Revamping the Charles M. Russell Wildlife Refuge Conservation Plan

By David Nolt, 2-22-08

	Caption: Photo courtesy of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Officials from the Lewistown-based U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) held a public meeting in Bozeman on Thursday, answering questions and taking comments on the formation of a 15-year comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Montana’s treasured Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge (CMR), the second largest national refuge in the lower 48. The previous plan was written in 1986.

The 1.1 million acre refuge along the Missouri River and Fort Peck Reservoir in northeastern Montana is home to well over 200 species of birds and a host of mammals including bighorn sheep, elk, pronghorn antelope, swift fox and the endangered black-footed ferret. The CMR is also a major recreational use area for hunters and fishermen.

The FWS extended the public scoping comment deadline to February 29, 2008. There will be two more public comment periods after plan alternatives and a draft are formed. The FWS hopes to have a final plan finished by Fall 2011.

Fish & Wildlife Service Project Leader Barron Crawford emphasized the importance of public involvement in the process, though the emphasis came with a disclaimer: “We’re probably going to make some decisions that not everybody will like. Obviously, we’re the federal government.”

Here’s a breakdown of responses to public questions and comments:

Roads

There are approximately 600 miles of two-track roads within the refuge. Crawford “guestimated” 80 to 85 percent of the refuge is within one to 1.5 miles of a road. Crawford said he believes there is sufficient road access and does not anticipate proposing new roads, though there have been public comments about creating more access for people with disabilities.

Regarding the notorious “gumbo” in the river bottoms, which can bring even the toughest of four-wheel drives to a messy hault, officials said there was a possibility of making some of the roads all-season to create more access, although Joe Gutoski, president of Montana River Action, warned against setting the stage for increased development in the refuge.

Wilderness

The UL Bend Wilderness Area comprises 20,000 acres within the CMR. After Congress passed the Wilderness Act, the Departments of Interior and Agriculture asked the FWS to assess the potential for wilderness areas within refuges. Crawford described the process as “a fire drill, from what we’ve been told, trying to meet the deadline.”

There are several proposed wilderness areas within the CMR, and each will be evaluated to see if they still meet wilderness criteria as part of the CCP.

Historic and Cultural Resources

There is currently no program for historic preservation in the CMR. Bill Berg, Deputy Project Leader, said historic and cultural resources, including over 60 gravesites, will be considered in the CCP.

Oil and gas exploration

The CMR is surrounded by thousands of acres of BLM land, and officials said there is still “quite a bit of land” with private mineral rights in and around the refuge. A large area south of the refuge in Garfield County was proposed for energy development, but the BLM recently refused the lease. There is currently significant gas development in bordering Phillips County, and the Bowdoin oilfield near Alta is on winter range for pronghorn antelope. Berg said energy development is “something we’re concerned about.”

There is currently a study on antelope and the effects energy development is having on antelope. The study is being performed by Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, the Rural Wildlife Fun and agencies in Canada.

Berg also said the FWS has “pretty strong restoration requirements” for energy exploration.

Cooperating agencies

The agencies actively “at the table” in the CMR CCP are Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, the Montana Department of Resources, the Bureau of Land Management, the Corps of Engineers and the six Montana counties bordering the refuge.

Crawford said all input outside the cooperating agencies will be considered, but he emphasized the FWS is the decision-maker. “This is our plan,” Crawford explained.

Sarah Carlson, executive director of the Montana Association of Conservation Districts (MACD), made an official comment urging the FWS to include the MACD as a cooperating group. She said the organization’s members are elected, and the group’s members are “insisting” a place at the table.

Land acquisition

Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge Enhancement Act of 2000 allows the FWS to purchase cabins within the refuge and use the money to “acquire land with greater wildlife and other public values” for the CMR.” The legislation sunsets in 2010. The FWS is in the process of surveying and appraising about 50 sites, though officials said they did not believe they would be able to complete the process by 2010 and expect to lobby for an extension of the act.

There are 20,000 acres of private land and 33,000 acres of state land within the CMR. Berg said there is much interest from landowners wanting to sell land in and around the refuge.

Elk and deer populations

Senior Wildlife Biologist Randy Matchett said population objectives in the CMR are 10 deer per square mile and 2.5 elk per square mile. He also added the ideal situation for game management within the refuge would be to meet Montana FWP standards.

Plants and invasive weeds

Sand Creek Station Manager Matt DeRosier said the FWS “gained a lot of ground” on invasive weeds with chemical control in the past few years, but added there is plenty of work to do.

Wildlife Biologist Bob Skinner and Barron Crawford said, though it is not often discussed, healthy native plant populations are absolutely crucial to the entire CMR ecosystem.

“There are a number of plants, on and off, that have been declining for a long, long time, probably since European settlement,” Skinner said. “The plant component is the foundation for it all.”

“The number one threat to the refuge is the spread of noxious weeds,” Crawford said. “With climate change and everything else, that is a battle we’re losing. Working cooperatively [with agencies and recreational users] is the only way we’re going to make a dent in it, and that’s what we intend to do.”

Last year the FWS set up a car wash station at the entrance to the refuge and also gave car wash coupons to motels for hunters. Crawford said the program was successful but not perfect, and the FWS is purchasing a state-of-the-art car washer and seed collector to be used later this year.

Bison

Several members of the public inquired about reintroducing bison to the CMR. Crawford said the agency will be looking at potential reintroduction as part of the CCP, though it would be contingent on a FWP plan to manage the species as wildlife and not livestock.

“We’re looking at managing bison as wildlife under” a Fish, Wildlife & Parks plan, Crawford explained. “If we’re going to get into bison management, we’re going to want bison that are free of cattle genetics.”

Officials also said any bison reintroduction would have to take elk populations into account in order to limit overgrazing.

Glenn Hockett, president of the Gallatin Wildlife Association, urged the FWS to seriously consider reintroducing bison to the CMR using quarantined Yellowstone bison or genetically pure bison from other areas such as the Wind Cave National Park. Two other members from the public urged bison reintroduction in the CMR.

Wolves

With the gray wolf officially removed from the Endangered Species List (at least for now), the FWS will be including a wolf management plan as part of the CCP but will not propose wolf reintroduction.

Livestock use

There has been a long history of livestock use on the CMR, according to Bill Berg.

“Right now we have some areas on the refuge that are grazed too heavily,” Berg said, while stressing the need to respect the rights and lives of ranchers there.

Livestock use will be reevaluated in the CCP.

Fire

Mike Granger, fire management officer for the CMR, said the FWS will be implementing “a rather large prescribed burn” this spring and fall. Granger said the idea is to replicate historical burns, which more frequent but much less intense than wildfires today.

“We no longer have fire-resistant timber, we have fire-prone timber,” Granger explained.

To comment on the CMR comprehensive conservation plan, click here.