
a
MIDDLE FORK
RIVER
III
a
IV
A
V
hi
la
20 40 60
80 100 HO 140 160 ISO 200 720 740 260 280 300 329 340 360 ' 380
FISH LENGTH (mm)
Length frequency for North and Middle Fork River cutthroat.
Mean length of fish in each age class assigned by scale
reading is indicated by an arrow.
-65-
-------
Ill
~
to
77-
64
56
4#
40
92
34'
16
«
il
JJ
North Fork
Tributaries
IV
~
V
~
"Hth-,.
o
A
E
a «
2 •
44
40
»
»
It
34
»
16
13
Mlddl« Fork
Tributaries
II
~ H
o
*
in
»
IV
«
v
t
ml
h rrrOi
Figure 7.
20 40 60 00 100 120 MO 160 160 200 220 240 260 200 300 J20
Fish Length(mm)
Length frequencies for North and Middle Fork tributary cutthroat.
The mean length of fish in each age class assigned by scale
reading is indicated by an arrow.
-66-
-------
Figure 8
Length-weight regressions for cutthroat from the North Fork River (NFR), Middle Fork
River (MFR), North Fork tributaries (NFT), and Middle Fork tributaries (MFT).
-------
Table 32. Mean condition factors by month for North and Middle Fork
River cutthroat trout (standard deviations in parentheses).
Month
June July August September
North Fork River
Mean condition factor .94(.11) .95(.11) .96(.10) —
Number of fish 8 100 19
Middle Fork River
Mean condition factor — .97(.15) 1.09(.21) 1.01(.12)
Number of fish 64 93 20
-68-
-------
560"
52C-
480'
440
400
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
9
—i 1 1 » i i 1 i i i
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
SCALE RADIUS (mm)
Body length-scale radius regressions for North Fork juvenile
bull trout (NF-J), Middle Fork juveniles (MF-J), Middle Fork
juveniles and adults (MF-J+A) and total Flathead drainage
juveniles and adults (TFD-J+A).
-69-
-------
Fork drainage, North Fork drainage, main Flathead River and Flathead Lake
collected in 1980, 1968 and 1963 (Figure 9). Measurements for fish collected
in the lower Flathead River and Flathead Lake are from unpublished data,
Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Kali spell.
Backcalculated lengths of juvenile bull trout are presented in Table
33. Lengths of North Fork juveniles at annuli 1, 2, and 3 were 20 percent,
10 percent, and three percent larger than Middle Fork juveniles, respectively.
This is probably due to the fact that juvenile bull trout for age and
growth analysis collected in the Middle Fork drainage were taken from
the upper reaches of the tributaries where growth rates are slower.
Growth of juvenile bull trout in tributary streams of Priest Lake, Idaho,
as reported by Bjorm (1961) was very similar to growth in Middle Fork
tributaries.
Backcalculated lengths of bull trout based on juveniles and adult
spawners collected in the Middle Fork drainage are presented in Table 34.
Lengths at annuli 1, 2, and 3 differed substantially from lengths calculated
from juveniles only. It appears that backcalculations for annuli 1, 2,
and 3 are not accurate when adult spawners are included in the calculations.
Backcalculated lengths for annuli 3 through 8 are larger than those
reported by Bjorn (1961) for Upper Priest Lake, but smaller than lengths
reported for Lower Priest Lake, Idaho.
Length frequencies for juvenile bull trout from the North Fork drainage,
and juvenile and adult bull trout from the Middle Fork drainage, are presented
in Figure 10. Age classes identified by peaks in the length frequencies
agreed closely with average lengths of the fish in assigned age classes.
The length frequency for a large sample of juvenile bull trout collected
from Trail Creek in 1979 and 1980 is presented in Figure 11.
A total of 40 otoliths from juvenile bull trout were read. Ages
assigned otoliths and scales from the same fish were in nearly 100 percent
agreement.
J
Average length of adult spawners collected by hook and line in the
Middle Fork drainage was similar to average lengths recorded for adult
bull trout in some previous studies in the Flathead River system (Table
35).
Length-weight relationships for North and Middle Fork juvenile bull
trout were similar (Figure 12). Slopes of the regression lines were nearly
identical and close to 3.0. Ricker (1971) reported that many salmonid
populations have a weight-length regression slope near 3.0, indicating
symmetrical growth.
Mean condition factors of juvenile bull trout were .93 (sd=.17) in
the Middle Fork drainage and .91 (sd=.37) in the North Fork drainage.
-70-
-------
Table 33. Backcalculated lengths of juvenile bull trout collected in North
and Middle Fork tributaries.
Age
Number of fish
Length at annulus
North Fork tributaries
1 60
2 28
3 5
Grand mean calculated
length
Number of fish
Length increment
79
82
82
80
(93)
80
117
112
116
(33)
34
143
143
(5)
31
Age
Number of Fish
Length at annulus
Middle Fork tributaries
1 39
2 53
3 11
Grand mean calculated
length
Number of fish
62
66
63
64
(103)
104
104
104
(64)
138
138
(11)
Length increment
64
39
34
-71-
-------
Table 34. Backcalculated lengths at annulus formation for juvenile and
adult bull trout collected in the Middle Fork drainage in
1980.
Number
Length at annulus
Aqe
of fish
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
39
51
2
42
44
87
3
10
40
82
122
4
0
5
2
55
132
228
337
464
6
15
52
111
183
280
384
486
7
11
50
122
201
292
392
488
581
8
3
43
100
169
254
358
462
555
636
Grand mean calcul-
ated length
Number of fish
48
(122)
97
(83)
174
(41)
286
(31)
389
(31)
484
(29)
575
(14)
636
(3)
Length increment
48
51
77
112
104
99
93
81
-72-
-------
50
IS
16
M
12
l»
a
fr
~
2
2&
10
16
H
12
10
0
6
4
2
I
t
North Forfc
Drainage
lit
a
XJ.
III
~
Middle Fork
Drainage
0
1
40 60 SO 100 120 MO 160 180
DA J
700V
I
VI
4
VII
4
tx
VIII
4
nrfmn.
-nn
520 54 0 560 510 600 630 640 660 610 700 720 740 760
Fish Length (mm)
Length frequency of 93 juvenile bull trout collected from
North Fork tributaries and 103 juveniles and 35 adult bull trout
collected from the Middle Fork of the Flathead River and
tributaries in 1980. Mean lengths of fish in each age class
assigned by scale reading are indicated by an arrow.
-73-
-------
100
1980
80-
60
40-
20
JC
CO
—i ¦
2 4
10 12 14 16 18 20
9
JO
E
3
z
120-
100-
80
60
40
20
1979
ho
6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Fish Length (cm|
20
Figure 11. Length frequency of juvenile bull trout collected from Trail
Creek in 1979 and 1980.
-74-
-------
Table 35. Comparison of lengths of adult bull trout collected in the Middle
Fork drainage with previous studies in the Flathead River system.
Average
length (mm)
Number
of fish
618
638
35
36
628
46
622
87
Study
Middle Fork, 1980
North Fork creel census, 1979
(Graham, unpub. data)
Flathead River, all forks,
creel census, 1975
(Hanzel 1975)
Middle Fork River trap at
Bear Creek, 1957
(Stefanich 1958)
-75-
-------
Figure 12. Length-weight regressions for North Fork juvenile bull trout
(NF) and Middle Fork juvenile bull trout (MF) collected in
1980.
-76-
-------
FISH HABITAT EVALUATION
Fish Habitat Characteristics of
North and Middle Fork Tributary Reaches
Habitat surveys were conducted on 245 kilometers of 22 tributaries
in the North Fork of the Flathead River drainage during the summer of
1980. The 22 tributaries were divided into 44 reaches. Habitat was evaluated
on 210 kilometers of 21 tributaries of the Middle Fork during the summer
of 1980. The 21 Middle Fork tributaries were divided into 53 reaches.
\
The drainage areas, reach lengths, late summer flows and gradients
of the 97 North and Middle Fork tributary reaches surveyed in 1980 are
presented in Appendix A, Tables 1 and 2. Drainage areas of the tributaries
ranged from 7.6 to 177.9 km2 in the North Fork drainage and from 15.4
to 133.1 km2 in the Middle Fork drainage. Late summer flows ranged from
3.2 to 67.4 cubic feet per second in North Fork tributaries, and from
2.5 to 28.5 cfs in Middle Fork tributaries. The mean maximum summer water
temperature in North and Middle Fork tributaries was 16.1° C.
Chemical parameters measured in the lower reaches of major North
and Middle Fork tributaries are presented in Table 36. Total organic
carbon, total phosphorus, nitrate, potassium, and sodium were similar
among the tributaries. Magnesium, calcium, total alkalinity and conductivity
were generally higher in Middle Fork tributaries than in North Fork tributaries.
All physical-chemical habitat data and fish population information
collected for each stream reach surveyed in 1979 and 1980 will be presented
in a separate report. This report will include a map describing physical
habitat characteristics and a map containing fish population information
for each reach. An example of the format of this report concerning reach
I of Trail Creek is presented in Appendix D.
Relationships Between
Habitat Variables and Fish Densities
Habitat and fish populations have now been evaluated on a total of
142 North and Middle Fork tributary reaches comprising 675 stream kilometers.
This total includes all major tributaries south of the Canadian border
in the North Fork drainage and approximately two-thirds of the tributaries
in the Middle Fork drainage. This basin-wide approach in assessing habitat
components and fish densities in North and Middle Fork tributaries has
been conducted to accomplish the following objectives:
1. Assessment of the relative importance of tributary streams for
producing migratory and resident populations of westslope cutthroat
and bull trout.
2. Development of long term monitoring index for juvenile trout
in major tributaries for correlation with habitat inventories
and monitor changes in environmental quality.
-77-
-------
Table 36 . Chemical parameters of the lower reaches of major tributaries of the North and Middle
Forks of the Flathead1 River in October, 1980. Total alkalinity and conductivity
were measured in the field. BDL indicates the value for the parameter is below the
detection limit.
++ ++ + + Total
Creeks TP TOC SO^ -N NOg -N Mg Ca K Na alkalinity Conductivity
North Fork drainage
Camas
.011
1.36
.67
BDL
2.7
10.0
.24
.73
35
40
Anaconda
.007
1.20
.87
BDL
1.7
5.8
.29
1.8
19
33
Logging
.008
1.04
.63
BDL
1.7
6.4
.17
1.0
23
25
Bowman
.004
.89
.83
.023
5.7
21.0
.23
.85
68
122
Akokala
.010
1.02
.67
BDL
3.7
13.8
.30
1.2
47
65
Ford
.014
1.67
.43
BDL
5.5
24.7
.56
2.0
85
105
Starvation
.003
.54
1.3
0.56
6.5
24.9
.26
1.3
83
100
Ki shenehn
.005
.46
5.1
<.01
7.3
24.9
.39
1.6
70
112
Sage
.006
.71
3.4
<.01
7.8
29.4
.50
1.8
92
115
Coal
.007
.65
1.1
.018
6.8
20.5
.26
1.2
73
82
Hay
.004
.70
1.0
BDL
9.5
26.6
.32
1.1
100
148
Red Meadow
.005
.98
.87
<.01
6.1
23.5
.21
.87
79
132
Moose
.004
1.02
1.0
BDL
8.4
20.6
.32
1.0
78
90
Couldrey
.005
.63
.93
BDL
6.8
27.7
.26
.97
91
105
Howe11
.004
.71
1.8
BDL
9.0
48.7
.30
.53
149
170
Cabi n
.011
1.60
3.2
BDL
10.9
39.5
1.4
1.5
135
170
Middle Fork
drainage
Strawberry
.004
.87
13.3
BDL
15.0
52.8
.64
2.3
146
240
Trai 1
.004
.76
4.7
BDL
15.3
45.7
.46
1.3
158
210
Gateway
.003
.54
21.4
.023
19.4
59.3
.73
1.8
163
275
Bowl
.003
.80
3.9
BDL
11.4
38.5
.56
1.6
145
195
Clack
.002
.77
1.9
BDL
10.1
41.7
.17
.18
140
200
Cox
.006
.83
5.3
BDL
7.5
29.5
.12
.74
102
145
Morri son
.006
.82
10.6
BDL
11.3
50.1
.51
1.5
138
220
Grani te
.003
.65
1.3
<.01
10.8
33.1
.46
1.1
118
160
Ole
.003
.70
1.1
.018
6.3
19.8
.32
1.0
73
110
Stanton
.004
1.14
.90
0.36
7.7
26.8
.22
.49
103
295
-------
3. Assessment of existing aquatic habitat in major tributaries
and determination of the importance of habitat components in
maintaining the existing fish populations.
Determining the relationships between the fish populations and habitat
components is an important step in meeting these objectives. Habitat
components which are critical in maintaining present trout populations
must be identified. Once this is determined, the potential rearing capacity
for juvenile trout in individual stream reaches can be predicted. The
purpose of the following analyses was to identify these critical components
of the habitat and determine the rearing potential of each tributary reach
based on its habitat quality. A study of the micro and macro habitat
preferences of juvenile cutthroat,and bull trout is also in progress to
identify important components of the habitat.
Simple Correlation of Habitat and Fish Densities
Chemical parameters measured for North and Middle Fork tributary
reaches were not analyzed for their relationship to trout density because
of insufficient sample size and because high ion concentrations did not
seem to be associated with high fish densities within the range of ion
concentrations sampled. Dissolved ion concentrations were about twice
as large in the Middle Fork drainage, but average trout density was only
half as large as the density in North Fork tributaries. Nutrient concentra-
tions (phosphorus and nitrate) and total organic carbon varied little
in tributaries of both drainages.
A total of 41 physical habitat variables or variable combinations
were tested to determine their relationship to fish densities in 110 North
and Middle Fork tributary reaches containing trout through the use of
simple linear correlation. Of these 41 parameters, 12 were found to have
significant relationships to trout densities at the 95 (p <.05) or 99
percent (p <.01) levels. These 12 variables and their associated simple
correlation coefficients are presented in Table 37.
Variables or variable combinations associated with cover had the
highest simple correlation coefficients. All cover variables tested had
significant positive relationships to trout densities. The combination
of the variables overhang and instream cover had the best correlation
with trout densities (r=.602, p<.01). This variable combination was chosen
as best representing trout cover in the tributary reaches. Overhang was
measured for the habitat section and included material such as logs or
vegetation extending over the stream at a height of one meter or less.
Instream cover was measured in the snorkel section as overhang touching
the water surface plus water depth, turbulence, debris and rocks. Canopy
had the lowest significant correlation of all cover variables tested.
The percent of run was also positively correlated (p <.05) with trout
densities.
D-90, wetted width, average depth, stream order, and channel width
were all negatively correlated at the 95 or 99 percent levels. This indicates
-79-
-------
Table 37. Physical habitat variables or variable combination. Significant
relationships (p < .01) with fish densities in North and Middle
Fork tributary reaches (N = 110)
Habitat variable
Simple correlation
coefficient
Overhang & instream cover
.602
Overhang
.570
Canopy, overhang & instream cover
.520
Canopy & overhang
.484
D-90
-.323
I nstream cover
.307
Wetted width
-.288
Canopy
.272
Average depth
-.270
Stream order
-.256
Chan'nel width
-.232
Percent run
. 220 y
1: P < .05
-80-
-------
that larger measurements of these variables in a reach were associated
with lower trout densities. Although water temperature was an important
variable affecting trout densities in other studies (Binns and Eiserman
1979), there did not appear to be a strong relationship between measured
fish densities and maximum summer water temperatures in North and Middle
Fork tributaries (r=.03).
The average measurements of the important habitat variables for North
and Middle Fork tributary reaches and their associated average fish densities
are presented by stream order in Table 38.
Multiple Regression Analysis of Habitat Variables and Fish Densities
Hynes (1972) suggested that the most important environmental factors
interacting to affect fish distribution and abundance in streams were
temperature, discharge, cover or shelter, and stream bed material. He
states that these habitat variables are not independent of one another
and should be considered in combination.
Platts (1974) has documented multivariate control of fish populations
in streams. More recently Binns and Eiserman (1979) developed a model
predicting trout densities in Wyoming streams based on 11 stream habitat
variables or variable combinations.
In order to determine the interaction of physical habitat variables
and trout densities in the Flathead drainage, multiple regression analysis
was conducted using the measured densities of age I and older cutthroat
and bull trout combined, age I and older cutthroat, age I and older bull
trout, and the 12 associated habitat parameters found significant for
each reach. The "step-up" and step-down" methods of multiple regression
were used and both yielded the same results.
Age I and Older Cutthroat and Bull Trout
Trout cover, stream order, D-90, and percent run formed the best
variable combinations, or "Model" (r=.653) describing the relationship
between habitat variables and combined densities of age I and older cutthroat
and bull trout (Table 39). After this four variable, preliminary model
had been constructed, each remaining habitat parameter in the data base
was individually added, but none increased model precision at the p <.05
level. A three variable model consisting of trout cover, stream order,
and D-90 had a somewhat lower correlation coefficient (r=.60).
Trout cover had the highest partial correlation coefficient in the
four variable combination, indicating it is probably the single most important
habitat variable measured that affected trout densities in the North and
Middle Fork drainages. Binns and Eiserman (1979), Platts (1979b), Cardinal
(1980), and Lewis (1967) all reported cover was a critical component of
stream habitat affecting trout density when considered in combination with
other habitat variables.
-81-
-------
Table 38. The mean and range (in parentheses) of major habitat parameters
of 110 North and Middle Fork tributary reaches analyzed by
stream order.
Stream order
Parameter
2(N = 32)
3(N = 61)
4(N = 17)
Total trout density
(Age I & older cut-
throat & juvenile
bull trout)
12.0
(0.3 - 14)
6.8
(0.1 - 33.6)
2.5
(0.1 - 11.1
Trout cover
{% of surface area
sheltered)
21
(5 - 62)
18
(4 - 55)
10
(5 - 24)
D-90
(Diameter (cm) of
largest 10% of the
substrate)
41
(10 - 121)
36
(8 - 86)
38
(21 - 80)
Channel width (m)
12
(3 - 39)
14
(2 - 50)
27
(7 - 63)
Wetted width (m)
4.6
(1.6 - 9.8)
5.5
(1.2 - 13)
10.7
(6.4 - 16.4)
Average depth (cm)
21
(10 - 45)
22
(10 - 50)
32
(20 - 53)
Percent feature
Pool {%)
10
(0 - 45)
12
(0 - 73)
17
(0 - 58)
Run {%)
45
(0 - 82)
43
(10 - 75)
43
(15 - 74)
Riffle (%)
30
(5 - 60)
35
(0 - 75)
33
(11 - 60)
Pocket Water (%)
15
(0 - 65)
10
(0 - 56)
7
(0 - 26)
-82-
-------
Table 39. Physical habitat variables which formed the best mutual
relationship with trout densities (age I and older cutthroat
and bull trout) in 110 North and Middle Fork tributary reaches
(r = .653, r^ = .430, N - 110)
Variable R-Partial—^ Slope^ P-Value-^
Trout cover (X^)
.483
.499
.001
Stream order (X^)
-.215
-2.82
.026
D-90 (x3)
-.205
-.088
.034
Percent run (X^)
.191
.089
.049
l: Correlation of a habitat variable to fish densities while other habitat
variables are held constant.
2: Slope is a measure of the direction and magnitute of a change in fish
numbers with an increase in the measurement of a habitat variable by
one unit.
3: Level of significance of the relationship of a habitat variable to fish
densitites when considered in combination with the other habitat
variables.
-83-
-------
Stream order is a classification (Platts 1979a) assigned to a reach
based on its position in a stream drainage. Stream order is roughly indicative
of certain physical habitat characteristics such as drainage area, discharge,
and wetted width. A significant negative partial correlation coefficient
was demonstrated by stream order in the model, indicating streams of lower
order were associated with larger trout densities. Platts (1979a) also
found a negative correlation of stream order with cutthroat and juvenile
bull trout densities.
The D-90, or the substrate size which is larger than 90 percent,
of the stream bed material also related negatively to trout density in
the model, suggesting larger substrate sizes in association with the other
habitat variables in the model reduce fish densities in a reach. The
percent run was positively associated with trout densities in combination
with the other variables. This may be due to the fact that most tributaries
in both drainages were composed mainly of run-riffle habitats. When the
percent run is large, riffles areas are less abundant. Riffles contain
little cover and low trout densities (see the Fish Population section
of this report). The second order stream reaches which supported high
densities of trout had a moderate gradient and were mainly run habitats.
The slope associated with each variable in the model is a measure
of the probable increase or decrease in trout densities with a one unit
change in the measurement of the habitat variable (assuming a linear relation-
ship). For example, trout cover was associated with a slope of +.483.
This indicates that given an increase of one unit (1%) in trout cover,
we may expect an increase in trout density by .483 fish per 100 m2. This
would mean that if trout cover were increased by 10 percent in a reach,
it should result in an increase in trout density by 4.8 fish per 100 m2.
However, an increase or decrease in trout cover by adding more debris
to a stream or logging operations in a drainage might also change the
D-90 or percent run by altering the stream hydraulics or channel morphology.
Because of this interrelationship of the variables, it is difficult to
predict the exact nature of the effects of a change in habitat on trout
populations. This model could be valuable to assess impacts of environmental
changes by taking into account their combined effects on the stream habitat
and associated fish densities.
Age I and Older Cutthroat Trout
The same variable combinations describing variations in cutthroat
and bull trout densities combined also best described variations in cutthroat
densities, with a slightly lower correlation coefficient (r=.610 p<.001).
Cutthroat were generally found in much larger densities than bull trout
and dominated the combined species variable combination, or model.
Age I and Older Bull Trout
Canopy, instream cover and the percent of class 1 pools was the best
variable combination relating physical habitat to juvenile bull trout
densities (r=.472, p<.05). This indicates that juvenile bull trout were
closely associated with cover in North and Middle Fork tributary reaches.
-84-
-------
Bull trout densities were generally low, and a good model for predicting
their abundance could not be developed. Bull trout were found in only
about half as many reaches as cutthroat and the small number of observations
also limited development of a model.
Testing of Model Performance: Predicting the Potential Fish Densities
of Each Reach Based on Habitat Quality
In order to test the four variable model and identify outlying observa-
tions, trout densities were predicted by the equation of the model based
on habitat quality for each of the 110 North and Middle Fork tributary
reaches. The equation used to predict the fish densities was:
Y = .499Xj - 2.82Xx - .O88X3 + .089X4 + 7.05
Where:
Y = Predicted Trout Density
= Trout Cover
X2 = Stream Order
X3 = D-90
X^ = Percent Run
Y intercept = 7.05
The relationship of the predicted and actual fish densities is depicted
in Figure 13. The scatter of points indicate the model is a better predictor
for reaches of moderate trout densities. It was a poorer predictor in
cases of exceptionally high or low fish densities.
The correlation between predicted and actual fish densities was .653,
which is significant to the 99.9 percent level (p<.001). This correlation
coefficient is acceptable when the number of reaches analyzed and number of
variables in the model are considered. Binns and Eiserman (1979) obtained
a much higher correlation coefficient (.977) in a model predicting trout
densities in Wyoming; however, the model was based on ratings of 11 variables
or variable combinations and constructed with only 20 observations. The
variable combination for the North and Middle Fork tributary reaches consisted
of the actual measurements of only four variables which are relatively
easy to measure and was based on 110 observations (reaches). In addition,
Binns' model was based on chosen observations from throughout the state
of Wyoming, while our model is based on observations from only the Flathead
drainage. A much higher correlation coefficient could probably be obtained
if streams from other parts of Montana were included in the model, but
this would not improve its predictive qualities for the Flathead drainage.
The four variable model for the North and Middle Fork reaches explained
43 percent (r?) of the variation observed in trout densities. Snedecor
-85-
-------
Figure 13. Relationship between measured trout densities and densities
predicted by the four variable habitat model for 110 North
and Middle Fork tributary reaches.
-86-
-------
arid Cochran (1969) state that reduction of significance of variable combinations
of this nature could be caused by failure to include one or more important
variables in the analysis or inaccurate measurements of included variables.
Physical habitat components and fish populations are variable and
often difficult to measure. It is likely that the precision of our model
is limited by the difficulty of obtaining accurate measurements for these
variables in a reach of stream. Trout movements and multiple fish populations
(resident, fluvial, and adfluvial) in the Flathead drainage create further
difficulty in obtaining accurate relationships between trout densities
and habitat variables. Also, it is a basic assumption that the North
and Middle Fork tributaries were at carrying capacity for juvenile trout.
Studies conducted by Graham (1977), Sekulich and Bjornn (1977), and Horner
(1978) indicated that densities of some age classes of salmonids in several
Idaho tributaries may not be at carrying capacity. Burns (1971) reported
that juvenile salmonid populations were not always at carrying capacity
in small California streams. He suggested carrying capacity of a stream
may fluctuate from year to year.
Further expansion of the data base and refinement of the model is
expected in 1981. Reaches in which fish densities predicted by the habitat
model were extremely different than measured fish densities will be examined
in the 1981 field season. An attempt will also be made to integrate the
land type associations developed by the U.S. Forest Service into the habitat
model in 1981 similar to that described by Platts (1979b).
INVENTORY OF BULL TROUT SPAWNING SITES
Distribution and Abundance of Spawning Sites
Enumeration of spawning sites (redd counts) can provide information
on distribution of spawners within a drainage, relative importance of
each tributary for spawning, and long-term trends in population abundance
and stability. Accurate redd counts require good water clarity, knowledge
of time and length of the spawning season, and the ability to discern
actual spawning sites from false dips or depressions. Cutthroat trout
spawn along the edge of the stream during high, turbid spring flows and
make relatively small redds which are difficult to locate. In contrast,
bull trout spawn in the fall when flows are low and stable. Their redds
are large and often near mid-stream making them easy to locate and verify.
There were 688 kilometers of stream which were unrestricted to bull
trout on their upstream spawning migration in our study area, excluding
three Middle Fork tributaries in Glacier National Park and the Flathead
River in British Columbia. Of this total, 270 kilometers were surveyed
by ground crews in 1980, concentrating in areas where spawning was known
to occur or suspected to occur based on previous spawning or fish population
inventories. Redds were located in 78 kilometers of stream comprising
14 percent of the waters accessible to bull trout. Redds were present
in 34 of the 142 stream reaches classified to date.
The survey in 1980 represents the most extensive drainage-wide effort
-87-
-------
to date. A total of 568 redds were located; 268 in the North Fork drainage,
and 300 in the Middle Fork drainage. An estimate of the numbers of bull
trout which entered tributary streams to spawn in 1980 was made using
a ratio of the number of spawners per redd (based on trap records in selected
North Fork tributaries) and our estimated efficiency in counting redds.
We estimated that 80 percent of all redds present were counted in the Middle Fork
and U.S. portion of the North Fork drainages. An estimated 60 percent
of all redds present were counted in the Flathead River basin in Canada, based
on our knowledge of the basin and communication with B.C. Research of
Vancouver. Estimates of the number of fish entering a creek to spawn
were obtained from trapping up and downstream migrants in Big, Coal, Red
Meadow, Whale and Trail creeks in 1977 (Montana Fish and Game, 1979).
The largest redd count for each creek drainage between 1977 and 1980 was
used because only partial redd counts were made in 1977 (Table 40). The
ratio ranged from 2.7 to 8.4 spawners per redd and averaged 3.9 fish/redd.
A more conservative estimate could be made assuming only 80 percent of
the redds were counted, giving a ratio of 3.2 fish per redd.
An estimate of the total numbers of bull trout reaching tributary
or main stem areas to spawn in 1980 would be 2,400 to 2,925 jfish. An
estimated 1,200 to 1,462 fish entered streams to spawn in the North Fork,
with 512 to 624 fish entering tributaries partially or wholly in Canada
and 688 to 838 entering tributaries in the U.S. portion of the North Fork.
An estimated 1,200 to 1,462 bull trout entered streams in the Middle Fork
of the Flathead River drainage to spawn. The estimates for streams in
Canada may be low because fishing for adult bull trout is allowed in spawning
tributaries and could reduce the number of redds that would have been
produced.
Spawning was concentrated in several major tributaries in both the
North Fork and Middle Fork drainages (Tables 41 and 42). Although the
total number of redds observed in a particular stream was variable between
1979 and 1980, the spawning population appears to be relatively stable.
A comparison of the total redds counted in the North Fork for the same
stream reaches surveyed during both years showed 171 and 168 redds in
1980 and 1979, respectively.
Spawning was also concentrated within a stream reach. The density
of redds in reaches where spawning occurred ranged from 0.2 to 7.0 redds
per kilometer (Table41and 42). Densities of redds in high-use areas
within a reach were generally two to three times larger, ranging from
2.0 to 15.3 redds per kilometer. Howell Creek in British Columbia had
15.3 redds per kilometer in the high use area, the largest density in
any tributary in the North Fork drainage (Table 41). Granite Creek had
the largest density of redds in the Middle Fork drainage, with 11.2 redds
per kilometer (Table 42).
Timing of Spawning
Adult bull trout may arrive in tributaries as early as July or as
late as November (Graham et. al. 1980b). However, spawning occurs in
a relatively short time of approximately two weeks.
-88-
-------
Table 40. Estimated number of spawning bull trout in five North Fork
tributaries in 1977, redd counts for those tributaries from
1977 to 1980, and a ratio of the number of spawners to the
largest redd count during the four year period.
Spawning , .
population-'
Redd
counts
Ratio of
spawners.,,
to redds—'
Drai nage
80
79
78
77
Big Creek
120
23
24
5.2
Coal Creek
249
60
50
4.5
Red Meadow Creek
84
6
2
4
10
8.4
Whale Creek
261
51
77
14
3.4
Trail Creek
96
31
35
15
2.7
Total
Mean
810
206^
3.9
1: Obtained from up and downstream trapping of marked adult spawners in
1977.
2: Total reflects largest redd count for each stream from 1977 to 1980.
3: Ratio of the number of spawners estimated in 1977 to the largest redd
count for each stream from 1977 to 1980.
-89-
-------
Table 41. Numbers and densitites of bull trout redds (by reach) in North
Fork tributaries surveyed in 1979 and 1980.
Number of
redds
Density(#/km)
(high use area)
Density(#/Km)
(entire reach)
Stream
Reach
1980
1979
1980
1980
Cabi n
II
2
~
Howel1-/
I
47
~
15.3
5.2
Couldrey^
I
15
~
Sage^
I
6
*
Ki sheneh^
I
16
*
Flathead River-'
(Howell Cr.-
Pollock Cr.)
10
~
Starvation
II
1
~
.3
Trai 1
I
31
35
7.75
3.6
Whale
I
II
12
35
10
24
4.10
3.8
1.5
3.5
Shorty
I
4
33
.8
Red Meadow
II
6
2
3.0
.5
Coal
I
II
III
1
47
0
0
40
4
7.2
1.6
6.2
South Fork
Coal
I
2
4
2.0
.3
Mathi as
Big
I
I
10
0
2
6
. 10.0
4.0
II
15
6
3.3
2.3
Hallawat
I
8
2
3.2
1.9
Total
268
168
1: Results from survey by B.C. Research, Vancouver.
2: Combined for Canada and U.S.
* Not surveyed in 1979.
-90-
-------
Table 42. Numbers and densities of bull trout redds by reach in Middle
Fork tributaries surveyed in 1979 and 1980.
Number of Density(#/Km) Density(#/Km)
redds (high use area) (entire reach)
Stream
Reach
1980
1979
1980
1980
Strawberry
I
4
*
.8
II
9
*
1.2
IV
4
*
1.8
Trail
I
31
*
5.9
2.6
Bowl
II
19
*
7.4
4.5
III
7
*
4.4
IV
3
*
.5
Clack
I
10
*
3.5
Schafer
I
10
15
5.3
2.2
III
0
1
Dol ly Varden
I
21
20
3.6
1.6
Morri son
I
32
12
7.3
4.3
II
4
9
1.1
III
39
4
7.5
4.4
Lodgepole
I
14
32
8.1
2.1
Granite
I
0
2
II
34
12
11.2
6.1
Bear
II
9
*
2.1
Long
II
2
15
.7
III
6
0
4.5
Charl ie
II
7
3
4.1
Ole
II
19
*•
5.0
4.0
Nyack
I
14
*
1.9
Lake
I
1
*
.4
Dirtyface
I
0
1
Elk
I
1
*
.2
Total 300
* Not surveyed in 1979.
-91-
-------
Physical factors probably play an important role in triggering redd
construction. Temperature data from thermographs on Trail, Coal, Big,
and Red Meadow creeks were analyzed to examine the relationship between
water temperature and onset of spawning. During peak spawning, mean maximum
temperature for 1979 and 1980 was 8° C and 9° C, respectively. Water
temperatures for the week preceeding spawning were similar to temperatures
during the peak spawning period in 1979 and 1980. Other investigators
have found water temperatures near 9° C associated with vigorous spawning
activity (McPhail and Murray 1979; Needham and Vaughan, 1952).
On 4 September, 1980, habitat classification and underwater fish
census was conducted on Granite Creek in the Middle Fork drainage. Nearly
20 mature bulls were seen but no redds were in evidence. The air temperature
was 18-21° C and water temperature was 9-10° C. On 9 September, nearly
30 redds were counted, but few bulls were found indicating most spawning
had occurred and most adult bull trout had emigrated. On 14 October,
34 redds were counted and some of these were difficult to discern.
Air temperature in the North Fork drainage was 21° C and water temperatures
were 10° C on 14 September. A number of bulls were observed holding in
tributaries that day. Overnight a cold front dropped air temperatures
below freezing, and the next day, with the water temperature at 9° C,
bull trout were observed actively building redds. The actual parameter(s)
that trigger spawning activity have not yet been determined, but temperature
may be a key.
North Fork redd surveys were not conducted until October 16 through
19 in 1979 because of late spawning activity. That autumn was warm and
stream flows were low. Bull trout spawning during 1980 peaked in the
third week of September, and the redds were counted from October 6 through
10. Some of these redds were already silting over. The Middle Fork survey
began on October 3 and ended.on October 31. Difficult access to streams
in the wilderness is one problem that extended the time necessary to complete
the survey.
Spawning Site Preference
A total of 465 redds were measured for length and width in the North
Fork and Middle Fork drainages in 1980 (Table 43). Distance to cover,
stream depth and wetted width were measured at each spawning site. The
average length (2.1 m) and width (1.1 m) of redds were both 40 percent
larger than for redds measured in 1979 (Graham eta. al. 1980b). Average
of stream depth measurements at the head of the redd (0.27 m) was 35 percent
larger than in 1979. Average distance to cover was 3.8 m compared to
an average wetted width of 8.6 m at the redd site.
Frequency distribution curves were compiled for velocity and depth
measurements taken at the head of 80 redds sampled in the North and Middle
Fork drainages in 1979 and 1980 (Figures 14 and 15). Average water velocity
was higher for samples taken in 1980 than in 1979 (Figure 14). Most were
higher than 0.8 ft/sec., but none exceeded 2.0 ft/sec. The combined average
was 0.95 ft/sec. Water velocity measured 1 cm above the gravel in the
-92-
-------
Table 43. Average measurements of bull trout redds in tributaries of
the North and Middle Forks of the Flathead River during
1980.
Number Wetted Distance to
of Length Width Depth width nearest cover
Drainage redds (meters) (meters) (meters) (meters) (meters)
North Fork
Big Cr.
15
2.3
1.3
.32
8.5
4.6
Hallawat Cr.
8
2.0
1.0
.31
8.2
1.8
Coal Cr.
48
1.9
1.1
.26
9.6
4.0
So. Fork Coal Cr.
2
2.3
1.0
.31
6.1
.8
Mathias Cr.
10
1.9
.9
.30
5.3
2.1
Red Meadow Cr.
6
1.8
.8
.31
6.8
9.1
Starvation Cr.
1
3.0
1.0
.24
4.0
.5
Trail Cr.
31
2.4
1.5
.33
12.0
7.4
Whale Cr.
47
1.9
1.2
.30
11.2
2.9
Shorty Cr.
4
2.0
1.1
.19
9.5
4.3
Howell Cr.
18
1.9
.9
.35
10.0
1.5
North Fork average
2.0
1.2
.30
9.7
4.2
Middle Fork
Bear Cr.
9
1.6
1.0
.26
6.7
5.2
Bowl Cr.
29
2.0
.9
.29
5.7
1.7
Charlie Cr.
6
2.2
1.3
.25.
7.0
2.4
Clack Cr.
10
1.9
1.0
.23
5.2
4.1
Dolly Varden Cr.
21
2.2
1.0
.26
6.8
3.0
Granite Cr.
34
2.2
1.1
.27
6.4
2.7
Long Cr.
8
3.0
1.2
.20
6.5
3.1
Morrison Cr.
75
2.2
1.0
.27
8.2
3.1
Lodgepole Cr.
13
2.6
1.2
.23
7.2
4.1
Nyack Cr.
14
3.1
1.1
.34
15.6
5.7
Ole Cr.
19
2.5
1.1
.32
8.0
4.9
Schafer Cr.
11
2.0
1.1
.29
7.4
4.7
Strawberry Cr.
15
2.4
1.1
.20
6.1
3.7
Trail Cr.
31
1.8
.9
.24
5.1
3.3
Middle Fork average
2.2
1.0
.26
7.4
3.4
Overall average
2.1
1.1
.27
8.6
3.8
-93-
-------
VELOCITY (fVsec)
Figure 14. Velocities recorded at the head of 37 North and Middle Fork
bull trout redds in 1979, and 43 North Fork bull trout redds
in 1980. Velocities were determined proportionally 0.4 of
the distance from the stream bottom. All measurements were
taken with either Pygmy, Price AA, or Marsh McBirney current
meters.
-94-
-------
20
18
16
14
12-
(/)
~
Q
W 10
QC
O 8
0C
Hi
CQ 6
5
D
A A 4 4
>>>>>
~Mv.
Kvtv.
»~4VtV<
vXv
vMv
»,v.v<
VKV,
»;wX
>,v,v,
WiV<
vXv
~Mw,
v,v.»<
~Xv
,vlw
"44*44
y.viv
•>>:~>
44*444
>vtv.
1980
1979
.2 .3
DEPTH (meters)
.6
Figure 15 . Depths recorded at the sites of 37 North and Middle Fork
trout redds in 1979, and 43 North Fork bull trout redds
1980.
-95-
bull
in
-------
Arrow Lakes Study was 1.86-2.1 ft/sec. (McPhail and Murray 1979). The
majority (70%) of the redds were in water 0.15 to 0.35 m in depth in 1979
and 1980 (Figure 15). Average depth of 0.28 m was similar to those
reported by Block (1955) and Hunter (1973).
Flows during the fall spawning season were higher in 1980 than in
1979 for most North Fork tributaries (Appendix A, Figures 1 through 5).
This may explain the larger redd size and increased depth and velocity
at site of spawning in 1980.
Composition of material from bull trout redds in Trail, Whale, Coal,
and Hallawat creeks in the North Fork drainage were consistent (Figure 16).
The predominance of 2 to 16 mm, and 19 to 50 mm size gravel is evident
in the composite graph for all creeks. Blackett (1968) studied substrate
composition for Dolly Varden redds in Hood Bay Creek, Alaska, and found
material primarily between 6 mm and 50 mm in diameter. In a tributary
to Arrow Lakes, B.C., gravel size in bull trout redds centered around
25 mm (McPhail and Murray 1979). The composite graph for all bull trout
redds from 1977 to 1979, although analyzed with different sieve sizes,
shows a bimodal distribution for approximately the same size gravel most
abundant in the 1980 composite (Figure 17). The percent of fine material
in the sample is somewhat low because our sampling methods were not 100
percent efficient in flowing water conditions.
Gravel samples from cutthroat trout redds in two North Fork tributaries
show the 2.36 to 9.5 mm size to be most abundant (Figure 18). However,
the composite of samples showed a more heterogeneous mixture of gravels
than that found in bull trout redds. Overall, bull trout selected areas
with larger size gravel than cutthroat trout.
The average depth and velocity of a small sample of cutthroat redds
was 20 cm and 0.37 m per second, respectively. Red size averaged 0.86 m
x 0.4 m and were 0.9 m from the nearest cover. Most cutthroat redds
measured were found in small tributaries, probably a result of better
visibility than in larger streams.
Spawning Reach Classification
An attempt was made to classify stream reaches based on intensity
of use for spawning by bull trout. The results from the regression analysis
of redd numbers and habitat parameters were inconclusive. Stream order
was the most promising of the parameters examined. There also may be
a relationship between stream gradient and bull trout spawning areas.
The average gradient for reaches where bull trout redds were found was
1.7 percent, while the average gradient for non-spawning reaches was 3.7
percent. This lack of correlation between most of the variables and redd
numbers is probably due to the use of average habitat measurements for
the entire reach. Since areas of redd locations were concentrated within
a reach, measurements should have been taken only in these areas. For
example, the D-90 for spawning areas was probably less than 20 cm, but
average D-90 for bull trout reaches was 38 cm. A concerted effort will
be made in 1981 to measure important parameters in the area of concentrated
-96-
-------
BULL TROUT REDD SAMPLES
COAL SAMPLE 1
WHALE SAMPLE-I
COAL SAMPIE-3
X
o
uj
5
>
m
UJ
>
<
K
O
Ul
(J
oc
111
a.
n
WHALE SAMPLE-}
COMPOSITE 1980
40
30
20
10 .
SO 10 16 2 .063 <.063
GRAVEL SIZE (mm)
HALIOWAT SAMPLE 1
TRAIL SAMPLE *1
uiilfWll UUMf.I
GRAVEL SIZE (mm)
gure 16. Bull trout gravel samples collected from North Fork tributari
in 1980. Each size gravel is expressed as percent of total
gravel weight.
¦97-
-------
BULL TROUT REDD SAMPLES
X 6O1
O
ui
5 50
>
CO
40J
ID
< 30^
cc
o
201
i-
z
UJ
o 10-
cc
UJ
Q.
COMPOSITE 1977-1979
7.62 50.8 25.4 12.5 6.35 .85
GRAVEL SIZE I INCHES)
.42
<.42
Figure 17. Size of aravels present in bull trout redds combined for
1977, 1978, and 1979.
-98-
-------
CUTTHROAT TROUT REDD SAMPLES
i-
X
o
Hi
5
>
CD
UJ
>
<
DC
O
z
Ul
o
QC
Ul
a.
SAMPLE LANGFOBD-1
30
20
10
50
SAMPLE L-2
SAMPLE YAKIMtKAK-1
COMPOSITE 1980
19 9.5 2.36 .075 <.075
GRAVEL SIZE (mm)
10
20
SAMPLE L-3
50 19 95 5 36 07b « 075
50 19 9 5 134 075 «.075
GRAVEL SIZE (mm)
Figure 18. Cutthroat trout gravel samples collected from North Fork
tributaries in 1980. Each size gravel is expressed as a
percent of total gravel weight.
-99-
-------
spawning in a reach.
FOOD HABITS OF CUTTHROAT AND BULL TROUT
Food habits information is important to the overall management of
fish populations in the Flathead drainage. It is necessary to determine
what types of organisms are consumed by various fish species. If a certain
group of prey is heavily utilized in the diet, proper habitat management
can be implemented to insure the continued presence of that prey in the
food chain.
Major Fish Food Organisms
Results of the studies conducted in 1975-1976 by personnel of the
Flathead 208 study indicate that Ephemeroptera (mayflies) were the dominant
insect order seasonally in the North Fork of the Flathead River, comprising
45 percent (by number) of the total benthic community. Diptera (two-
winged flies), Plecoptera (stoneflies), and Trichoptera (caddisflies)
made up 30, 21 and 4 percent of the community. Peterson et. al. (1977)
reported that the benthic communities of some North Fork tributaries were
dominated by Ephemeroptera and Diptera. Further information on the North
Fork drainage insect community, particularly the Trichoptera and Plecoptera,
have been reported by the Flathead Research Group (Stanford et. al. 1979
and 1980).
Information has not been reported concerning the composition of the
benthic insect community in the upper portion of the Middle Fork where
trout stomachs were collected. In order to identify the composition of
the major fish food organisms in the benthic community of the upper Middle
Fork, samples collected from the river near Bear Creek and from Strawberry
Creek (headwaters of the Middle Fork) were analyzed. The taxa and numbers
of benthic invertebrates from these samples are presented in Table 44.
The Middle Fork benthic samples collected near Bear Creek were dominated
by Ephemeroptera and Diptera, which comprised 48 and 47 percent of the
total numbers of insects, respectively. The dominant families of Ephemeroptera
were Heptageniidae, Baetidae and Ephemerellidae. The dominant family
of Diptera was Chironomidae. Plecoptera and Trichoptera made up 3 and
2 percent of the total numbers in the samples, respectively. Dominant
families were Chloroperlidae (Plecoptera) and Hydropsychidae (Trichoptera).
Samples collected from Strawberry Creek were chosen to represent
the benthic community of the third and fourth order tributaries of the
upper Middle Fork basin. These samples were also dominated by Ephemeroptera
(47%) and Diptera (39%). Plecoptera and Trichoptera comprised 9 and 4
percent of the samples, respectively. Major families of each order were
Heptageniidae, Baetidae, and Ephemerellidae (Ephemeroptera), Chironomidae
(Diptera), Perlodidae and Chloroperlidae (Plecoptera), and Rhyacophilidae
(Trichoptera).
Adult aquatic insects were collected by Middle Fork field crews throughout
the upper drainage during the summer of 1980. These adult collections
-100-
-------
Table 44. Number of aquatic insects in benthic samples collected on the Middle Fork of the Flathead
River during the summer of 1980. Total volume (ml) by family is in parentheses. Family
totals include insects (small instars) from second picking of a 1/8 sub-sample. Type of
substrate from which each sample was collected is indicated.
Taxa
Middle Fork at
Bear Cr.(Rubble)
7/9/80
Middle Fork at
Bear Cr.(Gravel)
7/9/80
Sampling sites
Strawberry Creek
(Rubble)
8/9/80
Strawberry Creek
(Gravel)
8/9/80
PLEC0PTERA
Chloroperlidae
SioeJLtba sp.
SmaJtLia sp.
PaAapejtla sp.
Perlodidae
M2.gaJic.yA sp.
Kogotui, sp.
Pteronarci dae
PteAonaAcelZa badia sp.
Nemouri dae
lapada sp.
TRICH0PTERA
Hydropsychi dae
HydAopisycht sp.
Afic£o psyche. sp.
Rhyacophi1i dae
Rhyacopkota sp.
Brachycentridae
Blacky ce.n&tiu sp.
G1ossosomatidae
GloAAOAoma. sp.
56 (. 05)
25
7
1 U)
1/
4 (.4)
1
3
5 U)
5
3 (.05)
3
7
1 (t)
57 (.07)
11
22
.05)
4 (.25}
3
2 (t)
2
1 U)
1
37 (.1
27
2
12
12
'.05)
23 U)
7
17 (t)
17
4 (.05)
4
16 .(£)
6
49 (.05)
23
1
1
40
32
:.o5)
9 U)
9
41 (.05)
25
1 (£)
-------
Table 44. (Continued)
Sampling sites
Taxa
Middle Fork at
Bear Cr.(Rubble)
7/9/80
Middle Fork at
Bear Cr.(Gravel)
7/9/80
Strawberry Creek
(Rubble)
8/9/80
Strawberry Creek
(Gravel)
8/9/80
COLEOPTERA
Elmidae
—
—
12
U)
3
U)
DIPTERA
Chironomidae
316
(.15)
358
(.n
4 33
(.7)
292
(.05)
Ceratapogonidae
6
it)
—
2
U)
—
Simuli idae
128
U)
266
(.7)
2
U)
—
Tipulidae
2
1.15)
4
U)
2
(.7)
3
(.05)
Hzxatoma sp.
2
1
1
2
Antoc.ka sp.
—
1
T^puJLa sp.
—
2
—
1
Blephariceridae
10
l.D
13
(.6)
—
—
Deuterophlebi idae
—
2
U)
—
—
Atheri cidae
3
1
U)
—
—
Athn/tix. vaJvLzgaXa sp.
3
1
—
—
EPHEMEROPTERA
Baeti dae
116
U5)
155
(.2)
797
(.75)
67
(.7)
8aeto, sp.
66
105
112
51
V^zixdoc.lz.on sp.
1
10
5
CaJULLbaoJU.-6 sp.
1
—
—
Heptageni idae
406
(.9)
252
(. 6]
205
1.3]
2 78
(.3)
Epeo^io* sp.
96
82
39
15
RtuXkiogzna sp.
25
11
1
7
C^inygmata sp.
76
75
41
13
Ephemerel1i dae
83
(.7)
103
(7.6)
86
(.75)
49
1.4)
EpkmoJieJLla doddUi. sp.
7
8
2
-------
Table 44. (Continued)
Taxa
Middle Fork at
Bear Cr.(Rubble)
7/9/80
Middle Fork at
Bear Cr.(Gravel)
7/9/80
Sampling sites
Strawberry Creek
(Rubble)
8/9/80
Strawberry Creek
(Gravel)
8/9/80
Ephemeroptera - Ephemerellidae
(continued)
Ephmz/ielZa ^Zav-CLcne-a —
Ephmtfidtta. Ap^nifieAa. —
EphmeJi&tta £cb^aLu> 41
EphmeA&Lta. gA.ancLu 3
Paraleptophlebiidae —
PaAalzptophZeb-ia sp. —
Total No. of Insects 1,140
Total volume (ml) 2.7
11
11
41
1,223
3.6
3
8
11
2 U)
2
1,050
1.1
11
2
2
832
1.2
1/ £ = volumes less than .05 ml
-------
are valuable in checking identifications of immature forms and as a basic
partial species list for the upper drainage. Approximately 33 species
of stoneflies, 20 species of mayflies, and 11 species of Trichoptera were
collected (Table 45).
Particularly valuable records of Plecoptera were MzAocapyita owzoykl,
?.lctQ£LdULa. expanda, and HzavipznJLa fio/icipata. NzavipQAZa hoticlpcuta was
collected from four tributaries in the drainage. This insect appears
in Bauman, et. al. (1977) in a list of rarely collected Plecoptera of
the Rocky Mountain area. All records of Ephemeroptera are highly valuable
as data on this order in the upper Middle Fork drainage is not currently
available.
Analysis of Cutthroat and Bull Trout Stomachs
Stomach contents from 80 westslope cutthroat and 28 juvenile bull
trout from the North Fork drainage and 30 cutthroat and seven juvenile
bull trout from the Middle Fork drainage were examined to determine food
habits.
Data was organized by species and length to compare food habits of
small and large fish of each species in tributaries of the North and Middle
Fork drainages. The two size groups for each species were fish shorter
than or equal to 110 mm and fish larger than 110 mm in total length. There
was also a grouping for Middle Fork River fish.
The number and volume of insects in each taxa, frequency of occurrence
of taxa, and Index of Relative Importance for all stomach contents were
calculated and are presented in Appendix E , Table 1 - 12.
Cutthroat
The relative importance of insect orders in the diets of two size
classs of cutthroat trout in North and Middle Fork tributaries and one
size class in the Middle Fork river is depicted in Figure 19.
Ephemeroptera, Diptera and Trichoptera were the major orders in the
diet of cutthroat less than or equal to 110 mm in length in tributaries
of both drainages.
In the diets of cutthroat larger than 110 mm, Ephemeroptera was the
dominant order with Trichoptera, Diptera, and Plecoptera well represented.
Stomach samples collected in 1979 from North Fork tributaries were also
dominated by Ephemeroptera (Graham et. al. 1980b). Hymenoptera (terrestrial
adults), Diptera (adults) and Trichoptera were the major food items found
in larger cutthroat in Middle Fork tributaries.
Stomach contents of Middle Fork river fish were dominated by winged
adults of the orders Trichoptera, Diptera and Ephemeroptera, with other
orders also represented. It appears that larger cutthroat trout in Middle
Fork tributaries and in the Middle Fork River feed largely on the water
surface for winged insects.
-104-
-------
Table 45. Adult aquatic insects collected from the Middle Fork of the Flathead River and its tributaries
during the summer of 1980.
Taxa
Date of collection
Location
EPHEMEROPTERA
Heptageni idae
C-LnygmuJia pan.
RkiXhAogena. fiutcLLs
RhJM1n.og2.na mowUAoni.
R \niXhfiogma kagerU
C-inygmuZa gaA£h.2JULL
C-inygmuta KcuwJLyi.
tt It
C-inygmuta tajida.
RbjXfowgzna. sp. female
Unknown £ 4ub-anago
Ephemerellidae
EphmzAeXZa gsia.ntiLa>
EphemeAelZa sp. female
EphmoAoULa. gtiandLa, lnge.m,
tt II tt
EphmejieXZa dodcU,-i
Ephme.n.eJLla ^lavZtinza
EpkmeAeZZa sp. female subimago
EphmeAeHa giancLU, -ingem
11 July
21 July
17 July
23 July
24 July
27 July
14 July
12 July
13 July
12 July
9 September
11 August
10 August
5 September
22 August
28 July
18 June
12 July
25 June
28 July
8 August
25 July
5 September
22 August
10 August
6 September
8 August
23 September
Schafer Creek
Surprise Creek
Schafer Creek
Cox Creek
Clack Creek
Bowl Creek
Schafer Creek
Dolly Varden Creek
Dolly Varden Creek
Dolly Varden Creek
Morrison Creek
Gateway Creek
Mid-Fk Schafer Creek
Morrison Creek
Mid-Fk-Gooseberry Park
Bowl Creek
Mid-Fk Flathead below Schafer
Dolly Varden Creek (upper)
Mid-Fk Flathead below Schafer
Bowl Creek
Trail Creek
Clack Creek
Granite Creek
Lodgepole Creek
Gateway Creek
Granite Creek
Gateway Creek
Cox Creek
-------
Table 45. (Continued)
Taxa
Date of collection
Ephemeroptera -
(conti nued)
EphemeAeJLta.
Siphlonuridae
S-ipkto nuAiu>
It
S-iphtonuAiUi
S-LphJLonuAuA
PcuiameXeXai
AmeJL&tuA sp.
" sp.
" sp.
Baeti dae
CattibaeXLi
Ephemerellidae
sp. female subimago
columb-iane
ft
occA.de.n£aLtA
sp. female
sp. female
female
male
female subimago
dodcLi-i
II
CaJULLbaeAJji sp. female
Baetci sp. subimago
" sp. subimago
PLECOPTERA
Capni idae
Capyiia sp. female
M&iacapnia, oe.nom
Nemouri dae
PodmciAta. deJUcaXuta
'f II
22 August
25 July
14 July
26 July
26 July
28 July
No date
6 September
10 August
16 June
26 July
24 July
26 July
22 August
10 August
17 June
5 September
7 September
11 August
14 July
25 July
9 July
Locati on
Lodgepole Creek
Basin Creek
Schafer Creek
Clack Creek
Clack Creek
Basin Creek
Strawberry Creek
Granite Creek
Gateway Creek
Mid-Fk at Schafer Meadows
Clack Creek
Clack Creek
Clack Creek
Mid-Fk-Gooseberry Park
Mid-Fk above Schafer Creek
Mid-Fk Flathead below Schafer
Granite Creek
Granite Creek
Gateway Creek
Schafer Creek
Basin Creek
Morrison Creek
-------
Table 45. (Continued)
Taxa
Date of col lection
Plecoptera-Perlodidae (continued)
MegoAct/4 a-Lgnat a
KogotuA nonuA
It II
P-ictoXiotZa zxpaiua
Kogotcu modeAtuA
KogotuA nonuj,
n 11
11 ti
Perlidae
Vofionm/Lia tke.od.oia.
HoApoAopoAZa pa.ci{>-Lca.
11 It
Chloroperlidae
kttopoAta doJLLcata
KlZcipoAla 6Q.VQA.OL
tl tl
AttopoAZa piZoi,a
n rr
ti it
VaJiapoJiZa fisioyvtatiA
12 July
24 July
4 August
10 July
10 August
5 Septembe
22 Septembe
5 Septembe
6 Septembe
22 August
10 August
28 July
28 July
12 August
10 August
10 August
17 June
18 June
12 July
27 July
24 July
17 June
18 June
18 June
26 June
17 June
Location
Dolly Varden Creek
Mid-Fk -Gooseberry Park
Strawberry Creek
Dolly Varden Creek
Mid-Fk Flathead above Schafer
Granite Creek
Cox Creek
Morrison Creek
Granite Creek
Lodgepole Creek
Mid-Fk above Schafer
Bowl Creek
Bowl Creek-Grizzly Park
Strawberry Creek
Mid-Fk above Schafer
Mid-Fk above Schafer
Mid-Fk - Spruce Park
Mid-Fk - Spruce Park
Dolly Varden at Argosy
Basin Creek (head)
Bowl Creek
Morrison Creek
Mid-Fk at Spruce Park
Mid-Fk at Spruce Park
Clack Creek
Mid-Fk Flathead below Schafer
-------
Table 45. (Continued)
Taxa Date of collection
Plecoptera - Chloroperlidae
(continued)
SuwalLia. LLnno^a
24
July
It
II
25
July
H
11
5
September
It
It
22
August
It
11
8
August
It
11
5
September
Suwaltia patLLduZa.
10
July
It
11
11
July
It
11
3
September
It
II
11
August
1)
II
10
August
It
It
22
August
It
11
5
September
It
11
6
September
Svoolt&a
aZbeAtoMU)
19
July
II
11
28
July
botuiaLLt,
26
July
11
11
18
June
II
tl
8
August
II
11
18
June
II
II
26
July
SweZtia
co£ofia.d.£rU>'L&
12
July
II
11
18
June
II
11
26
July
II
11
18
June
II
11
25
July
SwoJbti,a
i-ideXLi,
26
June .
It
11
11
July
II
U
12
July
11
11
10
July
Locati on
Bowl Creek
Clack Creek
Long Creek
Lodgepole Creek
Gateway Creek
Granite Creek
Trail Creek
Schafer Creek
Long Creek
Gateway Creek
Mid-Fk above Schafer
Mid-Fk - Gooseberry Park
Morrison Creek
Granite Creek
Schafer Creek
Bowl Creek
Basin Creek
Mid-Fk Flathead below Schafe
Trail Creek
Mid-Fk at Spruce Park
Clack Creek
Dolly Varden Creek
Mid-Fk Spruce Park
Clack Creek
Mid-Fk Flathead below Schafe
Mid-Fk at Switch-back Creek
Clack Creek
Schafer Creek
Dolly Varden Creek - Argosy
Dolly Varden Creek - Argosy
-------
Table 45. (Continued)
Taxa
Date of collection
Plecoptera - Nemouridae (continued)
la.pa.da. cinctipa
lapada dnctip&A
lapada
Leuctri dae
PaAalmcXAa v&AAkina
PaAalcuc&ia. occidcntaLi*
Taeniopterygi dae
Tazviionma pa.citfi.cum
Peltoperlidae
VoAopcnZa bnzviA
II II
II II
Pteronarcidae
VtQAonajicoJtJta badia
It 11
Perlodidae
Me.gaA.cy-6 Mat&iXoni
13 July
6 September
26 July
18 June
24 July
12 July
27 July
24 July
25 July
18 June
18 June
14 July
17 June
8 August
28 July
11 July
8 July
25 July
24 July
13 July
28 July
27 July
Locati on
Strawberry Creek
Lake Creek
Basin Creek (head)
Mid-Fk Flathead below Schafer
Bowl Creek
Dolly Varden Creek
Basin Creek (head)
Bowl Creek (above Basin Cr.)
Bowl Creek (above Basin Cr.)
Mid-Fk Flathead-Spruce Park
Mid-Fk Flathead-Spruce Park
Dolly Varden Creek
Mid-Fk Flathead below Schafer
Trail Creek
Basin Creek
Schafer Creek
Trail Creek
Clack Creek
Bowl Creek
Dolly Varden Creek-Argosy
Bowl Creek
Basin Creek (head)
-------
Table 45. (Continued)
Taxa
Date of collection
Plecoptera - Chioroperlidae
(continued)
SweZtia. faldzLLt,
SweJLtAa. Zamba
Sivettia AevzloAtoka
UtapeAta ^optodofia.
Ne.avi.peAZa ^oficJjpata.
TRICHOPTERA
Rhyacophi1i dae
Rhijac-opkila. pzLLLba. Ross male
Rkyacopkila sp. female
Rhyacopklta sp. female
Rhyac.ophUJLa. vocala Milne male
Glossosomatidae
GloMOAcima sp. female
Anagepetu* de.b^tu> Ross male
13
July
25
July
24
July
27
July
8
August
14
July
14
July
25
July
25
July
18
June
14
July
25
June
26
July
5
September
3
September
11
August
3
September
6
September
6
September
6
September
6
September
28
July
25
July
24
July
18
July
18
June
11
July
Location
Dolly Varden Creek - Argosy
Clack Creek
Bowl Creek
Basin Creek
Trail Creek
Dolly Varden Creek
Dolly Varden Creek
Bowl Creek
Clack Creek
Mid-Fk Flathead below Schafer
Schafer Creek
Mid-Fk Flathead below Schafer
Clack Creek
Granite Creek
Long Creek
Gateway Creek
Long Creek
Long Creek
Lake Creek
Granite Creek
Lake Creek
Mid-Fk above
Mid-Fk above
Mid-Fk above
Mid-Fk above
Schafer Creek
Schafer Creek
Schafer Creek
Schafer Creek
Mid-Fk above Schafer Creek
Schafer Creek
-------
Table 45. (Continued)
Taxa
Date of collection
Locati on
Trichoptera (continued)
Hydropsychidae
A Adopt yche gAancUt Banks male
male
" " female-
Limnephili dae
Le.yiaAc.kiU> sp.
Eactciomy^ia maculosa. Banks males
Ec.ctomyi.a sp. female
EccLitomy-ia con&pzA&a Banks male &
" " females
OLiQophte.bodu nuthae. Ross male
L^mnepkllu,6 sp. female
26 July
18 July
25 July
17 April
12 July
8 July
11 July
18 July
26 July
8 August
Mid-Fk above Schafer Creek
Mid-Fk above Schafer Creek
Mid-Fk above Schafer Creek
Mid-Fk at Gooseberry Park
Dolly Varden Creek
Trail Creek.
Schafer Creek
Mid-Fk above Schafer Creek
Basin Creek
Mid-Fk above Schafer Creek
-------
Middle Fork
North Fork
R i ve r > no
Figure 19. Relative importance (IRI) of insect orders in the diets of
cutthroat trout £ 110 mm and > 110 mm in length from North and
Middle Fork tributaries and cutthroat > 110 mm from the Middle
Fork River. Shaded areas indicate winged adults. Stomachs
were collected during the summer of 1980.
-112-
-------
The major families of Ephemeroptera present in cutthroat stomach
are presented in Figure 20. Heptageniidae and Ephemerel1idae were the
major mayfly families present in North Fork drainage cutthroat of both
size classes. Heptageniidae and Baetidae were the major families found
in small cutthroat in Middle Fork tributaries, while Ephemerel1idae and
Baetidae were the major families in the larger cutthroat.
Figure 21 depicts the important families of Trichoptera in the North
and Middle Fork cutthroat stomachs. Brachycentridae, Limnephilidae, Hydro-
psychidae and Rhyacophilidae were the major Trichoptera families found
in cutthroat from both drainages. The family Chironomidae was by far
the most important dipteran in the cutthroat stomach samples.
A comparison between major food items found in the stomachs of small
North and Middle Fork tributary cutthroat and available benthic insect
food supply indicates feeding is opportunistic. Ephemeroptera and Diptera
were the dominant insect orders in diets as well as in the available benthic
food supply. This relationship was also present at the family level where
the dipteran family Chironomidae, and the mayfly families Baetidae, Heptageniidae
and Ephemerel!idae were the most important individual families in both
the stomach samples and in the available insect food supply^ Griffith
(1974) found that cutthroat and brook trout were opportunistic feeders
in four small streams in northern Idaho. He found that Ephemeroptera,
Coleoptera, Diptera, Trichoptera and Plecoptera made up more than 90 percent
of both the invertebrate drift and the diets of cutthroat and brook trout.
Bull trout
Mayflies were by far the most important insect order in stomachs
of both small and large bull trout in the North and Middle Fork drainages
(Figure 22). Other important orders in bull trout diets were Diptera
and Trichoptera in the North Fork drainage, and Plecoptera and Diptera
in the Middle Fork drainage.
The relative importance of Ephemeroptera by family in bull trout
diets is presented in Figure 23- Heptageniidae was the major family in
bull trout diets in the North Fork drainage, followed by Ephemerellidae
and Baetidae. These families were of similar importance in the available
benthic food supply of the North Fork drainage.
Baetidae was the major family in bull trout stomachs collected in
the Middle Fork drainage, followed by Ephemerel1idae and Siphlonuridae.
Siphlonuridae was not a major mayfly family in Middle Fork benthic insect
samples, but its presence in bull trout stomachs indicated selection for
this family. The "free swimming" habits of siphlonurids may make them
easier prey for the juvenile bull trout. Although Heptageniidae was the
major mayfly family in the Middle Fork benthic samples, it was not the
predominant family in the stomachs of juvenile bull trout collected from
the Middle Fork drainage.
There was a relative absence of winged adults in stomachs in small
(less than 110 mm) bull trout compared to larger bulls or cutthroat. Armstrong
and Elliot (1972) found that juvenile Dolly Varden obtained only 9 percent
-113-
-------
Middle Fork
North Fork
Heptageniidae \ / Baetidae
Ephemerell idae
>110
>110
Figure 20. Relative importance (IRI) of Ephemeroptera nymphs by family and
Ephemeroptera adults in the diet of cutthroat trout < 110 mm
and > 110 mm in length from North and Middle Fork tributaries.
Stomachs were collected durina the summer of 1980.
-114-
-------
Middle Fork
North Fork
Limneph ilidae
Rhyacophilidae/ X Adult
( IRI IHydropsychidae
Hydroptilidae\- y^eptoceridae
Brachycentridae
>110
>110
Figure 21. Relative importance (IRI) of Trichoptera larvae by family and
Trichoptera adults in the diet of cutthroat trout £ 110 mm
and > 110 mm in length from North and Middle Fork tributaries.
Stomachs were collected during the summer of 1980.
-115-
-------
North Fork
>110
Diptera
Plecoptera S~~V Coleoptera
Tnchoptera I IRI I Hymenoptera
Ephemoroptera \ / Hemiptera
Homoptera
<110
Figure 22. Relative importance (IRI) of insects by order in the diet of
bull trout £ 110 mm and > 110 mm in length from North Fork
trioutaries and bull trout _< 110 mm in length from Middle
Fork tributaries. Shaded areas indicate winged adults.
Stomachs were collected during the summer of 1980.
-116-
-------
North
Fork
IRI
>110
<110
Siphlonuridae/^\Adults
HeptageniidaeV /Baetidae
Ephemerellidae
Middle Fork
^110
Figure 23. Relative Importance (IRI) of Ephemeroptera by family in bull
trout _< 110 mm and > 110 mm in length from the North Fork
tributaries and bull trout < 110 mm in length from Middle
Fork tributaries. Stomachs were collected during the summer
of 1980.
-117-
-------
of their food items from the surface, while 56 percent were gathered from
the substrate in the form of immature aquatic insects. Murrell (1977)
found Diptera, Trichoptera and Ephemeroptera most abundant in stomachs
of juvenile Dolly Varden in streams near Glacier Bay, Alaska. Armstrong
(1970) found immature stages of Diptera, Ephemeroptera, and Plecoptera
predominated in stomachs collected from Hood Bay Creek, Alaska. Griffith
(1974) reported immature stages of Ephemeroptera, Coleoptera, Diptera,
Trichoptera and Plecoptera comprised 92 percent of the diet of brook trout
in small streams in northern Idaho.
These food habit analyses represent a cursory examination of the
summer diet of cutthroat and bull trout in the two drainages. Seasonal
study and larger sample sizes would be needed to determine in depth the
relationships between trout and their food supply in the North and Middle
Fork drainages.
MIDDLE FORK CREEL CARD SURVEY
Creel Card Returns
A total of 15 creel census cards were returned during 1980. Most
returns came from cards distributed by Fish, Wildlife and Parks, and U.S.
Forest Service personnel. Six of the 15 cards were for one-day trips.
The nine overnight trips average 6.8 days. The average number of anglers
per trip was 2.7 and the angler success rate for all trips was 85 percent.
The number of anglers and composition of the catch for the summers
of 1980 an 1979 are presented in Table 46. The numbers and percent composition
of each species caught was similar for 1980 and 1979. Cutthroat dominated
the catch with an average composition of 63 percent. Whitefish made up
35 percent of the catch, while bull trout comprised only two percent.
In 1980, anglers released 45, 36, and 79 percent of the cutthroat, whitefish
and bull trout caught. In 1979, anglers released 56 percent of the cutthroat
trout, 90 percent of the bull trout and 83 percent of the whitefish that
they caught.
Incidental Hook and Line Sampling
Results of hook and line sampling by Fish, Wildlife and Parks personnel
conducted on the North and Middle Forks of the Flathead Rivers in 1980
were compared to results from 1962 and 1961 in order to identify changes
or trends in species composition or catch rates (Table 47). Catch per
hour for cutthroat was greater than for other species in the North and
Middle Fork Rivers during 1961, 1962, and 1980. Mountain whitefish catch
rates were smaller, while catch rates for bull trout were the smallest
of the three species.
Cutthroat dominated the catch for all three years, averaging 90 percent
in the North Fork and 77 percent in the Middle Fork. Bull trout and mountain
whitefish comprised three and seven percent of the catch in the North
Fork , and six and 17 percent in the Middle Fork, respectively. Hanzel
(1977) reported a similar percent composition from a creel survey conducted
-U8-
-------
Table 46. Catch information from 15 voluntary creel cards returned in
1980 and 18 returned in 1979. Number of fish caught are in
parentheses.
Number Total Catch per hour
of fisherman Cutthroat Bull Mountain
Year anglers hours trout trout whitefish Total
1980 38
243
1.68(408)
.05(11)
.97(236)
2.70(655)
1979 44
228
1.61(367)
.08(19)
.91(197)
2.60(583)
-119-
-------
Table 47. Catch information from hook and line sampling by Fish,
Wildlife and Parks personnel on the North and Middle Forks
of the Flathead River during the summers of 1980, 1962 and
1961. The number of fish caught of each species is in
parentheses.
Total Catch per hour
Year
fisherman
hours
Cutthroat
trout
Bull
trout
Mountai n
whi tefish
Rai nbow
trout
Total
North
Fork
1980
1962
1961
120
233
146
2.15(259)
2.78(648)
1.97(288)
0(0)
.03(6)
.14(21)
•07( 9)
.24(55)
.25(36)
.05(2)
.005(2)
.05(2)
2.24
3.06
2.41
Middle
Fork
lllly.
196 li'
104
164
170
2.15(224)
.71(117)
.33(11)
.06(10)
.62(20)
.25(39)
0
0
3.10
1.02
1: Data from 1961 and 1962 are from Hanzel, unpub. data.
Table 48. Catch information from hook and line sampling by Fish,
Wildlife and Parks personnel in North and Middle Fork
tributaries during the summer of 1980. Number of fish caught
are in parentheses.
Total
Catch
per hour
Drainage
fi sherman
hours
Cutthroat
trout
Bull
trout
Mountai n
whitefish
Total
North Fork
34
3.03(103)
.06(2)
—
3.09(105)
Middle Fork
56.5
3.31(187)
.14(8)
.78(44)
4.0 (239)
-120-
-------
on the North and Middle Forks during the summer of 1975. Angling was
also conducted in North and Middle Fork tributaries during the summer
of 1980 (Table 48). Catch rates were 40-50 percent higher in tributaries
than in the rivers. Cutthroat made up 98 percent of the catch in North
Fork tributaries and 78 percent in Middle Fork tributaries.
This catch rate and species composition data will be valuable in
assessing changes in fish populations which may occur as development continues
in the two drainages. Catch rates of each species are useful as general
trend data when compared with angling by Fish, Wildlife and Parks personnel
from other years. These catch rates are higher than catch rates reported
by fishermen. This is probably due to the fact that Fish, Wildlife and
Parks personnel are more experienced than the average angler.
-121-
-------
CUMULATIVE IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE NORTH FORK
OF THE FLATHEAD RIVER: AN OVERVIEW
In the introduction, we wrote of the wild and scenic rivers, wilderness
areas, Glacier Park, and all that contributes to the national recreational
values of this area. What follows is a brief overview of resource develop-
ments which currently threaten those values. This section also serves
to illustrate the importance of the Flathead River Basin Study for addressing
the cumulative impacts of these developments. Much has been written
about the resource conflicts in the Flathead. A summary of impacts on
Glacier Park was written by Don Schwennesen (Missoulian, December 30,
1980, Glacier Under Siege, pp. 21-32).
RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
Coal
Cabin Creek Coal Mine
Sage Creek Coal Ltd. owns 10,000 hectares of land along Cabin Creek,
which enters the Flathead River nine miles north of the Canadian border
(Figure 24). They expect to disturb 1,500 hectares of land by pits,
roads, fill, etc., in the process of strip mining coal from two hills
located immediately north and south of Cabin Creek. Their present scenario
includes production of both metallurgical and thermal coal. Inital production
at the Cabin Creek site would be 1.2 million tons of raw coal, converted
to 0.8 million tons of clean coal per year. Crushing and washing would
occur on site and the coal would be trucked approximately 63 km to a
railroad. Production could be increased to 1.7 million tons of clean
coal per year, which would put the mine life at 35 years. The two open-
pit mines would be dug 100 meters below ground level, leaving two pits
over 1.5 kilometers wide, and about 2 billion tons of waste. Original
plans call for the diversion of Howell Creek, a tributary to Cabin Creek
to make room for the waste. Sage Creek Coal Ltd. is in the process of
securing a Stage II permit from the provincial government.
Lodgepole and Lily Bird Mine Sites
Crows Nest Industries, a subsidiary of Shell Canada, is completing
a Stage I application to develop two coal deposits for surface mining
approximately 40 miles north of the border. The largest site is the Lodge-
pole coal deposit near Foissey Creek which has an estimated 60 million
tons of extractible coal. Similar in size to Cabin Creek and across the
river is the Lily Bird coal deposit, between Squaw and Pincher creeks.
They plan to develop another small coal deposit in the upper end of Cabin
Creek when the main Cabin Creek site is developed.
T imber
The forest in the North Fork of the Flathead River drainage is largely
a monotypic stand of lodgepole pine. An estimated 349,645. acres of federal,
state, and private lands along both sides of the North Fork had been
-122-
-------
SPARWOOD
"UPPER
FLATHEAD
RIVER^ „
BASIN
N.
t
COLEMAN
' MeOILLlVRAt j
N
I Q. \
k
NORTH FORK FLATHEAD RIVER
IN BRITISH COLUMBIA
f e fe t
MORR1SSEY '
ELKO
BRITISH COLUMBIA
MONTANA
1
*
Cr
Current Logging
® Community
'~S~~ Drainage Basin Boundary
Political Boundary
National Park Boundary
10 Miles
Cr
C'j
\
WATERTON LAKES
NATIONAL PARK
»
ALBERTA
MONTANA
Upp»r KinttO
rKmt!o L / ^
GLACIER NATIONAL
PARK
Figure 24. Drainage map of the upper North Fork of the Flathead River (adapted
from Montana Dept. Natural Resources & Conservation (1977)
-------
infested in the valley and foothills of the Flathead River drainage in
British Columbia. Various management practices have been employed, ranging
from no harvest of trees in Glacier Park to the plan by British Columbia
forestry officials to clear half of the dead timber out and a-ttempt reforest-
ation. There is controversy surrounding all the management plans, and
the cumulative impacts are merely speculative at this time. This management
problem may prove to be the most significant of all in respect to its
potential impacts on the aquatic resource. A brief review of the management
plans of the three major land holders in the North Fork of the Flathead
River drainage follows.
Glacier National Park
Glacier National Park controls the land along the east side of the
North Fork, which comprises 53 percent (365,824 acres) of the total acres
in the North Fork valley south of the Canadian border. The epidemic first
noted in the Park in 1972, covered 164,492 acres by 1978 and has continued
to spread through the valley. Glacier National Park manages the west
side of the Park for its wilderness attributes allowing nature to take
its course. However, some experimental research is planned for controlled
burning of selected areas of dead lodgepole (Joe Shellenburger, personal
communication, Glacier National Park). The policy of fire supression
has interrupted natural cycles and this research is aimed at slowly phasing
wildfires back in as part of the natural cycle of the Park. Selective
burning is also being considered for safety purposes to prevent a fire,
once started, from burning the entire east part of the North Fork drainage.
U.S. Forest Service (Flathead National Forest)
Most of the information in this section came fr e tly prepared
Cumulative Impact Assessment for logging on the Glacier View Ranger District.
The Forest Service has 284,140 acres along the west side of the North
Fork valley, interspersed with 22,520 (7%) of private and 16,226 (5%)
of state-owned land. The U.S. Forest Service estimated beetle infestation
has .spread to 85,160 acres of lodgepole pine and 93,525 acres of whitebark
pine by 1980 on their holdings in the North Fork. They expect to cut
10,000 acres over the next five years including salvage, clearcuts, shelter-
wood and seed tree units along the west side of the North Fork. Timber
sales adjacent to major bull trout spawning areas include Ketchikan Creek
(17 MMBF-FY81), Coal Ridge (10 WBF-FY83), Coal Creek (1.8 MMBF-?), Koopee-
Lookout Creek-Big Creek (3.7 MMBF-FY85), Forks Ridge and upper Hallawat
Creek (5 MMBF-FY 83), Whale Creek and other drainages in the North Fork
of the Flathead River.
The 10 MMBF sale on Coal Ridge would include 10 miles of new road.
Forest Service personnel estimated road construction alone may double
the sediment load in the stream from 1,440 tons to an estimated 3,100
tons per year. The Ketchikan Creek sale along Trail Creek has been approved
at the regional level, but is under appeal at the National Level. This
17 MMBF sale is underlain by clay tills which could contribute to acceleration
of run-off into Trail Creek. Timber sales in the Lookout Creek and Forks
Ridge-Hallawat Creek areas in the Big Creek drainage are located in steep
topography.
-124-
-------
Private land in the North Fork has been extensively logged, and 17
percent (3,941 acres) of it has been subdivided.
B.C. Forest Service
B.C. government controls 93 percent of the 464,315 acres of land
in the Flathead drainage north of the border. In 1977, an estimated 46,000
acres of forest had been infested by the mountain pine beetle and the
beetle has continued to spread. The provincial government wants to harvest
100 percent of the beetle infested timber. An estimated 7,000 acres of
infested timber remains. B.C. Forest Service expects to spend $4.5 million
to knock down and clear out nearly half of the dead timber over the next
four or five years (Gerry Ordway, personal communication, B.C. Forest
Service, Fernie) Extensive logging is ongoing in the Kishenehn, upper
Couldrey, and Sage creek drainages across the U.S. - Canadian border,
primarily by Crows Nest Industries (a subsidiary of Shell Canada). In
the Akamina-Kishenehn drainage adjacent to Glacier Park and draining through
its northwest corner, B.C. Forest Service officials estimated a harvest
of 37 acres/day and 46 haul trucks per day by Septmber, 1980. The cut
was estimated at 5,500 acres/year over the next five years.
Oil and Gas
Nearly 1,000,000 acres on the Flathead National Forest are under
application for lease of oil and gas rights. ARC0 has been conducting
seismic exploration using surface charges along Big and Trail creek tributaries
to the North Fork. Shell Oil Company has an exploration permit for Trail
Creek, and Amoco has exploration permits in the Whale, Moose, Red Meadow,
Hay, Coal, and Big creek drainages on a total of 82 miles of road. Early
exploration in the upper valley was for oil; today the exploration is
primarily for natural gas deep in the overthrust belt. Two wells were
punched in north of the border by Shell Canada last year. One located
on Cabin Creek was capped after drilling over 12,000 feet, another well
is still being drilled in the alpine zone of Middle Pass Creek and is
scheduled to go down 18,000 feet. Presently 91 percent of the Forest Service
land in the North Fork is under lease application. Shell Canada has 80
percent of the Flathead in Canada under lease.
Foothills natural gas pipeline has recently been laid in the upper
Flathead River basin near McLatchie Creek in British Columbia. It crossed
the headwall of the dendritic tributaries to McEvoy Creek, possibly causing
sediment problems in the Flathead River during the fall and winter of
1980-81.
Roadways
Extensive forest roadways exist in nearly every drainage on the west
side of the North Fork valley except in the Trail Creek drainage. Bridges
over tributary streams along the North Fork road have been significantly
upgraded during the past three years. The Federal Highway Administration
plans to continue paving the North Fork road from Canyon Creek to Camas
Creek, completing a loop into Glacier Park. Flathead County plans to
-125-
-------
pave the North Fork road from Camas Creek north to Polebridge. Road construction
on the two projects is expected to be completed by 1986. Vehicle crossings
at the U.S.-Canadian border over the past four years have averaged 662
northbound and 616 southbound from late spring through early fall. Apparently,
n anticipation of much greater use, the U.S. customs just completed construc-
tion of a $180,000 border station in the North Fork. Presently the North
Fork is relatively isolated and electric power lines have not been run
into the valley.
CUMULATIVE IMPACT ON THE BULL TROUT FISHERY: NORTH AND MIDDLE FORK DRAINAGES
All signs indicate that a significant increase in access, use and
development can be expected in the North Fork in the near future. Data
on the bull trout fishery in the North Fork is used here to exemplify
the cumulative impacts of resource development on the recreational and
biological resource of the Flathead Basin. This is a preliminary and
incomplete assessment, but serves to demonstrate the seriousness of the
problem.
Bull trout, also called Dolly Varden, provide a trophy sport fishery
in the Flathead Basin. An estimated 7,213 bull trout over 18 inches long
were taken out of North, Middle and Main Flathead River in 1975 (Hanzel
1977). A large fishery also exists in Flathead Lake and will be censused
in 1981-82. Restrictive measures were taken to preserve the bull trout
fishery in the early 1950's. All the major spawning tributaries in the
North and Middle Fork are closed to fishing. An 18 inch minimum size
limit was also imposed to protect pre-spawners in the rivers and Flathead
Lake.
A basin-wide inventory of bull trout spawning sites in the North
and Middle Fork drainages was conducted in the fall of 1980. This survey,
in conjunction with redd counts collected by B.C. Research in the Canadian
portion of the North Fork, provided an index of relative importance of
spawning areas in the basin. This data is presented in the section entitled
"Inventory of Bull Trout Spawning Sites". With that information, we can
evaluate the potential cumulative impacts of resource development on bull
trout spawning.
The proposed diversion of Howell Creek as part of the Cabin Creek
Coal development would eliminate as much as 18 percent of the total bull
trout spawning in the North Fork of the Flathead River drainage included
in the inventory. The diversion would dewater virtually all of the presently
usable spawning habitat in Howell Creek. Extensive timber harvest is
occurring in Sage, Kishenehn, and upper Couldrey creeks in Canada. These
streams accounted for 12 percent of the bull trout spawning in the North
Fork in 1980. Lower Sage Creek is also a critical rearing area for cutthroat
trout. Fish densities in the Canadian stream reaches have not been evaluated
to date.
Major timber sales in Trail, Coal, and Big creek drainages are adjacent
to major bull trout spawning areas which accounted for 42 percent of the
total observed spwning in the North Fork of the Flathead River drainages
-126-
-------
in 1980. The stream reaches are also critical rearing areas for juvenile
bull trout, as defined by present high fish densities.
In summary, at least 72 percent of the prime bull trout spawning
and over 30 percent of the critical rearing areas for juvenile trout could
be directly impacted by resource development in the North Fork drainage
over the next five years. Taken individually, these developments might
seem insignificant or mitigatible; however, taken in total, they threaten
the future of bull trout in the North Fork.
Bull trout spawning in 1980 was equally divided between the North
and Middle Forks of the Flathead River. Historically, the South Fork
also provided a significant proportion of the bull trout recruitment to
Flathead Lake. Construction of Hungry Horse Dam in 1953 prevent bull
trout coming out of Flathead Lake from entering the South Fork. Estimated
loss of recruitment of bull trout to Flathead Lake from the South Fork
was 40 to 60 percent of the total drainage based on estimates of available
rearing areas. Degredation of spawning and rearing habitat in the North
Fork would significantly affect the stability of the remaining population.
The Middle Fork of the Flathead River may not provide a secure refuge
for the remaining bull trout population. The U.S. Forest Service is prep-
aring an E.I.S. on leasing for oil and gas in the Bob Marshall and Great
Bear Wilderness areas by the fall of 1981 (Figure 25). Attempts to conduct
seismic exploration in those two wilderness areas is presently held up in
appeals. The surface explosion exploration would parallel or intersect
sections of six major tributaries in the Middle Fork drainage which accounted
for 39 percent of the spawning in the Middle Fork drainage in 1980. Six of
the 18 critical rearing areas for trout which have been identified to
date in the Middle Fork parallel the proposed seismic routes. A timber sale
(10 W1BF) is proposed for the upper Granite and Morrison creek drainages for 1983.
(Doug Maryott, U.S.F.S personal communication). These two drainages contained
41 percent of all bull trout redds located in the Middle Fork drainage in
1980. The remaining bull trout population is threatened in the North Fork
and its future is uncertain in the Middle Fork.
Restrictive regulations have existed for many years to protect spawning
bull trout in tributary streams and pre-spawning size fish in the lake.
Increased access and development in the North Fork will likely result
in much more restrictive fish regulations for bull trout in the future.
However, these restrictions will do little good in preserving the existing
fishery unless attention is paid to the cumulative impacts of development on
the bull trout population.
This section of the report was not prepared to present specific recommend-
ations to minimize negative impacts of development on the fishery. Some
of the impacts would be increased siltation in streams resulting in channel
instability, reduced carrying capacity for fish food organisms, decreased
survival of fish eggs in the stream bed, and fewer fish in both the Flathead
River and Lake. Certain criteria already exist to regulate these disturbances.
Too often these criteria are applied on a project by project basis. Only
recently has any attempt been made to look at the cumulative affects of resource
development on stream drainages. The significance of using cumulative impact
assessment is illustrated with the bull trout spawning data. This can help
put in perspective some of the complex problems involved in managing and
mitigating our wildlife resources.
-127-
-------
Upper Middle Fork of the Flathead Drainage
N
1
ro
00
1
\
Great
1
v.
\
I
\
Beer
Wilderness
— Wlldtmnt
..... Gl«cl«r Nat ioal Park
A Foraat Sarvica Cabin*
\v
V
\
r''S
I _
/ V
/ -
<
>
\
/
^-v
I xt
V
I
\
V
P oposed Seismic Exploration Routes
Figure 25. Proposed route of seismic exploration in the Bob Marshall and Great Bear Wilderness
areas (U.S.F.S. Progress Report; Consolidated Georex Geophysics Prospecting Permit
Environmental Analysis).
-------
LITERATURE CITED
Armstrong, R.H. 1970. Age, food, and migration of Dolly Varden smolts
in southeastern Alaska. J. Fish, Res. Board Can. 27:991-1004.
Armstrong, R.H. and S.T. Elliot. 1972. A study of Dolly Varden in Alaska.
Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game, Federal Aid in Fish Restoration, Annual
Progressive Report, 1971-1972, Project F-9-13:1-34.
Bauman, R.W., A.R. Gaufin, and R.F. Surdick. 1977. The stoneflies (Plecoptera)
of the Rocky Mountains, Memoirs of Amer. Ent. Soc. 31. 208 p.
Binns, N.A. and F.E. Eiserman. 1979. Quantification of fluvial trout
habitat in Wyoming. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 108(3):215-228.
Bjorm, T.C. 1961. Harvest age structure and growth of game fish population
from Priest and Upper Priest Lakes. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 90(1):27-
31.
Blackett, R.F. 1968. Spawning behavior, fecundity, and early life history
of anadromous Dolly Varden {Sa&vzntinuA malma) in southeastern Alaska.
J. Fish Res. Board Can. 30:543-548.
Block, D.G. 1955. Trout migration and spawning studies on the North
Fork drainage of the Flathead River. M.S. Thesis, University of
Montana 68 p.
Burns, J.W. 1971. The carrying capacity for juvenile salmonids in some
northern California streams. Calif. Fish and Game. 57(1):44-57.
Carlander, K.D. 1969. Handbook of fresh water fishery biology, Vol.
I. Iowa State University Press. 752 p.
Cardinal, P.J. 1980. Habitat and juvenile salmonid populations in
streams in logged and unlogged areas of southeastern Alaska. M.S.
Thesis. Montana State Univ., Bozeman. 115 p.
Flathead Drainage 208 Project. The North Fork of the Flathead River:
a baseline characterization. 89 p.
Graham, P.J. 1977. Juvenile steelhead trout densities in the Lochsa
and Selway River drainages. M.S. Thesis, University of Idaho,
Moscow. 91 p.
Graham, P.J., R. Penkall, and D. Burkhalter. 1980a. RTRN, a fish tag
return program. Dept. Fish, Wildlife & Parks. 5 p.
Graham, P.J., D. Read, S. Leathe, J. Miller and K. Pratt. 1980b. Flathead
River Basin fishery study. Mont. Dept. of Fish, Wildlife and Parks.
166 p.
-12.9-
-------
Graham, P.J., S.L. McM.ullin, S. Appert, K.J. Frazer, and P. Leonard. 1980c.
Impacts of Hungry Horse Dam on aquatic life in the Flathead River.
Annual Rept., Mont. Dept. of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Kalispell.
91 p.
Griffith, J.S. 1974. Utilization of invertebrate drift by brook trout
and cutthroat trout in small streams in Idaho. Trans. Amer. Fish.
Soc., 103(3):440-447.
Hanzel, D.A. 1966. Survey of cutthroat trout and Dolly Varden in the
Flathead River and tributaries above Flathead Lake. Mont. Dept.
Fish and Game. Project No. F-7-R-14, Job No. III. 8 p.
Hanzel, D.A. 1977. Angler pressure and game fish harvest estimates for
1975 in the Flathead River system above Flathead Lake. Fisheries
Investigation Report, Mont. Dept. of Fish and Game, Helena. Project
No. P-l-23.
Hesse, L. 1977. FIRE I, a computer program for the computation of fishery
statistics. Nebraska Tech. Ser. No. 1. Nebraska Game and Parks
Commission. Project No. F-10-R. 60 p.
Horner, N.J. 1978. Survival densities, and behavior of salmonid fry
in streams in relation to fish predation. M.S. Thesis. Univ. of
Idaho, Moscow. 118 p.
Hunter, J.W. 1973. A discussion of game fish in the state of Washington
as related to water requirements. Wash. State Dept. of Game,
Fisheries Mgmt. Div. 66 p.
Huston, J.E. 1972. Life history studies of westslope cutthroat trout
and mountain whitefish. Mont. Dept. of Fish and Game. Project No.
F-34-R-5. Job No. Ilia. pp. 1-7.
Hynes, H.B.N. 1972. The ecology of running waters. Univ. of Toronto
Press. 555 p.
Johns, W.M. 1970. Geology and mineral deposits of Lincoln and Flathead
counties, Montana. Mont. Bureau of Mines and Geology, Bulletin
36. 68 p.
Johnson, T.H., and T.C. Bjornn. 1978. Evaluation of angling regulations
in management of cutthroat trout. Idaho Cooperative Fishery Research
Unit, College of Forestry, Wildlife and Range Sec. Univ. of Idaho,
Moscow. 153 p.
Lestelle, L.C. 1978. The effects of forest debris removal on a population
of resident cutthroat trout in a small headwater stream. M.S. Thesis.
Wash. State Univ.
Lewis, S.L. 1967. Physical factors influencing fish populations in pools
of a trout stream. M.S. Thesis. Mont. State. Univ., Bozeman. 34 p.
-130-
-------
May, B. and J.E. Huston. 1975. Habitat development of Youngs Creek,
tributary to Lake Koocanusa. Mont. Dept. of Fish and Game. Final
job rept. Contract No. DACW 67-73-E0002. 12 p.
McPhail, J.D. and C.B. Murray. 1979. The early life history and ecology
of Dolly Varden {SaJLvelAnuu, malma) in the upper Arrow Lakes. Report
to B.C. Hydro and Power Authority and Kootenay Fish & Wildlife. 112 p.
Montana Dept. of Fish and Game. 1979. North Fork of Flathead River
fisheries investigation. 73 p.
Mudge, R.M., R.L. Earhard and D.D. Rice. 1977. U.S. Geological Survey
open end file rept. 77-25. 28 p.
Murrell, E.E. 1977. Growth and August food of juvenile and anadromous
Dolly Varden (SalveJUnuA malma) and coho salmon, (OnocosikymchuA
k^uutak) in the Boussole Valley of Glacier Bay National Monument,
M.S. Thesis. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks. 66 pp.
Needham, P.R., and T.M. Vaughan. 1951. Spawning of the Dolly Varden,
SalvdUnuA malma,, in Twin Creek, Idaho. Copeia, 1952, No. 3,
pp. 197-199.
Northcote, O.G. and W.W. Wilkie. 1963. Underwater census of stream fish
populations, Trans. Amer. Fish Soc. 92(2):146-151.
Nunallee, D.A. 1976. Summary of existing water quality data North Fork
Flathead River above Flathead Lake, Montana. Dept. Health Env.
Sci., Kalispel1. 12 p.
Pacific Northwest River Basin Commission. 1976. River mile index. Clark
Fork - Pend Oreille River. Washington, Idaho, Montana and British
Columbia. 53 p.
Peterson, L.C., L. Randall, G. Gould, T. Hall, and D. Read. 1977. Fishery
investigations, Glacier National Park, 1977 progress document. Dept.
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Kalispell, Montana. 322 p.
Platts, W.S. 1974. Geomorphic and aquatic conditions influencing salmonids
and stream classification. U.S.F.S. surface environment and mining
program report, Washington, District of Columbia U.S.A.
Platts, W.S. 1979a. Relationships among stream order, fish populations,
and aquatic geomorphology in an Idaho river drainage. Fisheries
(4)2:5-9.
Platts, W.S. 1979b. Including the fishery system in land planning.
U.S.D.A. Forest Service Tech. Rept. INI-60. 37 p.
Ricker, W.E. 1971. Methods for assessment of fish production in fresh
waters. Blackwell Scientific Publications. Oxford, England. 348 p.
-131-
-------
Reiser, D.W. and T. Bjornn. 1979. Habitat requirements of anadromous salmonids.
General Technical Report PNW-96. U.S.F.S. 54 p.
Sekulich, P.T. and T.J. Bjornn. 1977. The carrying capacity of streams for
rearing salmonids as affected by components of the habitat. M.S.
Thesis. Idaho Cooperative Fisheries Research Unit. Univ. of Idaho,
Moscow. 79 p.
Snedecor, G.W. and W.G. Cochran. 1969. Statistical methods. Iowa State
Univ. Press. 593 p.
Stanford, J.A., F.R. Hauer, and T.J. Stuart. 1979. Annual report of work
completed during 1978-79 on limnology of Flathead Lake-River ecosystem.
Flathead Research Group, Univ. of Montana Biological Station, Bigfork,
Montana. 155 p.
Stanford, J.A., F.R. Hauer, T.J. Stuart, B.K. Ellis, and W.B. Perry. 1980.
Limnology of the Flathead River-Lake ecosystem, Montana:Annual Report.
Flathead Research Group. Univ. of Montana Biological Station, Bigfork,
Montana. 443 p.
U.S. Geological Survey. 1979. Water resources data for Montana U.S.G.S.
water data report. MT-79-1. 842 p.
Vincent, E.R. 1971. River electrofishing and fish population estimates.
Prog. Fish Cult. 33(3):163-167
-132-
-------
APPENDIX A
Flow measurements, water temperature data and
reach description information for North and Middle Fork tributaries
-------
Table 1 . Reach information for North Fork tributaries surveyed in 1980.
Reach Drainage Length Gradient Late summer
Drai nage number area (km2) (km) {%} flow (cfs)
Canyon Creek 76.9 14.2 4.7
1 -- 6.3 4.0 16.0
2 -- 7.9 3.2 10.7
McGi nni s
--
6.7
1
--
1.2
3.0
0.7
2
--
5.2
--
--
Kimmerly
4.1
4.8
^ _
1
--
4.1
4.8
3.1
Camas Creek
143.5
21.0
.6
1
—
3.7
1.7
26.4
2
--
8.6
N.S.
16.4
3
8.7
<1
19.8
Dutch
71.2
18.1
1.8
1.
--
7.8
1.0
10.5
2
--
5.5
2.0
10.6
3
4.9
4.3
7.0
Anaconda Creek
101.5
14.0
2.2
1
--
8.8
2.3
7.3
2
6.3
4.0
3.6
Logging Creek
123.2
7.2
2.0
1
7.2
2.0
60.1
Quartz Creek
135.9
12.7
2.2
1
12.7
2.2
80.3
Cummings
5.1
2.8
1
5.1
2.8
5.2
Moran Creek
23.6
13.0
4.0
7.3
1
--
7.5
3.5
5.7
2
--
1.6
8.0
2.9
3
--
2.0
4.2
1.9
4
2.0
25.0
3.2
Hay Creek
78.2
25.3
2.6
1
--
8.5
3.3
21.3
2
--
7.4
1.3
14.4
3
7.5
2.6
8.6
4
1.9
10.0
9.6
-------
Table 1 . (Continued)
Drai nage
Reach
number
Drainage
area(km2)
Length
(km)
Gradient
(%)
Late summer
flow (cfs)
Bowman Creek
177.9
8.4
2.6
1
--
8.4
2.6
26.4
Akokala Creek
120.2
16.8
2.0
_ _
1
--
8.0
1.6
0.7
2
--
8.8
2.2
35.3
Parke
7.7
5.7
_ _
1
--
4.0
4.3
7.3
2
--
2.3
1.0
10.4
3
1.4
--
--
Long Bow
6.4
5.8
_ _
1
6.4
5.8
7.3
Moose Creek
43.5
19.3
3.0
8.9
1
5.1
2.6
10.8
2
--
4.9
3.1
9.3
3
--
9.2
3.5
6.7
Ford Creek
32.4
12.8
3.0
_ _
1
—
6.9
2.0
3.2
¦2
--
2.1
1.0
1.7
3
—
3.8
5.0
1.7
Kintla Creek
138.0
4.7
1.7
_ _
1
4.7
1.7
125.5
Starvation Creek
21.8
10.9
2.2
_ _
1
—
7.7
2.5
17.1
2
3.2
1.0
11.6
Kishenehn Creek
17.7
8.7
1.7
_ _
1
17.7
8.7
1.7
67.4
Spruce Creek
7.6
5.4
2.0
1
--
2.0
2.6
2.4
2
3.4
3.1
4.2
Sage Creek
6.2
2.3
2.0
1
2.3
2.0
48.3
-------
Table 2. Reach information for Middle Fork tributaries surveyed in 1980.
Reach
Drainage
Length
Gradient
Late Summer
Drai nage
number
area(km2)
(km)
(%)
flow (cfs)
Long Creek
19.37
8.61
2.5
1
2.72
1.8
2
1.32
1.8
3
4.57
3.2
Granite Creek
74.6
13.42
1.4
13.7
1
7.89
1.7
2
5.53
1.0
Lake Creek
19.37
7.43
1.6
21.4
1
2.54
2.5
2
4.89
0.7
Miner Creek
19.53
4.36
2.8
1
2.5
1.7
2
1.86
3.7
Morrison Creek
133.1
22.39
2.0
28.5
1
7.48
1.1
2
3.78
2.3
3
8.80
1.7
4
2.33
5.2
Lodgepole Creek
49.2
10.66
1.1
1
6.53
1.1
2
4.13
1.0
Whi stler
1
3.12
1.6
Schafer Creek
126.4
14.17
2.1
15.3
1
4.60
0.4
2
1.13
2.1
3
4.78
1.0
4
3.66
6.0
W. Fork Schafer
1
3.25
3.0
Dolly Varden Creek
68.4
14.79
1.1
14.7
1
13.05
1.0
2
1.74
Argosy
15.4
5.19
3.5
1
1.46
5.8
2
3.73
2.7
-------
Table 2. (Continued)
Reach
Drainage
Length
Gradient
Late summer
Drainage
number
area(km2)
(km)
(%)
flow (cfs)
Calbick Creek
21.70
4.3
2.3
2.5
1
4.3
2.3
Cox Creek
51.57
11.56
1.5
1.4
1
3.27
0.4
2
6.15
1.6
3
2.14
Clack Creek
36.57
10.56
3.8
9.9
1
2.82
1.0
2
2.67
1.0
3
5.07
7.0
Bowl Creek
46.80
17.19
2.5
18.3
1
2.59
2.1
2
4.20
2.5
3
1.6
0.5
4
6.4
3.3
5
2.4
3.6
Basin
25.25
10.5
1.3
4.1
1
2.1
1.3
2
6.6
1.1
3
1.8
3.1
Strawberry Creek
71.04
19.75
1.2
15.2
1
4.88
0.5
2
7.53
1.1
3
5.07
1.9'
4
2.27
1.0
E. Fork Strawberry
5.00
3.6
1
3.04
5.2
2
1.96
Trail
49.9
11.74
2.0
9.6
1
7.74
1.6
2
4.0
2.7
Gateway
19.63
7.47
3.4
4.0
1
2.49
2.9
2
2.16
4.0
3
1.77
4.8
4
1.05
1.2
S. Fork Trail
1
4.79
2.5
-------
Table 3. Monthly averages of minimum and maximum water temperatures (°C) in the North Fork
tributaries during 1980.
Month
Big II
Creek-
Coal 9/
Creek—
Logging.,,
Creek
Water temperature
Red Meadow
Creeki/
T ra i 1 j- /
Creek-
River
trap&/
May
Mean minimum
Mean maximum
Range
3.3
5.2
2.2-6.6
4.5
6.0
2.2-8.9
4.7
5.1
4.4-6.7
5.6
6.7
5.5-7.7
June
Mean minimum
Mean maximum
Range
5.9
8.5
3.3-11.6
5.6
7.2
2.2-10.5
13.3
15.4
11.6-17.2
7.3
7.9
4.44-10.0
6.3
8.4
5.6-11.1
I
cn
i
July
Mean minimum
Mean maximum
Range
8.7
12.9
7.2-16.1
8.1
12.2
8.9-13.8
14.8
19.0
12.2-22.2
10.6
12.1
8.3-15.5
8.36
11.5
7.8-16.1
12.1
17.8
10.0-17.4
August
Mean minimum
Mean maximum
Range
8.1
11.5
6.1-14.4
8.7
11.5
6.1-12.7
14.7
18.7
11.6-21.1
10.3
11.8
7.7-13.8
7.1
11.1
6.7-13.8
10.3
13.8
9.4-16.6
September
Mean minimum
Mean maximum
Range
6.4
8.7
4.4-10.5
6.1.
8.2
3.9-11.1
8.1
9.6
6.1-11.1
7.3
9 3
5.6-11.6
October
Mean minimum
Mean maximum
Range
3.0
5.2
2.2-7.8
3.9
4.4
3.3-7.7
5.27
6.3
2.77-9.44
5.4
6.4
3.9-9.4
-------
Table 3. (Continued)
Water temperature
Month
Coal 9,
Creek-
Logging,, Red Meadow
Creek — Creek^'
River,
trap"/
November
Mean minimum
Mean maximum
Range
3.7
3.9
1.1-5.0
3.9
4.4
2.8-5.0
4.02
3.88
2.2-5.5
4.6
5.2
3.3-6.1
1: Thermograph - in: May 1- out: May 17; in: May 28 - out: November 12
2: Thermograph - in: May 7- out: August 14; in: August 26 - out: November 12
3: Minimum-maximum thermometer - in: June 19 - out: August 31
4: Thermograph - in: May 21-out: August 13; in: August 23 - out: November 12
5: Thermograph - in: May 14-out: November 12
6: Minimum-maximum thermometer - in: July 27 - out: August 27
-------
Table 4. .1980 discharges for North Fork tributaries representing relatively high and low flows.
All measurements were taken near the North Fork road bridges.
Drai naqe
High water!/
Low water
Date
Discharge(cfs)
Gauge(cm)
Date
Discharqe(cfs)
Gauge height(cm)
Big Creek
5/26
78
129.2
11/5
57.40
67.0
Coal Creek
6/5
373.93
55.4
11/5
65.45
17.6
Moran Creek
5/5
70.70
33.8
11/5
6.30
10.4
Hay Creek
6/9
68.21
34.4
11/5
23.45
19.8
Red Meadow Creek
5/5
218.25
57.9
11/5
18.90
20.4
Moose Creek
5/5
66.13
39.6
11/5
5.95
15.8
Whale Creek
6/9
197.02
46.0
11/5
71.40
31.1
Teepee Creek
5/5
35.05
39.9
11/5
.70
15.5
Trail Creek
6/9
162.43
32.3
11/5
51.20
10.9
1: Peak flow occurred sometime between May 5 and June 9, 1980.
2: Flows were obtained from U.S.G.S. records.
-------
Figure 1. Seasonal water level fluctuation in Coal Creek during 1979 and 1980.
-------
Apri 1
Ma y
June
July
Augu st
Septem ber
October
Nov.
-35
-43
-30
-18
- 6
%
^ - * *
1980
RED MEA(
UPPI
LOWI
VOW CREEK
:r
:r —
#
* f
-168
•137
•107
¦70
¦46
¦15
0
s
—^ / \
'' S
BIG
1978
1979
1980
CREEK
Figure 2. Seasonal water level fluctuations in Big Creek during 1978, 1979, and 1980, and
two locations on Red Meadow Creek in 1980.
-------
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
¦67
• 34
•43
•SO
¦IB
•6
>¦ \
\ \
\
——- *
MOO!
1978
1979
1980
;e CREEK
¦47
¦54
¦43
¦30
¦IS
¦6
/
/'
\
\
\s
r . - ¦
WHAL
1978
1979
1980
E CREEK
Figure 3. Seasonal water level fluctuations in Moose and Whale Creeks during 1978 and 1979.
-------
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
¦55
\
\
TEPEE
CREEK
-43
\
\
V
1978
1979
1980
-30
-18
«¦»
**" 1 ,
-6
¦67
MORAN
CREEK
-55
1978
1979
¦
¦43
1980
——
¦30
\ ^ / N
\ '
\
-18
»
f
f
«
I
r ,
;
¦6
Figure 4. Seasonal water level fluctuations in Teepee and Moran Creeks during 1978, 1979, and
-------
April
•67
E
o.
©
z
x
lu
o
3
<
O
May
June
July
August
September
October
IN)
I
-67
55
-43
-18
TRAIL CRE
1978 ---
1979
1980 —
EK
Figure 5. Seasonal water level fluctuations in Hay and Trail Creeks during 1978 and 1979.
-------
OJ
I
~ 3.a
o>
® 2.5
x
0)
~)
3
(0
O 2.01
8/7/80
s 11/5/80
'9/4/80
20 30 40
Stream Width (ft)
v 6/10/80
High Flow Profile
V26/B0
Estimated Low Flow Profile
11/5/80
Big Creek
\
V26/80
100 200 300 400 500 600
Cubic Feet Per Second
700
"8^0
Figure 6. Gauge height and flow relationship for Big Creek. Dates of flow measurements are
indicated along the discharge curve.
-------
Stream Width (ft)
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Cubic Feet Per Second
Figure 7. Gauge height and flow relationship for Moran Creek. Dates of flow measurements are
indicated along the discharge curve.
-------
99i
98
High Flow Profile
6/7/79
Estimated Low Flow Pj-ofile
8/7/80
97-
10
—I 1 1—
20 30 40
Stream Width (ft)
50
6/7/80
6/9/80
^10/25/79
11/5/eo
' 8/7/80
Hay Creek
20
40
60 80 100 120 140
Cubic F«et Per Second
160 180
Gauge height and flow relationship for Hay Creek. Dates of flow measurements are
indicated along the discharge curve.
-------
99t
£ 98
a
a>
a
High Flow Profile 5/5180
1
Gravel Bar
Estimated Low Flow Profile
8/7/80
To
10
20
30 40 50 60
Stream Width (ft)
70
CTi
I
~ 1.5-
CTI
X 1.0
&
»
3
.5
11/5/80
8/7/80
I I I
5/5/80
5/14/79
Red Meadow Creek
I l
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260
Cubic Feet Per Second
Figure 9. Gauge height and flow relationship for Red Meadow Creek. Dates of flow measurements are
indicated along the discharge curve.
-------
High Flow Profile 5/5/80
Estimated Low Flow Profile 10/25/79
10 20
Stream Width (ft)
30
2. On
~ l-5i
¦C
o>
©
I
0)
o> 1.0H
3
flj
o
.5-
\
5/5/80
"8/7/80
10/25/80
Moose Creek
10
~20
—i—
30
~4o"
50
—i—
60
—i
70
Cubic Feet Per Second
Figure 10. Gauge height and flow relationship for Moose Creek. Dates
of flow measurements are indicated along the discharge
curve.
-17-
-------
Whale Creek
20 To 60 80 Too F5o 140 160 180 200 220 240
Cubic Feet Per Second
Figure 11. Gauge height and flow relationship for Whale Creek. Dates of flow measurements are
indicated along the discharge curve.
-------
Figure 12. Gauge height and flow relationship for Teepee Creek. Dates
of flow measurement are indicated along the discharge curve.
-19-
-------
10 20 30 40 50
Stream Width (ft)
Cubic Feet Per Second
Figure 13. Gauge height and flow relationship for Trail Creek. Dates of flow measurements are
indicated along the discharge curve.
-------
APPENDIX B
Data entry format and explanation for the Interagency Stream
Fishery Data Input Form for cards 1-22. Format, instructions
and example forms for additional cards 30-38.
-------
INTERAGENCY STREAM FISHERY DATA INPUT
FORM INSTRUCTIONS FOR DATA ENTRY CARDS 1-22
CARD 1:
Serial Number: This number will be controlled by regional or state office
or agency entering information.
State: The code for Montana is 30.
Hydrologic Unit Code: This entry designates the drainage. Regional and
state office of each agency have these codes.
Stream Order: A numerical class identification assigned to a tributary
based on its location in the drainage. Two first order stream's meet to
form a second order stream, etc.
State Water Code and Water Type: State water code and water type are obtained
from a list furnished by the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks.
Stream water type codes are 01 - 19, with 19 being a stream unable to
sustain a population of fish.
Reach: Portion of a stream with a distinct association of physical habitat
characteristics. Gradient is the major factor in reach delineation.
Reach Number: The reaches are numbered consecutively from the mouth,
up the stream.
CARD 2 AND 3:
Reach Boundaries: Brief description of upper and lower boundaries and
map coordinates for these boundaries.
Elevation: Upper and lower elevation of reach boundaries in meters.
Average Wetted Width: Average of measurements from one water's edge to
the1other, taken at random intervals within the habitat section.
Tributary To: U.S.G.S. map name of stream or river into which the study
stream converges.
County: All Flathead County streams are 029.
CARD 5:
Fish and Game Region: All Flathead County streams are in Region One.
Percent Pocket Water: A series of small pools that do not calssify as
pools individually, but in combination create fish habitat. Pocket waters
are usually found in boulder or cascade areas.
-1-
-------
Ingress: Legal availability of public access to the stream.
CARD 8:
Flow During Survey: The instream flow (m3/sec) during the survey and the
date of observation.
Normal Low Flow: Lowest flow expected during an average year from past
records or as can be estimated. Note: This is not the historic low
flow.
Valley Flat: The area of a valley bottom which may flood, including low
terraces. Relic terraces which cannot be flooded by the present river
are excluded from the valley flat.
Channel Width: The width of the channel from rooted vegetation to rooted
vegetation.
Average Maximum Pool Depth: The maximum depth measured in the deepest
pool in the habitat section.
Gradient (%): = Difference in elevation (meters) from upper to lower end
of reach
Length of reach (meters)
This is usually measured with a clinometer or is calculated from a topographic
map.
Pool-Run-Riffle Ratio: The estimated percent of each type, for a portion
of the stream at low water. In combination with pocket water, equals
100%.
Pool - Usually deeper, quiet water, although pools may be at the
base of falIs.
Run - Moderately moving water with the surface not turbulent to
the extent of being broken. Intermediate between pool and
ri ffle.
Riffle - Shallow, fast moving water where the surface is turbulent
and broken.
CARD 9 AND 10:
Bottom Type: Entered under Run. Percent make-up of bottom substrate
(the bed material).
Average Peak Water Temperature: The highest water temperature measured
during the summer.
Spring Creek: A spring creek or spring stream is identified by its fairly
-2-
-------
constant temperature, flow, and clear water. Watercress will often be
present.
Affected by Lake: When lake or impoundment significantly affects water
temperature, flow pattern, fish food, or fish runs within the reach or stream.
Inundated by Beaver Ponds: The percent of the reach length presently
impounded by beaver ponds is entered.
D-90: The diameter of bed material which is larger than 90 percent of the
remaining material. Measured by length of intermediate axis.
Total Alkalinity and Specific Conductance: Alkalinity and conductivity
values are measured at the lower end of individual drainages during the
low flow period.
Floating: Recreational use by boaters.
Special Value: Importance as a trout recruitment stream.
Channel Stability Rating Elements: Nine ratings of bank stability combined
with six ratings of bed stability for a stream reach. U.S. Forest Service
stability evaluation field forms were used.
Pool Classes: The percentage of the pools in the reach in each pool class.
Total = 100 percent. Pool classes are determined as follows:
Size: Measurements refer to the longest axis of the intersected
pool
CARD 11:
3 - Pool larger or wider than average width of stream
2 - Pool as wide or long as average stream width.
1 - Pool much shorter and narrower than average stream width.
Depth Ratings
3 - Over 3 feet
2 - 2-3 feet
1 - Under 2 feet
Cover Ratings
3 - Abundant cover
2 - Partial cover
1 - Exposed
Total Ratings
Pool Class
1
2
3
8-9
7
5-61/
4-5
3
Pocket water
1: Sum of 5 must include 2 for depth and 2 for cover.
-3-
-------
CARD 13 AND 14:
Habitat Value for Fishes of Special Concern: A judgement value of habitat
for spawning and production of westslope cutthroat.
Fish Population: List of game fish species present, their abundance and
dominant use.
CARD 19:
Imbeddedness: The filling of the interstitial spaces of a gravel or rubble
stream bottom with sand or fines.
Habitat Trend: All man-caused activities in or adjacent to the stream
as well as dynamic natural processes.
Esthetic: Description of the pristine qualities of the reach.
CARD 20:
Channel Alterations: Cause, type, and length of artificial and natural
changes occuring in the stream channel.
Bank Encroachment: Description of structure or-activities that interfere with
natural stream or flood plain hydraulics.
CARD 21:
Data Source: Month, year, field person, and agency to be contacted concern-
ing data and agency.
CARD 22:
Information on the reach not contained on other cards.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Parameters were rated based on the following criteria:
1-3 means the data rated were based on judgement estimates.
4-6 means the data rated were based on limited measurements.
7-9 means the data rated were based on extensive measurements.
-4-
-------
INTERAGENCY STREAM FISHERY DATA INPUT
FORM INSTRUCTIONS FOR DATA ENTRY CARDS 30-38
Cards 30-35 are optional, but .any module that has entries must be complete,
i.e., species (codes) and densities must be filled out.
CARD 30 - POOLS
Column 6-7:
Method of estimating (see code sheets for method
abbrevi ations)
Column 8:
Column 9-11:
Columns 12-27
Columns 28-30
Columns 31-46
Columns 47-49
Columns 50-57
Rating, enter 1-9
Enter species code (Enter 3 digit number) (012)
Enter density (0-999.9) per 100 m2 for each age class.
Enter species code (005)
Enter densities (0-999.9) per 100 m2 for each age class
Species code (085)
Densities (0-999.9) per 100 m2
If a species is not present, leave species code and density columns blank.
CARD 31 - 34 - RUNS, RIFFLES, POCKET WATER, COMBINED FEATURES
Same as Card 30
CARD 35
Same as card 30 except enter Biomass (g/100 m2) (0-999.9) instead of density.
CARD 36
Option, but any module that has entries must be complete, i.e., number,
density, year and rating must be filled out.
Columns 6-8: Number of bull trout redds in reach, enter 0-999
Columns 9-11: Density of redds (No/Km) (0-99.9)
Columns 12-13: Year of redd survey (1950 to 1980)
Columns 14: Rating 1-9
Sequence repeated through column 41.
-5-
-------
CARD 37 - ADDITIONAL PHYSICAL HABITAT DATA
Columns 6-8:
Column 9:
Columns 10-11:
Columns 12-13:
Column 14:
Columns 15-17:
Col LBTin 18:
Columns 12-25:
Column 26:
Column 27:
Columns 28-31:
Column 32:
Columns 33-42:
Column 43:
Columns 44-46:
Columns 47-48:
Column 49:
Columns 50-51:
Column 52:
Column 53:
Column 54:
Column 55:
Column 56:
Columns 57-59:
Column 60:
Average depth (0-999 cm)
Rating (1-9)
Percent cover, overhang (0-99 or blank)
Percent canopy (0-99 or blank)
Rating (1-9)
Wetted cross sectional area (m2) .1-99.9
Rating (1-9)
Drainage area (1-999999.9 or blank)
Rating (1-9)
Barrier Type (see code sheet for abbreviations)
Bariers (0-999.9 or blank)
Rating (1-9)
Percent cover in features (0-99, or blank)
Rating (1-9)
Blank
Flow Characteristics (see code sheet for abbreviations,
Alpha code - dominant in Col. 48)
Blank
Valley - channel ratio (1-99)
Rating (1-9)
Confinement (see code abbreviations)
Pattern (see code abbreviations)
Flood Plain debris - N L M H
Channel debris - N L M H
Percent of stable debris (0-100)
Rating (1-9)
-6-
-------
Column 61
Column 62
Column 63
Column 64
CARD 38 - OPTIONAL
Bank Form (see code abbreviations)
Bank Process (see code abbreviations)
Type of Genetic Mat11. (see code abbreviations)
Rating (1-9)
Chemical parameters and ratings, optional, all can be blank
Lines 6-9: Total Carbon (.01-9.99) Rating 1-9
Total Phosphorus (.001-.999) Rating 1-9
Nog - (.01-9.99) Rating 1-9
S04 - 2 (.1 - 99.9) Rating 1-9
Na+ (.1-99.9) Rating 1-9
K+ (.01-9.99) Rating 1-9
Lines 10-13
Lines 14-17
Lines 18-21
Lines 22-25
Lines 26-29
Lines 30-33
Lines 34-37
Line 38:
Ca+2 (.1-99.9) Rating 1-9
Mg+2 (.1-99.9) Rating 1-9
Turbidity - N L M H, (Nil, Low, Moderate, High)
-7-
-------
CODE ABBREVIATIONS
METHOD - THE METHOD OF OBTAINING FISH INFORMATION
BS: Boat Electroshocking
DN: Dip Netting
EL: Electroshocking (Back pack)
SN: Seining
- GN: Gill Netting
AG: Angling
TP: Traps
SW: Swimming with face mask
VS: Visual observations from above water
SP: Spearing
CL: Clubbing
HC: Hand Capture
PS: Poison
EX: Explosives
FLOW CHARACTERISTICS
P: Placid - Tranquil, Sluggish
S: Swirling - Eddies, Boils, Swirls
R: Rolling - Unbroken wave forms numerous
B: Broken - Standing waves are broken, rapids, numerous
hydraulic jumps
T: Tumbling - Cascades, usually over large boulders or
rock outcrops
BARRIER TYPES
A: Complete barrier to all fish passage
B: Barrier to spawning bulls
C: Possible barrier to all fish passage
D: Possible barrier to spawning bulls
-8-
-------
CONFINEMENT
Confinement (R) - the degree to which the river channel is limited in
its lateral movement by terraces or valley walls. The channel is either:
E: Ent Entrenched - The stream bank is in continuous
contact (coincident with) valley walls.
C: Conf Confined - In continuous or repeated contact at
the outside of major meander bends.
F: Fr Frequenctly confined by the valley wall.
X: Oc Occasionally confined by the valley wall.
U: Un Unconfined - not touching the valley wall.
N: N/A Not Applicable (e.g., where no valley wall exists.)
Confinement Classification
Entrenched Confined
PATTERN X/ V
Pattern (R) - The channel pattern for the reach is described in terms
of curvature. The channel is either:
S: St Straight - Very little curvature within the reach.
N: Sin Sinuous - Slight curvature within a belt of less
than approximately two channel widths.
P: Ir Irregular - No repeatable pattern.
C: Im Irregular Meander - A repeated pattern is vaguely
present in the channel plan. The angle between
the channel and the gsneral valley trend is less
than 90°.
R: Rm Regular Meanders - Characterized by a clearly
repeated pattern.
T: Tm Tortuous Meanders - A more or less repeated pattern
characterized by angles greater than 90°.
Typical Meander Patterns
Strai ght
Sinuous
Irregular Meander
-9-
Regular Meander
/\AA/
-------
Typical Meander Patterns, Cont.
Irregular
TURBIDITY
H
L
M
N
Tortuous Meander
-QRfU/i-
High
Low
Moderate
Nil
BANK PROCESS (P)
The current fluvial process the bank is undergoing.
F:
S:
Failing - Active erosion and slumping is taking
place.
Stable - The bank is composed of rock has very high
root density, or is otherwise protected from erosion.
Artificially stabilized banks should be noted in
the comnents.
Aggrading - Continuous sediment deposition is taking
place, causing the river channel to migrate away
from the river bank. Common on the inside of meander
bends where it may be accompanied by the presence
of a range of early to late serai vegetation.
BANK FORM
The range of bank forms is arbitrarily separated into four classes which
reflect the current state of river processes. These are:
F:
R:
S:
Flat - The river bed slopes gently to the beginning
of rooted vegetation, frequently with overlapping
bar deposits.
Repose - The bank is eroded at high water levels,
but is at the angle of repose of the unconsolidated
material (usually 34° - 37°).
Steep - The bank is nearly vertical, due to consolidation
by cementation, compaction, root structure, or some
other agent.
.Undercut - The bank has an undercut structure caused
by erosion. When undercut banks are stabilized
by vegetation this should be indicated in the comments.
-10-
-------
GENETIC MATERIALS (P)
Materials are classified according to their mode of formation. Specific
processes of erosion, transportation, deposition, mass wasting and weathering
produce specific types of materials that are characterized chiefly by
texture and surface expression. For added detail, consult the Terrain
Classification Manual (ELUC - Sec. 1976). Subsurface layers are noted
in a comment. Descriptive terminology:
A: Anthropogenic - Man-made or man-modified materials;
including those associated with mineral exploitation
and waste disposal, and excluding archaelogical
sites.
C: Colluvial - Product of mass wastage; minerals that
have reached their present position by direct, gravity-
induced movement (i.e. no agent of transportation
involved). Usually angular and poorly sorted.
E: Eolian - Materials transported and deposited by
wind action. Usually silt or fine sand with thin
cross-bedding.
F: Fluvial - Materials transported and deposited by
streams and rivers. Usually rounded, sorted into
horizontal layers, and poorly compacted.
K: Ice - Glacier ice.
L: Lacustrine - Sediments that have settled from suspension
in bodies of standing fresh water or that have accumulated
at their margins through wave action. May be fine
textured with repetative annual layers (varves).
M: Morainal - The material transported beneath, beside,
or within and in front of a glacier; deposited directly
from the glacier and not modified by any intermediate
agent. Usually poorly sorted and angular to sub-
angular. May be highly compacted and have significant
clay content.
X: Organic - Materials resulting from vegetative growth,
decay and accumulation in and around closed basins
or on gentle slopes where the rate of accumulation
exceeds that of decay.
R: Bedrock - Rock outcrop and rock covered by a thin
mantle (less than 10 cm) of consolidated materials.
S: Saprolite - Weatered bedrock, decomposed in situ
principally by processes of chemical weathering.
V: Volcanic - Unconsolidated pyroclastic sediments
that occur extensively at the land surface.
-11-
-------
1
rl
^ OJ)>r[.
Oj o x> > r
-C.
Cj c"j nJ °
\ •
Cjj f"1
o xj > <"j\:
a > n
ri
Cj E
o {
1
]
9>
•g
Cfi
«
O
K
U
ft
it
«•
N)
O
PC
K»
KJ
»s»
W
K>
ft
H
Si
>0
M
OJ
s
u
o
w
u
hi
K
S
a
is!
W
sj
S
8
*
O
u
t.
f-J
ft
CI
£
ft
l"
r»
o
1
|Me thod
9>
sj
»
40
o
Kl
u
ft
m
9>
x
a
\Cf
c
K
K>
hi
KJ
U
K)
ft
8
Si
fO
,oj
K>
C£
hi
V
UJ
o
w
M*
u>
hi
w
u>
4!
0)
(J)
V
u
u
i Method
O)
-•J
Method
9»
CO
»
o
KJ
U
ft
Ul
cn
a
O
K
K
hi
W
hi
ft
K)
Ul
ro
9)
__ r
fie t hod
CI
s
ft)
<£>
o
*g
u
ft
Ul
CI
vl
»
'
Method
:
i ^
Method :
bating
• Hating
Oi
Rating
Rating
Rating
CO
to
o
-
-
hi
u
ft
Ul
CI
sj
CO
to
5!
KJ
KJ
KJ
a
KJ
ft
H
%
KJ
KJ
CO
KJ
<£>
U
O
(J
CJ
KJ
a
k
to
Ul
«
a
K
¦ Rating |
Species
Code
|Species
Code
«o
o
U
«k
IA
0>
OB
i£
O
M
K»
K>
M
U
Species
Code
5pecies
!!ode
Species
Code
: Species {
i Code f
Age
0
:
Age
0
.
Age
0
-
\ge
3
_
Age
0
! A8e
0 3 f
. 1 ¦ S-
1 o ;
I
i
i
?
i,
¦!!
I
!
<
-
Age
I
Age
I
..
Age
I
\ge
I
-
Age
I
\v
Age I i
I S
P- f
«> k
«
—
Age
II
::
Age
II
Age
II
-
\ge
II
s
w
ti
B
KJ
A
KJ
CI
8
KJ
KJ
(J
KJ
UJ
8
Li
{_»
~J
U
s
(J
CT
«
L->
U
o
a
ft
o
ft
ft
ft
Cj
ft
ft
ft
Ci
ft
o
-
Age
II
-
Age g f;
II ? 1
- F
o f
o W
—
Age
III
««•>
W
Age
III
K>
A
fj
Ul
»
M
vj
-
Age.
Ill
—
^ge,
III
Age
III
—
Age 5 .
Ill f*
i
-
Species §
Code g
-
Species
Code
K)
CD
Kj
«o
Species
Code
N)
0?
U>
s
u>
s
8
ft
o
ft
ft
-
Species
Code
—
Species
Code
-
Species i[
Code U
Age ^
o 2
cn
zr
CO
Age 9
o p
T1
ft)
B)
U>
W
hi
w
u>
K
(J
CI
C)
C.'
•s>
(J
Age q
0 0
0 %
0
rt
Age 9
0 R
»-h
M
cn
Age g
0 §
0)
w
___
Age q [:
0 § r
-
Age g-
T 3
1 {u
(n
cn
>
Age J
T ^
1 CD
CO
n
o
3
"Age
T ^
1 fi>
Age ~
I
Age
I
:
f i
N
—
Age p
II ^
(T>
CD
rt
C
u
c>
&
o
ft
*
KJ
£
ft
ft
ft
V)
ft
CI
Age Ji
II D
XJ- 0»
CL
a
*
o
ft
ft
KJ
ft
U
&
ft
Ul
ft
0
ft
ft
01
ft
<£
o
tn
Ul
St
in
w
LT\
ft
m
u»
Ul
o»
Ul
-
"Sge
II
Age
TI
Age
II
a
t
ft
ft
KJ
&
£
5i
ft
9t
Age
II '
M
1
J
-
Age. g
III n
o
3
cr
—
Age o"
III g
V)
H-
rt
_
Age
III
ft
£
ft
Age
III
Age
III
-
Age
III
«k
•j
ft
GO
ft
13
tn
o
u*
Ui
KJ
B
K
V
Ui
UP
cr>
w
—
v ik
Species ^
Code ®
tk
<4
—
Species
Code
ft
Species
Code «
ft
to
-
Species
Code
ft
T>
O
ft
o
L.1
o
LT
CT
M
CI
CJ
Ci
ft
o
11
C1
—
Species
Code
ft
ft
CO
ft
o
U1
o
Ul
VI
hi
Ul
CJ
u»
ft
Ul
c
9.
IP
-
Species
Code
—
|e;150mm o
Ul
V
hi
U>
W
—
< 15thnm
<150mm
d
O
in
Ul
N>
Ul
U)
Ul
ft
u>
u>
w
9)
V
-5150mm
150mra
t
c
m
Ui
C>
LP
—
> 150mm
:
>150mm
> 150iran
__ > 15 Oram
> 150mm
i
— 1
- 1
1
j
<»."
o>
o
91
9i
KJ
KJ
cn
u
1
9)
Ul
•»*
&
9)
<0
O
V
N»
VI
U
ft
IT
-
C"i
00
Ul
u>
9>
0
0)
01
ro
Ol
u
91
Ol
Ul
9*
91
m
9>
O
M
Ul
vi
ft
-
a
Ul
tf)
9>
o
91
9»
M
9>
W
91
ft
CT>
tn
Ck
9»
91
9>
00
o>
u>
o
M
(J
ft
ci
o
o
o
a>
o
w
*-j
o
KJ
u
ft
S4
in
"
-
~
0/
«
ci
c
9>
O
KJ
91
W
9>
9»
Ul
o
91
9>
¦vj
91
O
o
«
o
KJ
U
Ul
—
•
*
h
*
A
4
»
e
i
-12-
-------
-13-
-------
APPENDIX C
Figures 1-12 Stream Trapping Results for 1980
-------
DOWNSTREAM
10-
BULL TROUT
10^
8
o>
CN
z
(/>
UPSTREAM
o
CO
\
CM
\
¦o
LL
O20i
QC
UJ
CD ioH
5
Z3
Z
•o
0)
¦*-<
(0
c
DOWNSTREAM
nA
¦D
>
O
E
a
(0
-O-
10-
20-
WESTSLOPE CUTTHROAT
UPSTREAM
25
30
MAY
-r-
5
i
10
15
—i—
20
JUNE
¦
25
30
Figure 1. Upstream and downstream trap catches of westslope cutthroat
and bull trout in Langford Creek for 1980.
-1-
-------
DOWNSTREAM
UPSTREAM
Figure 2. Upstream and downstream trap catches of westslope cutthroat
in Cyclone Creek for 1980.
-2-
-------
MOUNTAIN WHITEFISH
10
20
10
LONGNOSE SUCKER
I
W
o
\
XL
=~
~h m-n
O
oo
CM
o io
cc
UJ
m
s
z
¦o
a
n
+*
Cfl
C
BULL TROUT
r-r-n n
TJ
0)
>
O
E
0)
J=L
a
(0
a
n
WESTSLOPE CUTTHROAT
10
B
lUl
10
15
JULY
20
25
30
Figure 3. Downstream trap catches of westslope cutthroat, bull trout,
mountain whitefish, coarse scale and longnose suckers in
Moran Creek for 1980.
-3-
-------
LONGNOSE SUCKER
IO-
CS
00
*
o
00
\
CN
\
N
rn
X
C/>
BULL TROUT
10-
"O
O
W
C
j=a
¦O
0)
>
o
E
4)
CC
UJ
m
s
3
a
a
WESTSLOPE CUTTHROAT
a
(0
20'
10-
h-f"L
10 15 20
JULY
25 30
Figure 4. Upstream trap catches of westslope cutthroat, bull trout,
and longnose suckers in Moose Creek for 1980.
-4-
-------
40-
30-
20-
X
(/)
lZ 10H
oc 0-
LU
m
5
3
z io-
20-
o
CO
\
*
~o
4>
ra
4-»
(0
c
a
ra
DOWNSTREAM
ROUGH FISH
O
co
\
CN
N
K
TJ
a>
>
o
E
a>
a
ra
UPSTREAM
10
15
JULY
20
25
30
Figure 5. cU^|;eaf™ra"^»»"streara catches of non-game fish in Logging
suckers, northern squawfish! a"nd ^e;Jslde$sMne?sUCkm• '°n9n°Se
-5-
-------
DOWNSTREAM
"r=D=T
~ j.i rTL
MOUNTAIN WHITEFISH
O
00
UPSTREAM
o
oo
\
CN
-njB=r
DOWNSTREAM
BULL TROUT
¦D
0)
n
Cfl
c
UPSTREAM
T3
0)
>
O
E
a)
a
n
¦4
wm
DOWNSTREAM
a
n
WESTSLOPE CUTTHROAT **
UPSTREAM
10
15 20
JULY
25
Figure 6. Upstream and downstream catches of westslope cutthroat trout,
bull trout, and mountain whitefish in Logging Creek for 1980.
-6-
-------
10-
YELLOWSTONE CUTTHROAT
m n—i
10-
BULL TROUT
n n-JL-n l"l
20-
ARCTIC GRAYLING
« 'W
O 20-
oc
UJ
ffi
5
ZD
z
10-
o
J
Q
UJ
—I
_l
<
I-
(/)
tTMII r-> i—n
MOUNTAIN WHITEFISH
R
i-THT-i n ITn-i
o
\
CN
Q
UJ
>
O
5
UJ
cc
20-
10-
QL
<
CC
I-
WESTSLOPE CUTTHROAT
_d
Q.
<
CC
-t-ffT-i
10
15
JULY
20
2?"
Figure 7. Downstream trap catch in Red Meadow Creek for 1980. Species
include Yellowstone cutthroat trout, bull trout, Arctic gray-
ling, mountain whitefish, and westslope cutthroat trout.
-7-
-------
5 10 15 20 25 30
JULY
Figure 8. Upstream and downstream catches of westslope cutthroat trout
and bull trout in Trail Creek for 1980.
-8-
-------
DOWNSTREAM
fi=
UPSTREAM
o
S
o
«s
N
"O
0)
(0
4-*
(A
C
•o
0>
>
o
E
a>
a
-------
BULL TROUT
20-
z
w 10+
u.
LL
O
O
CO
CN
o
00
>
o
E
©
a
to
H~H
fhrfl ,
25 30
hi n n
4L
20
_~=i-
25
JULY
10 15
AUGUST
30
Figure 10. Downstream trap catch of westslope cutthroat trout and bull
trout in the North Fork of the Flathead for 1980.
-10-
-------
Fish Length fmm]
76-100 101-125 126-151 152-176 177-701 202 -226
Fish Length [mm).
.76-100.101-125 .126-151 152-176 177-201 202-226
7/9-7/24
MORAN CREEK
8/18-8/27
N.F RIVER TRAP
^11-7/24
n-34
x- 33
45
IS
8/4-8/13
LOGGING CREEK
N.F. RIVER TRAP
7/9-7/24
n-78
x-131
45
n-15
x-159
7/21-7/30
MOOSE CREEK
N.F. RIVER TRAP
7/10-^24
TRAIL CREEK
n-102
x-165
7/10-7/24
RED MEADOW CREEK
Figure 11.
Percent abundance and lengths of juvenile westslope cutthroat
trout emigrating downstream through Trail, Red Meadow, Moose,
Moran, Logging creeks, and the North Fork River traps in 1980.
-11-
-------
%
Fish length [mm)
76-100101-125 125-151152-176 177-201202-226
¥ 1 1 I 1 —— »iy
Fish lenqth(mm)
76-100 101-125 126-151 152-176 177-201 202-226
T
8/21-8/27
45
13
N.F. RIVER TRAP
7/9-7/24 n-5 n-6 7/10-7/24
x-15 x-138
MORAN CREEK
n-19
x-165
7/9-7/24
43
IS
5»v«w
MOOSE CREEK
7/10-7/2*
n-60
x-122
Figure 12. Percent abundance and lengths of juvenile bull trout emigrating
downstream through Trail, Red Meadow, Moose, Moran, and North
Fork River traps in 1980.
-12-
-------
APPENDIX D
Example of stream reach description, inventory data,
physical habitat map and fish population map
for Trail Creek Reach I.
-------
TRAIL CREEK REACH I
Reach Characteristics
Trail Creek is characteristic of lower reach 4th or 5th order tributaries
in the North Fork drainage. Wetted width is 15 m, which is typical of
many larger North Fork tributaries, and the average depth is 30 cm. Reach
I of Trail Creek is predominantly a run-riffle habitat. The amount of
channel debris was small and the debris present was generally unstable.
Trout cover was also low, covering less than 10 percent of the water surface
area. Stream gradient was relatively flat (2%), and the D-90 was 45 cm.
There were few major slump zones in this reach.
Valley Characteristics
The upper bank slope gradient was 40-60 percent and the reach had
a valley to channel ratio of 5:1. The average valley width for the reach
was 115 m. Trail Creek was occasionally confined in this reach and it
had a sinuous stream pattern. This portion of Trail Creek is a flood
plain area that has parent rock consisting of fintla red-green argelite
and Paleozoic limestone. Reach I flows through a mixture of Forest Service
and private land and is paralleled along the north side by the Trail Creek
road.
Fish Populations
Bull trout, westslope cutthroat, mountain whitefish, and slimy sculpins
were found in Reach I. This is a critical rearing area for juvenile bull
trout and also a major spawning area for adult adfluvial bull trout. An
estimated 90 to 100 bulls spawn in this reach, which amounts to approximately
15 percent of the North Fork spawning population.
-1-
-------
Stream habitat and fish population data
Location data
Stream
name
Keach
number
Trail Cr.
Physical habitat data
Stream
order
05
Drainage
area(km )
166. I
Side Maximum
channel pool
occurrence depth(m)
Serial Reach
number leng th
6.3
LIB 7
15.0
pool
-30
Trlbutary
ot
Average Average
wetted depth for
width (m) reach (in)
Average
channel
width(m)
20
% run ,% riffle
Upper
reach
boundary
fltrn of
dry area
Valley
width(m)
% pocket
water
Lower
Eleva- reach
tion(m) boundary
1254
Valley-
channel
ratio
% class
X pools
MouCh of
Trail Cr.
Flow
charac-
teristics
Swirling
Ro Iling
I class
II pools
Conf me-
ment
I class
III pools
% class
IV pools
I . 5
55
36
50
I class
V pools % fines
0 30
Bank
bank genetic
process
% bed material
% gravel I rubble % boulder t bedrock D-90 (cm)
30
Flood
plain
materla 1 debris
K d l 1 i it g Fluvial
Average
•peak water
temp (C) Turbid ity
20
Channe1
debris
19
% stable
channe1
debris
% cover-
canopy
% cover-
over ha ny
% Stability
gradient rating
Bank
form
2 94 Rapoae
% cover- Average Flow during
survey
(m /sec)
snorkel
section
10
low
flow
I .47
16
Water chemistry data
Conductance Alkalinity
(umohs/cni) (my /1)
Total
carbon
(wj/1)
. 76
Totai ++ ++ + +
phosphorus Nitrate Ca Mq Na K
(nig/ 1) (nig/ 1) (mg/1) (m^j/l) (mg/ 1) (mg/ 1)
. 008
<.05
spawning data
Number of
bull trout
redds in
reach
Kedd
denslty
(no/km)
3.6
Year
6 0
Number of
bull trout Kedd
redds in density
reach (no/km)
35
4 . 1
Year
79
Fish population data
Density (nu/lQQ m surface area)
Cut.throat
Age 11 Age 111-*- Ago 0
0 0.6 1.6
Bull trout Mtn. whitefish
Age I Age II Age 111+ < 150mm >150mm
0.1 0.9 0.7 0.2 2.2
Bioniass (grams/100 m" suriace area)
Cutthroat
Age
Age 1 1
Bull trout
Mtn whitefish
Age 1 Age I1 Age III+ <150mm >150mm
0.1 II 2 2 0.3 30.8
2-
-------
Legend for physical habitat map
Bri dqe
Intermittent stream
¦P
¥
¥
AAAA
X
Stream flow measured
Stream gauge site
Thermograph site
Maximum-minimum thermometer site
Water chemistry sampling area
Major slump zone
Debris accumulation in stream
channel
Marsh
[Bd
Bd
Single beaver dam
Series of beaver dams
r"
Hri —
12
3rd
3%
Habitat survey'boundaries
- Channel width (m)
- Stream order
- Percent gradient
-3-
-------
Physical habitat map
•Mima
-------
Legend for fish population map
I |R1
Reach boundary
Reach number located at upstream boundary
Bridge
Intermittent stream
Trap site
[E,S
Fish abundance sections
E - electrofishing section
S - snorkel section
{
Fish migration barriers
height: (m)
type: L(logs), C(chute or cascade),
Bd(beaver dams), BR(bedrock)
length:
- indicates partial barrier
(—TR1
CT*
DV*
WF
CT-westslope cutthroat
WF-mountain whitefish
DV-bull trout or Dolly Varden
* -indicates critical rearing area
for designated species
Bull trout (DV) spawning areas
Spawning area boundary A-A,B-B,...
Redd density (no/km)
BCCfeBBI
High density spawning area
-5-
-------
Fish population map
KCTCHIKAN
CREEK
SZov&p *P"n9'
^ANTLCT
CREEK
YAKINIKAK
CREEK
AWS |C
-------
APPENDIX E
Tables 1-12. Food habits analysis
of cutthroat and juvenile bull trout.
-------
Table l. Number, occurrence, volume and. IRI (Index of Relative Importance) of items in stomachs of
46 cutthroat trout £ 100 mm collected in North Fork Tributaries during the summer of 1980.
*= Aquatic.
Stomach contents
Number
Occurrence
Frequency of
occurrence
Volume (ml)
IRI
Total
Percent
Mean
Total
Percent
Mean
Diptera (Adult*)
29
4.2
4.1
7
15.2
.19
1.5
.02
7.0
Chi ronomi aae
64
9.1
4.0
16
34.7
.20
1.6
.01
15.1
Simuli dae
17
2.4
2.4
7
15.2
.07
.6
.01
6.0
Tipulidae
19
2.7
1.5
13
28.2
.11
.9
.01
10.6
Coleoptera
15
2.1
1.4
11
24.0
.38
3.0
.03
9.7
Hymenoptera
44
6.3
2.8
16
34.7
.60
5.0
.03
15.3
Hemiptera
3
.4
1.0
3
6.5
.07
.6
.02
2.5
Homoptera
9
1.2
3.0
3
6.5
.03
.3
.01
2.7
Nematoda
4
.6
1.3
3
6.5
.03
.3
.01
2.5
Ephemeroptera (Adult*)
13
1.8
2.6
5
10.8
.33
2.7
.06
5.1
Baetidae
35
5.0
2.3
15
32.6
.19
1.5
.01
13.0
Heptageni idae
167
24.0
6.9
24
52.0
1.78
14.8
.07
30.2
Ephemerellidae
86
12.3
3.2
27
58.7
2.82
23.4
.10
31.4
Siphlonuridae
35
5.0
3.2
11
24.0
1.46
12.1
.13
13.7
Trichoptera (Adult*)
17
2.4
2.8
6
13.0
.40
3.3
.07
6.2
Brachycentridae
35
5.0
2.3
15
32.6
.62
5.2
.04
14.3
Hydropsychi dae
17
2.4
1.8
9
19.5
.70
5.8
.08
9.2
Li mnephi1i dae
9
1.2
2.3
4
8.6
.41
3.4
.10
13.2
Rhyacophi1idae
27
3.8
2.3
12
26.0
.30
2.5
.03
10.7
Hydropti1idae
Leptoceri dae
Plecoptera (Adult*)
1
.1
1.0
1
2.2
.01
.1
.01
2.4
Nemouridae
Pteronarcidae
Perlodidae
11
1.6
1.8
6
13.0
.72
6.0
.12
6.8
Chloroperlidae
18
2.6
2.0
9
19.5
.17
1.4
.02
23.5
Perli dae
2
.3
2.0
1
2.2
.01
.1
.01
.8
Terrestrial Larvae
20
2.8
6.6
3
6.5
.32
2.6
.10
3.9
Total
697
11.92
-------
Table 2. Number, occurrence, volume and IRI (Index of Relative Importance) of items in the stomachs of
34 cutthroat trout _< 110 mm collected in North Fork Tributaries during the summer of 1980.
*= Aquatic
Stomach contents
Number
Occurrence
Frequency of
occurrence
Volume (ml)
IRI
Total
Percent
Mean
Total
Percent
Mean
Diptera (Adult*)
8
3.5
i. i
7
20.5
.10
6.6
.01
10.2
Chi ronomi dae
88
38.0
5.8
15
44.0
.18
12.0
.01
31.3
Simulidae
4
1.7
1.0
4
11.8
.04
2.6
.01
5.4
Tipulidae
4
1.7
1.3
3
8.8
.03
2.0
.01
4.1
Coleoptera
7
3.0
2.3
3
8.8
.03
2.0
.01
4.6
Hymenoptera
8
3.5
1.6
5
15.0
.05
3.3
.01
7.2
Hemi ptera
Homoptera
1
.4
1.0
1
2.9
.01
.7
.01
2.5
Nematode
Ephemeroptera (Adult*)
2
.9
1.0
2
5.9
.02
1.3
.01
2.6
Baeti dae
23
10.0
2.0
11
32.3
.11
7.3
.01
16.5
Heptageni idae
29
12.6
1.8
16
47.1
.16
10.6
.01
23.4
Ephemerel1i dae
20
8.6
1.6
12
35.2
.16
10.6
.01
18.1
Siphlonuridae
4
1.7
2.0
2
5.9
.02
1.3
.01
2.9
Trichoptera (Adult*)
4
1.7
2.0
2
5.9
.06
4.0
.03
3.8
Brachycentri dae
12
5.2
2.4
5
15.0
.05
3.3
.01
7.8
Hydropsychi dae
4
1.7
2.0
2
5.9
.36
24.0
.18
10.4
Limnephi1idae
2
.9
1.0
2
5.9
.02
9.3
.01
2.6
Rhyacophi1i dae
6
2.6
1.0
6
17.6
.06
4.0
.01
8.1
Hydropti1idae
Leptoceridae
Plecoptera (Adult*)
1
.4
1.0
1
2.9
.01
.7
.01
1.3
Nemouridae
Pteronarcidae
1
.4
1.0
1
2.9
.01
.7
.01
1.3
Perlodidae
Chloroperli dae
2
.9
1.0
1
5.9
.02
1.3
.01
2.6
Parii dae
Terrestrial Larvae
8
3.5
1.6
5
15.0
.05
3.3
.01
7.2
Total
238
1,55
-------
Table 3 Number, occurrence, volume and IRI (Index of Relative Importance) of items in the stomachs of
9 westslope cutthroat >_ 110 mm collected-in Middle Fork Tributaries during the summer of 1980.
*= Aquatic
Stomach contents
Number
Occurrence
Frequency of
occurrence
Volume (ml)
IRI
Total
Percent
Mean
Total
Percent
Mean
Diptera (Adult*)
153
24.0
17.0
9
100.0
1.22
9.1
.14
44.4
Chironomidae
3
.5
1.0
3
33.3
.03'
.2
.01
11.3
Simuli dae
T i puli dae
Coleoptera
39
6.1
7.8
5
55.6
.47
3.5
.09
21.7
Elmidae
9
1.4
9.0
1
11.1
.30
2.2
.30
4.8
Hymenoptera
328
51.4
65.6
5
55.6
8.37
62.4
1.67
56.5
Arachnida
4
.6
2.0
2
22.2
.20
1.5
.10
8.1
Hemiptera
4
.6
1.3
3
33.3
.12
.9
.04
11.6
Homoptera
25
3.9
6.3
4
44.4
.12
.9
.03
16.4
Nemat'oda
Ephemeroptera (Adult*)
1
.2
1.0
1
11.1
.05
.4
.05
3.9
Baeti dae
2
.3
1.0
2
22.2
.02
.2
.01
7.6
Heptageni idae
2
.3
2.0
1
11.1
.01
.1
.01
3.8
Ephemerel1idae
27
4.2
5.4
5
55.6
.38
2.8
.08
20.9
Siphlonuridae
1
.2
1.0
1
11.1
.01
.1
.01
3.8
Trichoptera (Adult*)
Brachycentri dae
5
: 8
1.7
3
33.3
.03
.2
.01
11.4
Hydropsychidae
2
.3
1.0
2
22.2
.16
1.2
.08
7.9
Limnephi1idae
3
.5
1.5
2
22.2
1.40
10.4
.47
11.0
Rhyacophilidae
1
.2
1.0
1
11.1
.01
.1
.01
3.8
Hydropti1i dae
3
.5
1.0
3
33.3
.03
.2
.01
11.3
Leptoceri dae
1
.2
1.0
1
11.1
.01
.1
.01
3.8
Plecoptera (Adult*)
22
.1
3.7
6
66.7
.44
3.3
.07
23.4
Nemouridae
Pteronarcidae
Perlodidae
Chloroperli dae
2
.3
1.0
2
22.2
.02
.2
.01
7.6
Perlidae
Terrestrial Larvae
1
.2
1.0
1
11.1
.01
.1
.01
3.8
Total
638
13.41
-------
Table 4 . Number, occurrence, volume and'IRI (Index of Relative Importance) of items in the stomachs of
12 westslope cutthroat £ 110 mm collected in Middle Fork Tributaries during the summer of 1980.
*= Aquatic
Stomach contents
Number
Occurrence
Frequency of
occurrence
Volume (ml)
IRI
Total
Percent
Mean
Total
Percent
Mean
Diptera (Adult*)
37
22.0
12.3
3
25.0
.17
24.6
.06
23.9
Chironomidae
72
42.9
10.3
7
58.3
.07
10.1
.01
37.1
Simuli dae
Tipuli dae
Coleoptera
11
6.6
5.5
2
16.7
.06
8.7
.03
10.7
Hymenoptera
5
3.0
2.5
2
16.7
.06
8.7
.03
9.5
Hemi ptera
1
.6
1.0
1
8.3
.01
1.5
.01
3.5
Homoptera
Nematoda
12
7.1
6.0
2
16.7
.02
2.9
.01
8.9
Ephemeroptera (Adult*)
Baeti dae
5
3.0
1.7
3
25.0
.03
4.4
.01
10.8
Heptageni idae
9
5.4
1.5
6
50.0
.06
8.7
.01
21.4
Ephemerel1i dae
1
.6
1.0
1
8.3
.01
1.5
.01
3.5
Siphlonuridae
2
1.2
1.0
2
16.7
.02
2.9
.01
6.9
Trichoptera (Adult*)
1
.6
1.0
1
8.3
.01
1.5
.01
3.5
Brachycentri dae
5
3.0
5.0
1
8.3
.01
1.5
.01
4.2
Hydropsychi dae
Limnephi1i dae
Rhyacophi1idae
1
.6
1.0
1
8.3
.01
1.5
.01
3.5
Glossosomati dae
1
.6
1.0
1
8.3
.01
1.5
.01
3.5
Hydropti1i dae
Leptoceri dae
Plecoptera (Adult*)
1
.6
1.0
1
8.3
.01 •
1.5
.01
3.5
Nemouridae
2
1.2
1.0
2
16.7
.07
10.1
.03
9.3
Pteronarcidae
Perlodidae
Chloroperlidae
Perli dae
Terrestrial Larvae
1
.6
1.0
1
8.3
.01
1.5
.01
3.5
Terrestrial Adults
1
.6
1.0
1
8.3
.05
7.3
.05
5.4
Total
168
.69
-------
Table 5 . Number, .occurrence, volume and IRI (Index of Relative Importance) of items in the stomachs of
9 westslope cutthroat _> 110 mm collected in Middle Fork River during the summer of 1980. *= Aquat
Stomach contents
Number
Occurrence
Frequency of
occurrence
Volume (ml)
IRI
Total
Percent
Mean
Total
Percent
Mean
Diptera (Adult*)
288
30.0
32.0
9
100.0
1.70
6.6
.19
43.4
Chironomidae
12
1.3
6.0
2
22.2
.02
.4
.01
7.9
Simulidae
Tipulidae
Coleoptera
80
8.3
10.0
8
88.9
1.32
5.5
.16
34.3
Hymenoptera
239
24.9
39.8
6
66.7
5.65
32.5
.94
41.4
Arachnida
2
.2
2.0
1
11.1
.20
6.9
.20
6.1
Hemi ptera
18
1.9
4.5
4
44.4
.27
2.4
.07
16.2
Homoptera
25
2.6
2.8
9
100.0
.86
3.5
.10
35.4
Nematoda
Ephemeroptera (Adult*)
146
15.2
18.3
8
88.9
3.68
15.9
.46
40.0
Baetidae
1
.1
1.0
1
11.1
.01
.4
.01
3.9
Heptageni idae
1
. 1
1.0
1
11.1
.01
.4
.01
3.9
Ephemerellidae
2
.2
2.0
1
11.1
.10
3.5
.10
4.9
Siphlonuridae
Trichoptera (Adult*)
20
2.1
2.9
7
77.8
.40
2.1
.06
27.3
Brachycentridae
17
1.8
2.8
6
66.7 -
.38
2.1
.06
23.5
Hydropsychi dae
1
.1
1.0
1
11.1
.01
.4
.01
3.9
Limnephi1idae
Rhyacophi1i dae
2
.2
1.0
2
22.2
.02
.4
.01
7.6
Hydroptilidae
4
.4
2.0
2
22.2
.02
.4
.01
7.7
Leptoceridae
Plecoptera (Adult*)
92
9.6
11.5
8
88.9
1.34
5.9
. 17
34.8
Nemouridae
Pteronarcidae
Perlodidae
Chloroperli dae
2
.2
2.0
1
11.1
.01
.4
.01
3.9
Perlidae
Terrestrial Larvae
1
.1
1.0
1
11.1
.01
.4
.01
3.9
Terrestrial Adults
6
.6
6.0
1
11.1
.15
5.2
.15
5.6
Fish
1
. 1
1.0
1
11.1
.15
5.2
.15
5.5
Total
960
16.28
-------
Table 6 . Number, occurrence, volume and IRI (Index of Relative Importance) of items in the stomachs of
7 bull trout £ 110 mm collected in Middle Fork Tributaries during the summer of 1980. *= Aquat
Number Frequency of Volume (ml)
Stomach contents Total Percent Mean Occurrence occurrence Total Percent Mean IRI
Diptera (Adult*) 1
Chironomidae 1
Simuli dae
Tipulidae
Coleoptera
Hymenoptera
Hemiptera
Homoptera
Nematoda
Ephemeroptera (Adult*)
Baetidae
Heptageni idae
Ephemerel1i dae
Siphlonuridae
Trichoptera (Adult*)
Brachycentridae
Hydropsychidae
Limnephi1i dae
Rhyacophi1idae
Hydropti1idae
Leptoceri dae
Plecoptera (Adult*)
Nemouridae 3
Pteronarcidae
Perlodidae
Chioroperlidae
Perli dae
Terrestrial Larvae
Total 31
3.2
3.2
9.7
1.0
1.0
1.0
14.3
14.3
42.9
.01
.01
.03
5.0
5.0
15.0
.01
.01
11
35.5
1.6
7
100.0
.07
35.0
.01
7
22.6
2.3
3
42.9
.03
15.0
.01
2
6.5
1.0
2
28.6
.02
10.0
.01
6
19.4
2.0
3
42.9
.03
15.0
.01
7.5
7.5
56.8
26.8
15.0
25.8
.01 22.5
,20
-------
Table 7 . Number, occurrence, volume and IRI (Index of Relative Importance) of items in the stomachs of
9 bull trout ^ HO mm collected in North Fork Tributaries during the summer of 1980. *= Aquatic
Stomach contents
Number
Occurrence
Frequency of
occurrence
Volume (ml)
IRI
Total
Percent
Mean
Total
Percent
Mean
Diptera (Adult*)
5
6.4
2.5
2
22.2
.02
1.1
.01
9.9
Chironomidae
1
1.3
1.0
1
11.1
.01
.5
.01
4.3
Simuli dae
1
1.3
1.0
1
11.1
.01
.5
.01
4.3
Tipulidae
1
1.3
1.0
1
11.1
.01
.5
.01
4.3
Coleoptera
2
2.6
1.0
2
22.2
.02
1.1
.01
8.6
Hymenoptera
12
15.4
4.0
3
33.3
.16
8.4
.05
19.0
Hemi ptera
1
1.3
1.0
1
11.1
.01
.5
.01
4.3
Homoptera
1
1.3
1.0
1
11.1
.01
.5
.01
4.3
Nematoda
Ephemeroptera (Adult*)
9
11.5
4.5
2
22.2
.21
11.0
.10
14.9
Baeti dae
8
10.3
2.0
4
44.4
.04
2.1
.01
18.9
Heptageni idae
19
24.4
4.8
4
44.4
1.03
53.9
.26
40.9
Ephemerel1idae
6
7.7
1.5
4
44.4
.13
6.8
.03
19.7
Siphlonuridae
5
6.4
2.5
2
22.2
.02
1.1
.01
9.9
Trichoptera (Adult*)
Brachycentridae
1
1.3
1.0
1
11.1
.01
.5
.01
4.3
Hydropsychidae
2
2.6
2.0
1
11.1
.10
5.2
.10
6.3
Limnephi1i dae
Rhyacophi1i dae
Hydropti1i dae
Leptoceri dae
Plecoptera (Adult*)
Nemouri dae
Pteronarcidae
Perlodidae
Chloroperlidae
Perli dae
Terrestrial Larvae
Total
2.7
2.7
1.0
1.0
22.2
22.2
.02
.10
1.1
5.2
,01
.05
8.6
10.0
78
1.91
-------
Table 8 . Number, occurrence,
volume
and IRI
(Index of Relative Importance)
of
items in the
stomachs
of
19 bull trout < 110
mm collected in
North Fork
Tributaries during
the
summer of 1980.
*= Aquatic
Number
Frequency of
Volume (ml)
Stomach contents
Total
Percent
Mean
Occurrence
occurrence Total
Percent
Mean
IRI
Diptera (Adult*)
1
1
1
1
5
.01
1
.01
2.3
Chi ronomidae
16
12
1.8
9
47
,09
7
.01
22.0
Simulidae
2
1
2
1
5
.01
1
.01
2.3
Tipulidae
2
1
1
2
11
.02
2
.01
4.7
Coleoptera
1
1
1
1
5
.01
1
.01
2.3
Hymenoptera
5
4
1.7
3
16
.02
2
.01
7.3
Hemiptera
Homoptera
14
10
14
1
5
.05
4
.05
6.3
Nematoda
Ephemeroptera (Adult*)
Baeti dae
24
18
2.7
9
47
.17
13
.02
26.0
Heptageni idae
30
22
2.5
12
63
.16
13
.01
32.7
Ephemerellidae
12
9
1.3
9
47
.13
10
.01
22.0
Siphlonuridae
4-
3
2.0
2
11
.06
5
.03
6.3
Trichoptera (Adult*)
2
1
1.0
2
11
.02
2
.01
4.7
Brachycentri dae
8
6
2.0
4
21
.04
3
.01
10.0
Hydropsychi dae
1
1
1.0
1
5
.05
4
.05'
3.3
Limnephi1i dae
Rhyacophi1i dae
5
4
1.2
4
21
.04
3
.01
9.3
Hydropti1idae
Leptoceridae
Plecoptera (Adult*)
Nemouridae
Pteronarcidae
Perlodidae
5
4
1.7
3
16
.17
13
.06
11.0
Chloroperlidae
3
2
1.5
2
11
.02
2
.01
5.0
Perli dae
Terrestrial Larvae
2
1
2.0
1
5
.20
16
.20
7.3
Total
137
1
.27
-------
Table 9 . Number, occurrence, volume and IRI (Index of Relative Importance) of items in the stomachs of
3 Westslope cutthroat j> 110 mm collected in Moose Creek during the summer of 1980. *= Aquatic
Number Frequency of Volume (ml) ~
Stomach contents. Total Percent Mean Occurrence occurrence Total Percent Mean IRI
Diptera (Adult*)
1
2
1.0
1
33
.01
1
.01
12.0
Chironomidae
Simuli dae
2
3
2.0
1
33
.01
1
.01
12.3
Ti puli dae
Coleoptera
3
5
1.5
2
67
.25
13
.13
28.3
Hymenoptera
9
16
4.5
2
67
.16
8
.08
30.3
Hemiptera
Homoptera
Nematoda
Ephemeroptera (Adult*)
3
5
3.0
1
33
.10
5
.10
14.3
Baetidae
Heptageni idae
8
14
4.0
2
67
.20
11
.10
31.7
Ephemerel1i dae
5
9
2.5
2
67
.20
11
.10
30.0
Siphlonuridae
1
2
1.0
1
33
.01
1
.01
12.0
Trichoptera (Adult*)
10
17
5.0
2
67
.35
18
.18
34.0
Brachycentridae
1
2
1.0
1
33
.01
1
.01
12.0
Hydropsychidae
7
12
3.5
2
67
.41
22
.21
33.7
Limnephi1i dae
Rhyacophi1i dae
3
5
1.5
2
67
.02
1
.01
24.3
Hydropti1i dae
Leptoceri dae
Plecoptera (Adult*)
1
2
1.0
1
33
.01
1
.01
12.0
Nemouridae
Pteronarcidae
Perlodidae
Chloroperlidae
1
2
1.0
1
33
.05
3
.05
12.7
Perli dae
2
3
2.0
1
33
.01
1
.01
12.3
Terrestrial Larvae
Fi sh
1
2
1.0
1
33
.10
5
.10
13.3
Total
58
1.90
-------
Table 10. Number, occurrence, volume and IRI (Index of Relative Importance) of items in the stomachs of
19 westslope cutthroat _< 110 mm collected in Moose Creek during the summer of 1980. *= Aquatic
Stomach contents
Number
Occurrence
Frequency of
occurrence
Volume (ml)
IRI
Total
Percent
Mean
Total
Percent
Mean
Diptera (Adult*)
2
2
1.0
2
11
.02
2
.01
5.0
Chi ronomi dae
35
33
5.0
7
37
.07
8
.01
26.0
Simuli dae
2
2
1.0
2
11
.02
2
.01
5.0
Tipulidae
3
3
1.5
2
11
.02
2
.01
5.3
Coleoptera
3
3
1.5
2
11
.02
2
.01
5.3
Hymenoptera
6
6
2.0
3
16
.03
3
.01
8.3
Hemi ptera
Homoptera
1
1
1.0
1
5
.01
1
.01
2.3
Nematoda
Ephemeroptera (Adult*)
Baeti dae
11
10
2.2
5
26
.05
6
.01
14.0
Heptageni idae
20
19
1.8
11
59
.11
12
.01
30.0
Ephemerellidae
11
10
1.6
7
37
.07
8
.01
18.3
Si phionuridae
Trichoptera (Adult*)
4
4
2.0
2
11
.06
7
.03
7.3
Brachycentri dae
1
1
1.0
1
5
.01
1
.01
2.3
Hydropsychi dae
4
4
2.0
2
11
.36
40
.18
18.3
Limnephi1i dae
1
1
1.0
1
5
.01
1
.01
2.3
Rhyacophi1i dae
1
1
1.0
1
5
.01
1
.01
2.3
Hydropti1idae
Leptoceridae
Plecoptera (Adult*)
1
1
1.0
1
5
.01
1
.01
2.3
Nemouridae
Pteronarcidae
Periodidae
Chloroperli dae
1
1
1.0
1
5
.01
1
.01
2.3
Perli dae
Terrestrial Larvae
Total 107 .89
-------
Table 11. Number, occurrence, volume and IRI (Index of Relative Importance) of items in the stomachs of
17 westslope cutthroat _> 110 mm collected in Red Meadow Creek during the summer of 1980. *= Aquatic
Number Frequency of Volume (ml)
Stomach contents Total Percent Mean Occurrence occurrence Total Percent Mean IRI
Diptera (Adult*)
6
2.0
2.0
3
18
.06
2.0
.02
7.3
Chi ronomi dae
25
8.0
2.8
9
53
.09
4.0
.01
21.7
Simulidae
9
3.0
3.0
3
18
.03
1.0
.01
7.3
T i pulidae
9
3.0
1.1
8
47
.06
2.0
.01
17.3
Coleoptera
7
2.0
1.7
4
24
.08
3.0
.02
9.7
Hymenoptera
10
3.0
2.0
5
29
.14
6.0
.03
9.3
Hemi ptera
Homoptera
1
.3
1.0
1
6
.01
.4
.01
2.6
Nematoda
2
1.0
1.0
2
12
.02
1.0
.01
4.7
Ephemeroptera (Adult*)
2
1.0
1.0
2
12
.02
1.0
.01
4.7
Baetidae
24
8.0
2.7
9
53
.13
5.0
.01
22.0
Heptageni idae
73
24.0
6.1
12
71
.78
31.0
.07
42.0
Ephemerel1i dae
59
13.0
4.5
13
76
.21
8.0
.02
32.2
Siphlonuridae
9
3.0
1.8
5
29
.14
6.0
.03
12.7
Trichoptera (Adult*)
7
2.0
1.7
4
24
.5
20.0
.13
15.3
Brachycentridae
16
5.0
2.0
8
47
.08
3.0
.01
18.3
Hydropsychidae
2
1.0
1.0
2
12
.06
2.0
.03
5.0
Limnephi1idae
2
1.0
1.0
2
12
.06
2.0
.03
5.0
Rhyacophilidae
18
6.0
3.0
6
35
.15
6.0
.03
15.7
Hydropti1idae
Leptoceri dae
Plecoptera (Adult*)
Nemouridae
Pteronarcidae
Perlodidae
1
.3
1.0
1
6
.01
.4
.01
2.6
Chloroperlidae
7
2.0
1.2
6
35
.06
2.0
.01
13.0
Perli dae
Terrestrial Larvae
18
6.0
6.0
3
18
.22
9.0
.07
11.0
Fi sh
1
.3
1.0
1
6
.6
24.0
.6
10.0
Total
305
2.52
-------
Table 12. Number, occurrence, volume and IRI (Index of Relative Importance) of items in the stomachs of
6 westslope cutthroat £ 110 mm collected in Red Meadow Creek during the summer of 1980. *= Aquatic
Number Frequency of Volume (ml)
Stomach contents Total Percent Mean Occurrence occurrence Total Percent Mean IRI
Diptera (Adult*)
4
4
1.3
3
50
.03
10
.01
21.3
Chironomidae
56
63
9.3
6
100
.09
31
.02
64.7
Simuli dae
2
2
1.0
2
33
.02
7
.01
14.0
Ti pulidae
1
1
1.0
1
17
.01
3
.01
7.0
Coleoptera
Hymenoptera
1
1
1.0
1
17
.01
3
.01
7.0
Hemi ptera
Homoptera
Nematoda
Ephemeroptera (Adult*)
1
1
1.0
1
17
.01
3
.01
7.0
Baetidae
5
6
1.7
3
50
.03
10
.01
22.0
Heptageni idae
2
2
2.0
1
17
.01
3
.01
7.3
Ephemerel1idae
4
4
2.0
2
33
.02
7
.01
14.7
Siphlonuridae
Trichoptera (Adult*)
Brachycentridae
9
10
4.5
2
33
.02
7
.01
16.7
Hydropsychi dae
Limnephi1i dae
Rhyacophi1idae
3
3
1.0
3
50
.03
10
.01
21.0
Hydropti1i dae
Leptoceridae
Plecoptera (Adult*)
Nemouri dae
Pteronarci dae
Perlodidae
Chloroperli dae
Perli dae
Terrestrial Larvae
1
1
1.0
1
17
.01
3
.01
7.0
Total
89
.29
------- |