red rock lakes nwr report on wilderness character monitoring€¦ · frequency of low-flying planes...

RED ROCK LAKES NWR REPORT ON WILDERNESS CHARACTER MONITORING

November 2011 Red Rock Lakes Wilderness

A Product of the FWS National Wildlife Refuge System

Wilderness Fellows Program

Prepared by Erin D. Clark, Wilderness Fellow

Wilderness.net Webmaster

This document is part of the Wilderness Character Toolbox on http://www.wilderness.net/toolboxes/

Red Rock Lakes NWR Report on Wilderness Character Monitoring

Page 1

Report on Wilderness Character Monitoring R E D R O C K L A K E S N A T I O N A L W I L D L I F E R E F U G E

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1

BACKGROUND 4

RED ROCK LAKES NWR STAFF 6

SELECTING WCM MEASURES AT RED ROCK LAKES NWR 8

WILDERNESS CHARACTER MONITORING MEASURES 10

Untrammeled ......................................................................................................................................................10

Indicator: Actions authorized by refuge manager that manipulate the biophysical environment .............10

Measure 1. Percent of natural fire starts that are manipulated within the boundaries of wilderness ...10

Measure 2. Acres of prescribed burning .......................................................................................................11

Measure 3. Number of water bodies with fish restoration efforts .............................................................11

Measure 4. Number of water bodies where fish trapping and/or gamete collecting occurred ............12

Measure 5. Number of man hours surveying and treating non-native, invasive plants ...........................12

Measure 6. Number of non-wildlife AUMs ....................................................................................................13

Measure 7. Number of animals handled .......................................................................................................14

Measure 8. Date Lower Red Rock Lake water gate closed ........................................................................15

Indicator: Actions not authorized by the Federal land manager to manipulate the biophysical environment ..............................................................................................................................................................................15

Measure 9: Number of miscellaneous unauthorized actions ........................................................................15

Natural .................................................................................................................................................................17

Indicator: Plant and animal species and communities .....................................................................................17

Measure 10. Number of plant, non-indigenous, invasive species ...............................................................17

Measure 11. Number of non-plant, non-indigenous, invasive species .......................................................18

Measure 12. Number of federally listed threatened or endangered species .........................................18

Measure 13. Number of extirpated, indigenous species ............................................................................19

Measure 14. Number of active trumpeter swan nests .................................................................................19

Measure 15. Number of trumpeter swan cygnets ........................................................................................20

Measure 16. Total population of trumpeter swans ......................................................................................20

Measure 17. Number of Shiras moose ..........................................................................................................21

Measure 18. Number of cormorant nests ......................................................................................................22

Measure 19. Percent of water bodies meeting SAV objectives .................................................................22

Measure 20. Number of water bodies with spawning Arctic grayling populations ................................23

Indicator: Physical Resources..............................................................................................................................23

Measure 21. Air quality ..................................................................................................................................23

Measure 22. Number of wilderness water bodies with flow impacted by roads ....................................24

Measure 23. Winter lake oxygen level ........................................................................................................24


Page 2

Indicator: Biophysical processes ........................................................................................................................25

Measure 24. Number of avalanches..............................................................................................................25

Undeveloped ......................................................................................................................................................26

Indicator: Non-recreational installations, structures, and developments .......................................................26

Measure 25. Miles of fence ............................................................................................................................26

Measure 26. Miles of powerline.....................................................................................................................27

Measure 27. Number of research structures and equipment installed ......................................................27

Measure 28. Number of bird nesting structures ...........................................................................................28

Indicator: Inholdings ............................................................................................................................................29

Measure 29. Number of inholdings ................................................................................................................29

Indicator: Use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment, and mechanical transport ....................................29

Measure 30. Uses of motorized boats or airboats ......................................................................................29

Measure 31. Miles of fence installed or repaired using mechanized equipment ....................................30

Measure 32. Miscellaneous authorized uses .................................................................................................30

Measure 33. Number of unauthorized uses ..................................................................................................31

Measure 34. Number of emergency uses......................................................................................................32

Indicator: Loss of statutorily protected cultural resources...............................................................................32

Measure 35. Number of disturbances of cultural resources ........................................................................32

Solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation ........................................................................34

Indicator: Remoteness from sights and sounds of people inside the wilderness ..........................................34

Measure 36. Miles of improved trail .............................................................................................................34

Measure 37. Acres of contiguous wilderness ................................................................................................34

Indicator: Remoteness from occupied and modified areas outside the wilderness .....................................35

Measure 38. Miles of road on wilderness boundaries ................................................................................35

Measure 39. Frequency of low-flying planes ...............................................................................................35

Indicator: Facilities that decrease self-reliant recreation ...............................................................................36

Measure 40. Number of refuge maintained facilities .................................................................................36

Measure 41. Number of recreational signs ..................................................................................................37

Measure 42. Number of developed campsites adjacent to wilderness ....................................................37

Indicator: Management restrictions on visitor behavior ..................................................................................38

Measure 43. Number of restrictions on visitor behavior ..............................................................................38

CONSIDERED, UNIMPLEMENTED MEASURES 39

Measure A. Number of hunter use days ........................................................................................................39

Measure B. Instances of livestock trespass ....................................................................................................39

Measure C. Willow browse .............................................................................................................................39

Measure D. Night sky brightness ....................................................................................................................40

Measure E. Noise pollution ..............................................................................................................................40

Measure F. Number of ibis ..............................................................................................................................40

Measure G. Number of impounded bodies of water ..................................................................................40

Measure H. Number of bio-controls used ......................................................................................................40

Measure I. Aspen regeneration ......................................................................................................................41

Measure K. Miles of cherry-stemmed road ...................................................................................................41

CONCLUSIONS 42


Page 3

Frozen Lower Red Rock Lake in early November 2011.

DOCUMENTS CONSULTED 45

APPENDICES 46

Priority ranking of measures ..............................................................................................................................46

Effort required for wilderness character monitoring.......................................................................................49

Wilderness Fellow effort per measure ..........................................................................................................49

Refuge staff effort ...........................................................................................................................................51

Miscellaneous Wilderness Fellow Effort.........................................................................................................51

Detailed description of data sources and how the data were gathered ....................................................52


Page 4

BACKGROUND

Red Rock Lakes was established as a national wildlife refuge on April 22, 1935 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The refuge was established to protect critical trumpeter swan (Cygnus buccinator) breeding habitat and to conserve a rare montane wetland ecosystem. At the time of establishment, Red Rock Lakes was one of the last known breeding location for trumpeter swans in the lower 48 United States. The refuge was also acknowledged as the foremost breeding, nesting, and resting place for migratory waterfowl within the state

of Montana. Red Rock Lakes National Wildlife Refuge is situated at the eastern end of Centennial Valley, a 60-mile long east-west valley in southwestern Montana. Its southern edge is demarcated by the Centennial Mountains. To the north it is bordered by unique sand hills, as well as the Snowcrest and Gravelly Mountains. Refuge lands

range between 6,600 feet above sea level on the valley floor to 9,400 feet above sea level in the Centennial Mountains. Interestingly, the source of the Missouri River watershed lies within the eastern Centennial Mountains. The wetland complex that dominates the valley within the refuge is the largest in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem.

The refuge‟s conservation mission has expanded beyond migratory waterfowl and trumpeter swans since the

1930s. The lakes and creeks of the refuge contain the last endemic population of adfluvial Arctic grayling (Thymallus arcticus) in the contiguous United States. The refuge also provides habitat for populations of Shiras moose (Alces alces), pronghorn antelope (Antilocapra americana), greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus), and Rocky Mountain elk (Cervus canadensis). Grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) and wolves (Canus lupus) are also occasionally sighted. The valley itself is considered an important wildlife corridor linking the Greater Yellowstone and Bitterroot ecosystems. A diverse set of habitats are present within the refuge

including: shallow lake wetlands, seasonally flooded wetlands, shrub-dominated wetlands, wet meadows, shrub-steppe, grasslands, sand hills, aspen woodlands, mixed-conifer forest, and sub-alpine. The remote location of Red Rock Lakes NWR made portions of the refuge excellent candidates for wilderness designation following passage of The Wilderness Act of 1964. In 1976, 32,350 acres of Red Rock Lakes NWR were selected for addition to the National Wilderness Preservation System. This acreage comprises

over 66% of the original refuge size. Much of Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness is contiguous and constitutes the main valley floor. It encompasses Lower Red Rock Lake, the River Marsh, Swan Lake, and Upper Red Rock Lake (26,213 acres). Of that area, approximately 7,800 are water-related or meandering acres. Two discontinuous wilderness units are located

south of the South Valley Road. The western unit lies west of refuge headquarters at Lakeview and comprises 2,117 acres. The eastern unit contains the slopes of Sheep Mountain and consists of 1,332 acres. Both wilderness areas south of South Valley Road abut the BLM Centennial Mountains Wilderness Study Area. One additional wilderness area is found in the northeastern corner of the refuge, north of North Valley Road. This 2,688 acre rectangle is sand hills habitat.

Several special provisions were included in the designating legislation for Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness. These allowances include:

Hunting provisions Waterfowl hunting will be allowed on Lower Red Rock Lake. General moose and antelope hunting allowed within wilderness.

Boat use Motorboat use is allowed for public safety purposes and use of air-thrust boats is allowed for essential management functions. The provision for public use of motorboats was eliminated in


Page 5

February 1986 after a management review determined that use of mechanized boats was not necessary to insure public safety. Since that time management activities have opted to use motorboats sparingly and airboat use has been discontinued altogether.

Designating legislation also made distinct allowances to improve public access. There is cherry-stemmed boat and vehicular access to Lower Red Rock Lake at three access points (Idlewild Road, River Marsh Campground,

and Middle Boat Ramp). Wilderness acreage also excludes the area on the shore of Upper Red Rock Lake that constitutes Upper Lake Campground and boat access point. A Wilderness Management Plan for Red Rock Lakes NWR was completed in June 1985. This plan provided management direction for use of prescribed fire, addressed water-related installations such as nest platforms, windmills, and dikes, delineated the use of fencing to create 23 grassland management units, set expectations

for use of mechanized vehicles for fence maintenance in wilderness every decade, and touts the lack of managed trails.

More recently, Red Rock Lakes NWR finalized a Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) in June 2009. The Wilderness Review conducted as part of this plan does not recommend any further additions to wilderness acreage. The CCP did not specify any wilderness specific goals or objectives, although many of the species-

specific management goals and objectives will impact wilderness due to habitat being wholly contained within refuge wilderness areas. Red Rock Lakes NWR utilizes livestock grazing as a tool to emulate natural grazing that occurred in the valley pre-settlement. Active livestock grazing occurs within Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness. Between 1994 and 2006 grazing rates ranged from 0.31-0.85 animal unit months (AUMs) per acre. Currently wilderness

livestock management units are on a four year grazing cycle (one year of grazing, three years of rest). Both permanent fence and drop-down fence (both electric and non-electric) are used to manage livestock within wilderness.

Wilderness map from 1985 Red Rock Lakes NWR Wilderness Management Plan


Page 6

RED ROCK LAKES NWR STAFF

B I L L W E S T , Project Leader

Bill has been project leader at Red Rock Lakes NWR since 2008. Prior to that he was project leader at Montana‟s National Bison Range and spent many years as a USFWS employee in Alaska. Bill has completed the Arthur Carhart Wilderness Institute‟s wilderness stewardship training course. Bill‟s guidance defined the

scope and tenor of all WCM measures selected for monitoring at Red Rock Lakes NWR. 406-276-3536 [email protected]

S U Z A N N E B E A U C H A I N E , Deputy Project Leader

Suzanne has been deputy project leader at Red Rock Lakes NWR since 2005. Her input provided data for measures relating to prescribed fire use, wildfire, invasive species, prescribed grazing, and fence maintenance. Before Red Rock Lakes NWR, she was assistant refuge manager at Browns Park National

Wildlife Refuge in Colorado. Suzanne has completed the Arthur Carhart Wilderness Institute‟s wilderness stewardship training course and was a wilderness ranger for the Bridger-Teton National Forest in the Gros Ventre Wilderness of Wyoming. 406-276-3536 [email protected]

K Y L E C U T T I N G , Refuge Biologist

Kyle has been biologist at Red Rock Lakes NWR since spring 2011 and has conducted research on the refuge since 2005. Kyle has ongoing research projects within wilderness areas of the refuge and was responsible for

contributing data for most of the WCM measures monitoring naturalness. In fact, Kyle has purview over more measures than anyone else at Red Rock Lakes NWR. He will be a critical contributor to ongoing database population for measures. Kyle does not have any formal wilderness training. 406-276-3536 [email protected]

J A C K I E V A N N , Budget Specialist

Jackie has the longest tenure of all current staff at Red Rock Lakes NWR. She is the eyes and ears of the

refuge from refuge headquarters in Lakeview. We will be counting on her to record observed instances of unauthorized trammeling and use of mechanized vehicles and equipment—not to mention noting low flying planes. She‟s been a year-round resident of the Centennial Valley for over a decade. 406-276-3536 [email protected]

L A N C E H I C K S , Maintenance Worker

Lance makes sure that all of the refuge vehicles are in tip-top shape (extremely important when you‟re

counting on a Sno-Cat to transport you 28 miles out of the valley in the winter) and does most of the heavy lifting on the refuge with the help of some machinery. If mechanized use is authorized on the refuge and performed by refuge staff Lance is providing the vehicles or equipment to get the job done if not tackling it himself. 406-276-3536 [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]





Page 7

A view of Upper Red Rock Lake from South Valley Road.

G L E N N B O L T Z , FWS Fisheries Biologist

Glenn has been visiting Red Rock Lakes NWR for years conducting research on the refuge‟s creeks and other water bodies. He‟s a critical member of the Arctic Grayling Recovery Program. He provided data for all WCM measures relating to water body health, fish populations, and research activities such as tagging of fish and deployment of thermographs. Glenn is based out of Bozeman, MT. 406-582-0717 [email protected]

N A T H A N K O R B , The Nature Conservancy, Southwest Montana Director of Science and Stewardship

Nathan heads up The Nature Conservancy‟s offices on the Murphy Creek ranch on the north side of Centennial Valley and collaborates widely with Red Rock Lakes NWR. While he did not contribute specific data for any of the chosen Red Rock Lakes NWR WCM measures, he did weigh in the overall selections. His research and knowledge about fire ecology and aspen health may contribute to measures added in the future. 406-925-1144 [email protected]

L I N D Y G A R N E R , Montana Invasive Strike Team Coordinator and Regional Invasive Species Specialist

Lindy‟s invasive plant strike team visits Red Rock Lakes NWR once a year to work on critical invasive plant projects. Her team also provides excellent maps and data detailing all projects they work on. Lindy is based out of the Benton Lakes NWR office in Great Falls, MT. 406-727-7400 x213 [email protected]




Page 8

SELECTING WCM MEASURES AT RED ROCK LAKES NWR

An initial set of wilderness character monitoring measures was developed in two meetings attended by the core Red Rock Lakes NWR staff (the first five individuals profiled in the Red Rock Lakes NWR Staff section of this report). These meetings allowed for group discussion of potential measures to fulfill each of the 13 indicator categories in the WCM framework. Each meeting lasted 1.5 hours and occurred two weeks apart.

The meetings resulted in the generation of a list of 51 possible measures. Individual meetings were then held with all staff, plus other contributing partners (such as Glenn Boltz and Lindy Garner). In individual meetings the efficacy of each measure was reviewed along with available data sources and the best ways to quantify the data to meet the purposes of the wilderness character monitoring program. These discussions resulted in the elimination of some proposed measures due to lack of sufficient data, problematic definitions, redundancy,

and resource issues. The meetings also resulted in the addition of several measures. After several rounds of refinement the final list of measures totaled 43. A breakdown by character quality follows:

Character Quality # of measures

Untrammeled 9

Natural 15

Undeveloped 11

Solitude and/or primitive recreation opp. 8

Once data were obtained for each measure, core staff members made informed decisions about frequency, significant change value, condition, and confidence for each measure, where each of these terms are defined

as follows:

Frequency The duration of expected time between database entries for this measure. A frequency of „1‟ indicates that it will be updated every year. Attempts were made to keep frequencies to every five years or less.

Significant change value The amount of fluctuation in data, year over year, that will be considered significant. The only significant change values offered were a percent, absolute value, any, or a regression line p-value.

Ex. The significant change for Number of Shiras moose is 15. This means that an increase or decrease in the population from one year to the next of 15 or more moose should be considered significant, anything less than 15 will be considered a stable trend.

Condition Each data entry for a given measure is given a condition of Good, Caution, or Poor demonstrating whether that data reflects a desirable state.

Confidence This reflects the staff‟s confidence in the data collection method and the data itself.

Confidence values are High, Medium, or Low. Decisions regarding the appropriate weight for each measure and priority were not made until all data were collected. These decisions were made in a group forum, via a three hour meeting, so that all participants could weigh in on and represent measures they felt were most critical. (Note: These decisions were based on the current staff at the refuge during the time this document was created.)


Page 9

A stem of prairie smoke (Geum triflorium) on a

brilliantly sunny August day at Red Rock Lakes NWR.

Prairie smoke is a perennial that is common to prairies

and woodlands and is commonly found at Red Rock

Lakes NWR.

A breakdown by priority follows (unimplemented measures were not prioritized):

Priority # of measures

High 10

Medium 19

Low 14

Further details about measure priorities can be found in the Appendix of this document: Priority ranking of measures.

2011 was established as the baseline for all measures. In most cases, attempts were made to obtain and input data for both 2010 and 2011. The earliest data provided was from 2003 and related to natural fires that occurred in refuge wilderness.


Page 10

WILDERNESS CHARACTER MONITORING MEASURES

U N T R A M M E L E D

A definition of untrammeled from Keeping it Wild: An Interagency Strategy to Monitor Trends in Wilderness

Character Across the National Wilderness Preservation System: The Wilderness Act states that wilderness is

“an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man,” and “generally appears to

have been affected primarily by the forces of nature.” In short, wilderness is essentially unhindered and free

from modern human control or manipulation. This quality is degraded by modern human activities or actions

that control or manipulate the components or processes of ecological systems inside the wilderness.

Monitoring Question: What are the trends in actions that control or manipulate the “earth

and its community of life” inside wilderness?

Indicator: Actions authorized by refuge manager that manipulate the

biophysical environment

Measure 1. Percent of natural fire starts that are manipulated within the

boundaries of wilderness

Description: Percent of natural fire starts (i.e. lightning ignitions) manipulated while within the

boundaries of wilderness. Calculated in this manner: the number of natural ignition fires

manipulated by fire managers divided by the total number of natural ignition fires, multiplied

by 100. This measure does not account for natural fires that are ignited outside of wilderness

and are suppressed before reaching the wilderness boundary.

Context: The mosaic of ecosystem types in Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness had varying

historical fire return intervals. Historically, natural fires would have impacted conifer stands,

wet meadows, shrub-steppe and grasslands, and even the sand hills. The current landscape,

suppression history, and management goals of the refuge, however, have created an

environment in which the infrequent natural fires which ignite in wilderness may require

manipulation. There hasn‟t been a natural fire start in Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness since

2003. Therefore, the 2011 value for this measure is zero.

Relevance: Ideally, manipulation attempts will strive to insure that natural fire starts achieve

conditions historically maintained or created by fire, in spite of changes in plant mixtures and

vegetation density caused by invasive plants and recent fire suppression. Climate change may

shift the frequency of fire on this landscape.

Data source: Records kept by Suzanne Beauchaine, deputy project leader.

Data adequacy: Measure is a reflection of fire manipulation and not the extent of natural

fire‟s impacts on the landscape. Data supplied is of high confidence.

Process used to compile or gather data: Suzanne reviewed her records and provided data.


Page 11

Priority & significance factor: Low / Any change will be considered significant.

Measure 2. Acres of prescribed burning

Description: Number of wilderness acres prescribed burned each year.

Context: Fire suppression in southwestern Montana and at Red Rock Lakes NWR since

settlement in the 1800s has resulted in altered vegetation structure and species mixtures.

Prescribed fire will be used to restore the landscape‟s fire return interval and to reduce

hazardous fuels in conifer stands. It is also cited in the CCP as a management tool for invasive

plants, such as smooth brome, in combination with prescriptive cattle grazing. Even though the

1985 Wilderness Management Plan provided management direction for use of prescribed

fire little controlled burning has been conducted in wilderness in the last two decades (an

exception is 1,072 acres burned in 2008). Zero acres were prescribed burned in 2011.

Relevance: Current resource constraints (both financial and personnel-related) have made it

difficult for Red Rock Lake management to use prescribed fire to achieve ecological goals.

The hope is that these constraints will be increasingly overcome in the future. Although use of

prescribed fire constitutes trammeling, it will aid the refuge in maintaining the wilderness‟

natural state.

Data source: All prescribed fire activities on the refuge are managed by Suzanne Beauchaine,

deputy project leader.

Data adequacy: Data supplied is of high confidence.


Priority & significance factor: Medium / A 50% change in acreage burned will be considered

significant.

Measure 3. Number of water bodies with fish restoration efforts

Description: Number of creeks, rivers, and lakes stocked with fish or fry each year. Stocking

may not actually occur within wilderness, but fish or fry are released in locations where they

travel into or through wilderness portions of these water bodies.

Context: Native fish populations in Red Rock Lakes NWR water bodies have been impacted

by the introduction of non-native species and human alterations to natural flow patterns,

resulting in population declines. Significant declines have affected Arctic grayling. In 2011,

57,000 Arctic grayling fry were stocked in Elk Springs Creek in an attempt to restore

spawning in that creek.

Relevance: Maintaining a spawning population of Arctic grayling is a priority for Red Rock

Lakes NWR, given that the refuge represents the only naturally occurring adfluvial population

in the contiguous United States. The CCP establishes a goal of ensuring at least three refuge

streams contain spawning populations by 2013. Currently, there are two, but the Odell Creek

population is tenuous. Although restoration efforts constitute trammeling, the activities aid the

refuge in restoring an important native fish population.

Data source: Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist, and Glenn Boltz, FWS fisheries biologist.


Page 12


Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiry sent to Glenn Boltz and data confirmed with

Kyle Cutting. Glenn is able to provide number of eggs incubated, number of fry released, and

the name(s) of water bodies where releases occurred.


Measure 4. Number of water bodies where fish trapping and/or gamete collecting

occurred

Description: Number of streams, creeks, rivers, and lakes where fish were trapped and

gametes may also have been collected. Trapping and gamete collecting may not have

occurred in wilderness portions of the water body, but will impact wilderness populations

further upstream or downstream. Measure will record specific breakdowns of trapping versus

gamete collecting in comments if possible.

Context: See Measure 3. Number of water bodies with fish restoration efforts for context. All

fish trapping and gamete collecting in 2011 occurred in Red Rock Creek and Upper Red Rock

Lake.

Relevance: Trapping and gamete collecting efforts on Red Rock Lake water bodies directly

relate to Arctic Grayling objectives in the Red Rock Lakes NWR CCP (see additional

information in Measure 3. Number of water bodies with fish restoration efforts) and also

contribute to other refuge studies whose aims are to maintain healthy populations of native

fish in Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness (ex. burbot trapping in Upper Red Rock Lake).


Data adequacy: Data supplied is of high confidence. Measure does not quantify the number

of instances trapping or gamete collecting occurred, only the number of water bodies (ex.

trapping occurred in Upper Red Rock Lake on three separate evenings in September &

October 2011).

Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiry sent to Glenn Boltz and data confirmed with

Kyle Cutting. Glenn is able to provide number of eggs incubated as a result of trapping and

gamete collecting.

Priority & significance factor: Medium / Any change will be considered significant.

Measure 5. Number of man hours surveying and treating non-native, invasive

plants

Description: Number of hours refuge staff, Montana Invasives Strike Team, and other crews

(such as the Montana Conservation Corps) spent surveying and treating (both plant removals

and herbicide application) non-native, invasive plants. Includes efforts to control aquatic

invasive plants.

Context: Invasive plants have a presence both inside and outside wilderness at Red Rock Lakes

NWR. Each year efforts are expended to control and reduce populations of certain invasive


Page 13

plants in wilderness areas, with particular emphasis on early detection and treatment. In 2011,

448 hours were spent surveying and treating.

Relevance: Herbicides and pulling efforts are intended to target only a specific invasive plant

species, but impacts, albeit minor, occur beyond that single stem. While this management

activity constitutes trammeling, it is an effort intended to improve the natural state.

Data source: Number of hours compiled by Suzanne Beauchaine, deputy project leader.

Data adequacy: Data supplied is of medium confidence. Hours of wilderness treatment were

broken out from records of total hours of surveying and treating across the refuge.


Priority & significance factor: Medium / 20% change will be considered significant.

Measure 6. Number of non-wildlife AUMs

Description: Number of non-wildlife AUMs actively used that year.

Context: Accounts for prescriptive grazing that is used as a management tool in Red Rock

Lakes NWR wilderness areas. Currently, grazing units in wilderness are grazed for one year

and rested for three. A letter in the Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness files from December 15,

1971 indicates that at that time 5,000 head of cattle were using 13,000 animal unit months

(AUMs) from July 10th to October 30th each year. Efforts were made to ensure that at least

50% residual cover was left following grazing. AUM use since 1971 has decreased

significantly. The below table summarizes non-wildlife AUM use in wilderness since 2008.

# of AUMs by Year

Permittee 2008 2009 2010 2011 Comments

J Bar L 0 0 0 0 Has yet to graze in wilderness

Huntsman 1183 1480 1487 1551

Matador 503 875 225 850

Raffety 981 0 695 700 Grazing in 2009 was outside wilderness.

Value for 2011 is estimated

Wolfe 827 774 701 0 Grazing in 2011 was outside wilderness

TOTALS 3494 3129 3108 3101

Relevance: Non-wildlife AUMs, or prescriptive grazing, are utilized on the refuge to mimic

herbivory patterns of native grazers and to achieve ecological goals. There is recognition,

however, that impacts vary from those of wildlife.

Data source: Binders of permittee bills for collection in Jackie Vann‟s office. Jackie also has

digital copies of data.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high.

Process used to compile or gather data: Wilderness Fellow reviewed permittee binders and

obtained missing values from Jackie.


Page 14

Priority & significance factor: High / A increase or decrease of 500 or more AUMs will be

considered significant.

Measure 7. Number of animals handled

Description: Number of animals captured and leg banded, ear tagged, web tagged, nasal

tagged, radio collared, fin clipped, or chips or other devices surgically implanted each year.

Count includes all animals handled within wilderness or tagged outside wilderness whose

habitat range includes refuge wilderness areas.

Context: Research conducted at Red Rock Lakes NWR often includes the handling of animals.

Over the last decade the majority of banding and tagging is accounted for by a lesser scaup

duck study conducted by Jeff Warren, I&M biologist. Leg bands and web tags are not visible

to the average Red Rock Lakes NWR visitor as a duck‟s leg is most often underwater. Nasal

tags are small and difficult to detect. Other research efforts have ear tagged voles, clipped

the fins of cutthroat trout, and tagged Arctic grayling. In 2011, 1,385 animals were handled

for research purposes in wilderness. The breakdown by species was as follows:

Lesser scaup (duck) 92 nasal tagged

218 leg banded

39 web tagged

Ruddy duck 1 handled

Brewer’s sparrow 26 leg banded

Vesper sparrow 22 leg banded

Arctic grayling 249 tagged in Red Rock Creek

0 tagged in Odell Creek

Voles 738 ear tagged

In 2010, 2,783 animals were handled. The decrease between 2010 and 2011 is attributable

to fewer Lesser scaup on Lower Red Rock Lake and 600 fewer voles ear tagged in 2011.

Relevance: The handling of animals detracts from their „wildness‟ and may impact their future

behavior in the presence of humans. Occasionally an animal dies or is injured as a result of a

handling effort, but this is approved through the International Animal Use Care Committee.

Visitors who detect nasal tags and hunters who harvest birds will be alerted to this research

activity. The banding and tagging operation also involved the temporary installment of a net

in Lower Red Rock Lake.

Data source: Lesser scaup report containing yearly banding statistics provided by Jeff

Warren, I&M biologist. Dave Messmer, a doctoral student, also contributes to lesser scaup

work and record keeping. Glenn Boltz, FWS fisheries biologist, provides Arctic grayling

tagging data. Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist, and Suzanne Beauchaine, deputy project leader,

also contributed information.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high, given that careful records are kept and drive

research performed by refuge staff.

Process used to compile or gather data: Request for counts sent via email to Jeff and Glenn.

Discussions were had with Kyle and Suzanne.


Page 15

Priority & significance factor: Medium / A 25% change will be considered significant.

Measure 8. Date Lower Red Rock Lake water gate closed

Description: The earliest date any Lower Red Rock Lake water gate(s) is/are closed, which

impacts the flow of water in Red Rock River as well as water levels in Lower Red Rock Lake.

Any time a gate is lowered such that it touches the water the gate is considered closed. If

gates are not closed during the year a value of zero is recorded.

Context: A water control structure was initially built in 1930 to stabilize the water level of

Lower Red Rock Lake. A new structure replaced the original one in 1957, and major repairs

and improvements were made to the new dam in the 1980‟s. The structure is located on the

Lower Red Rock Lake outlet to Red Rock Creek on the border of wilderness in the northwest

corner of the refuge. The control structure is primarily used in fall to control the level of the

lake to maximize recreational opportunities, namely duck hunting. Between April 2004 and

August 2009 all gates in this control structure remained open and no water level manipulation

occurred. Gates were closed on August 12th in 2009 and on September 7th in 2010. No gates

have been closed in 2011.

Relevance: The date that a gate is closed provides a sense of the duration of that year when

water manipulation is occurring in Lower Red Rock Lake and Red Rock River. This has impacts

for hydrology both within refuge wilderness and on private land downstream along Red Rock

Creek.

Data source: Jeff Warren, I&M biologist, keeps a record of when gates are opened or closed.

Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist, and Bill West, project leader, also keep some records.


Process used to compile or gather data: Dates obtained from Jeff, Kyle, and Bill.

Priority & significance factor: High / A change of one week will be considered significant.

Indicator: Actions not authorized by the Federal land manager to

manipulate the biophysical environment

Measure 9: Number of miscellaneous unauthorized actions

Description: A count of all miscellaneous unauthorized actions observed by Red Rock Lakes

NWR staff and volunteers or reported by the public that resulted in a refuge management

response.

Context: The public and grazing permittees sometimes undertake unauthorized actions in

wilderness that manipulate the environment in unplanned and impactful ways. This can include

diverting water before it enters the refuge, grazing without authorization, poaching, use of

salt licks to attract wildlife, etc. In 2011, the unauthorized trammeling actions that results in a

refuge response primarily constituted livestock trespass by both grazing permittees and non-

permittees. On six instances, refuge staff had to request a local cattle owner (Tash) to remove

trespass cattle from refuge wilderness.


Page 16

A dead whitebark pine on the skyline in Red Rock Lakes Wilderness south

of the South Valley Road. Whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) is one of

five federally listed threatened, endangered, or candidate species found

in Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness. Lower Red Rock Lake is visible in the

distance.

Relevance: These unauthorized actions do not take into account ecological goals, impacts, or

sustainability. They also constitute a management burden that takes away from other refuge

activities.

Data source: Instances of unauthorized trammeling are recorded by refuge staff on

spreadsheets kept on a clipboard hanging near the printer.

Process used to compile or gather data: Data is taken from spreadsheet mentioned above.

Data adequacy: Confidence of data is high given that only unauthorized trammeling that

results in a refuge response are tallied for this measure. It is possible that other unauthorized

actions occur but are not observed and therefore not responded to. The process currently in

place relies on staff remembering to report actions resulting in a refuge response.

Priority & significance factor: High / A 50% change will be considered significant.


Page 17

N A T U R A L

A definition of natural from Keeping It Wild: The Wilderness Act states that wilderness is “protected and

managed so as to preserve its natural conditions.” In short, wilderness ecological systems are substantially free

from the effects of modern civilization. This quality is degraded by intended or unintended effects of modern

people on the ecological systems inside the wilderness since the area was designated.

Monitoring Question: What are the trends in terrestrial, aquatic, and atmospheric natural

resources inside wilderness?

Indicator: Plant and animal species and communities

Measure 10. Number of plant, non-indigenous, invasive species

Description: Number of non-indigenous, invasive plant species known to exist in refuge

wilderness. This measure includes only species currently managed and species of concern.

Context: As of 2011, there are 17 non-native, invasive plant species present in Red Rock

Lakes NWR wilderness. All non-native plants that are listed as noxious in Montana are being

managed in Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness. These species include spotted knapweed

(Centaurea maculosa), houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale), black henbane (Hyoscyamus

niger), common tansy (Tanacetum vulgare), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), field bindweed

(Convolvulus arvensis), cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), Siberian peashrub (Caragana

arborescens), bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), hoary alyssum (Berteroa incana), and common mullein

(Verbascum thapsus). The following non-native, invasive plants are present and of concern, but

not being managed: smooth brome (Bromus inermis), Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis),

crested wheatgrass (Agropycron cristatum), marsh sowthistle (Sonchus arvensis), yellow/white

sweet clover (Melilotus officinalis), and watercress (Nasturtium officinale).

Relevance: Non-native, invasive plants claim growing space and compete with native plants,

often to the extent of displacing natives. Red Rock Lakes NWR utilizes a significant number of

management hours for managing non-native, invasive plants. These efforts are undertaken by

the Montana Conservation Corps, USFWS Montana Invasives Strike team, and seasonal staff.

Data source: Suzanne Beauchaine, deputy project leader.


Process used to compile or gather data: Suzanne manages all non-native plant surveying on

the refuge and produced a list of species currently present.

Priority & significance factor: High / Any change will be considered significant.


Page 18

Measure 11. Number of non-plant, non-indigenous, invasive species

Description: Number of non-plant, invasive species established on the refuge. Accounts for both

aquatic and land species.

Context: On a smaller scale than plants (currently), vertebrate, invertebrate, and viral species

have been introduced and become established in Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness. These

species compete with and displace native species. In 2011, three non-plant invasives are

present—whirling disease (causes spine curvature in trout; Mycobolus cerebralis), brook trout

(Salvelinus fontinalis), and hybrid Yellowstone cutthroat-rainbow trout.

Relevance: The competition these species provide disrupts the natural ecosystem and displaces

native species.

Data source: Inquires made with Suzanne Beauchaine, deputy project leader, and Kyle

Cutting, refuge biologist.


Process used to compile or gather data: Compilation of responses from Suzanne and Kyle.


Measure 12. Number of federally listed threatened or endangered species

Description: Number of federally listed threatened or endangered species who are known or

assumed to utilize wilderness habitat at Red Rock Lake NWR.

Context: In 2011, there is one federally listed threatened or endangered species present in

Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness—grizzly bear, and three candidate species—Arctic

grayling, greater sage-grouse, and wolverine (Gulo gulo). Lynx (Lynx canadensis) are not

included because they are excluded from the Endangered Species act in Beaverhead County.

Assumptions about species‟ presence in wilderness is made from surveys occurring within the

known range a species will travel (ex. grouse are known to travel up to four miles from an

active lek to nest).

Relevance: Management of wilderness may choose to emphasize these species and their

associated habitat. Efforts will be made to prevent extirpation.

Data source: FWS site that lists federally listed and proposed species

(http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/adHocSpeciesForm.jsp)


Process used to compile or gather data: Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist, reviewed website

listed above.


http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/adHocSpeciesForm.jsp


Page 19

Measure 13. Number of extirpated, indigenous species

Description: Number of indigenous plant and animal species that have been extirpated based

on time from European contact.

Context: Human impacts have resulted in the expiration of several species from the Centennial

Valley and Red Rock Lakes NWR. In 2011, this amounts to three species—big horn sheep,

mountain goat, and American bison. The refuge stance on bison restoration, as stated in the

CCP, is “the refuge will support, and participate in a MFWP led landscape-scale restoration

of bison as free-ranging wildlife in southwest Montana if the state decides to pursue this

initiative. The Service will not support proposals to restore bison as a captive, fenced herd.”

Relevance: Restoration of one or more of these species may be a future management goal.

Data source: Inquiry made to Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist.


Process used to compile or gather data: List of species provided by Kyle.


Measure 14. Number of active trumpeter swan nests

Description: Number of active trumpeter swan nests within wilderness. This measure excludes

nests outside wilderness.

Context: The establishing purposes for Red Rock Lakes NWR emphasize habitat for migratory

birds. At Red Rock Lakes NWR there has always been emphasis on trumpeter swans, given

that when the refuge was founded it was one of the last remaining breeding grounds for this

species in the contiguous United States. In 1936, the North American population was down to

less than 120 known individuals. Although the North American population has rebounded to

nearly 50,000 birds, Red Rock Lakes NWR continues to play a pivotal role in the restoration

of the species and contributes some of the most productive swan habitat in the tri-state area

of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming. The 2009 CCP establishes the following trumpeter swan

objectives: nineteen nesting pairs and 140 adults and sub-adult trumpeter swans during the

breeding season, on average, in the Centennial Valley by 2013. Lower Red Rock Lake, Upper

Red Rock Lake, Swan Lake, River Marsh, and Shambow Pond are all important wilderness

habitat for trumpeter swans at Red Rock Lake. Since trumpeter swans are a long-lived species

(>20 years) yearly breeding is not necessary and adults will wait until good conditions exist

to attempt nesting and rearing young. In 2011, there were 16 active nests in wilderness, 18

active nests across the refuge as a whole.

Relevance: This measure will allow the refuge to track Red Rock Lake wilderness‟ contribution

to overall trumpeter swan objectives. The number of active nests reflects the health of

breeding habitat for swans and is directly correlated with the number of breeding pairs.

Data source: A count is made of active nests each year via plane by Kyle Cutting, refuge

biologist.


Page 20

Three trumpeter swans in flight over Red

Rock Lakes NWR. Photo credit: Erin Clark

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high. Flights are thorough and the white birds are easy

to detect on a green landscape. It is possible to accurately separate data re: wilderness nests

from non-wilderness nests.

Process used to compile or gather data: Count data is entered in the Red Rock Lakes NWR

database and Kyle can query the database in order to provide yearly counts.


Measure 15. Number of trumpeter swan cygnets

Description: Number of trumpeter swans cygnets

hatched in refuge wilderness each year.

Context: See context for Measure 14. Number of

active trumpeter swan nests.

Relevance: This measure will allow the refuge to track

Red Rock Lake NWR wilderness‟ contribution to overall

trumpeter swan objectives. The number of trumpeter

swan cygnets born reflects the health of breeding

habitat for swans, but reproductive success may not be

the most significant factor affecting population growth

so total population is also included as a separate

measure. In 2011, there were 23 trumpeter swan cygnets in wilderness.

Data source: A count is made of cygnets each year via plane by Kyle Cutting, refuge

biologist.


Process used to compile or gather data: Cygnet count data is entered in the Red Rock Lakes

NWR database and Kyle can query the database in order to provide yearly counts.


Measure 16. Total population of trumpeter swans

Description: Number of trumpeter swans using wilderness habitat.

Context: See context for Measure 14. Number of active trumpeter swan nests. This measure

assumes that all swans present on the refuge utilize wilderness habitat at some point. In 2011,

the total population of trumpeter swans at Red Rock Lakes NWR was 88 and the total

population in the Centennial Valley was 135.

Relevance: This measure will allow the refuge to track Red Rock Lake wilderness‟ contribution

to overall trumpeter swan objectives on both a refuge and regional scale. During an informal

conversation with Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist, he estimated that Red Rock Lakes NWR

should contribute approximately 80% of the total population for the Centennial Valley. By this

standard, Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness should have 112 adults and sub-adult trumpeter

swans present during the breeding season, on average, by 2013.


Page 21

Data source: September population counts are used by the Trumpeter Swan Society to

establish tri-state population estimates, so September refuge counts will be used in this

measure. Data are available in the Red Rock Lakes NWR database.


Process used to compile or gather data: Kyle can query Red Rock Lakes NWR database in

order to provide yearly total population counts.


Measure 17. Number of Shiras moose

Description: Number of Shiras moose using wilderness habitat.

Context: The 2009 CCP sets the following Shiras moose objective: “Maintain at least 2,000

acres of willow-dominated riparian habitat at moderate to low browse levels for greater than

eighty wintering Shiras moose throughout the life of this plan. Eighty moose is within 20% of

the 1990-2009 average of moose observed wintering on the refuge.” In 2011, there were

135 moose (115 adults and 20 calves) present in Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness. This is

significantly more than desired. Hunting will be used to reduce the total population to within

20% of the 1990-2009 average.

Relevance: The majority of willow habitat on the refuge in within wilderness. These willows

provide relatively stable and important wintering habitat for moose. It is thought to support

the majority of the moose population within Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks Hunting District

334 during the winter.

Data source: Observed adult and calve populations are available in the Red Rock Lakes

NWR database, which can be queried by Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist.

Data adequacy: The CCP details some of the concerns regarding past estimations of moose

populations on the refuge. From 1944 to through the 1980s survey flights were used to track

populations. Since 1991 budget constraints and shifting priorities have resulted in a

termination of regular aerial surveys. So, current estimates reflect both potential differences in

detection rate and true fluctuations in animal abundance.

Process used to compile or gather data: Survey flights are flown by the state, but funded by

the refuge. Survey data is provided to Kyle and he enters it into the Red Rock Lakes NWR

database.

Priority & significance factor: Medium / An increase or decrease of 15 or more moose will be

considered significant.


Page 22

Measure 18. Number of cormorant nests

Description: Number of cormorant nests in wilderness.

Context: Double-crested cormorant nest on the bulrush islands of Lower Red Rock Lake. In

2011, there were 68 cormorant nests in Lower Red Rock Lake. This represents a significant

decrease from the last two surveys, conducted in 2005 and 2009, but the decrease may be a

result of sampling different bulrush islands in 2011.

Relevance: Cormorant are one of many migratory bird species that nest in Red Rock Lakes

NWR wilderness.

Data source: Yearly survey results can be found in the Red Rock Lakes NWR database, which

can be queried by Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is low, given acknowledgement that different bulrush

islands can be surveyed from year-to-year. A significant decrease in nests from 2009 (225

nests) to 2011 (65-71 nests) may be explained by different islands surveyed.

Process used to compile or gather data: Nests are counted from aerial photographs.

Priority & significance factor: Low / A 300% change will be considered significant.

Measure 19. Percent of water bodies meeting SAV objectives

Description: The percent of water bodies monitored for sub-aquatic vegetation (SAV) that are

meeting objectives for SAV canopy cover defined in the 2009 CCP. The monitored water

bodies are Upper Red Rock Lake, Lower Red Rock Lake, Swan Lake, and River Marsh. Lower

Red Rock Lake and River Marsh will be considered a single water body.

Context: Historical survey data and the relative forage quality of sub-aquatic vegetation

(SAV) were the criteria used to determine the desired species composition of Lower Red Rock

Lake and River Marsh. SAV levels in Lower Red Rock lake are impacted by lake water levels

and swan grazing. Recent trends in local climate (increasing temperatures and decreasing

precipitation) have raised concerns about future SAV resources. The 2009 CCP sets the

following objectives:

Upper Red Rock Lake >35% SAV canopy cover

Swan Lake 60% canopy cover

Lower Red Rock Lake and River Marsh >40% coverage of pondweeds and

Canadian waterweed within 10 years of CCP approval. Jeff Warren, I&M biologist,

has recommended using a range of 25-55% canopy coverage as a revised objective

for these two water bodies.

The 2011 Lower Red Rock Lake and River Marsh coverage of pondweeds and Canadian

waterweed is 25.2%, which meets the revised objective set by Jeff. Sampling has not be

performed on Upper Red Rock Lake or Swan Lake since the early 1980s. Data collected at

that time indicated that Swan Lake and Upper Red Rock Lake were in SAV-dominated states,

but canopy coverage data is not available. For the purposes of 2011, the value for this

measure will be captured as 100%.


Page 23

Relevance: The sub-aquatic vegetation communities of Lower Red Rock Lake provide important

forage for trumpeter swans and other migrating birds. Greater plant biomass also increases

the abundance and diversity of invertebrates for breeding ducks and carnivorous species such

as eared grebe, Franklin‟s gull, and Wilson‟s phalarope. The CCP states that SAV levels

should continue to be monitored through the life of the plan.

Data source: Jeff Warren, I&M biologist, and Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is low given information Jeff shared about SAV sampling

methods not accounting for patchiness of vegetation and the fact that data has not been

collected for Upper Red Rock Lake and Swan Lake since 1984 and 1983 (respectively).

Process used to compile or gather data: Jeff Warren provided percent canopy cover values

by species for Lower Red Rock Lake and River Marsh.


Measure 20. Number of water bodies with spawning Arctic grayling populations

Description: Number of streams with active Arctic grayling spawning populations.

Context: In the 1970s, approximately five Red Rock Lakes NWR water bodies contained

active spawning populations. Since 2000, however, only two water bodies have contained

active spawning (Red Rock Creek and Odell Creek) and Odell Creek has only a tenuous

population of approximately 25 or fewer fish. Spawning has been disrupted by altered creek

flows where water bodies cross roads.

Relevance: The 2009 CCP sets the following objective for Arctic grayling: “the refuge will

work to ensure at least three refuge streams contain adfluvial Arctic grayling spawning

populations by 2013.” Efforts in the last two years have focused on establishing a spawning

population in Elk Springs Creek.

Data source: Glenn Boltz, FWS fisheries biologist.


Process used to compile or gather data: Glenn conducts population surveys in all Red Rock

Lake NWR water bodies each year.


Indicator: Physical Resources

Measure 21. Air quality

Description: This measure of refuge wilderness air quality will be entered nationally by the

I&M program.

Context: Air quality is deemed a nationally important natural physical resource.

Relevance: Air quality is important to maintain for overall ecosystem health and for enjoyment

of the visiting public.


Page 24

Data source: National I&M program.

Data adequacy: N/A

Process used to compile or gather data: N/A

Priority & significance factor: High / Significance will be set at national level.

Measure 22. Number of wilderness water bodies with flow impacted by roads

Description: Number of streams/creeks and rivers whose flow is impacted by the presence of

roads and road culverts.

Context: There are approximately 12 miles of public and service roads maintained by the

refuge and 23 miles of county-maintained roads that bisect the refuge. Many of these roads

impact water flow in water bodies that eventually flow through wilderness. In 2011, there are

11 creeks at Red Rock NWR that are impacted by roads: Elk Springs, Red Rock, Tom, Odell,

Matsingale, Nye, Shambow, Humphrey, Duff, Battle, and Tepee. A proposal currently under

consideration to close Elk Lake Road would remove road impacts to Elk Springs Creek.

Relevance: Road impacts on wilderness streams effect fish populations as well as downstream

water availability and overall water body health and function. There is particular interest in

minimizing road impacts to creeks in which Arctic grayling spawn.

Data source: Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist, and Glenn Boltz, FWS fisheries biologist, provided

a list of impacted water bodies.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is medium given that the assessment was qualitative.

Process used to compile or gather data: Qualitative assessment by Kyle and Glenn.


Measure 23. Winter lake oxygen level

Description: A measure of the weighted average water oxygen level of Upper Red Rock Lake

during the period when the surface of the lake has frozen (December to early-April).

Context: In 2010, Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist, began to monitor winter water temperatures

and oxygen levels in Upper Red Rock Lake in order to better understand conditions for

overwintering native fish populations. This monitoring will be performed approximately every

three years going forward. In 2011, the average water oxygen level was 4.06 mg/L.

Oxygen levels below 3 mg/L are lethal for fish. Levels between 3 and 5 mg/L results in

hypoxia and levels greater than 5 mg/L are desirable.

Relevance: Many important native fish populations overwinter in Upper Red Rock Lake,

including an important portion of the Arctic grayling population. This research will help refuge

managers to better understand winter conditions the population encounters, which may be

impacted in the future by climate change.

Data source: 102 measurements were taken between 12/17/2011 and 4/1/2011. Kyle

provided an average winter lake oxygen level from those values.


Page 25

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high. Sample size is large.

Process used to compile or gather data:

Priority & significance factor: Low / A change of ±1 mg/L will be considered significant.

Monitoring Question: What are the trends in terrestrial, aquatic, and atmospheric natural

processes inside wilderness?

Indicator: Biophysical processes

Measure 24. Number of avalanches

Description: Number of avalanches occurring in wilderness each year.

Context: Avalanches are a natural process functioning in the mountains on the southern side of

the refuge. Climate change may alter the frequency of avalanches in this region. In 2011,

there was one avalanche in the wilderness area south of the Upper Lake campground. It

occurred in late February or early March.

Relevance: Increasing avalanche frequency may require better public communication about

hazards and will impact stands in wilderness areas. A recent wilderness avalanche was close

to the Upper Lake campground and this measure will help track whether that campground is

at risk.


Data adequacy: Confidence in data is low given that not all avalanches will be observed or

detected.

Process used to compile or gather data: Suzanne keeps a record of avalanches.



Page 26

U N D E V E L O P E D

A definition of undeveloped from Keeping it Wild: The Wilderness Act states that wilderness is “an area of

undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or

human habitation,” “where man himself is a visitor who does not remain,” and “with the imprint of man‟s work

substantially unnoticeable.” This quality is degraded by the presence of structures, installations, habitations,

and by the use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment, or mechanical transport that increases people‟s ability

to occupy or modify the environment.

Monitoring Question: What are the trends in non-recreational development inside

wilderness?

Indicator: Non-recreational installations, structures, and developments

Measure 25. Miles of fence

Description: This measure tallies miles of fence within wilderness and excludes fence on

wilderness boundaries. It includes all fence types (electric, barbed wire, wildlife friendly, etc.)

even if not actively used that year and dropped down.

Context: Fencing is used primarily at Red Rock Lakes NWR to segment portions of the

wilderness into livestock grazing units. In recent years efforts have been made to ensure that

fencing between units that are being rested is dropped down and that the fencing that is

actively used is wildlife friendly. In 2011, there is approximately 18.9 miles of fence within

wilderness. All fence is within the main 26,214 acre wilderness area at the refuge.

Relevance: While fence performs a very important role in Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness to

protect sensitive ecological areas from non-wildlife grazing and allows refuge managers to

selectively graze only certain areas, fence is a hindrance to wilderness recreational users and

serves as a reminder of man‟s presence. This measure does not distinguish between types of

fence utilized in wilderness, but serves to encourage the refuge to reduce fence use,

regardless of type, within wilderness.

Data source: The refuge maintains a GIS data layer of all fence that has been mapped using

Trimble or other GPS units by seasonal technicians.

Data adequacy: All fence has been mapped with the exception of one segment. That

segment, which is between grazing unit 12W and 12E, was estimated in ArcGIS as 2.5 miles.

This fence segment should be mapped using a GPS unit in 2012 in order to improve data

accuracy.

Process used to compile or gather data: Fence layer in ArcGIS used to isolate wilderness fence

and calculate total mileage.



Page 27

Measure 26. Miles of powerline

Description: Miles of powerline within wilderness. This measure excludes powerlines on

wilderness boundaries.

Context: Power to the south side of the Centennial Valley is provided by Vigilante Electric Co-

operative by powerline that runs along South Valley Road. This powerline cuts across

wilderness south of South Valley Road across from Idlewild Road for 0.28 miles.

Relevance: The powerline and the associated poles are reminders of man‟s presence. Bill West

has talked to the power company about placing this line underground alongside or below the

road, but not enough maintenance work has been required on the powerline to incent the

power company to undertake this work.

Data source: Wilderness fellow walked the extent of the powerline on the refuge and GPS‟ed

the length as well as the location of all poles.

Data adequacy: Confidence in this data is high. The accuracy of the GPS is 10m or less.

Process used to compile or gather data: GPS data collected by Wilderness Fellow was

brought into ArcGIS and ArcGIS tools were used to calculate the total mileage.


Measure 27. Number of research structures and equipment installed

Description: Number of permanent or

temporary research structures and

equipment installed in the wilderness.

Includes exclosures, weather stations, water

temperature (thermographs) and height

equipment, etc. Does not include pin flags.

Context: Several research and ongoing

data collection projects require permanent

or temporary installation of structures and

equipment in wilderness. At Red Rock Lakes

NWR this includes stream installations of

thermographs (four in 2011) by Glenn

Boltz, FWS fisheries biologist, one lake

level measuring instrument (capillary rod)

on Lower Red Rock Lake and two

temporary temperature loggers on Upper

Red Rock Lake installed by refuge staff,

two weather stations, and two t-posts

marking the beginning of research transects

in the willow fen (see photo on left).

Relevance: The value of these installations is

clear, but the structures and equipment do serve to remind recreationists of the presence of


Page 28

man. A goal for the refuge should be to minimize installations to the fewest absolutely

necessary and to, when possible, install equipment only temporarily.

Data source: Refuge staff were asked to recall locations of all structures. Kyle Cutting

provided locations of all water equipment on Upper and Lower Red Rock Lake and

information about t-posts in the willow fen. Suzanne Beauchaine provided locations of all

weather stations. Glenn Boltz provided a map and coordinates for all thermographs he has

installed for Arctic grayling creek studies. Wilderness Fellow noted one research transect t-

post near willow fens and provided GPS coordinates.

Data adequacy: Additional installations likely identify research transects or plots that the

current staff is unaware of. Jeff Warren may be able to help locate some of these

installations in 2012. Seasonal technicians can assist by taking GPS coordinates of installations

they find while performing field work in 2012.

Process used to compile or gather data: Compilation of known structures/installations

provided by Kyle, Suzanne, and Glenn.

Priority & significance factor: Medium/ Any change will be considered significant.

Measure 28. Number of bird nesting structures

Description: Number of water and non-water installations for bird nesting.

Context: In earlier decades the refuge engaged in more intensive trumpeter swan

management. This included the installation of structures in water bodies, both inside and

outside wilderness, for nesting and feeding. Swan feeding on the refuge ceased in 1992.

Currently, waterfowl are not assisted by any installations for nesting. There are, however, five

boxes provided in wilderness for nesting of bluebirds.

Relevance: These installations assist birds, but serve as reminders of man‟s presence. When

possible, efforts should be made to place nests outside wilderness. Less than a dozen song

bird nesting boxes currently sit 50-100m off the road in the southeastern corner of the refuge

wilderness. Bird boxes on the wilderness boundary/fence-line are not included in this count.

Data source: Wilderness Fellow took GPS coordinates for all bird boxes in wilderness in

October 2011.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high. GPS data collected in October 2011 should

account for all bird boxes.

Process used to compile or gather data: A tally of the total number of boxes was taken while

GPS coordinates were compiled in the field. Suzanne Beauchaine incorporated the GPS

coordinates into an ArcGIS layer.



Page 29

Indicator: Inholdings

Measure 29. Number of inholdings

Description: Number of private or state inholdings within wilderness.

Context: No inholdings have been present within Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness since

wilderness designation in 1976. It is highly unlikely that inholdings would be created, but it is

possible that new areas of the refuge would become WSAs, proposed, or designated

wilderness and incorporate inholdings. An inholding within wilderness would be defined as a

private or state-owned parcel of land that is surrounded on three or more sides by wilderness.

Relevance: Private or state inholdings have the potential of impacting all qualities of

wilderness, but more often than not contain developed structures that detract from a

wilderness‟ undeveloped state.

Data source: Bill West, project leader.


Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiry made to Bill.


Monitoring Question: What are the trends in mechanization inside wilderness?

Indicator: Use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment, and mechanical

transport

Measure 30. Uses of motorized boats or airboats

Description: Number of days motorized boats or airboats were used for authorized refuge

management activities, such as research.

Context: A special provision in the founding legislation for Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness

allowed for continued use of motorboats for public safety purposes and airboats for

management purposes. In 1985, the Red Rock Lakes NWR Wilderness Management Plan

recommended against management use of airboats and suggests that motorboats disturb

trumpeter swans less and that, above all, surveys should be conducted from the air whenever

possible. In February 1986, public use of motorboats and management use of airboats was

discontinued after management investigations led to a conclusion that the allowed use of

motorboats did not truly improve public safety. In 2011, the refuge utilized motorized boats

15 times to conduct fish research (6 nights), take water quality measurements (1 day), and to

spotlight for scaup capture on Upper Red Rock Lake (8 nights).

Relevance: Today, motorboats are used sparingly by Red Rock Lakes NWR refuge staff to

conduct on the water research. In almost all cases motorboat use is restricted to use when

research is conducted after sunset. Jeff Warren, I&M biologist, and Glenn Boltz, FWS fisheries


Page 30

biologist, in conjunction with Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist, are responsible for most research

that results in motorboat use.

Data source: Jeff provided dates for 2011 uses of motorboats prior to September for

spotlighting purposes. Uses of boats since September have been recorded on the „Authorized

uses of mechanized vehicles, equipment, and transport‟ log that the Wilderness Fellow created

and is found on a clipboard that hangs on the wall near the printer.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high. Uses of motorboats are infrequent and Bill West,

project leader, is always made aware in advance.

Process used to compile or gather data: Combination of inquiries made with Jeff and Glenn

and compilation of records made to log.

Priority & significance factor: Medium / A 50% change will be significant.

Measure 31. Miles of fence installed or repaired using mechanized equipment

Description: Miles of fence installed or repaired through use of motorized equipment. Includes

use of vehicles to access fence and use of mechanized equipment to install or repair fence.

Context: As described in Measure 25. Miles of fence, fence in used to create 23 grazing units

in Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness. When new fence is installed or significant maintenance

repairs are preformed permission is sometimes granted to a contractor or refuge seasonal

employee to use mechanized equipment. The 1985 Wilderness Management Plan set

expectations that motor vehicles would be used for fence construction and reconstruction

approximately every ten years. In 2010, 1.51 miles of fence underwent major repairs. This

section of fence is located on the west side of grazing unit 5W. In 2011, 0.76 miles of fence

was repaired by a contract using mechanized equipment. This fence is on the west side of

grazing unit 5e.

Relevance: The use of motorized vehicles for fence repair and installation decreases incentives

to reduce fence in wilderness. Allowing contractors to utilize mechanized equipment, however,

reduces refuge costs for fence repair and installation.

Data source: Suzanne Beauchaine, deputy project leader, coordinates all contractor and

seasonal technician fence maintenance and installation efforts.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high in 2010 and medium in 2011. Wilderness Fellow

was not able to confirm 2011 mileage with Suzanne.

Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiry made to Suzanne.

Priority & significance factor: High / Any change of ±1 mile will be considered significant.

Measure 32. Miscellaneous authorized uses

Description: Number of days of authorized motor vehicle, motorized equipment, and

mechanical transport uses in or over wilderness (excluding use of motorized boats or airboats

and use of mechanized equipment for fence maintenance or installation). This measure includes

low-altitude survey flights initiated by the refuge to survey wildlife.


Page 31

Context: Some refuge management activities are deemed to require motor vehicle, motorized

equipment, and mechanical transport use. Before any such use, however, a Minimal

Requirements Analysis should be performed in order to validate that this mechanized or

motorized use is absolutely necessary. In 2011, there were nine authorized uses. In January

and February 2011 there were four days of chainsaw use on Upper Red Rock Lake. There

were also five authorized survey flights. Four flights were flown by the refuge—three for

surveying swans and cormorant and one to survey moose. One flight was flown by the state to

survey for moose.

Relevance: The Wilderness Act of 1964 provides provisions for the Minimal Requirements

Analysis process to be used to authorize occasional uses of motor vehicles, motorized

equipment, and mechanical transport in wilderness areas for management purposes.

Data source: All staff provided examples of authorized uses between January and August

2011. Since September, a log for all authorized uses has been posted on the wall near the

printer. All instances of authorized use are recorded on this log and a copy of the Minimal

Requirements Analysis should be filed in the Wilderness Files at Red Rock Lakes NWR

Headquarters.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high. The refuge manager is made aware of all

authorized uses and the Minimal Requirements Analysis process formalizes the decision-making

process and ensures that detailed records are kept.

Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiries made with all staff members, wilderness files

reviewed, and post-August log reviewed.


Measure 33. Number of unauthorized uses

Description: Number of unauthorized motor vehicle, motorized equipment, and mechanical

transport uses in or over wilderness. (Including citations issued for off-road vehicle activity and

known violations without issued citations.)

Context: Most wilderness boundaries at Red Rock Lakes NWR are marked, but the public,

grazing permittees, or refuge volunteers and seasonal employees may, either knowingly or

unknowingly, use motor vehicles, motorized equipment, or mechanical transport in wilderness.

Observed or reported unauthorized uses will be recorded in the log on the wall near the

printer in refuge headquarters. In 2011, there were two observed, unauthorized uses. On

9/21 a local cattle owner, while moving their herd, used ATVs in wilderness. On 10/1 a

large, red and white helicopter flew low over refuge headquarters and west over wilderness.

There is speculation that this may have been a military flight.

Relevance: Unauthorized uses of motorized or mechanical vehicles, equipment, and transport

can be particularly damaging and may leave longstanding evidence of their presence.

Data source: All members of the Red Rock Lakes NWR staff, plus records from the log in

refuge headquarters.


Page 32

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is medium, given that careful records were not kept

before September 2011 and that instances of unauthorized use may not be observed.

Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiries made with all Red Rock Lakes NWR staff

and data compiled from log in refuge headquarters.


Measure 34. Number of emergency uses

Description: Number of authorized motor vehicle, motorized equipment, and mechanical

transport uses in or over wilderness for emergency purposes.

Context: The safety of the public and refuge staff may sometimes trump the restrictions on

motorized and mechanical use in wilderness. All instances of motor vehicle, motorized

equipment, and mechanical transport uses for emergency purposes will be recorded on the log

posted near the printer in refuge headquarters. There were no emergencies in 2011 that

required use of motorized vehicles, motorized equipment, or mechanical transport.

Relevance: Safety comes first, but emergency uses of motorized and mechanical vehicles,

equipment, and transport may possibly leave longstanding evidence of their presence.

Data source: All members of the Red Rock Lakes NWR staff, plus records from the log in


Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high, given that decisions in an emergency situation

would be made by the project leader or deputy project leader with full consideration of all

options for responding to the situation.

Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiries made with all Red Rock Lakes NWR staff

and data compiled from log in refuge headquarters.


Monitoring Question: What are the trends in cultural resources inside wilderness?

Indicator: Loss of statutorily protected cultural resources

Measure 35. Number of disturbances of cultural resources

Description: Disturbances to cultural resources can include human vandalism (carvings, spray

paint, removal of resources) or animal-caused damage (from rubbings, collisions, etc.).


Page 33

Context: The 1985 Wilderness Management Plan

acknowledges one historical and archaeological

site in Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness—the

stage-coach way station at Shambow Pond, which

was used by stage-coaches making their way

across the valley from Monida to Yellowstone

National Park and was heavily used by tourists in

the 1800s and early 1900s. The site is marked

with a small stone monument and plaque. This

site, however, would not be considered statutorily

protected. The Shambow stagecoach station site

was not disturbed in 2011.

Relevance: This site has significant historical and

archaeological value and its proximity to

Shambow Pond, which is closed year-round to the public, provides it extra protection. This

measure will track any known disturbances to this site.

Data source: Bill West, project leader, and Suzanne Beauchaine, deputy project leader.


Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiry made to Bill and Suzanne.



Page 34

S O L I T U D E O R A P R I M I T I V E A N D U N C O N F I N E D T Y P E O F R E C R E A T I O N

A definition of solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation from Keeping It Wild: The Wilderness

Act states that wilderness has “outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of

recreation.” This quality is about the opportunity for people to experience wilderness; it is not directly about

visitor experiences per se. This quality is degraded by settings that reduce those opportunities, such as visitor

encounters, signs of modern civilization, recreation facilities, and management restrictions on visitor behavior.

Monitoring Question: What are the trends in outstanding opportunities for solitude inside

wilderness?

Indicator: Remoteness from sights and sounds of people inside the

wilderness

Measure 36. Miles of improved trail

Description: Miles of refuge maintained and improved trail within wilderness.

Context: The 1985 Wilderness Management Plan indicates that there are no trails present in

Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness. Since 1985 only two trails have been created. One trail

provides access to the Snowtel weather station south of the refuge. This trail is not maintained

and inaccessible to the public and therefore is not included in this measure. The second trail

was outfitter created and is along Shambow Creek. Since it is not on the public use brochure,

nor is managed by the refuge, it is not included in this measure.

Relevance: While the presence of trail may improve recreation opportunities and provide

access to a larger audience, trails also concentrate use and make it more likely that

recreationists will encounter others.





Measure 37. Acres of contiguous wilderness

Description: Maximum number of connected, contiguous wilderness acres on the refuge.

Context: The majority of wilderness on Red Rock Lakes NWR is a contiguous area on the

Centennial Valley floor. A visitor can walk east to west across the extent of the refuge almost

entirely within wilderness without interruption by roads on the northern side of the valley. This

area total 26,213.5 acres.


Page 35

Relevance: The larger a wilderness area, the greater the possibility that a visitor can have a

high quality wilderness experience with a minimum of interactions with sights and sounds of

people from inside or outside the wilderness.

Data source: ArcGIS layer depicting Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high. ArcGIS layer is an accurate representation of

wilderness acreage.

Process used to compile or gather data: Accessed area acreage values in ArcGIS.


Indicator: Remoteness from occupied and modified areas outside the

wilderness

Measure 38. Miles of road on wilderness boundaries

Description: Miles of road on wilderness boundaries.

Context: Roads are a prominent feature on the western, southern, and eastern wilderness

boundaries. Roads separate the two wilderness areas on the southern edge of the refuge

from the large wilderness area on the valley floor, and a road also runs between the

northeastern sand hills wilderness area and the large wilderness area on the valley floor. In

total there are 16.40 miles of road on wilderness boundaries in 2011. A proposal is currently

under consideration to close Elk Lake Road, which runs along the eastern wilderness boundary.

If this proposal comes to fruition total mileage of boundary road will decrease.

Relevance: The presence of road on wilderness boundaries increases both the frequency with

which wilderness visitors are subjected to human sights (presence of cars, motorcycles,

bicyclists, etc.) and sounds (automobile and motorcycle engine noise, etc.).

Data source: ArcGIS data layer of all Red Rock Lake roads used to isolate and measure all

roads on wilderness boundaries.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high given accuracy of ArcGIS data.

Process used to compile or gather data: Measure length tool used in ArcGIS to calculate

distance of all individual road segments along wilderness boundaries.

Priority & significance factor: Medium /Any change will be considered significant.

Measure 39. Frequency of low-flying planes

Description: Refuge staff recorded instances in which low-flying planes flew over wilderness.

This measure includes low altitude flights initiated by the refuge for wildlife surveys.

Context: The Federal Aviation Administration has issued a Notice to Airmen that a minimum

altitude of 2,000 feet above the terrain (or above the uppermost rim of a canyon or valley)

over wilderness be voluntarily observed by all aircraft. In 2011, there were six recorded low

flights. One unauthorized flight occurred on 10/1 when a large, red and white helicopter flew


Page 36

over refuge headquarters and refuge wilderness to the west. There were five refuge

authorized flights over the year. Three were for surveying swans and cormorant and two were

to survey for moose.

Relevance: Red Rock Lakes NWR refuge staff have observed aircraft flying significantly lower

than 2,000 feet above the Centennial Valley floor several times a year.

Data source: A log has been established for tracking instances of low-flying aircraft. This log

captures date, time, and type of aircraft observed. This log is posted near the printer at


Data adequacy: Confidence in data is medium, given that the log was not established until

September 2011 and it is possible that refuge staff was not present to observe instances of

unauthorized low-flying aircraft passing over refuge wilderness.

Process used to compile or gather data: Data compiled from log completed by staff and

available in refuge headquarters.

Priority & significance factor: Low / A 50% change will be considered significant.

Monitoring Question: What are the trends in outstanding opportunities for primitive and

unconfined recreation inside wilderness?

Indicator: Facilit ies that decrease self-reliant recreation

Measure 40. Number of refuge maintained facilities

Description: Including, but not limited to, tent pads, bridges, backcountry campsites, bathrooms.

Context: As of 2011, Red Rock Lakes NWR does not have or maintain any facilities in

wilderness areas. When the wilderness areas were designated two campground locations, one

alongside Upper Red Rock Lake and the other alongside Lower Red Rock Lake, were cherry

stemmed from wilderness. These facilities provide for facilities beside wilderness and the

extent of them will be monitored via Measure 42. Number of developed campsites adjacent

to wilderness.

Relevance: Although the presence of facilities in wilderness may broaden the proportion of

public interested in willing to recreate in wilderness areas, refuge maintained facilities are

detractors from wilderness solitude and opportunities for primitive recreation and therefore

should be kept at a minimum.



Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiries made with Bill and Suzanne.



Page 37

Two of ten area closed signs surrounding Shambow Pond. Photo credit: Erin Clark

Measure 41. Number of recreational signs

Description: Number of signs aiding or informing recreational users within wilderness. Excludes

signs on wilderness boundaries.

Context: Recreational signs are used to provide guidance to recreational users as well as to

inform them of restrictions on their activities while in wilderness. At Red Rock Lakes NWR

recreational signs are predominantly used to inform users of restrictions. Signage is used to

convey hunting boundaries and areas that are closed year-round to recreational use, such as

Shambow Pond. In 2011, there are two signs conveying hunting restrictions in the River Marsh.

At Shambow Pond there are 10 „Area Closed Behind this Sign‟ signs and 13 posts that may

have once been used

to hold up chain-link

fence to mark the

closed area.

Relevance: The

presence of signs at

Red Rock Lake

predominantly serve

to restrict recreational

user opportunities in

wilderness.

Data source: Bill West,

project leader,

Suzanne Beauchaine,

deputy project leader,

and Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist. Wilderness Fellow performed ground-truthing.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is medium. River Marsh area was not ground-truthed and

more signs may be present than Bill recalled from a canoe trip during the summer of 2011.

Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiries made to Bill, Suzanne, and Kyle. Possible

locations provided were then ground-truthed.


Measure 42. Number of developed campsites adjacent to wilderness

Description: Number of campsites in Upper and Lower Lake Campgrounds, which are

immediately adjacent to wilderness areas.

Context: See context provided in Measure 40. Number of refuge maintained facilities. In

2011, Upper Red Rock Lake Campground provided 12 developed campsites and Lower Red

Rock Lake Campground provided 7 sites. Camping at these sites incurs a $7 per night fee. All

camping within wilderness is prohibited by the refuge.

Relevance: The prohibition of camping within wilderness and the presence of 19 developed

campsites beside wilderness both serve to reduce opportunities for primitive recreation.


Page 38

Data source: Wilderness Fellow.


Process used to compile or gather data: Both campgrounds were visited and the number of

campsites were tallied.


Indicator: Management restrictions on visitor behavior

Measure 43. Number of restrictions on visitor behavior

Description: Including restrictions on camping, fire

use, etc.

Context: There are seven distinct restrictions on visitor

behavior in Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness. They

are:

1) No visitor access year-round to Shambow

Pond and immediately surrounding area.

2) No camping.

3) No fires.

4) No fishing on Upper & Lower Lake, Swan

Lake, and River Marsh.

5) Seasonal restrictions on primitive boating

in order to protect nesting birds.

6) No hunting on Upper Red Rock Lake,

Swan Lake, and a portion of River Marsh.

7) No horse use north of South Centennial

Valley Road other than for game

retrieval.

The refuge also has shifted state instituted hunting dates for some wildlife species in order to

allow for maximum visitor wildlife viewing opportunities. Example: Moose hunting opener is

one month later at Red Rock Lakes NWR, i.e. October 15th instead of September 15th. These

modifications to state hunting dates are not, however, taken into account in this measure.

Relevance: All of these restrictions serve to reduce opportunities for primitive recreation.

Data source: Bill West, Suzanne Beauchaine, and Red Rock Lakes NWR National Wildlife

Refuge information pamphlet (“To Protect You and the Refuge” section).


Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiry made to Bill and Suzanne. List of restrictions

then confirmed by Suzanne.



Page 39

CONSIDERED, UNIMPLEMENTED MEASURES

Measure A. Number of hunter use days

Quality / Indicator: Untrammeled / Authorized actions

Why not used: Data for populating this measure is not readily available and would need to be

sourced from Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks. In addition, Montana FWP may be able to determine

the number of hunting tags issued for areas that include Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness, but may not

be able to provide an exact or even approximate number of hunter use days. More investigation is

necessary.

Measure B. Instances of livestock trespass

Quality / Indicator: Untrammeled / Non-authorized actions

Why not used: While livestock trespass occurs on the refuge, it is not deemed a very significant impact

on the wilderness landscape because most grazing leasees are quick to gather the livestock and

return them to their proper grazing unit. Repair of fence that allows livestock trespass to happen is

sometimes under the purview of the refuge and other times under the purview of the leasee.

Monitoring instances for 2011 would have been difficult because written records have not been kept

of instances of trespass. If records were kept in the future here is a potential framework for an index

that could be used to evaluate the severity of each instance of trespass:

Low severity: <50 animals and/or < ¼ mile

Moderate severity: 5-200 animals and/or > ¼ mile

High severity: 200+ animals and/or trespass occurs on boat ramps or river

For now, instances of livestock trespass (unauthorized non-wildlife grazing) will be monitored via

Measure 9. Number of miscellaneous unauthorized actions.

Measure C. Willow browse

Quality / Indicator: Natural / Plant & animal

Why not used: The amount of willow browse is correlated with the population of Shiras moose present

on the refuge, so there is some redundancy in creating measures to track both. At this time, data for

the Shiras moose population is more readily available. Going forward, Red Rock Lakes NWR should

assess whether the Shiras moose measure allows them to address related management concerns. A

willow and/or aspen browse measure could open up additional veins of discussion, such as possible

impacts on the breeding migratory land bird community and declining regeneration in woodlands and

forests, which may not be evident merely by reviewing fluctuations in moose populations on the

refuge.


Page 40

Measure D. Night sky brightness

Quality / Indicator: Solitude & primitive and unconfined recreation / Remote from outside

Why not used: Availability of data is problematic and discussions with Peter Landres, Aldo Leopold

Wilderness Research Institute and Wilderness Fellows Program Supervisor, led to a conclusion that this

measure should be tracked and populated on a national level (similar to air quality), but will not be

implemented in 2011.

Measure E. Noise pollution

Quality / Indicator: Solitude & primitive and unconfined recreation / Remote from outside

Why not used: Additional investigation into methods for measuring and tracking noise pollution is

necessary and Red Rock Lakes NWR needs to confirm that they have the staff and funds available to

complete this type of study on a yearly or semi-yearly basis. Discussion revolved around potentially

tracking noise pollution by linking the sampling method to already performed dove surveys or

tracking the number of vehicles heard on wilderness boundary roads. If Red Rock Lakes NWR chooses

to pursue this measure in the future I recommend review of the Wilderness.net Soundscapes Toolbox

found here: http://www.wilderness.net/index.cfm?fuse=toolboxes&sec=sound. Suzanne Beauchaine,

deputy project leader, expressed strong interest in taking on this tracking.

Measure F. Number of ibis


Why not used: Although populations surveys conducted by the refuge include ibis, goals for ibis

populations and habitat were not set in the 2009 CCP and it is not a strategic species for refuge

planning.

Measure G. Number of impounded bodies of water

Quality / Indicator: Natural / Physical resources

Why not used: Ideally, Red Rock Lakes NWR would monitor total CF/sec water diversion and

modification in wilderness, but this data is not available today. A suite of less effective, but relevant

other measures was discussed. Agreements were made to use Measure 8. Number of days Lower Red

Rock Lake water gate closed and Measure 22. Number of wilderness water bodies with flow

impacted by roads. Monitoring impoundments was also discussed, but was deemed less significant

than the other proposed measures.

Measure H. Number of bio-controls used

Quality / Indicator: Untrammeled / Authorized actions

Why not used: At this time bio-controls are not used at Red Rock Lakes NWR, but towards the end of

the measure data collection process Bill West mentioned that they might be in future years. If they are

deployed in the future the refuge will be interested in adding this measure.

http://www.wilderness.net/index.cfm?fuse=toolboxes&sec=sound


Page 41

Measure I. Aspen regeneration


Why not used: Data did not appear to be readily available and plans to monitor this in the future are

unclear. If a project is implemented a measure addressing aspen regeneration should be considered

and Nathan Korb, TNC, should be consulted for input.

Measure J. Solar cell and battery stations for electric fence

Quality / Indicator: Undeveloped / Non-recreational installations, structures, and developments

Context: Electric fence is used to create livestock grazing units within wilderness. Electric fence is

favored because it can be easily dropped down in years when a grazing unit is being rested, is

wildlife friendly, and is lighter weight and easier to install in wilderness. Electric fence, however,

requires a power source. Car batteries and solar panels are used to power segments of electrical

fence. Efforts are being made to establish permanent solar cell stations for powering electric fence in

wilderness, but some units are still powered by temporary stations.

Why not used: This measure was originally included, but was removed during final review because it

overlapped with Measure 25. Miles of fence.

Measure K. Miles of cherry-stemmed road

Quality / Indicator: Solitude / Remote from inside

Why not used: The amount of cherry-stemmed road is not something current Red Rock Lakes NWR

management sees changing in the future. An attempt was made, via the 2009 CCP, to close Idlewild

Road (a cherry-stemmed road that provides access to the southern shore of Lower Red Rock Lake).

This proposal was met with vehement public distaste and was removed from the final CCP. Since then

Idlewild Road has been improved and there are no further plans to consider closure of it or any other

cherry-stemmed roads in wilderness. There are currently 1.4 miles of cherry-stemmed road in Red

Rock Lakes NWR wilderness (Lower Lake campground access road: 0.3 miles, middle boat ramp road:

.5 miles, and Idlewild Road: 0.6 miles).


Page 42

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of many refuge activities, especially research, occur in Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness, as it

comprises a majority of the refuge acres on the Centennial Valley floor. This results in two unique realities at

Red Rock:

1) Wilderness tends to blend in and be „the norm‟ since it contains much of the critical habitat and bird

populations. i.e. Upper and Lower Red Rock Lakes, River Marsh, Swan Lake, and Shambow Pond.

Wilderness is a fact of every-day management at Red Rock Lakes and not a unique sub-set of the

refuge acreage.

2) In spite of 1), wilderness awareness is high. Wilderness is often remote and difficult to access on other

refuges, national forests, and national parks. At Red Rock Lakes NWR, not only has all refuge staff

spent time in the wilderness, but most work in it weekly, if not daily. This is what made Red Rock Lakes

NWR an ideal refuge for inclusion in the first round of wilderness character monitoring measure

development. Staff throughout the process showed keen interest and investment.

A robust set of measures were developed for Red Rock Lakes NWR between August and November 2011.

The measures emphasize the refuge‟s trust species: trumpeter swans, Shiras moose, Arctic grayling, and their

associated habitat and research. The measures also identify significant management activities occurring in

wilderness: water control for migratory waterfowl habitat, livestock grazing and associated fence

maintenance, and invasive plant control. The measures developed capture an excellent snapshot of the core

26,214 acres of wilderness on the Centennial Valley floor.

The measures do not thoroughly address changes in wilderness beyond the Centennial Valley floor main

wilderness area. The measures do not address the sand hills habitat found in a separate, rectangular

wilderness unit in the northeastern corner of the refuge or the aspen and coniferous woodlands and forests

found in several wilderness units south of South Centennial Valley Road.


Page 43

Future additions to Red Rock Lakes NWR monitoring measures could strive to improve monitoring of these

habitats and areas, but the fundamental reality is that the current set of measures reflect current management

priorities. Since little research or management currently occurs in these peripheral wilderness units it logically

follows that measures were not developed to allow for their monitoring.

The process of creating monitoring measures for Red Rock Lakes NWR brought heightened awareness to

unauthorized activities that occur in the refuge‟s wilderness—from ATV use by grazing permittees to the

frequency with which planes or helicopters fly low over refuge wilderness. A tracking system, employing a

hard copy log of observed and recorded instances of unauthorized activity maintained by the refuge staff,

was put in place in September 2011 in order to improve monitoring of these activities. The tracking system

also allows refuge staff to keep track of their own authorized use of motorized vehicles, motorized

equipment, and mechanized transport.

As a result of my work as a Wilderness Fellow I‟d like to offer Red Rock Lakes NWR staff the following

recommendations:

Continue to encourage tracking of unauthorized and miscellaneous authorized activities that stretch

the intended spirit of wilderness.

Look for ways to improve monitoring of water control on the refuge. The current measures, „Number

of days Lower Red Rock Lake water gates closed‟ and „Number of wilderness water bodies with

flow impacted by roads‟, captures only a slice of the water management puzzle. I know the system

of historical water control structures is very complex and numerous, and thereby precludes easy

monitoring, but continue to consider better possibilities for quantifying impacts to habitat and water

availability, both within refuge wilderness and downstream.

Encourage researchers, including refuge staff, to tout the fact that their research occurs within

wilderness—both a privilege and an enhancer of research quality—and is conducted in a way that

demonstrates wilderness character awareness.

Reconsider several visitor restrictions:

o Shambow Pond closure: Current visitors are restricted from this area year-round. Could

restrictions be relaxed to only prohibit entry during trumpeter swan breeding and nesting

season? Also, a review of the area surrounding the pond uncovered 13 waist-high metal

pipe posts, which the Wilderness Fellow presumed to previously hold area closed signs, but

actually may have been part of a chain-link fence. An assessment should be made whether

removal of these posts would improve wilderness character without causing undue impacts. In

addition to these 13 posts, there are 10 „Area Closed Behind this Sign‟ signs. If an effort is

made to remove the 13 unused posts, consideration should also be given to reducing the

number of area closed signs as well.

o Fishing is prohibited on Upper and Lower Red Rock Lake and River Marsh to minimize

impacts to migratory birds, however, primitive boating and duck hunting (Lower Red Rock

Lake only) is allowed, which seem capable of similar disturbances to migratory bird

populations. Consider allowing fishing for a limited portion of year, with attention paid to

the lake‟s appropriate carrying capacity, on Upper Red Rock Lake only. This would not

diminish wilderness character and would be a method for reducing populations of non-native


Page 44

fish, such as Yellowstone-cutthroat hybrid trout. Restrictions, such as required release of Arctic

grayling and barb-less hooks, could be put in place.

If management priorities expand to include more work in woodland and forested areas of the

refuge, incorporate monitoring measures to reflect that work.

Consider expanding visitor tracking (through guest log in the refuge office) to inquire whether visitors

visited wilderness during their stay. In order to improve visitor awareness of wilderness, consider

highlighting wilderness on visitor kiosks and more extensively in the refuge brochure.

Encourage all Red Rock Lakes NWR staff to attend formal wilderness training, since so much of their

work will require interaction with wilderness. The Arthur Carhart Wilderness Institute provides

wilderness stewardship training (http://www.wilderness.net/index.cfm?fuse=NWPS&sec=courses),

but biological staff should be encouraged to search out wilderness training that emphasizes

wilderness research methods or takes the form of a field course or conference.

Continually question the need for fence within and on the boundaries of wilderness. There is currently

18.9 miles of fence within 26,214 acres of wilderness at Red Rock Lakes NWR. The boundary of this

area is also almost entirely surrounded by fence and is not included in the 18.9 mile figure. The

presence of this fence acts as both a physical and psychological barrier for recreation and visitor

use and can influence, if not impede, wildlife movement.

Even without the implementation of these recommendations, Red Rock Lakes National Wildlife Refuge

provides an excellent example of wholehearted integration of wilderness into overall refuge goals and

objectives. The wilderness on this refuge also played an important role in a trust species success story—the

recovery of the trumpeter swan. Furthermore, Red Rock Lakes NWR has demonstrated a commitment to

wilderness character in the last two decades through eliminating use of airboats by refuge staff and

motorized boats by the public, replacing permanent, barbed wire fence with electric, drop-down fencing, and

eliminating winter feeding of swans.

Although not successful, the refuge attempted to reduce the mileage of cherry-stemmed roads by suggesting

the closure of Idlewild Road. (Significant, negative public comment on this plan in the draft CCP resulted in its

removal.) Currently, a new proposal is under consideration to close Elk Lake Road, which lies on the wilderness

boundary. This change would not only reduce adjacent road, but would also minimize road impacts on flow of

Elk Springs Creek and Red Rock Creek, two important wilderness creeks and spawning habitat for Arctic

grayling.

Continued efforts such as these in coming decades will result in improved wilderness character at Red Rock

Lakes National Wildlife Refuge. These improvements will be captured by the monitoring measures put in

place in 2011, and by any additional measures the refuge deems fit to include going forward. All of these

positive changes are a testament to the wilderness consciousness and caring of the Red Rock Lakes NWR staff.

http://www.wilderness.net/index.cfm?fuse=NWPS&sec=courses


Page 45

Swans take flight from Lower Red Rock Lake in Red Rock Lakes Wilderness in early

November 2011. Thousands of migrating trumpeter and tundra swans stop at Lower Red

Rock Lake to feed in late October and early November before the lake and River Marsh

freezes.

DOCUMENTS CONSULTED

Landres P., Barnes C., Dennis J.G., Devine T., Geissler P., McCasland C.S., Merigliano L., Seastrand J., Swain

R., 2008. Keeping it wild: an interagency strategy to monitor trends in wilderness character across the

National Wilderness Preservation System. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-212. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, 77p.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1976. Red Rock Lakes Wilderness Proposal.19p.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. June 1985. Wilderness Management Plan: Red Rock Lakes National

Wilderness Refuge, Red Rock Lakes Wilderness. 42p.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. October 2009. Red Rock Lakes National Wildlife Refuge brochure.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. June 2009. Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Red Rock Lakes National

Wildlife Refuge.


Page 46

APPENDICES

Priority ranking of measures

Those measures with the highest overall scores are the highest priority for assessing trends in wilderness character.

A. Level of importance (the measure is highly relevant to the quality and indicator of wilderness character,

and is highly useful for managing the wilderness):

High = 3 points, Medium = 2 points, Low = 1 point

B. Level of vulnerability (measures an attribute of wilderness character that currently is at risk, or might likely

be at risk over 10-15 years):


C. Degree of reliability (the measure can be monitored accurately with a high degree of confidence, and

would yield the same result if measured by different people at different times):


D. Degree of reasonableness (the measure is related to an existing effort or could be monitored without

significant additional effort):

High = 1 point, Low = 0 point

Criteria for Prioritizing Potential Measures

Quality Measure A. Importance B. Vulnerability C. Reliability D. Reasonableness

TOTAL

SCORE

Untrammeled Percent of natural fire

starts manipulated within

wilderness 1 1 3 1 6

Acres of prescribed

burning 1 3 3 1 8

# of water bodies with fish

restoration efforts 2 1 2 1 6

# of water bodies where

fish trapping and/or

gamete collecting occurred 2 2 2 1 7

# of man hours surveying

and treating non-native,

invasive plants

2 3 2 1 8

# of non-wildlife AUMs 3 3 3 1 10 # of animals handled 2 1 3 1 7

Date Lower Red Rock Lake

water gate(s) closed 3 3 3 1 10

# of miscellaneous

unauthorized actions 3 3 3 1 10


Page 47



TOTAL

SCORE

Natural

# of plant, non-indigenous,

invasive species 2 3 3 1 9

# of non-plant, non-

indigenous, invasives 2 3 3 1 9

# of federally listed

threatened, endangered,

or candidate species 3 3 3 1 10

# of extirpated,

indigenous species 1 3 3 1 8

# of active trumpeter

swan nests 1 1 3 1 6

# of trumpeter swan

cygnets 1 1 3 1 6

Total population of

trumpeter swans 3 1 3 1 8

# of Shiras moose 2 2 3 1 8

# of cormorant nests 1 1 2 0 4 % of water bodies

meeting SAV objectives 1 2 1 0 4

# of water bodies with

spawning Arctic grayling

populations

3 3 3 1 10

Air quality 3 3 3 1 10 # of wilderness water

bodies with flow impacted

by roads

3 3 2 1 9

Winter lake oxygen level 1 2 3 0 6

# of avalanches 1 1 1 1 4 Undeveloped Miles of fence 3 2 2 1 8

Miles of powerline 3 1 3 1 8 # of research structures

and equipment installed 2 1 3 1 7

# of bird nesting structures 1 1 3 1 6 # of inholdings 1 1 3 1 6

Uses of motorized boats or

airboats 1 3 3 1 8

Miles of fence installed or

repaired using mechanized

equipment

3 3 3 1 10

Miscellaneous authorized

uses 2 2 3 1 8

# of unauthorized uses 3 2 1 1 7

# of emergency uses 1 1 3 1 6 # of disturbances of

cultural resources 1 1 3 0 5


Page 48



TOTAL

SCORE

Solitude

and/or

opportunities

for primitive

recreation

Miles of improved trail 1 1 3 1 6 Acres of contiguous

wilderness 3 1 3 1 8

Miles of road on

wilderness boundaries 3 1 3 1 8

Frequency of low-flying

planes 2 2 1 1 6

# of refuge maintained

facilities 3 1 3 1 8

# of recreational signs 2 2 2 1 7

# of developed campsites

adjacent to wilderness 2 1 3 1 7

# of restrictions on visitor

behavior 3 1 3 1 8

Names of team members filling out this worksheet: Suzanne Beauchaine, Kyle Cutting, Erin Clark


Page 49

Effort required for wilderness character monitoring

Wilderness Fellow effort per measure

Quality Measure

Data Source (Office paper

files, computer files, or field

work) Time spent

(in whole hours) Comments

Untrammeled % natural fire starts manipulated

Suzanne’s files 1 Unsure whether they are paper or digital

Acres of prescribed burning ArcGIS data 1

# of water bodies with fish restoration efforts

Glenn’s memory 1

# of water bodies with fish trapping and/or gamete collecting

Glenn’s memory 1

# of man hours surveying and treating non-native, invasive plants

Suzanne’s computer files

2 Multiple discussions about how to best track invasives

# of non-wildlife AUMs Paper files 4 Permittee bills for collection

# of animals handled Computer files 2 Scaup PDF report & database

# of days Lower Red Rock Lake water gates closed

Paper files 2 Jeff Warren notes dates in his planner. Wilderness Fellow visited dam.

# of miscellaneous unauthorized actions

Paper files 2 Log kept on wall near printer

Natural # of plant, non-indigenous, invasive species

Suzanne’s memory

2

# of non-plant, non-indigenous, invasive species

Suzanne’s memory

1

# of federally listed threatened, endangered, or candidate species

USFWS website 1

# of extirpated, indigenous species

Suzanne & Kyle’s memory

1

# of active trumpeter swans RRL database 1

# of trumpeter swan cygnets RRL database 1

Total population of trumpeter swans

RRL database 1

# of Shiras moose RRL database 1

# of cormorant nests RRL database 1

Lake sub-aquatic vegetation levels

Jeff’s digital files + paper files

3 Paper files contain historical data from 1970s & 1980s


Page 50

# of water bodies with spawning Arctic grayling populations

Glenn’s memory 1

Air quality N/A N/A

# of wilderness water bodies with flow impacted by roads

Glenn & Kyle’s memory

1

Winter lake oxygen levels Kyle’s digital files

1

# of avalanches Suzanne’s files 1 Unsure whether they are paper or digital

Undeveloped Miles of fence ArcGIS data 1

Miles of powerline ArcGIS data 4 Wilderness fellow walked powerline in field and GPS locations of all powerline poles

# of research structures and equipment installed

Staff memory 2 Wilderness Fellow spent time in field locating structures

# of bird nesting structures ArcGIS data 3 Wilderness fellow took GPS coordinates of all wilderness bird nesting structures in the field

# of inholdings N/A 1

Uses of motorized boats or airboats

Staff memory 1 Kyle, Jeff, and Glenn contributed

Miles of fence installed or repaired using mechanized equipment

ArcGIS data 2

Miscellaneous authorized uses

Paper file 1 Paper log near printer

# of unauthorized uses Paper file 2 Paper log near printer

# of emergency uses Paper file 1 Paper log near printer

# of disturbances of cultural resources

Staff memory 1

Solitude & primitive recreation

Miles of improved trail Staff memory 1

Acres of contiguous wilderness

ArcGIS data 1 Wilderness boundary layer

Miles of road on wilderness boundaries

ArcGIS data 1 Road layer

Frequency of low-flying planes

Paper file 1 Paper log near printer

# of refuge maintained facilities

Staff memory 1

# of recreational signs Staff memory 3 Wilderness Fellow counted signs at Shambow Pond


Page 51

Solitude & primitive recreation

# of developed campsites adjacent to wilderness

N/A 3 Wilderness Fellow visited

campgrounds

# of restrictions on visitor behavior

Paper files 1 Red Rock Lakes NWR visitor

brochure

Total Hours 64

Refuge staff effort

Title of staff involved

Time to identify, prioritize, and select

measures (in whole hrs) Comments

Project Leader 9

Deputy Project Leader 12

Refuge Biologist 17 Kyle remarked that, “This was a nice experience as it forced all of the staff to stop and think about wilderness issues.”

Administrative Officer 7 Attendance at three group meetings and help with AUM bills

Maintenance Technician 6 Attendance at three group meetings

I&M Biologist 4 Three one-on-one meetings and several email exchanges and delivery of data

FWS Fisheries Biologist 2 One meeting and several email exchanges and delivery of data

Miscellaneous Wilderness Fellow Effort

Time to identify, prioritize, and select all the measures

(in whole hours)

Time to enter all data into the WCM database application

(in whole hours)

Time on other tasks directly related to WCM (e.g. reading CCP, giving

presentations) (in whole hours)

Time doing other Refuge tasks not related to WCM (in whole hours)

30 12 100* 66** * CCP and background reading 10 hours Preparing final report 56 hours Updates to measures tracking spreadsheet 8 hours Field groundtruthing 11 hours Review of ArcGIS data 8 hours Meeting with Nathan Korb (TNC) 3 hours Review of RAPP data 2 hours AUM database entry 2 hours ** Data collection for grazing study with Kyle 10 hours Fish trapping with Glenn 4 hours National Public Lands Day service 9 hours Assisting USGS with drone survey 20 hours Fence maintenance in wilderness 4 hours Lesser scaup banding efforts 10 hours Assisting at research sites on Odell Creek 5 hours Daily SCA/Americorps logs 4 hours


Page 52

Detailed description of data sources and how the data were gathered

UNTRAMMELED

Measure 1. Percent of natural fire starts that are manipulated within the boundaries of wilderness

Data source: Records kept by Suzanne Beauchaine, deputy project leader.

Data adequacy: Measure is a reflection of fire manipulation and not the extent of natural fire‟s impacts on

the landscape. Data supplied is of high confidence.


Measure 2. Acres of prescribed burning

Data source: All prescribed fire activities on the refuge are managed by Suzanne Beauchaine, deputy project

leader.



Measure 3. Number of water bodies with fish restoration efforts



Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiry sent to Glenn Boltz and data confirmed with Kyle Cutting.

Glenn is able to provide number of eggs incubated, number of fry released, and the name(s) of water bodies

where releases occurred.

Measure 4. Number of water bodies where fish trapping and/or gamete collecting occurred


Data adequacy: Data supplied is of high confidence. Measure does not quantify the number of instances

trapping or gamete collecting occurred, only the number of water bodies (ex. trapping occurred in Upper

Red Rock Lake on three separate evenings in September & October 2011).

Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiry sent to Glenn Boltz and data confirmed with Kyle Cutting.

Glenn is able to provide number of eggs incubated as a result of trapping and gamete collecting.

Measure 5. Number of man hours surveying and treating non-native, invasive plants

Data source: Number of hours compiled by Suzanne Beauchaine, deputy project leader.

Data adequacy: Data supplied is of medium confidence given that hours of wilderness treatment were broken

out after the fact from records of total hours of surveying and treating across the refuge.



Page 53

Measure 6. Number of non-wildlife AUMs

Data source: Data is compiled and can be accessed from the Red Rock Lakes database.


Process used to compile or gather data: Data entry for 2008 through 2011 data was performed by

Wilderness Fellow. Database will need to be updated yearly going forward by a member of the staff or a

seasonal employee/volunteer.

Measure 7. Number of animals handled

Data source: Lesser scaup report containing yearly banding statistics provided by Jeff Warren, I&M biologist.

Dave Messmer, a doctoral student, also contributes to lesser scaup work and record keeping. Glenn Boltz,

FWS fisheries biologist, provides Arctic grayling tagging data. Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist, and Suzanne

Beauchaine, deputy project leader, also contributed information.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high, given that careful records are kept and drive research

performed by refuge staff.

Process used to compile or gather data: Request for counts sent via email to Jeff and Glenn. Discussions were

had with Kyle and Suzanne.

Measure 8. Date Lower Red Rock Lake water gate closed

Data source: Jeff Warren, I&M biologist, keeps a record of when gates are opened or closed. Kyle Cutting,

refuge biologist, and Bill West, project leader, also keep some records.


Process used to compile or gather data: Dates obtained from Jeff, Kyle, and Bill.

Measure 9: Number of miscellaneous unauthorized actions

Data source: Instances of unauthorized trammeling are recorded by refuge staff on spreadsheets kept on a

clipboard hanging near the printer.

Process used to compile or gather data: Data is taken from spreadsheet mentioned above.

Data adequacy: Confidence of data is high given that only unauthorized trammeling that results in a refuge

response are tallied for this measure. It is possible that other unauthorized actions occur but are not observed

and therefore not responded to. The process currently in place relies on staff remembering to report actions

resulting in a refuge response.

NATURAL

Measure 10. Number of plant, non-indigenous, invasive species




Page 54

Process used to compile or gather data: Suzanne manages all non-native plant surveying on the refuge and

produced a list of species currently present.

Measure 11. Number of non-plant, non-indigenous, invasive species

Data source: Inquires made with Suzanne Beauchaine, deputy project leader, and Kyle Cutting, refuge

biologist.


Process used to compile or gather data: Compilation of responses from Suzanne and Kyle.

Measure 12. Number of federally listed threatened or endangered species

Data source: FWS site that lists federally listed and proposed species

(http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/adHocSpeciesForm.jsp)


Process used to compile or gather data: Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist, reviewed website listed above.

Measure 13. Number of extirpated, indigenous species

Data source: Inquiry made to Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist.


Process used to compile or gather data: List of species provided by Kyle.

Measure 14. Number of active trumpeter swan nests

Data source: A count is made of active nests each year via plane by Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high. Flights are thorough and the white birds are easy to detect on a

green landscape. It is possible to accurately separate data re: wilderness nests from non-wilderness nests.

Process used to compile or gather data: Count data is entered in the Red Rock Lakes NWR database and

Kyle can query the database in order to provide yearly counts.

Measure 15. Number of trumpeter swan cygnets

Data source: A count is made of cygnets each year via plane by Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist.


Process used to compile or gather data: Cygnet count data is entered in the Red Rock Lakes NWR database

and Kyle can query the database in order to provide yearly counts.

Measure 16. Total population of trumpeter swans

Data source: September population counts are used by the Trumpeter Swan Society to establish tri-state

population estimates, so September refuge counts will be used in this measure. Data are available in the Red

Rock Lakes NWR database.

http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/adHocSpeciesForm.jsp


Page 55


Process used to compile or gather data: Kyle can query Red Rock Lakes NWR database in order to provide

yearly total population counts.

Measure 17. Number of Shiras moose

Data source: Observed adult and calve populations are available in the Red Rock Lakes NWR database,

which can be queried by Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist.

Data adequacy: The CCP details some of the concerns regarding past estimations of moose populations on the

refuge. From 1944 to through the 1980s survey flights were used to track populations. Since 1991 budget

constraints and shifting priorities have resulted in a termination of regular aerial surveys. So, current estimates

reflect both potential differences in detection rate and true fluctuations in animal abundance.

Process used to compile or gather data: Survey flights are flown by the state, but funded by the refuge.

Survey data is provided to Kyle and he enters it into the Red Rock Lakes NWR database.

Measure 18. Number of cormorant nests

Data source: Yearly survey results can be found in the Red Rock Lakes NWR database, which can be queried

by Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is low, given acknowledgement that different bulrush islands can be

surveyed from year-to-year. A significant decrease in nests from 2009 (225 nests) to 2011 (65-71 nests) may

be explained by different islands surveyed.

Process used to compile or gather data: Nests are counted from aerial photographs.

Measure 19. Percent of water bodies meeting SAV objectives

Data source: Jeff Warren, I&M biologist, and Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is low given information Jeff shared about SAV sampling methods not

accounting for patchiness of vegetation and the fact that data has not been collected for Upper Red Rock

Lake and Swan Lake since 1984 and 1983 (respectively).

Process used to compile or gather data: Jeff Warren provided percent canopy cover values by species for

Lower Red Rock Lake and River Marsh.

Measure 20. Number of water bodies with spawning Arctic grayling populations

Data source: Glenn Boltz, FWS fisheries biologist.


Process used to compile or gather data: Glenn conducts population surveys in all Red Rock Lake NWR water

bodies each year.

Measure 21. Air quality

Data source: National I&M program.


Page 56

Data adequacy: N/A

Process used to compile or gather data: N/A

Measure 22. Number of wilderness water bodies with flow impacted by roads

Data source: Kyle Cutting, refuge biologist, and Glenn Boltz, FWS fisheries biologist, provided a list of

impacted water bodies.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is medium given that the assessment was qualitative.

Process used to compile or gather data: Qualitative assessment by Kyle and Glenn.

Measure 23. Winter lake oxygen level

Data source: 102 measurements were taken between 12/17/2011 and 4/1/2011. Kyle provided an

average winter lake oxygen level from those values.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high. Sample size is large.

Process used to compile or gather data:

Measure 24. Number of avalanches


Data adequacy: Confidence in data is low given that not all avalanches will be observed or detected.

Process used to compile or gather data: Suzanne keeps a record of avalanches.

UNDEVELOPED

Measure 25. Miles of fence

Data source: The refuge maintains a GIS data layer of all fence that has been mapped using Trimble or other

GPS units by seasonal technicians.

Data adequacy: All fence has been mapped with the exception of one segment. That segment, which is

between grazing unit 12W and 12E, was estimated in ArcGIS as 2.5 miles. This fence segment should be

mapped using a GPS unit in 2012 in order to improve data accuracy.

Process used to compile or gather data: Fence layer in ArcGIS used to isolate wilderness fence and calculate

total mileage.

Measure 26. Miles of powerline

Data source: Wilderness fellow walked the extent of the powerline on the refuge and GPS‟ed the length as

well as the location of all poles.

Data adequacy: Confidence in this data is high. The accuracy of the GPS is 10m or less.

Process used to compile or gather data: GPS data collected by Wilderness Fellow was brought into ArcGIS

and ArcGIS tools were used to calculate the total mileage.


Page 57

Measure 27. Number of research structures and equipment installed

Data source: Refuge staff were asked to recall locations of all structures. Kyle Cutting provided locations of

all water equipment on Upper and Lower Red Rock Lake and information about t-posts in the willow fen.

Suzanne Beauchaine provided locations of all weather stations. Glenn Boltz provided a map and coordinates

for all thermographs he has installed for Arctic grayling creek studies. Wilderness Fellow noted one research

transect t-post near willow fens and provided GPS coordinates.

Data adequacy: Additional installations likely identify research transects or plots that the current staff is

unaware of. Jeff Warren may be able to help locate some of these installations in 2012. Seasonal technicians

can assist by taking GPS coordinates of installations they find while performing field work in 2012.

Process used to compile or gather data: Compilation of known structures/installations provided by Kyle,

Suzanne, and Glenn.

Measure 28. Number of bird nesting structures

Data source: Wilderness Fellow took GPS coordinates for all bird boxes in wilderness in October 2011.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high. GPS data collected in October 2011 should account for all bird

boxes.

Process used to compile or gather data: A tally of the total number of boxes was taken while GPS

coordinates were compiled in the field. Suzanne Beauchaine incorporated the GPS coordinates into an ArcGIS

layer.

Measure 29. Number of inholdings

Data source: Bill West, project leader.


Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiry made to Bill.

Measure 30. Uses of motorized boats or airboats

Data source: Jeff provided dates for 2011 uses of motorboats prior to September for spotlighting purposes.

Uses of boats since September have been recorded on the „Authorized uses of mechanized vehicles,

equipment, and transport‟ log that the Wilderness Fellow created and is found on a clipboard that hangs on

the wall near the printer.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high. Uses of motorboats are infrequent and Bill West, project leader,

is always made aware in advance.

Process used to compile or gather data: Combination of inquiries made with Jeff and Glenn and compilation

of records made to log.

Measure 31: Miles of fence installed or repaired using mechanized equipment

Data source: Suzanne Beauchaine, deputy project leader, coordinates all contractor and seasonal technician

fence maintenance and installation efforts.


Page 58

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high in 2010 and medium in 2011. Wilderness Fellow was not able to

confirm 2011 mileage with Suzanne.

Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiry made to Suzanne.

Measure 32: Miscellaneous authorized uses

Data source: All staff provided examples of authorized uses between January and August 2011. Since

September, a log for all authorized uses has been posted on the wall near the printer. All instances of

authorized use are recorded on this log and a copy of the Minimal Requirements Analysis should be filed in

the Wilderness Files at Red Rock Lakes NWR Headquarters.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high. The refuge manager is made aware of all authorized uses and

the Minimal Requirements Analysis process formalizes the decision-making process and ensures that detailed

records are kept.

Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiries made with all staff members, wilderness files reviewed, and

post-August log reviewed.

Measure 33: Number of unauthorized uses

Data source: All members of the Red Rock Lakes NWR staff, plus records from the log in refuge headquarters.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is medium, given that careful records were not kept before September

2011 and that instances of unauthorized use may not be observed.

Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiries made with all Red Rock Lakes NWR staff and data

compiled from log in refuge headquarters.

Measure 34. Number of emergency uses

Data source: All members of the Red Rock Lakes NWR staff, plus records from the log in refuge headquarters.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high, given that decisions in an emergency situation would be made by

the project leader or deputy project leader with full consideration of all options for responding to the

situation.

Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiries made with all Red Rock Lakes NWR staff and data

compiled from log in refuge headquarters.

Measure 35. Number of disturbances of cultural resources




SOLITUDE OR A PRIMITIVE AND UNCONFINED TYPE OF RECREATION

Measure 36. Miles of improved trail



Page 59



Measure 37. Acres of contiguous wilderness

Data source: ArcGIS layer depicting Red Rock Lakes NWR wilderness.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high. ArcGIS layer is an accurate representation of wilderness

acreage.

Process used to compile or gather data: Accessed area acreage values in ArcGIS.

Measure 38. Miles of road on wilderness boundaries

Data source: ArcGIS data layer of all Red Rock Lake roads used to isolate and measure all roads on

wilderness boundaries.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is high given accuracy of ArcGIS data.

Process used to compile or gather data: Measure length tool used in ArcGIS to calculate distance of all

individual road segments along wilderness boundaries.

Measure 39. Frequency of low-flying planes

Data source: A log has been established for tracking instances of low-flying aircraft. This log captures date,

time, and type of aircraft observed. This log is posted near the printer at refuge headquarters.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is medium, given that the log was not established until September 2011

and it is possible that refuge staff was not present to observe instances of low-flying aircraft passing over

refuge wilderness.

Process used to compile or gather data: Data compiled from log completed by staff and available in refuge

headquarters.

Measure 40. Number of refuge maintained facilities



Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiries made with Bill and Suzanne.

Measure 41. Number of recreational signs

Data source: Bill West, project leader, Suzanne Beauchaine, deputy project leader, and Kyle Cutting, refuge

biologist. Wilderness Fellow performed ground-truthing.

Data adequacy: Confidence in data is medium. River Marsh area was not ground-truthed and more signs may

be present than Bill recalled from a canoe trip during the summer of 2011.

Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiries made to Bill, Suzanne, and Kyle. Possible locations provided

were then ground-truthed.


Page 60

Measure 42. Number of developed campsites adjacent to wilderness

Data source: Wilderness Fellow.


Process used to compile or gather data: Both campgrounds were visited and the number of campsites were

tallied.

Measure 43. Number of restrictions on visitor behavior

Data source: Bill West, Suzanne Beauchaine, and Red Rock Lakes NWR National Wildlife Refuge information

pamphlet (“To Protect You and the Refuge” section).


Process used to compile or gather data: Inquiry made to Bill and Suzanne. List of restrictions then confirmed

by Suzanne.

red rock lakes nwr report on wilderness character monitoring€¦ · frequency of low-flying planes...

Documents