8097 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

INTEGRATION OF BEAVER ON THE LOLO NATIONAL FOREST - A BEGINNING In 1981, The Proposed Lolo National Forest Plan gave emphasis to riparian dependent resources. The Plan identified problems that poten- tially could be benefitted by beaver, such as past drainage to streams by both domestic livestock and mining. In major riparian areas, managers have the latitude to write silvicultural prescriptions to benefit riparian resources, such as beaver. In the recent past, beaver on the Lolo Forest have declined. Trap- ping regulations have been liberalized and a proliferation of roads paral- leling streams have given trappers easy access to streams. Uneven age timber management has favored conifer stands to the detriment of seral shrubs or deciduous trees on most Forest streams. In 1980 to 1981, a stream reach inventory was completed of which all data were entered in a computerized data system. Various data sorts were used to identify existing beaver colonies and potential beaver habitat. Potential beaver habitat was selected based on stream gradient, riparian area width, and stream order. Dominant vegetation was selected to ident- ify where silvicultural treatments were needed to favor beaver forage. Areas were identified where stream damage was occurring as a result of livestock damage. Computerized lists of streams generated potential areas where beaver could be used to maintain or enhance riparian resources. Beginning in 1981, these opportunities began to be integrated into livestock allotment management plans under scheduled allotment management plan revisions. In addition, some silvicultural prescriptions were written to favor regeneration harvest in hopes of creating hardwood shrubs and trees usable as beaver forage for future colonies. An environmental assessment was completed to evaluate potential beaver transplants. It incorporated a simple matrix designed to identify site specific potential benefits, as well as possible negative effects (Table 1). As a result, the Lolo National Forest favors those transplant opportunities where resource conflicts can be reduced or riparian resources enhanced. It also identifies possible negative consequences that can eliminate a potential transplant. The Lolo National Forest has worked with the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks to reduce trapping harvest on key populations, especially in those drainages where transplants were anticipated. The two agencies have also initiated processes to transplant beaver by con- tracting services of local trappers. 78