FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

Tribal code

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

FLATHEAD INDIAN

RESERVATION

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

An Ecosystem Approach to Tribal Forest Management

Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes

309

May, 2000

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

FLATHEAD INDIAN RESERVATION

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

2000

Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes

Approved by: _______________________________________________ Date: ____________

Fred Matt, Tribal Chairman, CSKT Tribal Council

Approved by: _______________________________________________ Date: ____________

Ernest T. Moran, Superintendent of the Flathead Agency

310

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

Flathead Indian Reservation

Forest Management Plan

Interdisciplinary Team*

Francis Auld

Sue Ball

George Barce

Rolan Becker

Jim Beyer

David DelSordo

Dennis Dupuis

John Gobeille

Barry Hansen

Tony Harwood

Seth Makepeace

Tom McDonald

David Rockwell

Terry Tanner

Pat Thomas

Brad Trosper

Germaine White

Kootenai Culture

GIS and Transportation

Wildlife

Silviculture

Plant Ecology

Forest Modeling

Forest Modeling and Vegetation

Wildlife

Fisheries, Riparian Areas, and Transportation

Fire Ecology, and Fire Management

Hydrology

Scenery and Recreation

Team Leader

Salish Culture

Landscape Architect

Soils and Agriculture

Salish Culture

Other Contributors

Ken Augustson

Tara Barrett

Joanne Bigcrane

Lester Bigcrane

Arnold Browning

John Fisher

Marty Gulick

Brian Mladenich

Art Soukkala

Don Vandendriesche

Roads

Linear Programming

Botany

Scenery and Recreation

Modeling

Photography

Roads

GIS

Wildlife

Modeling

Supervision

Dennis Dupuis

Ralph Goode

Joe Hovenkotter

Sam Moregeau

Tribal Forestry

Tribal Legal

Tribal Natural Resources

This document was prepared by David Rockwell.

Small sections have been adapted from Volume I of the

Flathead Reservation Comprehensive Resources Plan.

CSKT

PO Box 278

Pablo, MT 59855

(406) 6752700

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

PREFACE

Legend

Tribal and

Trust lands

Forest

FLATHEAD

RESERVATION

Scale 1:500,000

1" = 7.89 miles

Tribal and trust lands and forested acres on the Flathead Indian Reservation. Forests occur primarily on Tribal and trust land.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

PREFACE

Preface

While the purpose of forest management planning — providing long-term direction for the wise

use and management of forest resources — has not changed, the methodology and philosophy

behind forest planning has. As a consequence, this Forest Management Plan is a major

departure from the plans of past decades.

We have, for example, used computer models more extensively than ever before. This does

not mean we did not rely on field knowledge. We have simply used that knowledge in several

state-of-the-art computer models which enable us to better predict what our forests will look

like in the future under various management scenarios. We have also brought in data derived

from satellite imagery to help us classify vegetation. And we have done much more spatial or

geographic information system (GIS) analysis. These analyses appear as graphs, charts, and

maps throughout the document.

But perhaps the greatest distinction between this plan and those of the past is in its overall

approach — that of ecosystem management. Ecosystem management uses ecological,

cultural, economic, social, and managerial principles to maintain and restore the ecological

diversity and integrity of the forest. By definition, it requires an integrated or interdisciplinary

approach. This is not necessarily a departure from past planning, but it was a key element in

our process and is reflected in the makeup of our forest plan ID team and the document we have

produced. Ecosystem management also requires input from the public, in this case the Tribal

membership. In addition to half a dozen public meetings and meetings with the Tribal culture

committees and the Tribal Council, the forest plan ID team worked over the course of several

days with an Ad Hoc group of Tribal members appointed by the Tribal Council. The concerns

of the Tribal public and the Ad Hoc group played a major part in shaping our plan. Most

important, ecosystem management attempts to understand the interactions of plants and

animals and natural processes — fire, insects, disease, flooding, windthrow — as a functioning

whole, and this, too, is reflected in our plan.

Throughout the planning process our premise has been: In order to manage for diverse and

sustainable forests, we must maintain and restore the processes, structures, and functions under

which our forests evolved. We have therefore tried to develop management strategies that will

reproduce or mimic those key structures and processes. Our planning process involved four basic

steps: (1) developing a model of the kind of forest structure that existed prior to European

settlement, (2) analyzing the conditions that exist today, (3) determining the kinds of conditions

that are both sustainable and desirable, and (4) developing a strategy to achieve those conditions.

Plan Duration

Unlike the Tribes' previous forest management plans, which were concerned with short-term

commodity production, this plan is largely driven by long-term structural goals. Therefore this

Plan shall be in effect from 2000 to 2030 with the following stipulations:

1. The Plan will receive on-going monitoring as described in Chapter 5: Environmental

Indicators for Monitoring.

2. The Plan will be critically reviewed every ten years by an interdisciplinary team,

coincident with the analysis of new CFI data. If this data analysis indicates

substantial changes in potential harvest levels, if ongoing monitoring indicates the

need to change significant portions of the Plan (for example, the vegetative goals),

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

PREFACE

or if substantially new resource issues surface, then an interdisciplinary team will

be reconvened to recommend analysis methods, amendments to the FEIS and Plan,

or the writing of a new FEIS and forest management plan. Other circumstances that

might trigger amendments or a rewrite of the plan include a major shift in

management philosophy on the part of the Tribal Council, a large change in acreage

allocation, or a catastrophic event such as a very large wildfire.

If on-going reviews and the 10 year CFI measurement cycle indicate that harvest levels are

reasonably accurate and commensurate with the attainment of vegetation goals, and if it is

determined that the forest plan is providing adequate direction for forest management, then

it (the forest plan) shall remain in effect until the final review date or expiration date of 2030.

Summaries of all reviews and analyses will be appended to both the Forest Plan and the Forest

Plan FEIS.

Lands Covered by the Plan

This Forest Plan shall be applicable to all Indian lands on the Flathead Indian Reservation,

including allotments. Where possible, allotment sales will be included in and/or coordinated

with larger Tribal timber sales within the same vicinity. It is recognized, however, that the

broad vegetative goals developed for the forest may not be sensibly applied to most allotted

lands because of their small, fragmented nature. Thus, management of allotment lands may

incorporate objectives and goals other than those in the management plan. The allottee would

be encouraged, however, to use management practices desired by the Tribes, especially with

respect to vegetative goals and road closures wherever feasible. Other portions of this Forest

Plan, such as compliance with best management practices and application of sound silviculture

and sustained yield principles, apply to allotted lands.

A Word About Data

This plan draws upon data from a variety of sources, each the best available at the time. Still,

some of the data have limitations which we, as an Interdisciplinary Team, acknowledge. For

example, the plan uses 1990 as its base year for all vegetation analysis because more recent data

were not available. However, we have attempted, whenever possible, to compensate for these

limitations through the use of personal knowledge, professional judgment, and in some

instances complimentary data. We have also modified the assumptions and constraints in our

models when appropriate. While no one on the forest planning ID team believes we have

developed a perfectly comprehensive plan based on flawless data, we do have confidence in

the conclusions we’ve drawn and the management direction put forth.

It is important to keep in mind that this is a reservation forest plan which, by necessity, is

broad in scope. It is intended to set a general management direction for relatively large areas

of land over extended time periods, and it allows for mid-course corrections. Project level

planning, which, by definition, is more specific, will undoubtedly fill in many gaps or areas

in which this plan may be weak. In a sense, our situation is analogous to a ship moving across

a wide ocean toward a specific destination. If the crew sets out in the right general direction,

they can be reasonably assured of success as long as they continually monitor their progress

and are willing to make the necessary mid-course corrections.

As another group of forest planners once observed in a US Forest Service publication titled

Sustaining Ecosystems, “It would be vastly reassuring to us if we had the scientific

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

PREFACE

information and knowhow to ensure the successful management of sustainable ecosystems.

In an absolute sense, it is doubtful that we ever will. The dilemma then is whether to proceed

with less information than we would like — or not to proceed at all. If we do not proceed [but

remain on our present course] we run the risk of dire consequences. Stewardship, utilizing

available science in combination with our best professional and ethical judgment where

information is missing, is required to meet this challenge. An adaptive management approach

is used to incorporate scientific understanding and knowledge as it evolves.”

As managers, we have to make judgments on what appears to be most scientifically

persuasive and ethically responsible. That is precisely what we have attempted to do in this plan.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

Table of Contents

Preface ....................................................................................... 3

Chapter 1: An Introduction .................................................... 10

Purpose, Need, and Goal Statement .................................................... 10

A Long History of Forest Management by the Tribes ......................... 12

A New Approach to Forest Management ............................................. 14

Major Forest Trends: A Photographic Overview ................................. 34

Public Participation ................................................................................ 45

The Setting: The Flathead Indian Reservation ................................... 47

Chapter 2: The Resources ...................................................... 55

Disturbances and Vegetation ................................................................ 56

Fire Management .................................................................................................. 57

Vegetation Management ...................................................................................... 82

Wildlife Management ............................................................................ 102

Water and Fisheries Management ...................................................... 116

Tribal Cultural Resources .................................................................... 126

Scenery and Recreation ...................................................................... 133

Transportation Management ............................................................... 143

Air Quality ............................................................................................. 150

Grazing Management ........................................................................... 152

Minerals ................................................................................................. 155

Socio-economic .................................................................................... 156

Communication and Education .......................................................... 162

Chapter 3: Landscapes ......................................................... 163

North Missions Landscape .................................................................. 165

Missions Landscape ............................................................................ 184

Jocko Landscape ................................................................................. 202

Southwest Landscape ......................................................................... 222

West Landscape ................................................................................... 240

Salish Mountains Landscape .............................................................. 258

Chapter 4: Standards ............................................................ 276

Fire Management .................................................................................. 276

Timber Management ............................................................................ 279

Wildlife Management ............................................................................ 284

Water and Fish ...................................................................................... 287

Culture ................................................................................................... 290

Scenery ................................................................................................. 291

Recreation ............................................................................................. 293

Transportation ...................................................................................... 294

Grazing .................................................................................................. 298

Weeds .................................................................................................... 299

Minerals ................................................................................................. 299

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

Chapter 5: Monitoring ........................................................... 300

Fire Management .................................................................................. 300

Vegetation Management ...................................................................... 301

Wildlife Management ............................................................................ 301

Water and Fish ...................................................................................... 302

Culture ................................................................................................... 304

Scenery and Recreation ...................................................................... 305

Transportation ...................................................................................... 306

Air Quality ............................................................................................. 307

Grazing .................................................................................................. 308

Bibliography .......................................................................... 309

Glossary ........................................................ back cover sleeve

Appendices ............................................................................ 319

Appendix A: Fire Mgmt Response Strategy Classifications .................. 320

Appendix B: The SARA Model and Prescriptions ................................... 321

Appendix C: Seral Cluster Groups as a Percent of Fire Regimes ......... 328

Appendix D: Prescription Acres ............................................................... 329

Appendix E: Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species ............. 330

Appendix F: Wildlife Fragmentation and Diversity ................................ 332

Appendix G: Grizzly Bear Management Situations ................................ 333

Appendix H: Wildlife Species and Associated Vegetation .................... 336

Appendix I: Species Requiring Snags and DWD .................................. 366

Appendix J: Methods used to Predict Future Road Densities .............. 370

Appendix K: List of BIA Main Haul Roads .............................................. 374

Appendix L: Scenery Model and Viewpoints .......................................... 375

Appendix M: Proposed Limited Public Access Areas ........................... 382

Appendix N: DROL Classification Definitions ........................................ 383

Appendix O: Applicable Laws and Tribal Ordinances ........................... 384

Appendix P: CSKT Snag Policy ............................................................... 386

Appendix Q: CSKT Best Management Practices (BMPs) ...................... 388

Appendix R: Maps of Reservation Watersheds, etc .............................. 401

Appendix S: Windroses for the Flathead Indian Reservation ............... 404

List of Maps

Tribal and trust lands and forested acres .................................................... 2

Figure 1-2 Reservation landscapes ............................................................ 19

Figure 1-34 Mean annual precipitation ...................................................... 49

Figure 2-46 Scenic integrity levels .......................................................... 135

Figure 2-50 Roadless areas and wilderness additions .......................... 142

Figure 2-51 Reservation-wide road densities ......................................... 145

Figure 3-1 The Reservation landscapes (LS) ......................................... 164

Figure 3-2 Distribution of fire regimes, North Missions LS .................. 166

Figure 3-4 Unavailable and restricted areas, North Missions LS ......... 170

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

Figure 3-5 Seral cluster distributions, North Missions LS .................... 172

Figure 3-6 Recommended scenic integrity, North Missions LS ........... 178

Figure 3-8 Road densities, North Missions LS ....................................... 182

Figure 3-9 Distribution of fire regimes, Missions LS ............................. 186

Figure 3-10 Unavailable and restricted areas, Missions LS .................. 188

Figure 3-12 Seral cluster distributions, Missions LS ............................. 192

Figure 3-13 Recommended scenic integrity, Missions LS .................... 196

Figure 3-15 Road densities, Missions LS ............................................... 200

Figure 3-16 Distribution of fire regimes, Jocko LS ................................ 204

Figure 3-17 Unavailable and restricted areas, Jocko LS ....................... 206

Figure 3-19 Seral cluster distributions, Jocko LS .................................. 210

Figure 3-21 Recommended scenic integrity, Jocko LS ......................... 216

Figure 3-22 Road densities, Jocko LS .................................................... 220

Figure 3-24 Distribution of fire regimes, Southwest LS ........................ 224

Figure 3-25 Unavailable and restricted areas, Southwest LS ............... 226

Figure 3-26 Seral cluster distributions, Southwest LS .......................... 228

Figure 3-28 Recommended scenic integrity, Southwest LS ................. 234

Figure 3-29 Road densities, Southwest LS ............................................. 238

Figure 3-31 Distribution of fire regimes, West LS .................................. 242

Figure 3-32 Unavailable and restricted areas, West LS ......................... 244

Figure 3-33 Seral cluster distributions, West LS ................................... 246

Figure 3-35 Recommended scenic integrity, West LS ........................... 252

Figure 3-36 Road densities, West LS ...................................................... 256

Figure 3-37 Distribution of fire regimes, Salish LS ................................ 260

Figure 3-38 Unavailable and restricted areas, Salish LS ....................... 262

Figure 3-40 Seral cluster distributions, Salish LS ................................. 266

Figure 3-41 Recommended scenic integrity, Salish LS ......................... 270

Figure 3-42 Road densities, Salish LS .................................................... 274

List of Tables

Table 1-1 Major fire regimes ....................................................................... 25

Table 1-2 Seral Classes lumped into Seral Clusters ................................ 29

Table 2-1 Acres within each fire regime by availability class. ................ 59

Table 2-2 Timber harvest and growth statistics 1945 to 1989 ................ 84

Table 2-3 Management systems and treatments ..................................... 90

Table 2-4 Existing and desired seral clusters and cluster groups ......... 93

Table 2-5. Descriptions of cluster groups. ................................................ 94

Table 2-6. Annual allowable Cut by landscape ......................................... 96

Table 2-7 Five-year regulation system ...................................................... 97

Table 2-8 Thermal cover by fire regime and landscape ........................ 108

Table 2-9 Hiding cover by fire regime and landscape ........................... 108

Table 2-10 Large snag habitat by fire regime and landscape ............... 109

Table 2-11 Down woody debris by fire regime and landscape ............. 109

Table 2-12 Early-seral/forage habitat by fire regime & landscape. ....... 110

Table 2-13 Percentage of streams with barriers .................................... 118

Table 2-14 Limited Public Access Areas. ............................................... 131

Table 2-15 Diversified Recreation Opportunity Level Objectives ......... 137

Table 2-16 Roadless Areas with roadless harvest ................................. 141

Table 2-17 Roadless areas with logging prohibited .............................. 141

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

Table 2-18 Wilderness areas and wilderness additions ........................ 141

Table 2-19 Miles of each road type .......................................................... 143

Table 2-20 Mean annual income of families with range units or

grazing leases. ........................................................................................... 153

Table 2-21 Flathead Reservation Population .......................................... 157

Table 2-22 Socio-economic characteristics of Indians and

Non-Indians ................................................................................................ 158

Table 2-23 Jobs and income produced by timber harvest

(per MMBF) ................................................................................................. 158

Table 2-24 Forest receipts and volumes. ................................................ 160

Table 2-25 Recreational Use by Nonmembers ....................................... 160

Table 3-1 Acre Distributions by Administrative Category,

North Missions Landscape ....................................................................... 168

Table 3-2 a and b Desired Conditions for Seral Clusters ...................... 174

Table 3-3 Existing condition Scenic Integrity Level definitions ........... 177

Table 3-4 Recommended Scenic Integrity Level definitions ................. 177

Table 3-5 Acre Distributions by Administrative Category,

Missions Landscape .................................................................................. 185

Table 3-6 a and b Desired Conditions for Seral Clusters ...................... 191

Table 3-7 Acre Distributions by Administrative Category,

Jocko Landscape ....................................................................................... 203

Table 3-8 a and b Desired Conditions for Seral Clusters. ..................... 209

Table 3-9 Acre Distributions by Administrative Category,

Southwest Landscape ............................................................................... 223

Table 3-10 a and b Desired Conditions for Seral Clusters .................... 230

Table 3-11 Acre Distributions by Administrative Category,

West Landscape ......................................................................................... 241

Table 3-12 a and b Desired Conditions for Seral Clusters .................... 248

Table 3-13 Acre Distributions by Administrative Category,

Salish Mountains Landscape ................................................................... 259

Table 3-14 a and b Desired Conditions for Seral Clusters .................... 265

Table 4-1 Priority of the underburning prescription .............................. 277

Table 4-2 Priority of silvicultural prescriptions by fire regime ............. 281

Table 4-3 Forest Road Standards ............................................................ 294

Table 5-1 Existing assessment reaches ................................................. 304

Illustration Credits

We wish to thank the following agencies and individuals for use of illustrations and photographs:

British Columbia Forestry Department, the Canadian Journal of Forest Research, the Colorado Division of

Wildlife, the USDA Forest Service, the US Environmental Protection Agency, John Fisher, the Salish and Pend

d'Orielle Culture Committee, Ramona Hammerly, the Montana State University Extension Service, the Montana

Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, Salish Kootenai College, the USDI, Glacier National Park,

and Shannon Wagner.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Chapter 1: Introduction

Purpose, Need, and Goal

Statement

The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes have prepared this Forest Management Plan in

accordance with 25CFR 163 to cover forested acres owned by the Confederated Salish and

Kootenai Tribes and allottees (trust lands). The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes and

BIA will meet all applicable Federal laws, CFR regulations, and Tribal ordinances when

carrying out forest protection, forest improvement, and timber harvesting and planning

activities under this plan. All permits and contracts issued will be in compliance with these laws

and regulations. The Tribes will carry out all forestry planning, preparation, and monitoring

and oversight activities. The Bureau will approve contracts, permits, NEPA documents, and

suppression actions.

Compliance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, the

Endangered Species Act, and other Federal laws and Tribal ordinances will be achieved by

preparation of appropriate environmental documents (Environmental Assessments, Biological

Assessments, etc.) on a project-by-project basis. These will be developed for each action or

tiered off of existing documents or categorical exclusions before approval of any forestry

management projects.

The FEIS for the Forest Management Plan was completed November of 1999, and the

Record of Decision was issued in March of 2000.

The Need for the Plan

The Forest Management Plan is needed to:

1. Satisfy Tribal goals and objectives.*

2. Ensure that management activities are compatible with sustainable forest

ecosystems.

3. Balance Tribal cultural, social, economic and environmental values.

4. Establish an adaptive management and monitoring process that incorporates Tribal member values.

* Tribal goals and objectives include all applicable goals and objectives in all approved Tribal guidance and

planning documents.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

The Goals of the Plan

The goals of the Forest Management Plan are to:

1. Strengthen Tribal sovereignty and self sufficiency through good forest

management.

2. Manage forest ecosystems to include natural processes and to balance

cultural, spiritual, economic, social and environmental values.

3. Adopt a process which accommodates changes in Tribal values and

resources.

4. Facilitate Tribal member involvement in forest stewardship.

5. Provide sustained yield of forest products and maintain or enhance forest

health.

“These Mountains

belong to our children, and when our

children grow old

they will belong to

their children. In this

way and for this

reason, these

mountains are

sacred.”

— Flathead Culture

Committee, 1977

6. Develop options for managing land use conflicts.

7. Provide perpetual economic benefits of labor, profit, and products to local

communities.

8. Manage forested ecosystems to protect and enhance biological diversity.

9. Provide a variety of natural areas that Tribal members can use for solitude,

cultural activities, and recreation pursuits.

10. Work cooperatively with adjacent landowners and federal agencies to

minimize cumulative impacts.

11. Protect human life, property and forest resources through fire suppression and fuels management.

12. Comply with Tribal and Federal laws.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

A Long History of Forest

Management by the Tribes

For thousands of years, the Salish, Kootenai and Pend d'Oreille derived much of their living

from forests. Before European settlement, the Tribes found all they needed — foods,

medicines, shelter, and beauty — within forests. They considered the forests and the

grasslands that border them their home. And apparently they used and managed them in a

sustainable way because their cultures coexisted with stable plant and animal communities for

millennia.

Indian-lit and Lightning Fires Shaped the Forest

Here in the Northern Rockies, fire, more than any other factor except climate, shaped the

structure of our forests. It determined the kinds and ages of trees, how close together they grew,

and the number and types of openings that existed. These structural characteristics in turn,

determined the kinds of plants and animals that lived here.

The fires were caused both by lightning and people. Prior to European contact, the Tribes

used fire to manage the forests where they lived. From the stories of elders, the historical

accounts of early Europeans, and the findings of modern scientific research, we know that

Indians have been purposefully burning in this area for at least 7,000 years. Fire kept brush

down in favorite campsites, opened travel routes through dense timber, enhanced berry

production over large areas, increased forage for big game and herds of horses, and forced

wildlife to move. It was also used as a tool in warfare. Research conducted by fire ecologists

like Steve Barrett has shown that the Indian use of fire was so extensive in some areas that

the Salish, Kootenai, and Pend d'Oreille actually doubled the number of fires that would have

occurred from lightning alone (part of his research involved interviewing Tribal elders).

The fires lit by Indians

Indian-lit fires fit a different pattern than lightning fires. Tribal people started most of their fires

in spring, early summer, and fall, when burning conditions were less hazardous. In addition,

most of their burning was done in lower-elevation forests, although many times these lowelevation blazes burned up slope into higher elevations. As a rule, Indian-lit fires were

generally of a lower intensity than lightning fires, which burned at all elevations and generally

got their start in mid to late summer — the hottest and driest time of the year.

Most of the fires lit by

Indian people were lowintensity fires that burned

the understory of lowelevation forests.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Lightning and Indian-lit

fires created a diversity of

habitats, as is apparent in

this photo of the

mountains east of Arlee

taken around 1920. Note

the many different

patches; each represents

a different kind of forest

structure that provides

unique habitat conditions

for wildlife.

Our forests depend on fire and other disturbances

By using fire on a regular basis, the Tribes exerted a tremendous influence over the character

of the forest. Not only did they shape the age, spacing, and species of trees, they also had a major

influence over the mix of birds and animals that lived here. The plant and animal communities

we inherited — the big game, furbearers, predators, birds, rodents, food and medicine plants

— are in large part the legacy of thousands of years of regular and purposeful burning by Indian

people and frequent, uncontrolled lightning-fires. Fire has played such a large role for such a

long time that many of our plant and animal communities now depend on it.

The magnitude of

the problem suggests we need to

take a lesson from

the past and begin

Changes Caused by 100 Years of Fire Exclusion

looking at our

Indians lit fewer fires after the 1880s. Since 1910, the policy has been to exclude fire altogether

forests in a differ(except for a very limited amount of prescribed burning). The fire exclusion policy, as well as

logging and grazing practices have brought about enormous changes in the forest. Many stands ent way.

of trees have grown dense and now have more trees per acre than ever before. As a consequence

these stands are stressed and more susceptible to severe insect and disease outbreaks. The firecreated quilt-work of communities that existed in pre-European times — a mosaic of many

different patches each with its own mix of tree species, ages, and sizes — is becoming more

homogeneous, more like a blanket than a quilt. This loss of structural diversity has caused a

corresponding loss of habitat diversity for wildlife. In short, the kinds of trees, understory

plants, and animals that depend on fire have experienced population declines, while those

species that don't depend on fire have increased. Biologists and foresters alike believe these

shifts are unsustainable over the long term.

If current forest trends of diminishing structural diversity continue, we stand to see many

species of plants and animals decline, which would have profound implications for the Tribes.

We also run the risk of experiencing exceptionally large and intense fires and extreme epidemics

of insects and diseases — events of a scale never before seen on these lands. The magnitude of

the problem suggests we need to take a lesson from the past and begin thinking about and

managing our forests in a different way.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

A New Approach to Forest

Management

Ecosystem management views the entire

forest as the context

for management as

opposed to its individual parts — hence

the name ecosystem

management. In this

sense, managing a

forest is somewhat

analogous to dissecting a frog. If you only

look at the frog once

its cut up — at each

of its parts neatly

lined up — you have

no idea what a living,

breathing frog is all

about, even if you

know how each individual part functions.

We’ve all heard the saying, “You can’t see the forest for the trees.” That old cliche goes right

to the heart of many of the problems with the way we've thought about and managed forests

over the past one hundred years. That is to say, managers have often concentrated on individual

parts of the forest at the expense of the ecosystem as a whole. Foresters have focused primarily

on individual stands of trees while biologists have focused on particular species of plants and

animals. This approach can work for a while, but forests are too complicated — they have too

many parts interacting in too many different ways — for humans to understand or manage them

piecemeal.

Another problem is that society has often viewed important elements of the forest — fire,

predators, insects and diseases — in a negative way. We’ve attempted, often successfully, to

control or remove them from the forest. Again, we have been so caught up in looking at the

individual parts of each community that we have neglected the big picture — the consequences

of our actions across large areas and over long periods of time. We’ve missed, until relatively

recently, some startling trends and fundamental ecological changes.

Taking another Look

This negative attitude toward the kinds of natural forces that bring about change has developed

in part because we have failed to ask a key question: How did our forested ecosystems evolve?

Put another way, what natural processes created our forests? Asking this question is critical

because it allows us to see more clearly the conditions our plant and animal communities

evolved with. Case in point. If elk and grizzly bears and rufous hummingbirds and dozens of

other species evolved with frequent fires and have come to depend on the kinds of forest

openings that fire creates, removing fire will, over the long term, eliminate key habitats for

these species. The same principle applies

for the trees that make up the forest. Removing or altering age-old processes will

change how our forests function and ultimately cause serious forest health

problems and events of a scale that threaten

sustainability. Many ecologists believe

our forests are approaching that point today.

To manage for diverse and sustainable

forest ecosystems, we need to maintain

and restore the natural processes and functions under which our ecosystems

evolved. And where it is not possible to

restore natural processes, we need to

provide conditions within and across landscapes that mimic those processes. For

example, selective cutting and clearcuts,

when carried out in combination with

prescribed burning, can be used to mimic

natural fires.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

What is Ecosystem Management?

Ecosystem management, the approach taken by this management plan, attempts to address

some of the deficiencies of past management. First, it views the entire forest as the context for

management rather than the individual parts, and it considers all parts of the landscape to be

interrelated. It focuses on the diversity of forest structures and how they function across

relatively large areas. Second, it emphasizes the importance of key elements or processes like

fire — the natural forces that shaped the forest and created the basic pattern or mosaic our plant

and animal communities evolved with. Third, it attempts to develop policies and programs

designed to restore or mimic natural processes. The goal is to sustain forests as diverse,

productive, and resilient ecosystems.

Humans are Considered Part of the System

Ecosystem management does not, however, ignore human needs and uses of the forest. Indeed,

it views people — our beliefs, life styles, land uses, culture, and economy — as an integral part

of the forest community. It integrates economic and biological concerns so that each builds on

and benefits the other. More important, ecosystem management takes the long view by merging

what the current generation desires for itself and its children with what our scientific

understanding tells us is biologically and physically possible over the long term.

Five Key Questions

We could summarize the ecosystem management approach, the approach we’ve taken in this

plan (figure 1-1), by listing some of the key questions managers need to ask.

Five basic questions fundamental to ecosystem management

1. How did our ecosystems evolve?

What were the pre-European conditions?

Ecologically

Viable

Economically

Feasible

Socially

Desirable

Our management goals

and actions should fall

within the zone where the

three spheres intersect

(the area that is colored

black) in the above

diagram. Operating

within this zone will

ensure that management

is simultaneously ecologically viable, economically

feasible, and socially

acceptable. If we are

unable to reach this kind

of balance, it's likely our

desired condition will not

be sustainable because of

failures in one or more of

the spheres. After

Zonnveld (1990).

2. What is the situation today?

What are the existing conditions?

3. What is sustainable?

What activities can be perpetuated indefinitely?

4. What conditions do we want in the future?

What is the desired condition?

5. How do we move from where we are today to where we want to be?

Answering these questions will help to change the focus of forest management planning

from output-driven project-oriented planning, which asked “What do we need to mitigate?”

to outcome-driven ecosystem-focused planning, which asks “What conditions do we want to

create?”

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

Figure 1-1. Ecosystem

management involves three

key steps. First, it looks at

pre-European conditions to

learn how our plant and

animal communities evolved.

Second, it considers the

existing condition — what

our forests look like today

— to see what changes

have occurred and to

identify trends. Finally, it

describes the desired

condition — what we want

our forests to look like —

and suggests a practical

strategy for getting there.

What was the

Pre-Contact Condition?

Analyze and Describe the Forest as it

existed prior to European settlement.

This is the model of what is

sustainable.

The

Ecosystem

Management

Planning

Process

Elder's Accounts

Non-Indian Historical Accounts

Review of Scientific Literature

and Local Fire Histories

Old Photos

Computer Modeling

What is the

Existing Condition?

Analyze and Describe the Forest as it

exists today. Compare today's

forests with pre-contact condition to

learn what has changed and to reveal

conditons that may be unsustainable.

Forest Inventory Data

Computer Modeling

Air Photos

Knowledge of Local

Professionals and Others

Tribal Member

Surveys

Flathead

Indian

Reservation

2000

Forest Plan

What is the

Desired Condition?

Forest Ad

Hoc Group

Describe the Forest Conditions we want to

achieve based upon what we believe is

sustainable and desireable. Tell how we get

from what we have to what we want.

Culture

Committees

Tribal Council

Computer Modeling

Tribal Resource

Professionals

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

Some Key Terms and Concepts Defined

Although we have tried to keep technical jargon to a minimum in this document, there are a

few terms and concepts fundamental to our planning approach that we feel are useful. These

are defined below and on the following pages.

General Ecosystem Management Terms

Biological Centered and Ecosystem Centered*

There are different philosophical approaches to forest management. As an example, managers

can take either a biologically centered or an ecosystem-centered approach. Strategies that

focus on individual or groups of species are considered biologically centered, while those that

focus on landscape patterns are termed ecosystem centered. Another choice of approach has

to do with the level of refinement or detail. Managers can operate using a fine-filter approach

or a coarse-filter approach (or some combination of the two). Strategies designed to address

the needs of individual, at-risk species are called fine filter, while those that seek to retain entire

communities are termed coarse filter.

The biologically centered approach

The traditional approach has been a species-focused or biologically centered approach.

Emphasis has been on Federally threatened and endangered species, culturally sensitive

species, and game animals. These species have been used as management indicators, and

have often been used to represent the habitat needs of large groups of other species.

The use of individual indicator species to represent the habitat needs of others is

inconsistent with the concept that each plant or animal has individual habitat needs. Today,

biologically centered approaches use a combination of coarse-filter and fine-filter methods.

Large reserves, such as Tribal conservation

areas, provide protection for entire communities (a coarse-filter strategy), while fine-filter

strategies protect individual species at risk

(such as grizzly bears and bald eagles). The

threatened, endangered, and sensitive species

programs at the Tribal and Federal levels are

generally regarded as appropriate fine-filter

conservation efforts.

Problems with the biologically

centered approach

Examining the habitat

and biological needs

for each individual

organism within all

communities would be

tremendously complex, costly, and

impracticable at any

sort of extensive

scale.

Managers can either take

a biologically centered

approach that focuses on

individual species, or an

ecosystem-centered

approach that emphasizes vegetation patterns

and structures. The

latter approach is based

on the premise that if

quality habitat is available, wildlife will use it.

The focus of the biocentric approach has

changed over time from a small number of key

species, to groups of related species, to entire

communities of organisms. This approach has

not yet been used for developing strategies for

conserving the full range of biological diver* Adapted from Sustaining Ecosystems: A Conceptual Framework. Sherry Hazelhurst, Frank Magary, and Kelly

S. Hawk, eds. 1992.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

A well designed finefilter approach will

serve as an early

warning that some

aspect of the coarsefilter approach needs

adjustment. In

practice the two

systems can complement each other well.

sity, which would involve examining the habitat and biological needs for the full range of

organisms within all the communities. Such an endeavor would be tremendously complex,

costly, and impracticable at any sort of extensive scale. There are many other problems as

well. For example, this approach can ignore potentially important interactions between

communities. Assuming communities are stable, predictable entities, it focuses on dominant

species that may not represent the needs of others that are less abundant or conspicuous, and

it ignores the influence our society has had on disturbance regimes.

The ecosystem-centered approach

A different approach to conserving biological diversity is a coarse-filter, ecosystemcentered approach. It looks beyond single species. Reserves are no longer the key part of

the conservation scheme — the entire landscape assumes that role. The focus is on providing

components, structures, and processes that mimic natural ecosystems, thereby providing

habitat for a greater range of biological organisms within each ecosystem.

The ecosystem-centered approach is an attractive alternative because it offers a conceptually sound and potentially achievable approach for addressing the full range of biological

diversity. It is not necessary to have detailed information about all the organisms and

processes in an ecosystem to develop a management scheme based on maintaining the

integrity of the ecosystem across the landscape. In other words, it assumes that if the habitat

or structure is present in the right proportions, the animals will use it.

Because landscapes are dynamic, the ecosystem approach attempts to mimic the expected

variation that would be produced by natural disturbances and, in fact, is a more practicable

approach to conserving biological diversity given the complexity and dynamic nature of

ecosystems. Its theoretical weakness is that it may not recognize the needs of critical species.

Another problem is that scientists and land managers are just beginning to understand the

intricacies of how ecosystems function. It is, however, in our view, the most sensible

approach to management planning and the principle strategy used in this forest plan.

Taking the best from both

Grizzly bears require

special management.

This plan proposes to

use an ecosystemcentered, coarse-filter

approach to provide

ecosystem structures

and processes on a

broad scale, while using

a fine-filter strategy to

protect sensitive

species like grizzly bears.

Our current level of understanding and the amount of time required to achieve natural

patterns across landscapes compels us to also continue our use of biologically centered, finefilter approaches. Fine-filter methods will be needed for some time to sustain species already

known to be at risk, as well as species that will become at risk in the future.

The two approaches — coarse-filtered ecosystem-centered and fine-filtered biologically centered — can

complement one another. Indeed, in

our time neither is a defensible conservation strategy in and of itself. The

former relies upon the fine-filter approach as a safety net, because incomplete information can lead to false

assumptions about ecosystems, and

species or processes will suffer as a

result. A well-designed fine-filter

approach will serve as an early warning

that some aspect of the coarse-filter

approach needs adjustment.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

Key Terms and Concepts Continued…

General Ecosystem Management Terms

Landscapes

Ecosystem management requires managers to focus on relatively large areas. In this plan,

we have divided the Reservation into six landscapes based on physical features such as

topography, soils, geology, climate, watersheds, vegetation types, and administrative

designations. The six landscapes are shown in figure 1-2. Each landscape in turn is divided

into four major fire regimes.

A landscape is defined as an area

drained by one or a

group of similar

streams within which

the climate, landforming processes

and natural vegetation patterns are

fairly uniform. It is

an area that, for a

number of reasons,

people tend to view

as a single unit.

Figure 1-2. The ID Team

divided the Reservation

into six landscapes.

The Adaptive

Management Cycle

Plan and

Project

Adaptive Management

In our planning process, we readily admit that our scientific knowledge and our technical

abilities are limited. We do, however, recognize the need to move forward — even if we don't

have all the answers. Our approach is to use our best stewardship skills with adaptive

management. Adaptive management simply means that we will plan and implement our

activities to the best of our abilities, then monitor the results to see if we are meeting our goals.

If our strategy proves inadequate, we will make the changes in management that are necessary

to better meet our goals.

Evaluate

and

Adjust

Implement

Monitor

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

Key Terms and Concepts Continued…

General Ecosystem Management Terms

Figure 1-3. This graph shows

how the water temperatures

of a hypothetical stream

may have fluctuated prior to

European settlement. A

sudden jump to 73° F in

modern times would clearly

be beyond the reference

variability and would

probably threaten sustainability of aquatic organisms

in the stream.

Reference Variability (RV)

Fundamental to ecosystem management is the concept of sustainability. Managers hope

to manage for conditions that will allow plant and animal communities to perpetuate

themselves. The best model of sustainability comes from the pre-European period when

forest ecosystems remained relatively stable over thousands of years. Pre-European

conditions are the conditions under which our plant and animal communities evolved. These

are the conditions to which they are best adapted.

Westslope cutthroat trout, for instance, are adapted to summer water temperatures of

between 43 to 62° F. For thousands of years that was the natural range of variation in water

temperature. If, however, through land management activities such as removing shade trees,

we raise the summer temperatures to, say, 73° F, the trout would suffer, their growth would

slow, and some fish would likely die. If the high temperatures persist, the population itself

would be in jeopardy. In other words, it would not be possible to sustain a cutthroat

population under this new condition.

In ecosystem management, managers attempt to identify and manage within the natural

range of variation for key elements of the forest because these conditions represent the best

opportunity for sustainability. This natural range of variation is referred to as the reference

variability (RV) (figure 1-3).

This higher value is well above the reference variability and may

jeapordize the sustainability of cutthroat trout populations.

Water Temperature

Temperature

Water

Reference variability

is the natural variation exhibited by an

element of the forest

during pre-European

times.

Reference Variability

Time

Recommended Management Variability (RMV)

In general, managers hope to manage for conditions that fall within reference variabilities

(RVs). However, managers probably do not want to operate at the extremes of reference

variabilities. For example, with cutthroat trout, the reference variability for summer water

temperatures is 43 to 62° F. A fisheries manager probably would not want to manage for

conditions that would have water temperatures near 62° F. Rather, he or she would probably

target a more narrow range within the reference variability, say, an upper temperature of 60°

F. The reason is, managing at the margins leaves little room for error, and if the system

experiences a major disturbance like a fire, we run a greater risk of being pushed beyond our

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

Key Terms and Concepts Continued…

General Ecosystem Management Terms

WaterTemperature

Temperature

Water

reference variabilities. It is therefore prudent to manage within a more narrow range. We call

this more narrow range the recommended management variability (RMV). The concept is

illustrated in the graph below (figure 1-4). Again, the basic premise is: ecosystems evolved

over extended time periods present the best chance for sustainability; and management

designed to maintain or reproduce key components, structures, and processes is the most

likely management approach to sustain ecosystem integrity and productivity.

Recommended Mgt

Variability

Time

Figure 1-4. Managers will

generally choose to operate

within a slightly more

narrow range than the

reference variability to

provide them with a buffer

in the event of major

disturbances like fires. This

more narrow zone is

referred to as the recommended management

variability.

The relation between RMVs and the Desired Condition

Figure 1-5 shows the hypothetical relationship between the reference variability, the

recommended management variability, the existing condition and the desired condition

(DC) for the percent thermal cover for big game. (Thermal cover is timber vegetation that

provides protection from temperature extremes in summer and winter.) The chart shows that

during pre-European times, thermal cover fluctuated between about 25 and 100 percent

Reservation wide. This then is our reference variability. Based on this RV, the wildlife

biologist is recommending we try to manage for between 35 and 100 percent thermal cover.

This is our recommended management variability. The existing condition is between 43 and

93 percent (each landscape is shown as a separate bar). We estimate that the desired

condition will result in from 40 to 70 percent thermal cover Reservation wide. The desired

condition will bring us within the RMV.

Subalpine Larch Cones

Ecosystems evolved

over extended time

periods present the

best chance for

sustainability. Management designed to

maintain or reproduce

the key components,

structures, and

processes present

during pre-European

times is the approach

most likely to sustain

ecosystem integrity

and productivity.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

Figure 1-5. This chart shows

the relationship between

RVs, RMVs, the existing

condition and the desired

condition for thermal cover.

Generally, the desired

condition will fall within or

close to the recommended

management variability,

although not always.

Reference Variability

Recommended Management

Variability

Existing Condition

SW & W

J NM M

Desired Condition

Obviously, the world

has changed in

countless ways since

pre-European times,

and we can't recreate

what was here before.

20%

40%

60% 80%

Thermal Cover

100%

Managing outside the RMVs

In an ideal world, we would attempt to maintain all key elements of the forest within their

recommended management variabilities. However, there are often times when, for social,

cultural, economic, or even ecological reasons, this approach will not be possible. The world

has changed substantially since pre-European times. We now have thousands of miles of

forest roads, dams, and utility corridors. We have hundreds of homes within the forest or at

its margin. We have threatened and endangered species for which there are specific federal

guidelines limiting management options. The public has strong attitudes about prescribed and

natural fires, clearcutting, and other forest practices. Also, the Tribes depend on revenue from

timber. Hence, in some instances the desired condition may not fall within the recommended

management variability. Being outside the recommended management variability for one or

more elements does not necessarily mean that the ecosystem is unsustainable. It is, however,

a red-flag that indicates a potential risk to sustainability. In these instances, recommended

management variabilities are still useful because they inform us of potential problems.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

Key Terms and Concepts Continued…

Disturbance and Vegetation Terms

Disturbance

In 1928, Frank Jaquette, an early settler in the Bitterroot Valley reminisced about Salish land

management practices in the 1800s and described them as superior to those of the white settlers.

Referring to the West Fork of the Bitterroot River in 1887, he said:

At this time the creek was thoroughly set with a growth of willows and very completely

so on the south side. Since it has become part of the white man’s domain and fires are

less general and frequent, the large alder growth has very generally replaced these

willows.

It might be noted here that the Indians were great foresters, as all old-time

prospectors will affirm. They left the forests to the tender mercies of nature… [While the

Forest] Service spends millions of dollars battling against nature’s force, the result is a

tendency to a scrubby growth of timber and a fire trap.”

“It might be noted

here that the Indians

were great foresters…”

— Frank Jaquette,

Homesteader,

1928

Disturbances create diversity

What the Salish, Kootenai, and Pend d'Oreille took for granted, but few Europeans

understood, is that fire is a necessary process of forest renewal. Rather than thinking of

natural disturbances (events like fire, floods, drought, windthrow, storm damage, insects and

disease, etc.) as enemies of a healthy forest, they viewed them as integral, even beneficial.

They understood that the plants and animals they harvested and hunted depended on a variety

of habitats, and that disturbances created that variety. That’s why they lit so many fires.

dusky flycatchers

song sparrows

yellow warblers

brown thrashers

porcupines

little brown bats

white-tailed deer

mountain bluebirds

flickers

rufous hummingbirds

western meadowlarks

rosey finches

garter snakes

meadow voles

yellow-bellied marmots

badgers

mule deer & elk (forage)

grizzly bear (if cover is

nearby)

Vaux's swifts

barred owls

flammulated owls

pileated woodpeckers

red-backed voles

northern flying squirrels

fishers

martens

black bears

elk & deer (hiding and thermal cover)

Figure 1-6. Different species

require different kinds of

habitats. All the

vegetation types found

within a forest —

everything from recently

burned areas and meadows

to old growth — have

specific communities of

animals that depend on

them. The lists given here

are only a sampling of the

species that use and

depend at least in part on

the kind of habitat represented.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

Deer and elk, for example, need densely timbered areas to hide in and large old trees for

protection from winter cold and summer heat, but they also need open areas for foraging.

Grizzly bears need variety too, open areas to feed in and timbered areas for cover. Other

species rely almost exclusively on a single kind of forest habitat, such as openings or old

growth (figure 1-6). The point is, periodic disturbances, especially fire, which is our most

common type of natural disturbance, ensure the diversity that wildlife needs.

Natural and human caused

Ponderosa Pine

Events which are described as disturbances generally cause significant change in a forest,

usually altering the way the ecosystem functions (a recent burn, for instance, has a different

role than an old growth forest). Disturbances can be natural or human caused. Humancaused disturbances include events like timber harvesting, grazing, the introduction of exotic

species, roads, and so on. Their consequences can be similar to those of natural disturbances

or they can be of another magnitude, altering ecosystems in ways natural disturbances seldom

did.

Fire: our most frequent natural disturbance

Douglas-fir

Ponderosa pine (top) is

more fire resistant and

less susceptible to rootrots and mistletoe than

Douglas-fir (bottom), but

past practices have

tended to favor Douglasfir over ponderosa pine

across much of the

Reservation. Because our

plant and animal communities evolved with fires

such as the “standreplacing fire” shown at

right, many species have

become dependent on it.

Restoring disturbances

by utilizing management

practices that mimic

natural fire can maintain

healthier forests.

Fire can be beneficial as a disturbance. In addition to increasing the variety of habitats for

wildlife, in certain fire regimes it tends to favor tree species that are more fire resistant and

less vulnerable to insect attack and disease infection.

In addition, fire is an important part of the forest nutrient cycle, especially on drier sites.

Without periodic fires, nutrients become less available to plants and soil organisms.

Although fire can be kept out of the forest for long periods, it will eventually return, and

when it does, the fuel buildups caused by decades without disturbance usually result in much

larger and more catastrophic burns — burns that can consume tens of thousands of acres and

do long-term damage to soils and other resources.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

Key Terms and Concepts Continued…

Disturbance and Vegetation Terms

Fire Regimes

The term fire regime refers to the kind of fire behavior that occurred within a portion of a

landscape during pre-European times. Although fire exclusion policies have changed the fire

behavior and vegetation within these zones, pre-European fire regimes reveal basic information

about how our ecosystems functioned before the days of fire suppression. We have identified

four major fire regimes: nonlethal, mixed, lethal, and timberline. General characteristics are

summarized in table 1-1 and described in detail in Chapter 2.

Nonlethal

Fire Regime

(& Encroached Areas)

Mixed Fire

Regime

Lethal Fire

Regime

Timberline

Fire Regime

Habitat

Dry P. Pine,

Dry D.Fir

Moist D. Fir, W.

Larch, Cool/Dry

D.Fir

L. P. Pine, G.

Fir, Spruce and

Warm S. A. Fir

W. B. Pine and L.

P. Pine

Cold S. A. Fir

Fuels

Grass and

Litter

Grass, Shrubs

and Regen.

Regen. and

Downfall

Grass, Shrubs

and Downfall

Location

Low to MidElevations,

Mild Slopes,

SE-W Aspects

Low to MidElevations, All

Slopes, All

Aspects

Mid- to High

Elevations,

Steep Slopes,

All Aspects

High Elevations,

All Slopes, All

Aspects

Structure

Large Trees,

Old Growth,

Closed Canopy,

Uneven-aged,

Seral Stands

Mature Trees,

Open/Closed

Canopy, Mosaic,

Mixed Seral

Stands

Mature Trees &

Old Growth

Closed Canopy,

Even-aged,

Seral Stands

Mature Trees,

Open/Closed

Canopy, Mosaic,

Climax Stands

Fire

Occurrence

Short Interval

5 - 30 years

Variable Interval

30 - 100 years

Long Interval

70 -500 years

Variable Interval

30 - 500 years

Fire Behavior

Low Intensity,

Large Size,

Short Duration

Variable Intensity, High Intensity, Variable Intensity,

Variable Size,

Large Size, Long

Variable Size,

Moder. Duration

Duration

Short Duration

Typical Areas

Dry Fork, Jette,

Stevens,

Seepay,

Little Money

Garceau,

Hell Roaring,

La Moose

Dog Lake,

Boulder,

S. Fork Jocko,

Revais Creek

The term fire regime

refers to the kind of

fire behavior that

occurs in an area.

During pre-European

times, fire regimes

determined the

pattern, structure,

and composition of

the vegetation.

Table 1-1. Descriptions of

the major fire regimes of

the Flathead Reservation.

Moss Pk,

Ninemile Divide,

Top of Mission

Range

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

Key Terms and Concepts Continued…

If there is one concept

that underlies this

forest plan, it is that

change is a natural

part of healthy forest

communities.

Disturbance and Vegetation Terms

Succession*

One of the most important ecological concepts underlying this forest plan is that change is a

natural part of healthy forest communities. The term forest succession refers to change,

specifically the patterns of change that occur within a forest over time.

The concept of forest succession often clashes with the human desire to maintain stability

and control over the environment. We are drawn to trees in part because of their seemingly

timeless quality. In a world of seething change, an ancient forest becomes a symbol of

permanence and serenity. Besides that, we are sentimental about our forests. We don't like to

see trees die. But if we think of forests as stable communities, forest fires and other

disturbances do not seem part of a natural process.

The Classical View: A Straight Path

In simplified presentations of forest succession, the forest progresses toward a final or

climax condition. Although details vary, several elements are commonly presented in the

sequence of forest succession (figure 1-7). Following a major disturbance, such as a standreplacement fire, the site enters a relatively short period in which grasses, forbs, and/or brush

dominate. This period is typically followed by the dominance of tree species that require lots

of sun (called shade-intolerant or early seral species by foresters). In a final stage, shade

tolerant or climax species begin to flourish. Eventually they overtop the seral species and

dominate the site, establishing a climax forest community.

Figure 1-7. This is the

classic view of forest

succession, but there is a

problem applying this model

to the Reservation:

frequent, periodic

disturbances have been left

out of the picture. The

diagram at right depicts a

more accurate model.

After a “standreplacing” disturbance shrubs,

grasses, and forbs

dominate the site.

Trees that require full

Trees that

sunlight (shadetolerate shading

intolerant trees like

begin to develop

ponderosa pine,

in the underwestern larch, and

story.

lodgepole pine) develop

and dominate the site.

The forest reaches a climax

condition. Shade tolerant

trees like Douglas-fir, grand

fir, subalpine fir, Engelmann

spruce, and cedar dominate

the site. Shade-intolerant

trees cannot reproduce.

* Adapted from Forest Health and Ecological Integrity in the Northern Rockies by Edward Monnig and James

Byler. 1992.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

The climax condition is often thought of as the goal to which all forests are progressing. It's

easy to envision it as the last and best forest, the forest primeval. However, it is not necessarily

the natural state of forests in the Northern Rockies nor is it necessarily the best for all wildlife

and other forest resources.

A More Realistic Model: Circles within Circles

Before European settlement in the Northern Rockies, many forest types rarely reached climax

conditions because of frequent disturbances. More typical patterns of forest development are

shown in this second depiction of succession (figure 1-8). Major elements in forest succession

were insects, disease, and fire — all made worse by periodic drought. Depending on the site,

the interval between disturbances could range from a decade or less to several centuries.

However, disturbance was inevitable and played a key role in maintaining the health and

diversity of the forest.

Over the last one hundred years, the patterns and types of disturbance have changed. Fire

has played a much smaller part in bringing change to our forests, while human disturbances

such as logging and grazing have increased. Natural fires cannot be eliminated from forested

ecosystems, however. In preventing fires we've allowed fuels to build and created the

opportunity for larger, catastrophic fires and insect and disease epidemics.

Infrequent, high-intensity

fires and insect and

disease outbreaks

typically prevented most

of the forest from ever

reaching a climax

condition.

After a fire, shrubs, grasses and

forbs dominate the site. The new

growth produces a variety of

nutritious foods that benefit

everything from butterflies to elk

to grizzly bears.

Fire

On many sites,

frequent fires

removed young

shade-tolerant

trees.

Trees that tolerate

shading begin to

develop in the

understory.

Forest succession

simply refers to how

forests change over

time.

Fire

Figure 1-8. This model of

forest succession fits the

Reservation (and the rest

of the Northern Rockies)

better than the one shown

in figure 1-7. Prior to

European settlement,

forest succession seldom

proceeded to a climax

condition but was often

interrupted by fire and

other disturbances.

Older trees

survived.

Trees that require full

sunlight (shadeintolerant species) grow

to dominate. The forest

changes to provide a

home and food for a new

community of animals.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

Key Terms and Concepts Continued…

Disturbance and Vegetation Terms

Seral Classes

Seral classes are a

simplified way of

classifying timber

vegetation based on

its structure and

composition.

In this plan, we focus chiefly on the structure and composition of the forest — on the size and

age of the trees, on how close they are to each other, on whether a stand is multi or single

layered, and on whether species are shade tolerant (climax) or shade intolerant (seral). Keeping

track of all these factors on a Reservation scale is complex, so we have simplified things

somewhat by developing what we refer to as seral classes. Seral classes are types of timbered

vegetation distinguished by their structure and composition. An example might be a stand of

old trees that is relatively open and multi-storied with mostly shade tolerant (or climax) species

in both the overstory and understory. This particular seral class might look like the one at left,

which is a computerized depiction of an actual timbered stand on the Reservation.

We developed a four digit code to help us keep track of all the various seral classes. We

explain that code here, but you won't need to memorize it. Understanding the concept is all

that is needed for the reader to follow the plan.

The first number refers

to the size of the most

dominant tree layer.

The second number describes

density or how much shading

the ground receives.

3213

The third and fourth numbers indicate the species composition of

the overstory and understory trees (whether seral or climax) and

whether the stand is single or multi-storied.

The seral class code

The above depiction of

seral class 5333 was

made by taking actual

forest inventory data

(CFI) for a specific plot

on the Reservation and

feeding that data into a

computer program. The

computer then drew this

image of the stand. Each

individual tree measured

in the field is represented.

The seral class code was calculated using two slightly different methods. Seral classes were

determined using both imagery data and CFI data. For spacial calculations using imagery

data, dominant tree size was a volume estimate that was a function of diameter, height, and

numbers of trees. The size designation of a seral class calculated from CFI data was

determined by the 5-inch diameter class that had the most basal area. Imagery data measured

coverage directly, while CFI data predicted coverage using species, tree diameter, tree height,

crown length, crown ratio and tree numbers per acre.

These computational methods will not always predict the same seral class at the stand

level, but are similar enough that that any differences will not preclude reasonable project,

landscape, or forest level comparisons.

The Code Explained

1. Dominant tree size, based on the predominant size class.

Four size classes were recognized by the modeling process: 1 = trees from 0 to 4.9 inches

dbh, 2 = trees from 5.0 to 9.9 inches dbh, 3 = trees from 10.0 to 20.9 inches, and 5 = trees

21 inches and greater. A size class of 4 (10.0 to 13.9 inches dbh) was not used in the original

modeling but was instead lumped with size class 3 because of the inability to distinguish

it from the satellite imagery. In the future, stand level reconnaissance will gather data using

all 5 size classes, equal in class widths, for example, 10 to 14.9”, 15 to 19.9, etc.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

2. Density: based on canopy closure (how close together the trees' crowns

are to each other)

Modeling used three density classes: 1 = 0 to 39% coverage, 2 = 40 to 69% coverage, and

3 = 70%+ coverage. Operational experience demonstrated that a fourth coverage is

necessary. Field collections should use the four class system: 1 = 0 to 14.9% coverage,

2 = 15 to 39.9% coverage, 3 = 40 to 69.9% coverage, and 4 = 70%+ coverage.

3. Species composition and layering: based on the nature of the overstory

and understory

Two digits, the first representing the overstory, the second the understory. 0 = no trees

in that layer; 1 = at least 75 percent of that layer is in seral species; 2 = seral species

comprise between 25 and 75 percent of the layer; 3 = at least 75 percent of the layer is

made up of climax species.

A seral cluster is a

group of seral

classes that are

similar in the way

they function.

Seral Clusters

Table 1-2 shows the seral classes used in the development of this plan. The table also shows

how the ID Team simplified the model by lumping similar functioning seral classes into groups

which we call seral clusters (A through L in the table). This lumping is useful because the seral

classes within a cluster generally function in a similar fashion with respect to factors such as

fire risk, fire severity, hiding and thermal cover for big game, habitat for birds, insect and

disease risks, and so on. The RMVs, Desired Conditions (DCs), and vegetation descriptions

of individual landscapes in this plan use these seral clusters or groups of seral clusters. A brief

description of each follows (figure 1-9).

0 - 4.9"

5 - 8.9"

9 - 20.9"

>21"

3/3

2/2

2/3

2/2

2/3

1/1

2/2

2/3

2/2

2/3

3/3

> 70%

canopy

closure

0/2

2/2

2/3

0/2

2/2

2/3

40 - 70%

canopy

closure

0/2

2/2

0/2

2/2

2/3

0 - 39%

canopy

closure

2/3

0/3

0/2

0/3

Table 1-2. Seral Classes used in the

development of this plan were lumped into

Seral Clusters A through L.

X/Y: X represents the species group for

the overstory and Y represents the

species group for the understory. The

break point between overstory and

understory is 10 inch dbh.

0 = No species group present

1 = Seral tree species comprise >75% of

the stand

2 = Seral tree species comprise 25% to

75% of the stand

3 = Climax trees species comprise > 75%

of the stand

0/2

0/3

2/0

3/0

2/0

* Because of imagery limitations, we lumped size groupings 3 and 4 into a single group.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

Key Terms and Concepts Continued…

Seral Clusters (cont.)

Seral Cluster Key

Figure 1-9. Seral cluster descriptions.

Cluster

General Description

Cluster A

Cluster A1: Young and recenlty

disturbed, open canopy, mostly

pine and larch.

Cluster A2: mature and old,

frequently disturbed, open

canopy, mostly pine and larch.

Cluster B

Young, undisturbed since

regeneration, moderate canopy,

mostly fir.

Cluster C

Young, frequently disturbed to

undisturbed, moderate canopy,

mostly pine and larch.

Cluster D

Young, frequently disturbed to

undisturbed, closed canopy,

mostly pine and larch.

Cluster E

Mature, undisturbed, moderate

canopy, moslty fir and spruce.

Cluster F

Mature, undisturbed, moderate

canopy, mostly pine and larch.

Potential for lodgepole old

growth.

Cluster G

Mature, less frequently

disturbed, closed canopy,

mostly pine and larch. Potential

for lodgepole pine old growth.

Examples

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

Key Terms and Concepts Continued…

Seral Clusters (cont.)

Cluster

General Description

Cluster H

Mature, undisturbed, closed

canopy, mostly fir and spruce

Cluster I

Old, undisturbed, moderate

canopy, mostly fir and spruce.

Potential for old growth

Cluster J

Old, undisturbed, moderate

canopy, mostly pine and larch.

Potential for old growth.

Cluster K

Old, undisturbed, closed

canopy, mostly pine and larch.

Potential for old growth.

Cluster L

Old, undisturbed, closed

canopy, mostly fir and spruce.

Potential for old growth.

Examples

Seral Cluster Key

Figure 1-9. Seral cluster descriptions (cont.).

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

Key Terms and Concepts Continued…

Disturbance and Vegetation Terms

Key Parameters

Key parameters are

indices of how a

particular kind of

forest structure, or

seral cluster, functions. By analyzing

seral clusters in

terms of their key

parameters we can

estimate how a given

landscape functions

(in the past, present,

or future), because we

know or we can predict

the seral cluster

distribution found

within that landscape.

In our model, we use seral clusters to describe the structure and composition of the forest. We

then built maps showing how these seral clusters were distributed across the Reservation as of

1990 (using satellite and forest inventory data). We also estimated how much of each seral

cluster probably existed during pre-European times. The interdisciplinary team then evaluated

how each seral cluster functioned for a series of key parameters, which are listed below.

Key Parameters

Vegetation and Disturbance

Defoliator Risk

Root Disease Risk

Bark Beetle Risk

Mistletoe Risk

FireFire

Severity

High

Severity

FireFire

Risk

High

Risk

Prescribed

Underburn

Potential

High

Prescribed

Underburn

Potential

Wildlife and Diversity

Hiding Cover

Thermal Cover

Big Game Forage

Interior Forest Bird Diversity

Early Seral Bird Diversity

Products

Timber Stocking

Post and Pole Stocking

Christmas Tree Stocking

Firewood Stocking

Berry Production

Livestock Forage

Human Health

High

Smoke

Emissions

Smoke

Emissions

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – KEY TERMS

Key Terms and Concepts Continued…

As an example of how this system works, take the key parameter fire risk. Our ID team rated

seral clusters E, G, H, I, and L as having a high fire risk, which means they have a high potential

for ignition, and once a fire starts, the fuels are sufficient to sustain it. The fire will likely spread

and be of high intensity — the kind of blaze that is extremely costly and difficult to put out.

Clusters B, D, F, J, and K were rated as having a moderate fire risk, and clusters A and C were

rated low.

We did this exercise for each key parameter, and because we knew the seral cluster

distribution for each of the six landscapes, we were able to estimate how each functioned (in

terms of hiding cover, thermal cover, fire risk, insect and disease risk, timber production, and

so on) (figure 1-10). We were also able to estimate how each of the landscapes probably

functioned during pre-European times (which helped us set our reference variabilities or RVs),

and to develop sustainable seral cluster distributions for landscapes in the future (which

became our desired conditions). These analyses are presented in Chapter 3.

Seral Cluster

Figure 1-10. We analyzed

how seral clusters

function for various key

parameters, among them:

wildlife, fire risk, insects

and disease risk, and

forest products.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – FOREST TRENDS

Major Forest Trends:

A Photographic Overview

Looking at the Past to See Current and Future

Trends

“If a Salish or Kootenai person who lived

here two hundred

years ago came back

today and walked

through his or her old

forest haunts, they'd

have trouble recognizing them. Our forests

have changed that

much.”

— Steve Barrett,

Fire Ecologist,

1995

Much of the work of the interdisciplinary forest planning team involved conceptual and

computer modeling to estimate what the forests on the Reservation looked like prior to

European settlement (what we are calling pre-European conditions). We then compared those

conditions with the situation that exists today. This section provides a photographic overview

of some of the major changes that analysis revealed. Most of the shifts are a consequence of

fire exclusion, although commercial forestry and grazing have been responsible for some

major shifts, too. The trends depicted in the photos represent Reservation-wide changes that

continue today.

Many of the shifts have been detrimental from the standpoint of ecosystem stability. The

actions contained in this plan are designed to counter some of the more negative trends. The

major changes (in no particular order) are summarized below.

Major ecological shifts occurring in Reservation forests

1. Forest expansion onto grasslands.

2. Loss of plant and animal diversity.

3. Shifts in tree species composition.

4. Changes in structure.

5. Increases in density.

6. Changes in patch size and edge.

7. Shifts in the ages and sizes of trees.

8. Increases in road densities.

Ponderosa pine needles

and cones. This plan

addresses a number of

changes that are

occurring in forests from

Hot Springs to St.

Ignatius. Among them the

shift from seral species,

like ponderosa pine, to

climax species like

Douglas-fir. The shifts

pose a threat to the

health and stability of

both plant and animal

communities.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – FOREST TRENDS

Trend Number 1: Forest expansion onto grasslands.

Figure 1-11. The two aerial

photos of the dry hills at

the mouth of the Jocko

Canyon show how dramatic

the expansion has been in

some areas. The far left

photo was taken in 1938,

the other in 1990.

Grasslands at the forest edge are shrinking.

In pre-European times, fires kept grasslands free of most trees and shrubs. However, without

fire, trees are able to gain a foothold. The process, shown in figures 1-11 and 1-12, continues

today; young trees can be seen sprouting well below the forest edge on many dry hills. The net

result has been an overall increase in total forest acres and a corresponding decrease in interior

and exterior grassland. The trees in this “new forest” zone are often densely stocked and subject

to extreme drought stress. They are often weak and susceptible to insect and disease attacks as

well as stand-replacing fires. At the same time, the productivity of many seral herbs, shrubs,

and aspen stands has declined due to the absence of fire and forest densification.

By excluding fires, we have suffered a loss of the meadow and forest-edge habitats that

were traditionally key summer calving and wintering areas for big game (figure 1-13). These

open pockets were also home to a variety of songbirds, upland gamebirds, small mammals,

specialized insects, and unique plant communities — organisms that require undeveloped

open habitats within or at the forest edge. In some areas we have re-created these openings

with clearcuts.

Increasing Acres

Forests

Meadows &

Grasslands

1945

Pre-Contact

Times

1981

Today

Douglas Fir

Ponderosa Pine

Figure 1-12. The diagram

above shows the general

pattern occurring at

lower elevations at the

forest edge: because of

fire exclusion, trees are

expanding outward onto

areas that were historically non-forested.

Figure 1-13. The overall

trend Reservation-wide is

summarized in the graph

at left.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – FOREST TRENDS

Trend Number 2: Loss of diversity.

Figure 1-14. These photos

are of the Mission range;

St. Ignatius is in the

foreground. The top photo

was probably taken in the

1920s, while the lower

photo was taken in 1995.

The trend across the Reservation is toward reduced diversity.

Figure 1-15. The diagram

above summarizes a

Reservation-wide trend

toward a loss of diversity.

Each number represents a

different patch (forest

structural type).

Figure 1-16. On these

photos, different patches

have been delineated in a

general way with lines,

illustrating how over the

last 50 years diversity has

been reduced.

Because of fire exclusion policies and past forest practices, forest communities are becoming

uniform blankets of similarly aged trees (figures 1-14 and 1-15). Gone is the quilt-work of preEuropean times, a mosaic that contained a tremendous diversity of forest habitats. We have

traded that richness for a more impoverished forest dominated by just a few kinds of structures.

Losing habitats means losing plant and animal species, many with cultural significance.

Without changes in management, this trend will continue; our forest will become even

more habitat impoverished. Figure 1-16 shows two photos with lines marking individual

patches to show the trend more clearly.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – FOREST TRENDS

Trend Numbers 3 and 4: Shifts in species composition and stand structure.

Figure 1-17. These photos,

while not taken on the

Reservation (both are

from Lick Creek in the

Bitterroot) illustrate a

clear Reservation trend.

Douglas-fir is overtaking

ponderosa pine. The left

photo was taken in 1909,

the other in the same

location in 1979.

Seral species are loosing ground to climax species.

Over the last 50 to 100 years, climax species like Douglas-fir which tolerate shade have

increased at the expense of seral species like ponderosa pine which require lots of sun. Without

fire, Douglas-fir is able to gain a foothold beneath the pines, eventually out competing and

overtaking them. During pre-European times, periodic fires interrupted this process by killing

the climax species while they were young. Open stands of giant pines like the one shown in the

photo at upper left were maintained by frequent ground fires (figure 1-17).

The same dynamic — climax species overtaking seral species — continues to happen

throughout the Reservation, although the trend is most apparent at lower elevations, in the

Nonlethal Fire Regime, where ponderosa pine stands are giving way to Douglas-fir. The trend

concerns foresters because Douglas-fir is much more susceptible to a variety of insect pests

and diseases than ponderosa pine. In 1945, Douglas-fir made up only 26 percent of the forest,

while ponderosa pine occupied 59 percent. In 1981, Douglas-fir had increased to cover 42

percent of our forests, meanwhile, ponderosa pine had dropped to 22 percent (figure 1-19).

Stands that were historically parklike are also becoming more crowded and multilayered

(figure 1-18). Again, low intensity ground fires were the mechanism which kept stands in the

nonlethal zone open and parklike.

Percent of Forest

Ponderosa Pine

Douglas Fir

1945

1981

Ponderosa Pine

Douglas Fir

Figure 1-18 above illustrates a Reservation-wide

trend — the shift from

seral to climax species and

a more multilayered forest.

Figure 1-19 at left shows

how Douglas-fir has

increased at the expense

of pine on the Reservation.

According to Tribal

silviculturists, the trend

has become even more

pronounced since 1981.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – FOREST TRENDS

Trend Number 5: Increases in density.

Figure 1-20. These photos

were taken on one of the

Reservation's high ridges.

The left photo, taken in the

1920s, shows a stand

maintained in an open

condition by fire. The other

photo shows the same ridge

in 1994.

Stand density refers to how crowded a stand is.

Figures 1-22 and 1-23. The

diagram below and the

graph at right show the

trend toward increasing

stand density, a consequence of fire exclusion

policies.

Trees per Acre

Figure 1-21. The pattern of

increasing density across

the Reservation is demonstrated in these two aerial

photos (center) from the

Hot Springs area. They

show the same piece of

ground, first in 1935, then

again in 1990.

Without disturbance like fire or logging, stand density has increased substantially over what

it was during pre-European times (figures 1-20 through 1-23). The availability of moisture,

nutrients, and light limit the number of trees that can grow on each site, so as trees become more

crowded, stresses increase due to competition. As stresses increase, trees become more

susceptible to attack by insects and disease. Those agents kill trees. The result is a build up

of fuels giving rise to larger more destructive fires.

1900

Trees per Acre

Pre- 1915

Contact

Times

1930

1945

1960

1975

1990

Today

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – FOREST TRENDS

Trend Number 6: Changes in patch size and edge.

Figure 1-24. These photos of

the Mission Range east of

Pablo show the change in

patch size and amount of

edge. The top photo, taken

in the 1920s, shows the

numerous patches of all

sizes created by standreplacement fires (only one

or two of the patches at

the very base of the range

is from logging). The other

photo, taken in 1995, shows

how the patchiness has all

but disappeared.

Individual

patches

Fires created a mosaic dominated by small patches.

A patch is an area of vegetation that is relatively homogeneous and that differs from the

vegetation that surrounds it. The boundary between two patches is referred to as an edge. Fire

exclusion policies have caused an increase in the average patch size and a decrease in the

amount of edge, particularly in the mid-elevation Mixed Fire Regime. Now, much of the forest

is covered by a relatively uniform blanket of trees similar in age and size (figures 1-24 through

1-26). The size of patches and the amount of edge is vitally important for wildlife.

Increasing

Amount

of Edge

Patch

Size

1900 1910

1920 1930

1940 1950

Pre-Contact

Times

1960 1970

1980 1990

Today

Figure 1-25. The diagram

above (modified from

Barrett et al. 1991) shows a

hypothetical increase in

patch size and decrease in

edge for an area.

Figure 1-26. The graph at

left shows the same trends,

both of which are the result

of fire exclusion policies.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – FOREST TRENDS

Trend Number 7: Shifts in the ages and sizes of

trees — the trend at low elevations.

Figure 1-27. The big pines in

the photo on the left

(taken somewhere on the

Reservation) once dominated our low-elevation

forests. Some of these big

trees were logged and the

frequent low-intensity fires

that had maintained them

were excluded from the

forest. The combination

has resulted in a shift

toward younger trees.

The average age of trees has changed.

But there have been two kinds of changes, one at low elevations and another at middle to high

elevations. During pre-European times, lower elevation forests were shaped principally by

frequent, low-intensity fires, which left a forest of ancient pines like those shown in the photo

on the left (figure 1-27). Now because most of those large pines have been logged off and fire

has been removed from the ecosystem, these stands have, in many areas, been replaced by

younger pine and Douglas-fir trees (figure 1-28).

Figure 1-28. This graph

shows the general relation

between the different age

classes of trees over time

at low elevations. Large

trees have declined while

younger trees have

increased.

Large

Trees

Poles

Less 10

s and

Large

Today

Tree

Poles

Seed

Pre-Contact

Times

Seedlings

& Saplings

Saplin

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – FOREST TRENDS

Trend Number 7: Shifts in the ages and sizes of

trees — the trend at middle to high elevations.

Figure 1-29. The mountains

above the old Jocko Agency

in the southern part of the

Reservation show a clear

trend. On these mid- to

high-elevation slopes, fires

created a patchwork

during pre-European times.

As a consequence, there

were more young trees,

seedlings, and saplings in

this zone than there are

today.

Another trend is evident at mid to high elevations.

Here, stand replacing fires were the rule before European settlement. These fires created more

large openings, as the photo to the left shows (figure 1-29). Today, these higher slopes are

covered by a blanket of similarly aged, older trees. The mosaic of old and young stands present

in pre-European times are generally absent. Although logging has created new openings that

are now filled with young trees, the general trend is still toward larger trees in this zone (figure

1-30).

More60

Large

Trees

Poles

Seedlings

& Saplings

Large

Seed

s and

Tree

Poles

Pre-Contact

Times

Less

Figure 1-30. This graph

shows the general relation

between the different age

classes of trees over time

at mid to high elevations

where the land was

historically dominated by

stand-replacing fires.

Large trees have increased

in this zone.

Today

Sapli

ngs

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – FOREST TRENDS

Trend Number 8: Roads and other human developments have increased.

Figure 1-31. This area

northeast of Niarada

shows a pattern evident

throughout the

Reservation: roads have

increased dramatically.

Few of these roads end up

being closed, which has

serious consequences for

wildlife.

Road density, or the miles of roads per square mile have increased dramatically.

Less 5

Lar

Tre

198

197

196

195

194

193

Pre-Contact

Times

192

Miles of road

per sq. mile

199

More 45

191

Figure 1-33. This graph

shows the general trend in

road density over the last

century. Of all the

developments that occur

in the forest, roads have

some of the most serious

impacts for fish and

wildlife.

190

Figure 1-32. Roads generally

have more negative impacts

on fish and wildlife than the

logging itself, which can, in

fact, benefit many species.

When done properly, removing trees from a site through logging can enhance values for

wildlife and other resources. Roads, however, are another story. Roads increase access for

humans, thereby reducing security for big game and other animals. Roads also increase runoff

and sediment entering streams, which harms fish. Over the past century, road densities in nonwilderness forested acres on the Reservation have gone from zero to an average of about 6

miles of road per square mile of land (figures 1-31 through 1-33). For comparisons, the

unforested valley bottom with all its towns and farms has an average of 2 roads per square mile.

Today

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – FOREST TRENDS

The Implications and a Strategy

The trends described on the preceding pages are creating conditions quite different from those

that our plant and animal communities evolved with. The changes threaten biological diversity,

and ultimately, the health and stability of our forests, which in turn has profound implications

for Tribal culture. Whitebark pine, for example, a species of cultural and ecological significance,

has all but stopped reproducing cones because of fire exclusion policies and an introduced

(exotic) disease.

Losing fire as a process has affected the life histories and reproductive success of other

plants as well. It has caused reductions in nutrient cycling and unusually high accumulations

of biomass. It has reduced tree vigor, increased levels of insects and diseases, and caused

reductions in certain kinds of wildlife habitat.

Finally, the shifts described here have made the forest more susceptible to large and intense

wildfires and insect and disease epidemics. A fire that may have burned 300 acres during preEuropean times may burn 30,000 acres today. That is exactly what happened with the Red

Bench Fire in the North Fork of the Flathead in 1988. Large disturbances like the Red Bench

fire cause further damage to the ecosystem by adding to the general decline in overall diversity

and by jeopardizing water quality, fisheries, wildlife, and soils.

“Forest managers will

be continually challenged to make

commodity-producing

activities more

closely represent

natural processes.”

— Monnig and Byler,

Forest Ecologist

and Pathologist

1992

A plan for restoration

Without a change in management, extreme disturbance events will become inevitable. And

although the forests of the Flathead Reservation are not on the verge of collapse, the trends

suggest that, over the long term — say the next 25 to 50 years — our forests could face serious

problems, similar in magnitude to what the Forest Service is experiencing in the Blue

Mountains of Oregon. There, just like here, fire was excluded for a long period. Forest

ecologists have described the problems in the Blue Mountains to be of “catastrophic

proportions.” There the forest has seen a major

deterioration in visual quality, wildlife habitat,

water quality, and timber values.

Here on the Flathead Reservation, with the

number of people living in or adjacent to the

forest and with the current unnaturally high fuel

conditions, fire can no longer be expected to play

its historic role in ecosystem processes, at least

to the extent that it once did. While fire

suppression policies may change in some special

management zones, wildfires occurring in most

areas will have to be managed under existing

policies for the foreseeable future.

Still, the ecosystem management actions

contained in this plan — a combination of timber

harvest, pre-commercial and commercial thinning, and prescribed fire — are designed to

restore the forest, not all the way back to its preEuropean condition, but to move it in a more

ecologically sustainable direction, one that more

closely resembles the pre-European. In the

Elk and other big game

species should benefit

over the long term from

the actions contained in

this plan because forage

and thermal cover will

increase while open-road

densities will decrease.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – FOREST TRENDS

“…properly functioning forests proceed

through cycles of

succession and disturbance. If we would

conserve biological

diversity and ecological integrity, we must

allow for these cycles.

If we are to manage

these forests for a

variety of values and

simultaneously maintain forest ecological

integrity, we must

represent as closely

as possible these

cycles with our management activities.”

— Monnig and Byler,

Forest Ecologist

and Pathologist,

1992

Grand fir

words of Edward Monnig and James Byler, “[The] ecosystem approach is complicated by

changes in our forests since the early European settlement days and by an inability to fully

define pre-European conditions and processes. The changes in our forests over the past

century and the current societal demands on our forests make duplication of the pre-European

condition a virtual impossibility — even in areas reserved from commodity production. The

quest for healthy sustainable forests will require numerous approximations and continual

monitoring of effects.”

In the end, the best we can do is to strive to maintain and mimic important ecosystem

processes in order to arrest some of the more detrimental trends described on the preceding

pages. Besides providing the disturbances needed to maintain a healthy forest, the ecosystem

management approach will also maintain timber revenues and jobs for Tribal members.

A strategy that's both landscape-based and comprehensive

Ecosystem management challenges foresters, biologists, and the Tribal community at

large to take a broader view, to focus on the overall vegetative structure and composition of

an entire landscape rather than on the structure of isolated stands or the needs of individual

species (except for sensitive or threatened and endangered species). In the past, landscape

patterns were essentially unplanned. Management consisted of a collection of individual

activities, usually timber sales and fire suppression. These were normally well planned, but

the big picture was often neglected — in a sense, we were so busy looking at the trees, we often

lost sight of the emerging landscape pattern and how it was affecting other resources or

humans on a broader scale. Ecosystem management, however, begins with a landscape-level

plan. Individual activities develop from that.

Finally, it should be emphasized that moving toward a pre-European condition also

requires managing the forest road system. Restoring some of the pre-European vegetative

structures without managing road densities could have disastrous affects on both fish and

wildlife. Only by being comprehensive in our approach can ecosystem management succeed.

Managers must look at and analyze the effects of all human activities if we are to restore

healthy and sustainable forests to the Reservation.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – AD HOC GROUP

The Ad Hoc Group's View

Public Participation

From the beginning, the Tribal Council considered public participation crucial to the

development of a Tribal forest management plan. To that end, they appointed an ad hoc group

of Tribal members to advise the interdisciplinary or ID team. (The ID team is the group of

resource professionals charged with drafting the plan.) The Ad Hoc Group, the members of

which are listed below, represents a cross section of Tribal members interested in forest

management issues.

Forest Management Plan Ad Hoc Group

John Peter Paul

Matt “Buckskin” Michel

Maggie Goode

Doug Jackson

Pat Pierre

Thelma Niemeyer

John Stanislaw

Kendall Dupuis

Mark McDonald

Tom Orr

Rhonda Lankford

LeRoy O’Bennick

Clara Dumontier

From the beginning,

the Tribal Council

considered public

participation

crucial to the

development of a

Tribal forest management plan.

The ID Team met with the Ad Hoc Group several times. During the last meeting (which took

place over the course of three days), the ID team presented the concept of ecosystem

management and asked for direction from the Ad Hoc Group on a number of key management

issues. The group's recommendations are summarized below.

Ecosystem Management

• Ecosystem management is a sound approach to forest management and seems appropriate

here.

Disturbance and Vegetation

• Fire should be used as a management tool to enhance diversity while protecting human safety

and property. Manager-ignited and prescribed natural fires should be used where appropriate.

• Managers should consider varied levels of fire suppression based on the location of the fire,

the costs of suppression, and ecological factors.

• Managers should do underburning in the Nonlethal Fire Regime where needed.

• Managers should initiate interagency efforts to protect lives and property in the urban-forest

intermix. Fuel management is key in this zone.

• Burn, if possible, in the buffer zone to improve habitat diversity (but protect cultural sites from

fire).

• Clearcutting should be used as a management tool to mimic stand-replacing fires and in

situations where insect and disease problems make individual tree selection impractical.

• Managers should look for ways to reduce visual impacts from clearcuts by avoiding visually

sensitive areas, designing clearcuts in natural shapes, leaving islands and ribbons of trees

within clearcuts, and feathering the edges so the cuts look more natural. Rehabilitate existing

clearcuts so they look more natural as well.

Open cone of

western white pine

Wildlife and Diversity

• Wildlife and wildlife habitat is very important. Their protection should be given a high

priority.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – AD HOC GROUP

“Our forests are

vitally important to

who we are as a

people. The way we

manage them says a

lot about this Tribe.”

— Ad Hoc Group

Member, 1995

• Managers need to do a better job controlling grazing and balancing it with the needs of

wildlife.

• Grizzly bears should be protected.

Water and Fish

• The protection of water quality should be given the highest priority. Stream channels should

also be protected.

Culture

• Manage the forests in as natural way as possible; minimize the mark of humans.

• Use fire to improve berry production where appropriate.

• Lodgepole pine should be for Tribal member use only.

Scenery and Recreation

• Improve winter recreation opportunities.

Transportation

• There are too many roads; road densities should be reduced by approximately 50 percent.

When closing roads with gates, enforce the closures.

• Use Best Management Practices at all times when building and maintaining roads. Remove

roads completely after harvesting wherever possible.

• Use Timber Stand Improvement dollars to help control weeds along roads.

Grazing

• Some heavily impacted areas should be grazed less (grazing within the forest is acceptable

when properly managed).

Homesite Development

• The Tribes should use planning to minimize home building in wildlands and to mitigate

impacts where development does occur.

• Balance homesite development against other resource concerns.

Tribal Member Employment Opportunities

•

Lodgepole pine limb

and cones

Improve the opportunities for Tribal members to contract larger timber sales.

Increase the number of Tribal members employed in the woods.

Increase small business loans to enhance Tribal member business opportunities.

Keep more timber dollars in the Tribal community.

In addition to listening to the concerns and desires of the Ad Hoc the Tribes held five

scoping meetings around the Reservation and one public hearing in Pablo to gather public

input for the Forest Plan EIS. The ID Team also made presentations on the EIS and Forest Plan

to the Cultural Committees and Tribal Council and asked for their input throughout the

process.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

The Setting: The Flathead

Indian Reservation

Home of the Flathead Nation

The Flathead Indian Reservation, which makes up the lower quarter of the Flathead River

Basin, encompasses 1.3 million acres. About a third of that area, some 459,408 acres, is

forested. Most of these timbered acres are on the hills and mountains along the perimeter and

central portions of the Reservation and represent the bulk of the Tribal land base. Forest

communities range from dry ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir types to subalpine fir and alpine

larch.

The top of the Mission Range forms the eastern boundary of the Reservation. Its peaks vary

in elevation from six thousand feet at their northern end to ten thousand feet at McDonald Peak

in the middle of the range. The Rattlesnake Mountains, another high range, forms the southeast

boundary. The Reservation Divide, which reaches eight thousand feet in elevation, defines the

southwest boundary. The east edge of the Cabinet Mountains, where elevations reach seven

thousand feet, forms the Reservation’s western boundary. The northern boundary extends east

from these mountains, across Flathead Lake, to the Mission Range. All of these ranges are, for

the most part, heavily forested.

The sparsely timbered, low lying Salish Mountains stretch south from the

Reservation's north boundary to the central

part of the Reservation. This range separates two north-south valleys: the Mission

Valley to the east, and the more arid Little

Bitterroot River Valley to the west. Except

for riparian zones, these areas are generally

untimbered. Other principal valleys and basins

include Camas Prairie, Big Draw, Irvine Flats,

Sunny Slope, the Jocko Valley, and the Flathead

River Valley downstream from Dixon.

These Reservation valleys are generally flat;

some have low hills rising to thirty-five hundred

feet. All have wetlands and wooded riparian

areas. Where the Lower Flathead River leaves

the Reservation, the elevation is approximately

twenty-four hundred feet.

Geology

The Flathead Indian Reservation lies along the west

limb of the Rocky Mountains. Precambrian rocks of the

Belt Supergroup form the bedrock under virtually all of the

Reservation, and they are exposed in the mountain ranges, as well as

in many of the lower hills of the valleys. The major rock types include

argillite, siltite, quartzite, and limestone. Almost all of the forested acres are

underlain by these Precambrian rocks, which are fine grained, moderately

metamorphosed sediments which were deposited over one billion years ago. Belt

sediments are highly stable (they have low erosion potential) and they account for the

generally high stability of the Reservation's watersheds. Igneous rocks also occur but

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – THE SETTING

only in two areas: south of Hot Springs, and in the northwest corner of the Reservation. The

rocks in the latter area are volcanic in origin.

Over the last 100,000 years, Reservation landscapes have been extensively modified by

advances and recessions of glaciers. The most recent glacial advance, receded about 10,000

years ago and left unconsolidated surface sediments in many watersheds.

Unconsolidated glacial sediments found in forested watersheds:

1. Fine grained sediments deposited in Glacial Lake Missoula.

These materials are found to an elevation of approximately 4,150 feet across the Reservation

2. Glacial tills

These are clays and silts with interspersed gravels and boulders. They are found along the

east and west shore of Flathead Lake and in glaciated valleys

3. Glacial stream deposits

These are sands and gravels deposited by glacial streams, and are widely distributed on the

east half of the Reservation.

Soils

Top, an argillite outcropping. Argillite is one of

the more common rock

types underlying

Reservation forests.

These rocks were originally

laid down as mud in a

large lake or inland sea

over a billion years ago.

Bottom, a soil profile

showing volcanic ash

overlying a gravelly loam.

Reservation soils formed from residual and colluvial materials eroded from Belt rocks or in

materials deposited by glaciers, lakes, streams, and wind. Wind deposits include volcanic ash

from Cascade Range volcanoes in Washington and Oregon.

Since the glaciers receded, geologic conditions have been relatively stable. This is

suggested by the widespread distribution of 6,700-year-old Mt. Mazama volcanic ash in

forested drainages, well developed soil profiles on many glacial features, stable stream

channels, and stable slopes in forested watersheds. The volcanic ashes produce soils with very

high soil moisture holding capacity, high fertility, low strength, and high erodibility.

In many areas, soils formed in glacial till and are generally loamy and with moderate to

high quantities of boulders, cobbles, and gravels. Mountain and foothill soils are on steep

slopes and mostly well drained, with large amounts of broken rock. Rock outcrops are

common. In most of the valleys, the soils are deep and gently sloping. Most forest soils on the

Reservation are somewhat resistant to erosion by water. Some areas have groundwater levels

near the land surface.

Climate

The western half of the Reservation, which lies in the rain shadow of the Cabinet Mountains,

receives less precipitation than the east half — Camas Prairie is one of the driest areas in

Montana. Mean annual precipitation in the valleys ranges from twelve inches on the west side

of the Reservation to twenty inches or more on the east side.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – THE SETTING

The mountains are wetter, but the amount of moisture they receive differs greatly from east

to west. Annual precipitation in the Mission Mountains, the range with the heaviest precipitation,

reaches as much as one hundred inches, mostly in the form of snow. Typically the lower

mountains receive twenty to thirty inches (figure 1-34).

A moist, maritime influence from the Pacific

Ocean dominates the Reservation, especially

during winter months when low lying clouds

blanket the region. Precipitation falls on a fairly

regular basis throughout the year, although May

and June are about twice as wet as other months.

Forested watersheds receive over half of their

precipitation as winter or late spring snows, and the

hydrologic budgets in Reservation watersheds are

considered snow-dominated hydrologic regimes.

Rain events, which occur with greatest frequency in

the early summer and fall, add to the input of water

and modify the timing and magnitude of snowmelt

runoff.

Depending upon the density and structure of the

forest canopy, precipitation is either intercepted in the

forest canopy or lands on the ground. A percentage of

the snowfall intercepted by the canopy is lost back to the

atmosphere. Precipitation that falls to the forest floor as

snow accumulates as winter snowpack. As air temperature

increases during early spring, snowpack converts to

liquid water, and saturates the forest soil profile. Overland

flow is uncommon in forested watersheds due to the high levels

of moisture retained in the soil (although overland flow can occur

over frozen soils). Precipitation which infiltrates into the soil profile is

either taken up and transpired by vegetation or ends up in stream channels.

The vegetative growing cycle, and the corresponding need for plants to utilize

soil water, generally runs from May through September. During the early growing

season, there is adequate moisture for plants, but as the summer season progresses soil

moisture becomes limiting and most available soil moisture is consumed by vegetation.

Streamflows decrease as soil moisture levels drop. The permeability and depth of the soil

influence how rapidly soil moisture levels decrease. Deeper profiles usually hold higher levels

of soil moisture later into the summer season.

The mean annual temperature in the valleys is approximately 45° F. Winter temperatures

are fairly moderate, averaging about 27° F, thanks to the sheltering effect of the Mission

Mountains and the Continental Divide. Warm, southern

chinook winds occasionally moderate these systems, and

cold, arctic air masses can drop temperatures to below -20°

F for short periods.

A drier, continental climate dominates the Reservation

in July and August. Temperatures during these months

fluctuate from the high 70s to 90s in the valleys. The

growing season in the valleys lasts approximately one

hundred days and runs from May to September.

Figure 1-34. The map

(above) shows mean annual

precipitation in inches.

Sheltered portions of the

Mission Divide can receive

up to 100 inches of precipitation a year. Reservationwide, about half of the

moisture falls as snow.

Thunderstorms (left) are

not uncommon from midJuly to September.

Lightning from these

storms starts most of the

wildfires on the Reservation.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – THE SETTING

Vegetation: an Overview

The forests of the Reservation are typical of the northern Rocky Mountain region (figure 1-35).

Ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, western larch, lodgepole pine, grand fir, Engelmann spruce,

subalpine fir, whitebark pine, and alpine larch are the most common trees. Common shrubs

include snowberry, spiraea and ninebark. Wheatgrasses, fescues, pine grass, and introduced

bluegrasses compose most of the grasses. River floodplains support ponderosa pine, Rocky

Mountain juniper, Douglas-fir, black cottonwood, aspen, paper birch, willow, alder, dogwood,

rose, and snowberry. Willows, alder, aspen, dogwood, cattails, meadow grasses, and sedges

dominate wetlands.

Figure 1-35. A generalized

distribution of forest trees

on the Reservation (after

Pfister et al. 1977). The

arrows show the relative

elevational range of each

species; the solid portion

of each arrow indicates

where a species is the

potential climax and the

dashed portion shows

where it is seral.

Eighteen plant species on the Flathead Reservation have been identified as Plant Species

of Special Concern by the Montana Natural Heritage Program. A few of them have been

surveyed on Tribal lands and continue to be monitored. Others have not been seen in recent

years, and there is a high probability that some of these have been extirpated.

Two plants are being considered for listing under the Endangered Species Act by the US

Fish and Wildlife Service. They are the Spalding’s campion (also known as Spalding's

catchfly) and the clustered lady’s-slipper, although neither occur in forests. The U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service has proposed listing Spalding’s campion as threatened pursuant to the

Endangered Species Act. The species is currently known from a total of 52 populations, nine

of which are in western Montana. It is threatened by a variety of factors including habitat

destruction and fragmentation from agricultural and urban development, grazing and trampling by domestic livestock and native herbivores, herbicide treatment, and competition from

nonnative plant species. A wetland plant, water howellia, is listed as threatened by the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service pursuant to the Endangered Species Act. It grows in glacial potholes

and former river oxbows that flood in spring but usually dry out by late summer.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – THE SETTING

The Tribes

Elders of the Salish, Pend d’Oreille, and Kootenai people tell of the time when Coyote and

other animal-people who prepared the world for the human beings, who were yet to come.

Coyote destroyed the Na¸isqñliÏ — the Ones Who Ate Human Beings. As the signs of his

deeds, he left behind countless landmarks, a sacred landscape that tribal people have related

through traditional stories for millennia. The stories emphasize the interdependence of all

living organisms and remind us that animals came first to this earth and are the cradle of our

existence. The stories continue to inform our relations with the land, the plants, and the

animals.

Although each of the tribes on the Reservation is culturally unique and has its own belief

system, they are similar in at least two respects: each possesses a thorough knowledge of the

natural environment and each has a profound respect for all of creation. Both traits enabled

the Tribes to live sustainably within the forest and valleys for thousands of years.

The profound age of tribal inhabitance of the region is suggested by the numerous Tribal

legends that closely parallel geological descriptions of the end of the last ice age: the draining

of glacial Lake Missoula, the retreat of the glaciers, the establishment of a more temperate

seasonal regime. The millennia of habitation, experience, and observation resulted in an

intimate connection between people and place and a depth of understanding that is often

difficult for non-Indians to appreciate.

The Salish, Pend d’Oreille, and Kootenai practiced a cyclical way of life based on the

harvest and seasonal abundance of a tremendous variety of fish, game, and plants (for both

food and medicinal uses, as well as material culture). This way of life was suffused with a

spiritual tradition in which the people, both as individuals and collectively, respected and

sought help from the animals, plants, and other elements of the natural environment. In many

aspects of their mode of subsistence, our ancestors sought to conserve resources for future

generations. They never wasted anything, but took only took what they needed and only

harvested and hunted at the appropriate times. Their efforts were rewarded. Today's generations

of Tribal members enjoy clean water and clean air and animals like wolves, grizzly bears,

wolverine, lynx, cougars, and eagles — species absent from much of the rest of North America.

The Salish, Pend d’Oreille,

and Kootenai harvested a

tremendous variety of

plants for both food and

medicinal uses, as well as

their material culture.

The Tribes regularly lit

fires to alter both the

structure and

composition of the forest

to improve hunting and

camping and other

aspects of their lives.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – THE SETTING

Hunters sought many

different forest animals,

but deer and elk were

mainstays. The meat was

then dried, as shown here,

while hides were prepared

for robes and buckskins.

These Tribal ways of life continue to this day. Indeed, Tribal people are today a physical

manifestation of the hopes, prayers, and dreams of Tribal ancestors and elders. This is true

because of the place of honor Tribal elders hold in Salish, Pend d’Oreille, and Kootenai

culture and because of the knowledge that traditionally passes between the generations of the

Tribes on an individual and community level. In other words, there is continuity between the

beliefs and actions of the past and those of today. That continuity is reflected in the values and

goals contained in this forest plan, a plan that emphasizes restoration of the forest over the

economic returns it could provide. For the Salish, Pend d’Oreille, and Kootenai people, it is

a matter of trading short-term economic gain for long-term cultural survival. They believe the

beauty and sacredness of pure water and an uncluttered view of mountain peaks can not be

measured by monetary or legal standards and is a cultural value in and of itself. It is these

traditional values—in essence, viewing the land in a spiritual way—that distinguish this plan

from other forest plans.

Because of this spiritual relationship, many of the ways in which the Salish, Pend d’Oreille,

and Kootenai traditionally use the forest are not discussed in this plan. It is not culturally

appropriate to casually or publicly discuss specific spiritual traditions and beliefs in a

document such as this.

Salish

On the Flathead Reservation, the designation “Salish” refers to Salish-speaking people,

including the Bitterroot Salish, the Lower Pend d'Oreille, the Upper Pend d’Oreille ,

Spokane, and Coeur d'Alene Indians who settled on the Reservation. Elders say that these and

other tribes were once one Salish-speaking tribe. Thousands of years ago this ancestral tribal

group divided into a number of different bands that later became tribes and occupied much

of the Northwest, from Montana to the Pacific Coast. The various bands of the Salish and Pend

1 The Pend d'Oreille, both Upper and Lower, are also known as the Kalispel.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – THE SETTING

d'Oreille traditionally occupied a vast territory ranging from Yellowstone and the Three Forks

country to the Musselshell and Sun River and throughout the valleys of what is now Western

Montana — the Flathead, Clark Fork, Big Hole, and Bitterroot.

The Salish believe that Creation consists not only of humankind, but of everything in the

animal world, the mineral world, and the plant world. Even the elements and the forces of

nature are part of Creation. Each has a spirit that we must respect and love.

Before the time of the Reservation, the Salish tribes gained subsistence from a tribal system

of hunting, fishing, and harvesting that utilized all parts of the forest. The quest for food began

in the early spring when the people started harvesting plants from the forest for shelter, tools,

food, medicine, and other purposes. They fished year-round in forest streams and lakes. In

summer and fall, they hunted and picked berries: first strawberries and serviceberries, later

huckleberries, raspberries, chokecherries, and hawthorn berries. They also harvested

mushrooms, barks, and roots. They made annual trips to the tops of the mountains to gather

pine nuts from whitebark pine stands. In the fall, the men concentrated more on hunting. They

hunted many different forest animals, but deer and elk were mainstays. Meanwhile, the women

dried the meat and prepared hides for robes and buckskins. They spent the winter months

trapping and fishing. Women repaired clothing and sewed new garments from deer and elk

skins. They decorated their work with porcupine quills colored with natural dyes.

The forest provided not only food, but also material for lodges, tools, clothing, and games.

The Salish made lodge frames from lodgepole pine and coverings from elk and buffalo hides.

They fashioned tools such as needles, mauls, and grinding stones from wood, bone, and rock.

Kootenai

Before contact with non-Indians, the

Kootenai Nation numbered over ten

thousand and inhabited what is now

eastern British Columbia, the southern

half of Alberta, northern Idaho, eastern

Washington and Montana. The

Kootenai band that now lives in the

Dayton area called itself the “Fish

Trap People,” a name that comes

from their practice of setting traps in

the creeks during large fish runs.

The Kootenai moved seasonally

over a large territory. The seasonal

round started in the early spring when

they travelled to their fishing grounds

to catch bull trout and cutthroat trout,

salmon, sturgeon, and whitefish. They

also set traps and weirs in streams.

In early May, as the fishing season

came to a close, the root harvest began.

From mid to late summer the Kootenai

harvested serviceberries, chokecherries,

huckleberries, and other fruits. When

Salish bands lived in

valleys throughout the

Reservation and made

extensive use of

woodlands and forests.

They also lit fires

regularly to alter both the

structure and composition of the forest to

improve hunting and

camping and other

aspects of their lives.

Ponderosa pine

woodlands and parklands

near streams and lakes in

the valley bottoms often

served as important

camping areas for the

Kootenai.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION – THE SETTING

The Kootenai band that

lived in the Dayton area

lived in woodlands and

forests. They managed

forest vegetation with fire

as did the Salish.

fall approached they organized communal deer drives, caching surplus meat for winter. Deer were

the most accessible and abundant of the game animals, and deer meat was one of the most essential

foods, but the Kootenai also hunted elk, moose, caribou, buffalo, mountain sheep, bear, and birds

such as grouse, geese, and ducks.

The Kootenai lived in skin and mat-covered tepees (the latter woven from tulle and

dogbane) and used canoes to transport family and gear, and to fish.

In the words of Naida Lefthand: “It is important that we, as Tribes, preserve the lands of

our Reservation and monitor the activities on all of our aboriginal territories.

“The land, Mother Earth, is what provides the food for Indian people. The pure water and

air of these lands support the people and the fish and wildlife. Clean water and air is also

important to the growth of plants, the roots and berries of which are used by many of the Indian

people. Religiously significant areas must be preserved for present-day religious practices.”

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

Chapter 2: The Resources –

Their Status, Use, and

Management

Forest-wide Resource Descriptions

In this section, we describe the use and management of resources on a forest-wide scale. We

also outline forest-wide policies, objectives, and management strategies.

Topics included in this section

1. Disturbance and Vegetation

2. Wildlife and Diversity

3. Water and Fisheries

4. Culture

5. Scenery and Recreation

6. Transportation

7. Air Quality

8. Grazing

9. Minerals

Pygmy Nuthatch

(in feeding position)

Each resource description includes: (a) a narrative of the pre-European condition (when

applicable), (b) the existing condition, and (c) objectives and management strategies (figure

2-1).

Description of

Pre-Contact

Condition

Description of

Existing Conditions

Description

Proposed

Policies,

of Policies,

Objectives, and

Objectives,

and

Management

Strategies

Figure 2-1. Resource

descriptions are divided

into three parts (except

where pre-European

descriptions are not

applicable, such as with

weeds or minerals).

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 4: THE RESOURCES

Disturbances and Vegetation

Disturbance: Natural and Human

Natural disturbances have

always played a major role

in shaping the structure

and composition of our

forests. They were

responsible for the overall

pattern of vegetation.

When this photo of the

Missions was taken earlier

in this century, the

pattern created by natural

fires was still evident;

openings created by fire

are marked.

While dozens of species of

exotic plants or weeds

have invaded Reservation

wildlands, a handful pose

serious threats to

wildlands, among them

spotted knapweed, leafy

spurge, and Canada

thistle.

Events that are described as disturbances generally cause significant change in a forest,

usually altering the way it functions (a recent burn, for instance, has a different role than an

old growth forest). Disturbances need not be a single large event however. Many small

disturbances can add up to cause a significant change in a forest. Disturbances can also be

natural or human caused. Natural disturbances include events like fire, insects and disease

outbreaks, floods, drought, windthrow, and storm damage. Human-caused disturbances

include timber harvesting, heavy grazing, the introduction of exotic species such as weeds,

and so on. The consequences of human disturbances can be similar to those caused by natural

forces or they can be of another magnitude, altering ecosystems in ways natural disturbances

seldom did.

A good example is weeds. Noxious plants are thoroughly established in many forested

areas of the Reservation. Their spread has reduced important wildlife habitat as well as land

productivity. Spotted knapweed is the predominant noxious plant, and it occurs on about 85

percent of the weed-infested acres. Other noxious plants that occupy extensive acreages

include sulfur cinquifoil, Dalmatian toadflax, leafy spurge, St. Johnswort and whitetop.

Smaller, but significant, infestations of thistle, hounds’s tongue, yellow toadflax, and Russian

and diffuse knapweeds are also present. Purple loosestrife has recently become established

and is a serious invader of wetlands.

In the past, the Tribes have adopted a tiered method to address noxious weeds on Tribal

lands. They utilize approaches that include species-specific objectives, control objectives

based on site or location of infestations, special management areas (such as the Tribal

Wilderness and Wilderness Buffer Zone) which require modification of general treatment

techniques and policies, and planning units based on watershed or political boundaries.

Treatment methods include prevention, manual control, mechanical control, biological

controls, and chemical controls.

Spotted Knapweed

Leafy Spurge

Canada Thistle

Weeds are an enormous disturbance factor today. During pre-European times, however,

fire was the most frequent disturbance, second only to climate in the influence it exerted over

the mosaic, structure, and composition of our forests. And while the affects of weeds are

mostly negative from a biological perspective, fires, which were both natural and humancaused, were usually beneficial. While fire can no longer play the role it once did, silvicultural

activities combined with prescribed fire can be designed to mimic natural fires. Timber sales

differ from burns in many ways, but logging remains one of the most powerful tools we have

to renew forests where large-scale fires are no longer an option. Of course, natural wildfire

as a disturbance will always be with us, regardless of how good our suppression efforts are.

A brief summary of pre-European Tribal burning practices follows.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 2: THE RESOURCES – FIRE

Fire Management in Pre-European Times

To learn about Indian burning practices, fire ecologist Steve Barrett interviewed 31 Tribal

elders and 27 non-Indian “pioneer” settlers in the late 1970s. Testimony from these individuals

and other research Barrett conducted indicated that the Salish, Kootenai, and Pend d’Oreille

used fire extensively, especially in low-elevation forests. Fire history studies and early

accounts and photos show that these stands were generally open and parklike, presumably

from the frequent occurrence of low-intensity fires that burned over large areas and reduced

fuels and understory vegetation. Other research conducted in the area suggests this type of

Indian burning has gone on for over 7,000 years.

Further evidence of frequent fires comes from the daily journal accounts of Jesuits living

in the Mission Valley. The fathers who were here during the latter part of the last century, make

frequent mention of fires and remark almost daily in August and September about the

extremely smoky conditions in the valley. Theodore Shoemaker who worked for the US Forest

Service in the early 1900s wrote that “Prior to 1897, and even later in many sections, fires

burned continuously from spring until fall without the slightest attempt being made to

extinguish them.” While not all of these fires were Indian set, research by Barrett and others

suggests that Salish and Kootenai people were responsible for as many as half of them in

frequently used valley areas and low-elevation forests. In other words, they doubled the

frequency of lightning caused fires (figure 2-2). Indians cited dozens of reasons for setting

fires: the main ones identified by Barrett and others include:

The reasons for setting fires

1. To maintain open stands to facilitate travel and clear routes through dense

timber.

“There is no question

that enormous areas

of the forests and

grasslands we inherited were very much

cultural landscapes,

shaped profoundly by

human action… The

wildlife communities

that characterized

these cultural landscapes… were in large

measure products of

thousands of years of

human intervention.

And it will take continued human intervention to maintain

them.”

— Doug MacCleary,

Landscape

Architect, 1995

2. To improve hunting by stimulating the growth of desirable grasses and

shrubs, to facilitate stalking, and to drive or surround game.

The dark bars show the mean fire intervals prior to

1860 for areas frequently used by Indians.

Mean Fire Interval (years)

The lighter bars show the same for areas used

infrequently.

Pair Number

Figure 2-2. Barrett sampled

ten pairs of old-growth

stands. One member of

each was on slopes above a

large valley and was

thought to be within a

major travel and occupation

zone. The other was on a

similar site but in a remote

area not used extensively

by Indians for camping or

travel. The results, right,

show that before 1860

frequently used stands had

a mean fire interval

(average interval between

fires) of 9.1 years; remote

sites had an interval of 18.2

years.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 2: THE RESOURCES – FIRE

3. To enhance the production of certain foods and medicine plants.

“This knowledge

(about Indian burning) can help us

understand why and

how our forests have

changed.”

— Doug

MacCleary,

Landscape

Architect, 1995

4. To improve horse grazing (after the 1700).

5. To clear campsite areas thereby reducing fire hazard and camouflage for

enemies, and cleaning up refuse.

6. To communicate by setting large fires.

7. To reduce insect pests.

Traditional Tribal burning continued until local non-Indian authorities put an end to it

around the turn of the century.

Frequent, low-intensity

fires lit by Indians kept

the forest open. The

practice explains why so

many journal accounts of

European settlers talk

about people being able to

ride horses or drive

wagons through the

forest — something that

would be impossible today

in most of those same

areas.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 2: THE RESOURCES – FIRE

The Reservation's Fire Regimes

The term fire regime refers to the kind of fire that typically occurs in an area and the effects

that that particular type of burning has on the vegetation. Fire regimes are described by fire

frequency (how often fires occur), fire intensity (whether the fires that burn are mostly surface

fires that burn ground vegetation or crown fires that burn ground vegetation as well as in the

canopy), and the pattern of vegetation that the fires create. We have identified four fire regimes

on the Reservation, which are shown in figure 2-3 as they occur on the face of the Mission

Range. Fire Regime A is the Nonlethal Fire Regime, Fire Regime B the Mixed Fire Regime,

Fire Regime C the Lethal Fire Regime, and Fire Regime D the Timberline Fire Regime.

Figure 2-3. The Reservation's four main fire

regimes as they occur on

the Mission face. They

include: Fire Regime A, the

Nonlethal FR; Fire Regime

B, the Mixed FR; Fire

Regime C, the Lethal FR;

and Fire Regime D, the

Timberline FR.

On the pages that follow we describe the Reservation's four main fire regimes and the

vegetation patterns that existed in each during pre-European times. We also describe the

vegetative changes that have taken place in each regime over the last 50 to 100 years. These

descriptions of past and present conditions are followed by the forest-wide policies and

objectives for fire management. Detailed fire regime maps for each landscape are presented

in Chapter 3. Table 2-1 shows the acres within each fire regime (with encroached acres

separated out from the rest of the Nonlethal Fire Regime) by availability class.

Fire Regime

Nonlethal Fire Regime

Encroached Timber

Encroached Woodland/Sod

Encroached Woodland/Parks

Non-lethal Fire Regime with

Encroached Acres

Mixed Fire Regime

Lethal Fire Regime

Timberline Fire Regime

Total

Available

Acres

Restricted

Acres

Unavailable

Acres

Total

35,583

13,772

16,017

3,889

3,625

725

818

329

5,505

2,790

1,715

101

44,713

17,287

18,550

4,319

70,034

77,185

86,034

3,535

236,013

5,497

15,637

33,413

2,463

57,011

10,111

29,849

79,264

47,161

166,384

89,961

122,671

198,711

53,159

512,567

Table 2-1. The acres within

each fire regime by

availability class.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 2: THE RESOURCES – FIRE

The Nonlethal Fire Regime

Summary

“Travelers often rode

horseback or pulled

wagons for miles

through these areas

without having to cut

trails.”

— Steve Arno,

Forest Ecologist,

1994

The Nonlethal Fire Regime occurs at low to mid elevations on mild slopes and dry southeast

to west aspects. The fires that occurred within this regime generally did not kill mature trees.

They were brief, low intensity fires that burned mostly grass and litter on the forest floor. They

occurred frequently, sweeping through stands every five to thirty years (figure 2-4), and many

were started by Indian people. They created a forest of large, old, mostly ponderosa pine trees

— many individual trees were from 200 to 600 years old. These stands were open and parklike

with few shrubs, understory trees, or downed logs. In most, the duff layer rarely exceeded

three inches.

Stands tended to be uneven-aged although the pattern was dominated by small clumps of

even-aged trees. Stands were also intermixed with fire-maintained grasslands and ponderosa

pine woodlands. Occasionally bark beetles killed patches of trees and allowed a new age class

to develop. Examples of the Nonleathal Fire Regime can be seen in Dry Fork, Jette, Stevens,

Seepay, and along the base of the Mission Range (figure 2-5).

Changes since 1900

Fires have been all but completely excluded within this fire regime. Stands have become

overgrown with dense Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine understories (commonly 200 to 2,000

small trees per acre beneath old-growth stands and between 2,000-10,000 trees per acre where

pine overstories have been removed). Duff mounds of 6 - 24 inches are not uncommon. When

duff piles like these burn, they girdle and kill even big trees. Because of the ladder fuels (fuels

that reach from the forest floor into the canopy), fires in this zone now burn as partial standreplacement or stand-replacement fires.

Figure 2-4 (above). A crosssection from a ponderosa

pine stump reveals old fire

scars that show an average

fire frequency of one fire

every 8.5 years.

Figure 2-5 (right). The large

photo shows where the

Nonlethal Fire Regime (Fire

Regime A) occurred within

the Missions. The far right

inset shows typical nonlethal

fire behavior. The left inset

shows the kind of stand

structure that frequent, lowintensity fires created.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 2: THE RESOURCES – FIRE

A Closer Look at the Nonlethal Regime

The Vegetation

This regime is characterized by low-elevation seral and climax

ponderosa pine and dry Douglas-fir types. Sites are typically on

hot and dry, south to west-facing slopes or cool and dry upland

ridges at low elevations.

Prior to 1900, low-intensity surface fires occurred frequently,

returning at intervals of from 5 to 30 years in most areas. The

majority of overstory trees survived the fires, while many of the

understory seedling and sapling-sized trees were killed. Consequently, these sites were generally maintained in a late seral,

parklike condition where large trees dominated (figure 2-6). Shrubs,

understory trees, and downed logs were sparse, as testified to by

dozens of historical photos and narrative accounts. Undergrowth

was composed primarily of fire-dependent grasses and forbs which

resprouted quickly after each burn. The most fire-resistant species

— ponderosa pine and western larch — were favored. Pine regeneration occurred whenever

overstory trees died, thereby creating small openings. Trees were often distributed in small evenaged clumps. Old pines and scattered Douglas-fir often had scars from numerous fires dating

back to the early 1600s. In addition to these parklike stands, woodland structures made up a

significant portion of the Nonlethal Fire Regime, and they still do. Woodlands are characterized

by widely scattered large ponderosa pine trees on very harsh sites. Bunchgrass and seral shrubs

make up the understory.

Figure 2-6. These sites

were generally maintained

in a parklike condition

where large trees

dominated.

The Fires

Recurrent lightning and native-set fires were usually nonlethal

ground fires (underburns) with moderate to high spread rates

(figure 2-7). They burned throughout the summer and early fall

over a long season of favorable burning weather. They may have

been quite large, especially where dry forests and adjacent

grasslands were extensive. However, in rugged mountainous

topography, these fires were confined to smaller areas, mostly

dry sites on south-facing slopes.

Stand replacement fires in this regime were rare, at intervals

of several hundred years, but did occur under extreme fire

weather conditions and when longer than normal fire-return

intervals allowed litter and understory fuels to build.

The Changes

Important changes have occurred in these forests since 1900 due to the interruption of frequent

burning. Reduced fire occurrence began in the late 1800s as a result of the relocation of Indians;

fuel removal by heavy grazing of livestock; the disruption of fuel continuity on the landscape

due to logging, cultivation and development; and the adoption of a full fire suppression policy.

Successful suppression of surface fires in open, fire-maintained stands over the last several

decades has increased the potential for catastrophic fires.

Figure 2-7. In rugged

mountainous topography,

nonlethal fires were

confined to small areas,

mostly dry sites on southfacing slopes.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 2: THE RESOURCES – FIRE

Many stands have an

altered stand structure and composition,

and a build up of

understory fuels, so

much so that it would

be difficult — if not

impossible — to

restore forest health

with prescribed fire

alone.

Figure 2-8. Today,

prescribed fire is the

obvious and most feasible

substitute for filling the

ecological role of nonlethal

wildfires.

The down-dead fuel loading in these cover types usually average 10-15 tons per acre, but

tends to increase with stand age as a result of increased needle cast and duff, accumulated

downfall from insect and disease damage, blowdown, and natural thinning. Overstory trees

have been removed over more than a century of logging, and this has aided the development

of thickets of small trees. On sites where ponderosa pine is seral, there has been a shift to

shade-tolerant species, like Douglas-fir. These successional changes have resulted in a build

up of understory or ladder fuels that now allow wildfires to escalate into stand-replacing

crown fires.

Today, prescribed fire is the obvious and most feasible substitute for filling the ecological

role of historic fires (figure 2-8). However, many stands now have an altered structure and

composition and a buildup of understory fuels that makes it difficult if not impossible to

restore forest health with prescribed fire alone.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 2: THE RESOURCES – FIRE

The Mixed Fire Regime

Summary

This fire regime was characterized by a combination of nonlethal and stand-replacing fires. Fire

frequency varied from 30 to 100 years, and individual fires could be either large or small in size.

Most burned over relatively long periods. Two patterns were typical. In the first, a stand might

experience nonlethal fires every 30 to 40 years and a stand-replacing fire every 150 to 400 years.

In the second, fires killed fire-susceptible species growing in the overstory (such as subalpine

fir), but left fire-resistant trees (like big larch, Douglas-fir, and ponderosa pine).

The Mixed Fire Regime created many small stands dominated by various age structures and

was therefore rich in its diversity (figure 2-9). Stands with open overstories of mature Douglasfir and larch were common, although there were also closed, young stands. The general pattern

could be described as a patchy mosaic. The regime occurs on low to mid elevations on all

slopes and all aspects. Examples can be found in the Garceau, Hellroaring, LaMoose areas and

across the Mission face (figure 2-10).

“Fires in the Mixed

Regime create lots of

patches, each with a

different susceptibility

to insects, diseases,

and fire. It's a bit like

the farmer who grows

several different crops.

If something goes

wrong with one, he's

still in business.”

— Forest Plan ID

Team member, 1995

Changes Since 1900.

Fire exclusion policies have allowed trees to become older and more dense in this regime.

There has also been a significant buildup of down woody material and ladder fuels. Recent

wildfires have burned as large, stand-replacement fires creating fewer and larger patches.

Figure 2-9 (above). The

mosaic above is typical of

that found in a Mixed Fire

Regime. The numbers

represent the year(s) an

individual stand was

established; the data is

from the North Fork of the

Flathead (Barrett et al.

1991).

Figure 2-10 (left). The lower

photo shows where the

Mixed Regime (Fire Regime

B) occurred within the

Missions landscape. The

delineated area within the

top left inset shows a

typical Mixed Fire Regime

mosaic on the Reservation.

The right inset shows one

kind of fire behavior that

occurs within the regime.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 2: THE RESOURCES – FIRE

Figure 2-11. Stand- and

partial stand-replacing

fires typically swept

through this zone about

every 100 to 200 years.

A Closer Look: The Mixed Fire Regime

The Vegetation

This regime is characterized by moist Douglas-fir stands and occurs on most aspects in the

3,000 to 6,500 foot elevation range. Douglas-fir is both the indicated climax species and a

vigorous member of seral communities. It is not uncommon for Douglas-fir to dominate all

stages of succession on these sites.

Fires maintained a diverse pattern of forest vegetation of varying ages, compositions, and

health that was shaped by fuels, topography, and climate. Stand- and partial stand-replacing

fires typically swept through this zone about every 100 to 200 years, but lower intensity blazes

that created small openings of burned understory vegetation and that killed only a few trees

occurred as often as every 20 to 30 years (figure 2-11).

The fires generally killed overstory trees in an irregular pattern as a result of lethal heating

at the ground level or fire moving into the crowns of individual trees. The result was a mosaic

pattern of various shaped patches of live, mixed-seral forest, and openings occupied by dead

trees or even-aged regeneration. Lightning and native-set fires most likely spread over

periods of weeks or months in these mixed conifer forests, so burns often covered large areas.

Patches were fine grained and had curved edges and a high degree of internal structural

diversity (snags, islands of residual trees, etc.).

The uneven burning pattern in the Mixed Fire Regime was probably enhanced by the

pattern from previous burns and complex mountain topography.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 2: THE RESOURCES – FIRE

The Fires

Fire severity in this regime was variable; anywhere

from 10 percent to 90 percent of the trees within a

stand could have been killed, depending on the type

of fire (figure 2-12). Three types of fires were at

work: nonlethal underburns like those that dominated

the Nonlethal Fire Regime; stand-replacing fires

identical to those of the Lethal Fire Regime; and

fires that were a hybrid of these two types (figure 213). How a fire behaved depended on slope, aspect,

fuel conditions, and both short and long-term climatic

cycles. Steep, northerly slopes probably showed the

greatest tendency toward stand-replacement

behavior, while gentle, south-facing slopes tended

to have more nonlethal fires. The remaining sites,

steep south slopes and gentle north slopes, probably

experienced a blend of the two behaviors.

The Changes

Stands within this fire regime have undergone significant changes in recent decades. As a

result of fire exclusion, the trees have become older, and often have a build up of down woody

or ladder fuels. Fuel loadings average 10 to 12 tons per acre but can range as high as 75 tons

per acre (downed dead fuels tend to accumulate over time in these stands). The most hazardous

conditions occur in well-stocked stands with dense, Douglas-fir understories.

Fire’s role as a stand-replacement agent becomes more pronounced with fire exclusion,

unless corresponding fuel reduction activities occur. Recent wildfires have burned as large

stand-replacement fires. Continued fire exclusion will move these communities even further

toward a long-interval, Lethal Fire Regime which will decrease vegetation diversity and

reduce values for wildlife habitat, watershed protection, and esthetics.

Figure 2-12. As the name

suggests, fire behavior in

the Mixed Fire Regime is

variable and includes both

nonlethal and lethal fires.

Figure 2-13. A typical

pattern produced by a fire

in the Mixed Fire Regime.

Burned areas can be

relatively small with

patches of live trees. This

mosaic—areas with lots of

edge and many small

patches is valuable habitat

for many wildlife species,

especially birds.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 2: THE RESOURCES – FIRE

The Lethal Fire Regime

Summary

“Although some might

argue that wildfires

can be suppressed

indefinitely with modern fire-fighting technology, a dispassionate view of the fire

record in these forests

shows that we are only

postponing the inevitable… This situation

is like holding water

behind a leaky dam. We

can either draw the

water down gradually,

or we can wait for the

dam to break.”

— Monnig and Byler,

Forest Ecologists,

1992

Figure 2-14. The large photo

shows where the Lethal Fire

Regime (Fire Regime C)

occurred within the

Missions landscape. The

inset (top left) shows the

ladder fuels that give rise to

the all-consuming fires that

characterize this zone. The

right inset shows a standreplacing blaze.

Stand-replacing fires killed most if not all the trees where they occurred, although the size and

intensity of the fire varied with topography, fuels, and burning conditions. Some fires

consumed thousands of acres in a uniform way, others created a complicated mosaic that

consisted of stand replacing burning mixed with patches of unburned or lightly burned timber.

Stand replacement intervals are generally long — from 70 to 500 years — and probably varied

with climatic cycles.

Stands occur on steep, mid- to high-elevation slopes and were composed of grand fir,

Douglas-fir, lodgepole pine, western redcedar, subalpine fir, and spruce. They were dense and

typically contained substantial amounts of downed woody material and ladder fuels. The size

of fires varied. Large fires occurred on more gentle slopes and plateaus while smaller fires

burned in rugged mountain terrain where slopes and aspects created a variety of vegetative

conditions. Where fires occurred relatively frequently, they created numerous open areas

dominated by seral shrub species which provided forage for wildlife. Examples of the Lethal

Fire Regime can be seen at Dog Lake, Boulder, the South Fork of the Jocko, and midway up

Revais Creek and the Mission face (figure 2-14).

Changes since 1900.

Because of the low frequencies of fire within this regime, this zone has been altered less by

fire exclusion policies than other fire regimes. However, our policy of keeping fires at bay has

decreased the number of large openings, increased the age of trees, and allowed stands to

become denser and more susceptible to insect and disease epidemics and unusually large

stand-replacement fires.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 2: THE RESOURCES – FIRE

Figure 2-15. Fire return

intervals ranged from

about 70 years in lowerelevation lodgepole pine

forests to 300-500 years

in upper-elevation subalpine

types.

A Closer Look at the Lethal Fire Regime

The Vegetation

At lower to mid elevations this regime was characterized by grand fir/western redcedar and

Douglas-fir/larch types. At upper elevations subalpine fir, spruce, and whitebark pine types

dominated.

The warm, moist grand fir and western redcedar habitat types occurred in valley bottoms,

riparian areas, benches, and protected exposures (many tree species can occupy these sites, but

grand fir and western redcedar are commonly the climax species). Elsewhere at these

elevations, western larch, Engelmann spruce, lodgepole pine, and Douglas-fir were a major

component of seral stands (figure 2-15). Subalpine fir, lodgepole pine, and whitebark pine

occurred at mid to upper elevations, the latter on cold, wetter sites. Undergrowth is

characterized by a rich variety of moisture-loving herbs and shrubs.

Though fires killed trees over large areas (from 25 to 500 acres in fir types and from 100

to 10,000 acres in lodgepole stands), relatively small, partially burned or unburned areas were

produced by rugged mountainous topography that contained contrasting site types, microclimates, and vegetation. Patches of surviving trees were generally limited to moist, protected

areas, or places where fuels were lighter and more discontinuous.

The Fires

Fire return intervals ranged from about 70 years in lower-elevation lodgepole pine forests to

more than 400 years in upper-elevation subalpine types. The range is broad because the fires

themselves depended on a combination of chance factors such as drought, lightning, and wind.

In a stand-replacing fire, over 90 percent of the trees in a stand are generally killed.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 2: THE RESOURCES – FIRE

Fuels, stand structure, species composition, and forest health play a

critical role in the behavior of fire in this regime. Predominant climax

tree species, extensive ladder fuels, dense canopies, and high levels of

downed/dead fuels (from stand age, insect epidemics, root rots, blowdown, or previous fires) is required to allow a fire to sustain itself and

spread with torching or to change into a running crown fire.

Fuels are typically greater than 25 tons per acre and result from

accumulated deadfall and natural thinning (2-17). Soils and fuels are

moist or wet much of the year. The typically high humidity of these moist

sites usually mitigates the fire hazard under normal weather conditions.

A combination of deep duff and large amounts of dead, rotten fuel can

result in severe surface fires during unusually dry moisture conditions

(figure 2-16). Where dense understories exist, fires easily spread to the

tree crowns and destroy the stand.

The Changes

Figure 2-16. Fire return

intervals ranged from about

70 years in lower-elevation

lodgepole pine forests to

400 years in upperelevation subalpine types.

Figure 2-17. Fuel loadings in

this fire regime can be

dramatic. Fires that burn

through these materials

during dry seasons can

damage soils. Regeneration

suffers as a result.

Because of the low frequency of fire, this regime probably shows the

influence of fire exclusion policies less than the Nonlethal or Mixed

Regimes. Nevertheless, fire history studies suggest that fire suppression

has allowed large areas to develop into denser stands with higher

susceptibility to insect and disease epidemics and even larger standreplacement fires. At the same time, lodgepole pine and other seral

plants are being replaced by thickets of shade-tolerant species.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 2: THE RESOURCES – FIRE

The Timberline Fire Regime

Summary

This fire regime is similar in nature to the Mixed Fire Regime found at mid to low elevations

except that it is found at the highest elevations on the Reservation, in whitebark pine habitat

types (the regime also occurs slightly lower in some lodgepole types). It experienced both

infrequent nonlethal underburns and rare, large, stand-replacement fires. It generally occurs

where terrain is rocky and rugged and where dry south and west-facing slopes are bordered by

cool and moist north slopes, so fires generally had a patchy pattern. Fire frequencies varied from

30 to 500 years.

Mountain pine beetle epidemics periodically killed older whitebark pine trees, and those

dead trees and ladder fuels from young subalpine fir and Engelmann spruce trees increased the

number and size of fires in the regime. Examples can be found on Moss Peak and the upper

portions of Agency Creek, the Mission Range, and the Ninemile Divide (figure 2-18).

How the Timberline Regime has changed since 1900.

The loss of whitebark

pine is particularly

unfortunate here on

the Reservation

because at one time

whitebark pine nuts

were used extensively

by the Tribes. The

nuts were also important to wildlife. They

were a primary food

for over forty species,

including grizzly bears.

Fire exclusion policies have been especially effective in this regime. These policies and white

pine blister rust, an introduced disease that kills cone-bearing limbs and young trees, have

caused whitebark pine to decline. Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir — both less fire resistant

— have replaced it. The loss of whitebark pine is particularly unfortunate because whitebark

pine nuts were used extensively by Tribal people and wildlife (figure 2-20).

Figure 2-18. The large photo

shows where the Timberline

Fire Regime (Fire Regime D)

occurred within the Missions Landscape. The two

insets show, from left to

right, the upper elevations

of the Mission Range, which

is typical whitebark pine

habitat, and a whitebark

pine tree.

FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 2: THE RESOURCES – FIRE

Figure 2-19. A typical

whitebark pine stand. Both

stand-replacing and

nonlethal fires shaped this

regime. Fires have largely

been removed from this

ecosystem.

A Closer Look at the Timberline Regime

The Vegetation

This fire regime consists of high-elevation forests near and at treeline. Subalpine fir or

mountain hemlock are the indica

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.