# FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/tribal%3Aconfederated_salish_and_kootenai%3A1bceb68cb9b5c7e3

## Record

- **Collection:** Tribal code
- **Document type:** Tribal code

## Text

FLATHEAD INDIAN
RESERVATION
FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

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
©2000 CSKT

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 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

1

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.

2

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),

3

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

4

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.

5

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

6

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

7

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

8

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.

9

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.

10

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.

11

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.

12

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.

13

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.

14

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?”

15

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

16

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.

17

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.

18

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

19

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.

67
64
61
58
55
52
49
46
43
40

Reference Variability

Time
Recommended Management Variability (RMV)

20

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.

67
64
61
58
55
52
49
46
43
40

Recommended Mgt
Variability

RV

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.
21

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

22

J NM M

Desired Condition
O%

Obviously, the world
has changed in
countless ways since
pre-European times,
and we can't recreate
what was here before.

S

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.

23

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.

24

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

25

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.

26

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.

27

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.

28

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).

1

2

3

5

0 - 4.9"

5 - 8.9"

9 - 20.9"

>21"

H

L

3/3

3/3

G

K

2/2
2/3

2/2
2/3

F

J

1/1
2/2
2/3

2/2
2/3

E

I

3/3

3/3

D
3
> 70%
canopy
closure

0/2
2/2
2/3

0/2
2/2
2/3

C
2
40 - 70%
canopy
closure

0/2
2/2

0/2
2/2

B
2/3

1
0 - 39%
canopy
closure

2/3
0/3

A1
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

A2
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.

29

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.

30

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.).

31

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.

32

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.

33

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.

34

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.
60

60

50

Increasing Acres

50

40

40

Forests

30

Meadows &
Grasslands

20

30
20
10

10

0

0
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.

35

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.

36

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.
60

Percent of Forest

60
50
40

50

Ponderosa Pine

40
30

30
20

20

Douglas Fir

10

10

0

0
1945

1945

1981

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.

37

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.

60

60

50

50

40

40

30
20

20

10

10

0

0

1900

38

30

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.

45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

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.

39

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.

More

60

60

50

50

40

40

Large
Trees

30

30

Poles

20

20

10

Less 10

40

50

s and

90
19

19

80

70
19

0

Large

Today

Tree

s

Poles
Seed

60
19

19

19

40

30
19

19

Pre-Contact
Times

20

10
19

19

00

Seedlings
& Saplings

Saplin

gs

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).

60

More60

40

Large
Trees

40
30

30

Poles

20

20
10

10

Seedlings
& Saplings

0

Large

Seed

60

s and

90
19

19

80

70
19

19

19

50

40
19

Tree

s

Poles

30
19

19

Pre-Contact
Times

20

10
19

19

00

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.

50

50

Today

Sapli

ngs

41

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.

40
35
30
25
20
15
10
Less 5

Lar
ge
Tre
es
20
00

198
0

197
0

196
0

195
0

194
0

193
0

Pre-Contact
Times

192
0

Miles of road
per sq. mile

199
0

42

45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

More 45

191
0

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
0

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.

43

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

44

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.

45

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

46

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

47

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.

48

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.

49

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.

50

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

[Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.]

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/tribal%3Aconfederated_salish_and_kootenai%3A1bceb68cb9b5c7e3. Public record. Not legal advice.