The History and Status of Fishes in the
Little Lost River Drainage, Idaho
Bart L. Gamett
May 1999
Lost River Ranger District
Salmon-Challis National Forest
Upper Snake Region
Idaho Department of Fish and Game
Idaho Falls District
Bureau of Land Management
Sagewillow, Inc.
F'ORWARD AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This document representsthe culmination of a cooperative effort by several agenciesand individuals
over a sevenyear period. The field work was fundedby the U.S. ForestService,Bureauof Land Managemen!
and Idaho Department of Fish and Game. The U.S. Forest Service, Idaho Department of Fish and Game,
Bureau of Land Management,and Idaho Division of Environmental Quality provided personneland equipment
for field work. The data analysis and report preparationwas funded by the Idaho Department of Fish and
Game and the U.S. Forest Service. Additional funding was provided by Sagewillow,Inc, a landowner in the
Little Lost River drainage. Mike Foster,Lost River RangerDistrict, SalmonandChallis National Forests;Bob
Martin, Upper SnakeRegion, Idaho Department of Fish and Game; Mark Gamblin, Upper SnakeRegion,
Idaho Department of Fish and Game; Pat Koelsch, Idaho Falls District, Bureau of Land Management; and
Leon Jadlowski, Salmon and Challis National Forests each provided helpful reviews of the manuscript.
Without this cooperative effort, this study and report would not have been possible.
The authorwishesto expressappreciationto the following individuals who assistedin the completion
ofthis project.
USDA Forest Service
Daryl Moss - assistingwith survey methodology and field work
Jeff Knisely - assistingwith survey methodology, field work, and report preparation
Brett High - assistingwith survey methodology,field work, report preparation,dataanalysis,and conducting
the aging and maturity study
Mike Foster, Leon Jadlowski, and Jan Pisano - assistingwith survey methodology
Melissa Abbott - report preparation
Ryan Spencerand Mitch Day - assistingwith preparation of GIS coveragesand maps and assisting with field
work
Alyce Clark,LindaFoster, and Brad Gamett - assistingwith report preparationand field work
Beoky Lish, Will Marcroft, Dan Cunderman,Rosa Erickson, Marie Shaffer, Scott Sayer,Roy Churchwell,
Dave Fallis, Cody Schmidt, Chris Schmidq Dave Kearns, Karen Place, Jake Lewis, Brian O'Hearn, Shawn
Childs, Kam Nelson, Brett High, Mitch Day, Brett Gamett, Connie Hurst, Rachel Pieterick, and Randy
Schluter - assistingwith field work
Idaho Department of Fish and Game
Bob Martin - assistingwith report preparation
Mark Gamblin - assistingwith survey methodology and providing accessto file data
Bruce Rich - assistingwith survey methodology and field work
Beoky Lish - assistingwith report preparation
Sharon Clark - conducting stocking records research
Crystal Christensen- technical typing
USDI Bureau of Land Management
Pat Koelsch - providing technical assistance,accessto file data, and assistingwith field work
Dan Kotansky - assistingwith field work
Cindy Weston - providing accessto file data
Idaho State Division of Environmental Qualitv
DonZaroban - identification of sculpin
Tom Herron - technical assistanceand assistancewith field work
Sheryl Hill - assistingwith field work
Idaho State Universitv
Dr. Jack Griffith - technical assistanceand assistancewith field work
Volunteers
Charmaine Gamett - assistingwith field work, data analysis,and report preparation
Ashley Waddoups - report preparation
Paula Gamett - historical research
Heather Gamett - report preparation
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT....
1
INTRODUCTION
STUDY AREA
Location and Setting
Climate
Lands and Administration
Methods
2
)
2
4
5
FINDINGS AND DISCUS SION
Part 1: History and Overview
Water
Streams
Disoharge
Temperatures....
Lakes and Reservoirs . . .
SpeciesPresent
SpeciesOrigin
Previous Work .
Fishery ManagementHistorY
Habitat ManagementHistory
Part2: Species
Introduction
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
Bull Trout
Distribution
HistoricDistribution
Life History Strategies
Diet .
Growth
SexualMaturity
Spawning,Incubation,andRearing
HabitatCharacteristics. . .
PopulationTrend
Threatsto Bull Trout Populations
StreamTemperature. . . .
Hybridization,Competition,andPredationby Exotic Brook Trout . . . .
Disruptionof MigratoryCoridors
LossThroughIrrigationDitches
Artifi cial MigrationBarriers
AnglerHarvest
Lossof CoverandHabitatComplexity
Sediment
Brook Trout .
Distribution
1 a
IJ
t3
15
16
18
18
18
20
20
2A
22
24
24
25
25
26
30
aa
-lJ
aa
JJ
34
35
36
36
36
36
37
an
J I
37
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)
Maturity
Growth
RainbowTrout.
Distribution
Growth
ShortheadSculpin
C u t t h r o a t T r o. u t
Guppy,GreenSwordtail,AmelanicConvictCichlids,MozambiqueTilapia,
andGoldfish....
Brown Trout .
GoldenTrout .
MountainWhitefish
Grayling
Part3: Subdrainages. . . .
Introduction
AspenUreeK
BadgerCreek
BarneyCreek(IncludingBarneyHot Springs) . '
BarneyHot Springs
BasinCreek
BasingerCanyon
BearCanyon
BearCreek
Bell MountainCreek(BasingerCanyon)
Big Creek
Big SpringsCreek
Birch Basin
BirdCanyon....
Black Canyon
BlackCreek
Black Tail Canyon
BoulderCreekandFowler Springs
BriggsCanyon
B u o k C a n y o.n. . .
Bull Creek
BuntingCanyon
Cabin Fork .
CampCreek(SawmillCanyon)
CampCreek(SouthernLemhi MountainRange)
CedarRun CanyonandMud Spring
CedarvilleCanyon(includingNorth Fork andCabinFork) '
Chicken Creek . .
Coal Creek
CorralCanyonCreek
CorralCreek
......39
.......39
.......39
....39
.......42
.....43
......43
47
A1
47
48
48
48
48
48
49
50
50
50
52
52
52
53
53
55
56
56
56
56
57
57
57
57
57
58
58
58
59
59
60
60
60
6I
6l
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)
Cub Canyon
Deep Creek
Deer Creek (seealso Deer Creek, North Fork; Deer Creek, South Fork)
Deer Creek, North Fork .
Deer Creek, South Fork .
Dry Creek
EastCanyon....
Eightmile Canyon (including Right and Left forks)
Fallert Springs
Fallert Springs Creek
Firebox Creek
Fowler Springs
Garfield Creek
Hawley Canyon
Hawley Creek
HellCanyon....
Hilts Creek
Horse Creek
HorseLake Creek
HorsethiefCanyonCreek
...
HurstCanvon
Iron Creek
JacksonCreek
Jumpoff Canyon. . .
Little Lost River, Mainstem (including Sawmill Creek)
Long Lost Creek
Magpie Springs
Mahogany Creek
Main Fork Little Lost River .
MassacreCreek
Meadow Creek
Middle Canyon
Mill Creek
Moffett Creek (including Moffett Springs)
Moffett Springs
Moonshine Creek
Mormon Gulch
MudSprings....
North Creek
.....,
North Fork ( C e d a r v i l l e C a n y o n )
Pine Creek
QuigleyCreek
Redrock Creek
RockyRunCreek(SunnyBarCanyon)..
SandsCanvon
llt
61
6l
6I
62
64
64
66
66
67
67
67
68
68
68
68
69
69
69
70
70
70
7l
72
72
72
78
78
78
79
79
79
80
80
8l
81
82
82
82
82
83
83
83
84
........85
...'....85
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)
SandsCreek
SawmillCanyon
SawmillCreek
SixmileCanyon
SlideCreek
SmithieFork
SouthCreek
SquawCreek(SawmillCanyon)
SquawCreek(SawmillCanyon),North Fork .
SquawCreek(Wet Creek) . .
Canyon
Summerhouse
SummitCreek
SunnyBar Canyon
Taylor Canyon
TimberCreek
UncleIke Creek
Van Dorn Canyon
Warm Creek
Warm SpringsCreek
Wet Creek
WilliamsCreek
Y Springs
UnnamedTributary(1 km southof Warm Creek)
....
Otherunnameddrainages
Part4: LakesandReservoirs. . .
Introduction ...
Big Creek
Lower Big Creek Lake (beaver pond)
Big Creek Lake#2
Dry Creek
Dry CreekReservoir
C o p p e r l a k. e
Dry CreekPond
Dry CreekLake#1
Swauger Lake #l
SwaugerLake#2
Swauger Lake#3
Dry Creek Lake#2
Dry Creek Lake#3
Dry Creek Lake#A
HorseLake Creek
H o r s e l a k e. . . .
Long Lost Creek
Shadow Lake #1 (lower)
Shadow Lake #2 (upper)
85
85
85
86
86
86
88
89
89
90
9l
92
94
94
94
95
96
96
97
97
t02
r03
103
103
103
103
i04
r04
104
104
104
... '... 105
105
105
106
106
106
r07
107
107
107
r07
r07
107
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)
LongLostCreekLake
Mill Creek
Mill CreekLake .
SummitCreek
SummitCreekReservoir
wet creek
NolanLake .
108
108
108
.. ..... 109
109
109
109
RECOMMENDATIONS
HabitatManage
Fish Manageme
Education
110
ll0
i11
111
LITERATURE CITED
1t2
APPENDICES
t16
LIST OF TABLDS
Table1.
Table2.
andprecipitationfor Howe,Idaho
Meanyearlyandmonthlytemperature
(re6r- 1990).
Mean and annual discharges(m3/s)for Little Lost River (adaptedfrom Stone et al.
1993).
Summaryof watersandspeciesstockedin the Little Lost River drainage(adapted
Table3.
from IdahoDepartmentof Fish andGamestockingrecords)
anglercatchratesandspeciescompositionfor the Little Lost River drainage. . . . .
Mean
Table4.
Comparisonof bull trout lengthsat annulusfrom the Little Lost River to other
Table5.
systems
from SmithieFork
Comparisonof bull trout densitiesandhabitatcharacteristics
Table6.
(relativelyhigh density)andTimberCreek(relativelylow density)
(1995,1996,or 1997)andmaximum
betweentroutspeciescomposition
Relationship
Table7.
of the Little Lost River .
in
the
mainstem
in
1997
summerstreamtemperature
(1995,
1996,ot 1997)andmaximum
betweentroutspeciescomposition
Table8. Relationship
in 1997in Wet Creek
summerstreamtemperature
Comparisonof estimatedtrout/km in the Little Lost River betweenthe Forest
Table9.
boundaryand SummitCreekbetween1984and1997(Elle et al. 1987,Corsiand
Elle 1989,presentstudy)
Table10. Comparisonof estimatedtrout/km in the Litfle Lost River from the Forestboundary
to SmithieFork between1987and1997(CorsiandElle 1989,presentstudy)
Table11. Comparisonof brooktrout lengthsat annulusfrom the Little Lost River drainage
with brook trout from other systems . . . .
Table12. Comparisonof rainbowtrout lengthsat annulusfrom the Little Lost River drainage
with rainbowtrout of othersystems
II
l7
18
24
27
29
29
)z
)z
40
Aa
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)
Table13.
Table14.
Table15.
Table16.
Tablei7.
Table18.
'Iable
19.
Table20.
Table2l.
Table22.
Table23.
Table24.
Table25.
Table26.
Table27.
Table28.
Table29.
Table30.
Table31.
Table32.
Table33.
Table34.
Table35.
Table36.
Table37.
Table38.
Table39.
Table40.
Table41.
Table42.
Table43.
Table44.
Table45.
Table46.
Table47.
Table48,
Table49.
Table50.
Table51.
Table52.
Table53.
..
Summary of sculpin collections from the Little Lost River drainage . . .
. . . ". .
Summary of electrofishing data from Badger Creek
' . ". . ..
Summaryof electrofishingdatafrom Basin Creek
1997
and
Pine
Creek
in
between
Wet
Creek
of
Basin
Creek
characteristics
Habitat
...
(Forest Service R1/R4 stream habitx inventory)
..
Summary of electrofishing data from Bear Creek
Habitat characteristicsof the lower 1.5 km of Bear Creek in 1994 (Forest Service
...
R1iR4 stream habitat inventory)
...
Summary of electrofishingdatafrom Big Creek
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Summaryoe
f lectrofishingdatafromBigSpringsCreek
.
..
Creek
.
Summary of electrofishing datafrom Bunting Canyon
....
Summary of electrofishing dxa from Camp Creek (Sawmill Canyon)
..
Summary of electrofishing data from Coal Creek
'... ' '. '
SummaryofelectrofishingdatafromDeerCreek
..'
Summary of electrofishing data from Deer Creek, North Fork .
.
..
Fork
.
Summary of electrofishing data from Deer Creek, South
' .'
Summary of electrofishing data from Dry Creek
.' ....
Summary of electrofishing data from Fallerf Springs Creek
..-..
Summary of electrofishing data from Firebox Creek
.
....
Creek
from
Hawley
data
Summary of electrofishing
.
-.....
SummaryofelectrofishingdatafromHorseCreek
.... '...
SummaryofelectrofishingdatafromlronCreek
.....
Summary of electrofishing data from JacksonCreek
Summary of electrofishing data from mainstem Little Lost River
"(including Sawmill Creek)
.
..
.
Summary of electrofltshingdata from MassacreCreek
.
. .
Summary of electrofishing datafrom an unnamedtributary to Meadow Creek
... '....
S u m m a r y o fe l e c t r o f i s h i n g d a t a f r o m MCi lrl e e k
.... '..
SummaryofelectrofishingdatafromNorthCreek
.....
Creek
from
data
Summary of electrofishing
Quigley
.....
Summary of electrofishing data from Redrock Creek
.'
Summary of electrofishing data from Slide Creek
......
Summary of electrofishing data from Smithie Fork
... ' '..
SouthCreek
Summaryofelectrofishingdatafrom
SquawCreek(SawmillCanyondrainage)........
Summaryofelectrofishingdatafrom
Summary of electrofishing data from Squaw Creek (Sawmill Canyon), North Fork . . . . .
....
Summary of elecffofishing data from Squaw Creek (Wet Creek) '
Mean trout densities for three grazed (untreated)and three ungrazedsections(treated)
. ' ".
of Summit Creek in 1979(adaptedfrom Keller and Burnham 1982) '
.
' ...
Creek
from
Summit
data
Summary of electrofishing
...
.
.
.
Creek
Summary of electrofishing data from Timber
-. .
Summary of electrofishing data from Uncle Ike Creek
" ' ....
Summary of electrofishing data from Warm Creek
....-'
Summary of electrofishing data from Warm Springs Creek
.'
Creek
from
Wet
data
Summary of electrofishing
VI
44
49
51
5l
52
53
54
56
58
59
60
63
64
64
66
67
68
69
70
7l
72
74
79
80
81
83
84
84
86
87
88
89
90
91
93
93
95
q6
97
97
99
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)
Table 54.
Table 55.
Summary of electrofishing data from an unnamedtributary to Wet Creek
Summaryof electrofishingdata from Williams Creek
102
103
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure1.
Figure2.
Figure3.
Figure4.
Figure5.
Figure6.
Figure7.
Figure8.
Figure9.
Figure10.
Figure11.
Figure12.
Figure13.
Figure14.
.....3
ThelittlelostRiverdrainage
present
the
study
to
obtain
River
drainage
during
the
Little
Lost
in
sampled
Sites
.......9
fishpopulationdata
Perennialstreams,intermittentstreams,andlakesandreservoirsin the Little Lost
10
River drainageasdeterminedfrom the presentstudy .
12
Temperaturesitesmonitoredin the Little Lost River drainagein 1997
(present
19
study)
.
.
Lost
River
drainage
Little
in
the
of
all
salmonids
distribution
Current
(present
2l
study)
.
.
.
.
.
drainage
.
in
Little
Lost
River
Currentdistributionof bull trout the
(1995,1996,or 1997)andmaximum
betweentroutspeciescomposition
Relationship
28
.........
inl997 inthemainstemoftheLittleLostRiver
summerstreamtemperature
(1995,7996,or 7997)andmaximum
composition
betweentroutspecies
Relationship
. . . . ' . 28
summerstreamtemperatureinl997 in Wet Creek
between
1984
and
1997
River
in
Little
Lost
the
Comparisonof estimatedtrout/km
. . . . 31
(Elle et al. 1987,CorsiandElle 1989,presentstudy)
Comparisonof estimatedtrout/kmin the Little Lost River between7987and1997
' ' . . 31
(Elle et al. 7987,CorsiandElle 1989,presentstudy)
Currentdistributionof brooktrout in the Little Lost River drainage(presentstudy) . . . . 38
Currentdistributionof rainbowtrout in the Little Lost River drainage(present
.....41
study,Gamettlgg0a)
Museumspecimencollectionsitesfor shortheadsculpinin the Little Lost River
drainage(seeAppendixA for all sitesin which sculpinwerefoundduringthe
'..'.45
presentstudy)
convict
green
amelanic
guPPY,
swordtail,
grayling,
Distributionof cutthroattrout,
tilapia in the Little Lost
cichlid, goldfish(no longerpresent),andMozambique
..'.... 46
Riverdrainage(presentstudyandCourtenayetal.l9ST)
vil
ABSTRACT
Datarelating to fish populationsin the Little Lost River drainagewere gatheredbetween 1992 and
1999.During this time, fish populationdatawere gatheredfrom l7 7 streamsections.One-hundred+hirty-five
siteswere sampledby eleotrofishing,27 by visual observation,6 by a combinationof electrofishingandvisual
observation, 2 by hook and line, and 1 by snorkeling. Four-hundred-ninety-onekm of perennial stream,40
km of perennial stream/marsh,2,453 km of intermittent stream, 17 lakes, I reservoir, 3 dysfunctional
reservoirs, and several private ponds were found in the drainage.
Literature reviews and field work indioate 1l speciesof fish and 2 hybrids have beendocumentedin
the Little Lost River drainage. These include bull trout Salvelinus confluentusobrook trout Salvelinus
fontinalis,rainbowtrout Ancorhynchusmykiss,cutthroattroutOncorhynchusclarki,rainbow troutx cutthroat
trout Oncorhynchus mykiss x Oncorhynchus clarki, brook trout x bull trout Salvelinusfontinalis x Salvelinus
confluentus,graylingThymallus sp., shortheadsculpin Cottuscoffisus, guppy Poecilia reticulata, green
swordtail Xiphophorus helleri, amelanic convict cichlid Cichlasoma nigrofasciatum,Mozambique tilapia
Tilapia mossambica,and goldfish Carassiusauratus. Mountain whitefish Prosopium williamsoni have not
been found in fish collections completedin the drainage. However, local residentsindicate whitefish were
present in the Little Lost River in the early 1900's. Although brown trout Salmo truttahave not been
documentedin the basin, they have reportedly been caught by anglers in the lower end of the drainage. A
single introduction of golden trout Oncorhynchusaguabonita did not establisha population.
Although bull trout are widely distributed in the drainage,their distribution is fragmented. Data
collected duringthe presentstudy indicatebull trout occupy approximately 164km of stream andarethe only
salmonid presentin approxim ately32 km of stream. Both resident and fluvial populations are found in the
drainage. Threatsto bull trout populationsin the drainageinclude high streamtemperatures;hybridization,
competition, and predationby exotic brook trout; disruption of migratory corridors; sedimen! loss through
irrigation ditches; artificialmigration barriers; angler harvest; and loss of cover andhabitat complexity.
Rainbow trout are the most widely distributed fish speciesand were found in most streamsin the
drainage. Although brook trout arewidely distributedin the drainage,they are only abundantin a few stream
reaches.Although cutthroattrout arepresentin mountain lakes,only 2 fish capturedfrom streamsduring the
study appearedto be pure cutthroat trout.
The shortheadsculpin appearsto be the only sculpin speciespresentin the drainage. Itappearc some
factor or combination of factors (possibly high stream gradient) is limiting their distribution. With the
exception of Williams Creek and Horse Creek, shortheadsculpin were absentfrom streamsnot currently
oonnectedto the drainagenet.
INTRODUCTION
In the past,therehas beena lack of datarelating to fish populationsin the Little Lost River drainage.
Although some researchhas been conducted,it has generally focusedon streamsthatare important recreational
fisheries, and little or no data exist for most small tributary streams. Furthermore,much of the information
that has been gathered is unpublished and exists only in an office file format. This makes it generally
unavailableto others involved in the managementof the drainage. The lack and unavailability of data has
made the development of fish managementplans difficult. The purpose of this document is to rectify this
problem by presentinga completedescriptionof the history and statusof fish populations in the Little Lost
River drainage in one publication so that information is easily accessibleto resourcemanagers.
STUDY AREA
Location and Setting
The study areaincludesthe entire Little Lost River drainage(Figure l). The Little Lost River is one
of severalisolatedstreamslocatedalongthe northernrim ofthe SnakeRiver basinin southeasternIdaho. This
group of streams,which collectively includesBig Lost River,Little Lost River, Birch Creek,Medicine Lodge
Creek, Beaver Creek, and CamasCreek,originatesin the mountainsof southeasternand south central Idaho.
While these streamsare located within the SnakeRiver Basin, the immense lava formations ofthe upper Snake
River Plain preventthem from forming an overlandoonnectionwith other streamsin the basin. Rather,they
sink into the lava along the northern edge of the Snake River Plain. Henoe, these streams have been
collectively termed the Sinks Drainagesor Lost Streams. Specifrcally,the Little Lost River originates in the
Lost River and Lemhi mountain ranges,and flows in a southeasterlydirection where it sinks(when undiverted)
into the lava southeastofthe town of Howe. The drainagecoversapproximately2,520 km2. Elevation ranges
from 1.456 m at the Little Lost River Sinks to 3,718 m at the summit of Diamond Peak in the Lemhi
Mountains.
During the Pleistocene,increasedstreamflows from the Lost Streamscombined to form Lake Terreton
(Pierceand Scott 1982). This would likely have beenthe most recentconnectionthe Little Lost River hashad
with other streams. However, streamsmay have been transferred into the Little Lost River drainage via
headwater stream capture since the existenceof Lake Terreton.
Complete descriptions of the geology of the Little Lost River drainagewere made by Rember and
Bennett (I979aand 1979b)and Bond (197S). Mundorff et al. (1963) provided an extensivedescriptionof the
hydrology of the basin.
Climate
The climate of the drainageis relatively cool and dry. Annual precipitationvaries from less than25
cm at the lower end of the valley near Howe, to over 100 cm in the headwatersof Dry Creek and Wet Creek
in the Lost River Mountains. Mean annualprecipitation at Howe is23.9 cm, while mean annualtemperature
is 6.3"C (Table 1). Temperaturesat Howe rangefrom -39"C to 39"C.
Areaof Detail
N
OBoise
O
ldahoFalls
Clark
OCountr
.s*
bd
5
ffi
6
Mackay
0
Scale
5
l0Kilometers
Legend
al
LakeJReservoir
.\./'
\-'''
Perennialstroam
lntemittst StGam
M0nslip
@h*$de
tuedof
E
t4d lbwd
mtueorltro
f---
O Moore
l Pffi
ffimpm*r*s
Fcounty Ebundari6
Figure L.
The Little
3
l,ost River drainage.
Table l,
Mean yearly and monthly temperatureand precipitationfor Howe, Idaho (1961 - 1990).
Month
("C)
MeanTemperature
Mean Precipitation (cm)
1.7
January
-4.7
1.6
March
0.9
1.4
April
7.2
1.5
May
12.0
2.9
June
16.3
3.4
July
20.3
1.9
August
19.1
2.4
September
13.4
1.7
7.2
1.3
November
-0.6
2.0
December
-7.3
2.1
6.3
23.9
February
October
Yearly
Lands and Administration
The Little Lost River drainage is comprised of Forest Sewice, Bureau of Land Management (BLM),
Department of Energy (Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory), Stateof Idaho, andpivate
lands (Figure 1). All Forest Servicelands are managedby the Lost River RangerDistrict of the Salmon and
Challis National Forests. The Idaho Falls BLM District managesmost of the BLM land in the drainage;the
Salmon Disfict managesthose BLM lands in the extremeupper portion of the drainage. The extreme southem
tip of thc drainage is managedby the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. Private land
in the drainageis limited and is confinedprimarily to agriculturalland at the lower end of the valley and along
the mainstem of the river. Lands belonging to the stateof Idaho are scatteredthroughout the drainage. The
entire drainage is within the jurisdiction of the Upper SnakeRegion of the Idaho Department of Fish and
Game. The drainage includes portions of Butte, Custer, Lemhi, and Clark counties.
Methods
This report was compiled from existing dataand datagatheredthrough field work completedbetween
1992 and 1999. Reviervsof all availableoffice file datawere madeby the author at the Idaho Departmentof
Fish and GameUpper SnakeRegion office in Idaho Falls, Idaho,andthe U.S. ForestServiceoffice in Mackay,
Idaho. Pat Koelsch, a fisheriesbiologist at the BLM distriot office in Idaho Falls, provided pertinentdatafrom
that office. Cindy Weston, a fisheriesbiologist at the BLM office in Salmon,provided pertinent information
from that office. Literature searcheswere conductedat the Eli M. Obler Library at Idaho StateUniversity Lost
Rivers Community Library in Arco, Idaho; and over the Internet. Severalinterviews with biologists, land
managers,and local residentswere also made. All of thesedata were reviewed and significant information
included in this report. Referencesto office file data are abbreviatedas follows: Lost River RangerDistrict,
Salmonand Challis National Forests,Mackay, Idaho: LRRD f/re data;UpperSnakeRegion,Idaho Department
of Fish and Game,Idaho Falls, Idaho: USR file data;Idaho Falls District, Bureauof Land Managemen! Idaho
Falls,Idaho: IFD file data. Fish stockinginformation was compiled from Idaho Departmentof Fish and Game
stocking records, All location nameswere taken from the 1986 edition of the Challis National Forest map.
However, Sawmill Creek was treated as part of the mainstem of the Little Lost River.
Field work to obtain current fish population datawas conductedby the Lost River RangerDistrict of
the Salmon and Challis National Forestsand the Idaho Falls District of the Bureau of Land Management
between 1992 and 1997. Dwing this period the entire Little Lost River basin was inventoried.
Fish distribution was ascertainedby first determiningthe presenceor absenceof a perennial stream
within a subdrainage.This was done through field evaluationsandlor reviews of aerial photographs.After
some experimentationand field verification, it becameclear that in most areasaerial photographs could be
used to determinethe presenceand extent of perennialstreamseven if the stream was less than 0.5 m wide.
This was due primarily to the arid nature of the drainage,which causesa sharp contrast between riparian
vegetationcharacteristicsofperennial streamsand surroundingvegetation.Ifno perennialstreamwas present,
the subdrainagewas generally determinedto be fishless and was given no further consideration.
Each perennial streamwas then sampledin one or more locationsto determine if fish were present.
This was generally accomplishedthrough electrofishing. A representativesegmentof a stream reach was
selectedand electrofished to determine if fish were present. When fish were not found, at least one other
segment of the stream or stream reach was generally electrofishedto confirm the absenceof fish if it was
believedthe streamcould supportfish. The absenceof fish was generallyfurther confirmedby a visual survey'
On a few extrernely small streams,the absenceof fish was determined by visual survey only. However, this
was only done when the presenceof fish was unlikely and confidencewas high any fish presentwould be
detected. If no fish were found by thesemethods,the stream or stream reach was consideredfishless. The
generallocation and approximatelength of eachsampling site in which no fish were found was recorded for
future reference.
Once fish were located, or they were already known to exist in a certain reach,the population was
assessedat one of two levels. Both levels involved selecting and sampling a transect representativeof the
stream reach. If a reach was sampledby Corsi and Elle (1989) in 7987,the samereaohwas generally
resampled. While the exact location of someof the 1987siteswere not relocated,the sitessampledduring the
presentstudy shouldbe in the samevicinity. The first samplinglevel involved making a single electrofishing
passto determinespeciescomposition and length frequency. The secondsampling level involved making 2
io 4 sampling passesto determinespeciescomposition,length frequency,and density. The generallocations
of single passtransectswere recordedfor future reference.The exactlocationsof multiple passtransectswere
describedin detail, mapped, andlorphotographedso that they could be repeatedin the future. The latitude
and longitude of some of these sites were also obtained with a Global Positioning System. The detailed
descriptionsofthe transectssampledbetween1992 and 1994 areon file at the Idaho Falls BLM District, 1405
Hollipark Drive, Idaho Falls, Idaho, 83401,(208) 524-'7500. The detaileddescriptionsof the transects
sampledbetween 1995 and 1997areon file (file designation2620)at the Lost River RangerDistrict, P.O. Box
507,Mackay, Idaho, 8325I, (208) 588-2224. A generaldescriptionof eachtransectis provided in this report.
Fish sampling involved using a backpack mounted electroshockingunit powered by a backpack
mounted generator. One person caried and operatedthe electrofishing unit. Fish were netted by i to 4
personneldependingon streamsize. Fish collectedwere held in bucketsuntil samplingwas completed.
However, if extremely large numbersof fish were captured,somefish were releasedbelow the transectprior
to the completion of sampling. When this occurred, it was done in a manner that prevented fish from reentering the transect prior to the completion of sampling. Fish were anesthetizedwith tricaine methanesulfonate (MS-222). Speciesand total length were determined and recorded. Forest Service personnel
recordedthe length and speciesfor all fish captured. However, in somestreamsthat were sampledbetween
1992 and l994,theBLM only notedthe presenceof fish smallerthan 100mm and did not individually record
their lengths. Length frequencydistributionswere developedusing all fish captured,or in the caseof some
sites sampledby the BLM, all fish reported. Sincethe BLM did not always record the individual lengths of
fish smaller than 100 mm, the presenceof young-of-the-yearfish is not always reflected in the length frequency
distributions for sites sampledbetween 1992 and 1994. Snorkelingwas usedto assessspeoiespresenceand
composition in one large beaverpond. Hook and line samplingwas usedto assessspeciespresenceand
composition in another beaver pond and one isolated stream.
Population estimateswere madeusing the two passand multiple passmethodsdescribedby Platts et
al. (1983). This methodwas utilized to provide comparabilitywith previouslycollecteddata. Becausethe
BLM did not always attemptto capturefish under 100mm, populationestimatesfor reachessampledbetween
1992 and 1994 arefor fish 100 mm and larger. All other population estimatesare for fish 70 mm and larger.
After an evaluationof the dataanddiscussionwith otherbiologists,it becameclearthat determiningthe length
of age one fish for every site would be very subjectiveand prone to error due to the tremendousdifferences
in growth between sites and species. Therefore, a standardof 70 mm was set. This standardsize, which
should generally reflect age one and older fish, will also allow for easein duplicating the study. Density
estimateswere made by dividing the population estimateby the surfaceareaof the transect. Surface area of
the transect was calculated by multiplying the mean width by the length of the transect.
Brook trout and bull hout were identified using the criteria describedby Thurow (1994). Adult and
subadultbrook trout and bull trout were differentiated by the presenceor absenceof black markings on the
of a dark band through
dorsal fin. When a fish was too small to have thesemarkings, the presence/absence
by the presence
determined
Hybrids
were
used
the
criteria.
were
as
par
marks
of
shape
the
and
the nostrils
an
individual fish.
on
trout
existing
only
to
bull
and
trout
to
brook
unique
only
of phenotypic characteristics
Sculpin speciespresencewas determinedby sampling efforts, specimencollection, and referenceto
other literature. Due to the difficulty of identi$'ing sculpin to the specieslevel, 45 voucher specimenswere
collected and preserved from 8 key locations in the drainage during the present study. These fish were
identified by Don Zaroban at Albertson's College of Idaho. These specimensare now in the Albertson's
College of Idaho fish collection. No attemptwas madeto determinea populationestimatefor sculpin.
Sculpin distribution was determinedby noting the presenceor absenceof sculpin at eachsite sampled.
Since only I sculpin specieswas found at the 8 sites from which specimenswere collected and this same
speciesis the only sculpin speciesreportedin the drainageby others(seeAndrews 1972,Simpsonand Wallace
1982,University of Michigan Museum of Zoology), it was assumedthat this was the speciesobservedat all
sites.
The total streamlengthsreportedin the streamdescriptionswere generallyobtainedfrom topographic
maps using a map wheel. Although care was taken to ensurethe accuracy of this work, the scale of the maps
results in an underestimateof the actual stream length. However, the Forest Service Rl/R4 Fish Habitat
StandardInventory (Overton et al.1997)physically measuresthe entire streamreach. Therefore,R1lR4 reach
lengths are actualstreamlengths. For example,a topographicmap indicatedBig Creekwas 6.6 km long while
the R1/R4 fish habitat inventory indicatedthe reachwas actually 79km long. However, sinceR1/R4 dataare
not always available for a streamor streamreach,the streamlengthsreportedin the text are those calculated
from topographic maps.
Data obtained in this study were used to revise the existing surface water map coverage on the
GeographicInformation Systemat the Lost River Ranger District. Existing arcs in the map coveragewere
reattributedaccordingto the streamtype (perennialor intermittent) found in this study. The coverageis now
believedto be accurateto +500 m, althoughstreamsmay experiencesomeannualvariation.
The surface water map coverage was then used as a base layer for developing a map coverage
depicting fish speciesdistribution. Fish speciesdistribution was determinedby projecting the occunence of
fish speciesfound at sampling sitesup and down perennialstreamreaches. Streamgradient,barriers,size of
flow. and field observationswere usedto determinethe upstreamlimit of fish distribution. For consistency,
the distribution of one specieswas generallynot projectedthrough anothersamplingsite ifthe specieswas not
found at that site. However, it shouldbe noted that speciesmay occasionallyoccur in or move through these
reachesalthough they were not found during sampling. Likewise, this layer does not project fish distribution
into intermittent streamsalthoughthey may occasionallyoccupy thesereachesand use them for movement
between perennial reaches.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
in atotal of I7 | streamsections(Figure 2). One-hundred-thirty-five
Fish populationswere assessed
siteswere sampledby electrofishing,2Tby visual observation,6 by a combinationof electrofishingand visual
survey,2 by hook and line, and 1 by snorkeling. A completesummaryofthe field sampling effort conducted
during this study is presentedin Appendices A and B. For organizationalpurposes,the results have been
divided into 4 separatesections. These are Part 1: History and Overview; Part 2: Species;Part 3:
Subdrainages;and Part4: Lakes and Reservoirs.
Part 1: History and Overview
This sectionpresentsa generaloverview of the water, fish, and fish managementin the Little Lost
River drainage.
Water
Streams
During the presentstudy, 491 km of perennialstream,40 km of perennial stream/marsh,and2,453
kmofintermittentstreamwerefoundinthedrainage(Figure3). Eachsubdrainageandlorstreamisdescribed
in Part 3.
Discharge - Dischargein most streamsvariesdrasticallyfrom month to month andyear to year. Peak
stream flows occur in June, while minimum flows occur in December and January (Table 2). However,
streamsfed primarily by large springssuch as Big SpringsCreek,Deer Creek,Fallert Creek, Summit Creek,
and Warm Springs Creek have little variability in their discharge(personal observation).
Temperatures - Until recently, streamtemperature datainthe drainagewere limited. The BLM
collected streamtemperaturedatainthe drainageduring the summerand fall of 1987, 1988,7994, and 1995
(Appendix D). The Forest Servicecollected data in 1995 and 1996 (Appendix D). ln 1997, an interagency
effort resulted in the continuousmonitoring of summerand fall water temperaturesat 43 locations(Figure 4,
Appendix E). This monitoring indicatesmaximum streamtemperaturesgenerallyoccur in late July and early
August. The highestrecordedstreamtemperature(with the exceptionof Barney Creek)was 27"C intheLittle
Lost fuver (Sawmill Creek) above Summit Creek in July 1994. Bamey Creek, a streamfed by a wafln springs,
was29"C at its source (Barney Hot Springs) in June 1996 andMay 1997.
Lakes and Reserryoirs
There are lT lakes, 1 reservoir, 3 dysfunctional reservoirs, and severalprivate ponds in the Little Lost
(Gamett 1990b,LRRD file data,personal observation). All of the lakes in the drainage are
drainage
River
(less
than 6 hectares)mountain lakes. The lakes and reservoirs are describedin detail in Part 4'
small
Areaof Detail
N
5
0
r
Scale
5
'l0Kilometers
Legend
Lake/R€sqvdr
I
.\-/- Perennial Slream
LandOffeuhip
EA Fnd SeNi.e
E$Huoflid$an4@t
Slateofldaho
m
T---l Pn'vate
kpanml or tnergy
N
a
Figure 2.
Fish Populatlon sampling site (19921997)
Sites sampled in the LitLle Lost River drainage during Lhe presenL study to
obtain fish population data.
Areaof Detail
N
-*.
Shes
Mounlaln
,.!.'
' , 4
;A
./\.(. \ ,
/ ' F { \
\ .
\
Ii sI- ,,?.9
'vl
^el
Mount }!
BEitenbach-
t>-tt:'
n. J ')' ,.'
Y't'..'
,1,. ' " ' - ' \
\
-i
#
| ./"' i ( ,
o Mackay
5
Scale
5
0
r
10 Kilometers
Legend
I
n,\
\-')
Lakaneservoir
Per€nnial Streqm
Intemittfl
t srtream
o Moore
10
Figure 3.
Perennial slreams, inlermittent sLreams, and lakes and reservoirs
Lit.tle lost, River drainage as determined from Lhe presenL study.
in the
Table 2.
Mean and annual discharges(m3ls) for Little Lost River (adaptedfrom Stone et al. 1993).
Little Lost
River (SawmillCreek)
Month
Mean
Max
Min
Main Stem below
Wet Creekb
Mean
Max
Min
Main Stem near Howe"
Mean
Max
Min
January
0.4s
0.62
0.26
0.6s
1.s0
0.10
0.76
1.39
0
February
0.48
0.62
0.37
0.71
1.27
0.2s
1.00
2.27
0
March
0.s1
0.76
0.37
1.05
1.64
0.s1
1.56
3.r7
.048
April
0.96
2.27
0.48
1.8"1
4.59
0.68
2.38
4.93
1.13
May
4.22
8.98
|.s3
3.94
7.39
1.50
3.82
6.17
2.07
June
s.66
I 1.53
r.33
5.55
10.03
2.29
4.64
6.77
2.66
July
t.6 7
3 .r7
0 .62
2.83
5.89
0.96
3.03
5.52
r.42
August
0.82
1.47
0.42
1.78
3.99
0.74
2.t2
3.23
1.25
September
0.68
l.Os
0.45
|.70
3.62
0.76
2.04
3.14
1.36
October
0.59
0.85
0.40
1.70
2.86
0.93
2.r2
3.29
1.30
November
0.54
0.88
0.40
1.13
r.98
0.48
r.64
3.03
0.8s
December
0.48
4.96
0.26
0.62
1 aa
I.JJ
0.23
0.88
1.61
0
r.95
3.26
0.91
2.18
3.00
1.39
0.68
2.18
|.42
Annual
u Datafrom 1961-1973.
b Datafrom 1959-1990.
" Data from 1941-1981.1986-1990.
11
Areaof Detail
N
5
Scale
5
0
r
l0Kilometers
Legend
!
^-/'
LakdReseryoir
Perqnial
Slream
tandO*noshi!
ForesiSeruie
m
breu of tand I'iaEgmml
E
Sbteof ldaho
m
I-- l P,ivate
rel EpadMlstneqy
!
@
Figure 4.
WaterTemperature
Airt"rp"r"t
Monitoring Site
sila
16Monitoring
Temperature sites monitored in the Little
LosL River drainage in t997.
SpeciesPresent
Eleven speciesof fish and2hybrids have beendocumentedin the Little Lost River drainage. These
include bull trout Salvelinus confluentus, brook trout Salvelinusfontinalis, rainbow trout Oncorhynchus
mykiss, cutthroat trott Oncorhynchus clarki, rainbow trout x cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus mykiss x
Oncorhynchus clarki, brook trout x bull trout Salvelinus fontinalis x Salvelinus confluentus, grayling
Thymallus,qp.,shortheadsculpin Cottus coffisus, guppy Poecilia reticulata, green swordtail Xiphophorus
helleri, amelanic convict cichlid Cichlasomanigrofosciatum,Mozambiquetilapia Tilapia mossambica, and
goldfish Carassiusauratus (presentstudy, Gamett 1990a,Gamett 1990b,Corsi and Elle 1989, Courtenay et
al. 1987,Elle et al. 1987,Corsi et al. 1986,Corsi and Elle 1986,Ball and Jeppson1978,Jeppsonand Ball
1978, Andrews 1972, USR file data, LRRD frle data,IFD file data, University of Michigan Museum of
Zoology [UMMZI). Mountain whitefish Prosopium williamsoni have not been found in fish collections
completedin the drainage. However, local residentsindicatewhitefish were presenfin the Little Lost River
in the early i900's (JamesWaymire, local resident,personalcommunication). Although not documented,
browntrout Salmo truttahave apparentlybeencaughtin the lower portion of the drainagein recentyears(Will
Marcroft, LRRD, personalcommunication). A single introduction of goldentrout Oncorhynchusaguabonita
did not establish a population. A drainagewide overview of each of these speciesis presentedinPart2.
SpeciesOrigin
It is unclearwhich speciesof fish were nativeto the Lost Streamsincluding the Little Lost River. The
lack of an overland streamconnectionbetweenthe Lost Streamsand other drainagescurrently prevents fish
from gaining accessto these drainages. While it is obvious that brook trout, brown trout, guppy, green
swordtail, amelanic convict cichlids, Mozambiquetilapi4 goldfish, and all mountain lake populationsarethe
result of introductions,other speciesmay have beennaturally establishedin the Lost Streamsduring ancient
exchangesof water with other drainages.Yet authorsdisagreeas to which speciesare native and the manner
in which they were established.
Hubbs and Miller (1948) describedthe fish of the "Mud Lake-LostRiver group of streams"as follows:
In the several streams(Camas,Medicine Lodge, and Birch creelrs,and Little Lost and Lost rivers)
wefound 3 species: an endemicspeciesof cutthroqt trout; the Dolly Varden ftout (probably a Glacial
relict, rather than an introducedfish); and 5 highly localized, endemicsubspeciesor races in the
genus Cotttn, None of thesespeciesare Bonneville types,despite thefact that the stream complex
lies in the upper part of the SnakeRiver systems,which in general has a Bonnevillefauna..,These
fishes seemto be relicts of the old Snake Riverfauna, as it existedprior to the time of the destructive
Iavaflows and of the Lake Bonneville discharge
This accountis basedon fish collectedfrom thesestreamsby Carl Hubbs 1n 1934(R. Miller, personal
communication,UMMZ). Theserecordsindicatethat 4 sites in the Little Lost River drainagewere sampled
on July 19 and20. Speciescollectedin the Little Lost River drainagewere rainbow trout, shortheadsculpin,
one brook trout, one bull trout, and one rainbow trout x cutthroat trout hybrid.
In his field notes(UMMZ), CarlHubbs recordedthe following for the collection site on the Little Lost
River between Badger Creek and Wet Creek:
IJ
Two boys along stream whoJish it say that tltere are only rainbow trout, bull trout and bullheads.
Catch bullheads at night with light. They didn't know which of thefish were introduced.
Dr. Baker, druggist of Mackay, and a long+ime resident of the region, believesthat the bull nout are
native of the region.
Andrews (1972) believedcutthroattrout, bull trou! shortheadsculpin, and mountain whitefish were
native to the Lost Streams. He believedthesefish representedspeciesfrom both the SnakeRiver and Salmon
River drainages.Drawing on other literature,he describedthe eventsthathe believed led to the establishment
of thesespeciesin the Lost Streams. He believedthat prior to the Pleistocene,the SnakeRiver was flowing
down the middle of the SnakeRiver Plain. At that time, the presentday PahsimeroiRiver and Little Lost
River, Big LostRiver and Warm Spring Creek,and Birch Creekand Lemhi River eachformed single streams
that drained into the SnakeRiver. During this time, cutthroattrout and mountain whitefish were established
in the Lost Streams from the Snake River. Pleistocenevolcanic activity then pushed the Snake River
southwardand severedits connectionwith the Lost Streams,Uplifting and faulting separatedthe streamsinto
the presentday drainagepatternwith the Big Lost River, Little Lost River, andBirch Creekflowing southward
and sinking into the Snake River Plain and the other streamsdraining northward into the Salmon River. At
sometime, bull trout and shortheadsculpin were establishedin the Lost Streamsthrough headwater stream
capture from the Salmon River drainage.
Behnke (1992) believedbull trout, cottid sculpin, and possibly cutthroattrout were native to the Lost
Streams. He reported:
The question of the native trout of the Lost River streams remains open. The otherfish speciesnative
to thesestreams - bull trout and cottid sculpins - are alsofound in the Salmon River drainage but not
in the upper SnakeRiver. My interpretation is that Pleistocenevolcanic eruptionseliminated allfish
life from these streams and buried their connections with the upper SnakeRiver. Subsequently,
headwater stream transfers from the Salmon River system established the present fauna. If this is
true, westslopecutthroat trout would be the native trout of the Lost River slveamsunlessthe ffansfer
occurred at a time when Yellowstonecutthroat trout inhabited the Salmon River drainage.
However, Van Eimeren (1996) and Rieman and Apperson (1989) both concluded that westslope
cutthroattro ut O. c. Iewisi,the cutthroattrout subspeciespresentin the SalmonRiver drainage,were not native
to the Lost Streams.Similarly, }rlay (1996) concludedYellowstone cutthroattrout O. c. bouvieri, the cutthroat
trout subspeciespresentin the upper SnakeRiver drainage,were not native to the Lost Streams. Although
Thurow et al. ( 1988)indicatedYellowstone cutthroattrout were presentin the Lost Streams,they did not know
if these fish were native.
Simpsonand Wallace (1982) depictedthe rainbow trout of the Lost Streamsas introduced. However,
Corsi and Elle (1989) reasonedthat headwaterstreamcapturemay have establishedthis speciesin the Lost
Streamsfrom the Salmon River drainage.
Thurow et al.(1997) and Lee et al. (1997) concludedthat rainbow trout, Yellowstone cutthroattrout,
and westslope cutthroat trout were likely not native to the Little Lost River drainage. However, Rieman et al.
(lgg7) and Lee etal. (1997) concludedthat bull trout were likely presentin the drainageprior to European
settlement.
l4
It is also possiblethat trout were not native to the Little Lost River drainage. Early historical accounts
indicate that trout were not presentin the Big Lost River or Birch Creek drainagesprior to their introduction
in the late 1800's(Locke 1929, Sonnenkalb 1925, Oberg 1970). If trout were not present in the Little Lost
River drainage, earlyEuropeansettlers,who first arrived in 1879 (Anna Sermon,valley historian, personal
oommunication),may have introducedthem from the PahsimeroiRiver drainage. It is also possiblethat bull
trout moved into the Little Lost River through a small canal from the PahsimeroiRiver drainage. This canal,
which was probably built in the late 1800'sby the Swaugerfamily (RobertR. Mays, local resident, personal
communication), delivers water from Big Gulch Creek in the PahsimeroiRiver drainageto the upper portion
of the Little Lost River drainage. Bull trout are present in Big Gulch Creek and can move into the upper
portion of the Little Lost River drainagethrough this canal (personalobservation).
Although thesetheoriesgive muoh insight as to the possiblenative fish of the Little Lost River and
their origins, they differ greatly from eachother. Only with additional researchwill the correctnative species
and meansof origin be established.
Previous Work
Historical data (before 1950)relating to fish in the Little Lost River drainageis scarce. The earliest
referenceto fish in the Little Lost River drainagethat could be locatedis provided by Williams et al. (1973).
This unpublished family history gives an accountof the Williams family settling in the Little Lost River valley
in the 1880's. The accountindicatesthatthe "...streamswere full of fish." It alsomentionsthe "enormous"
fishing catcheson the Little Lost River betweenWarm Creekand SquawCreek. An additionalearly reference
is provided by Anna Sermon, alocal resident and valley historian (personal communication). Her greatgrandparents,who were settlersto the valley, indicatedthat in the 1880'sthere were lots of fish in the river.
She also indicated that fish were an important food source for early residents of the valley. For example, her
family would eat about 500 fish per year. Another referenceto fish in the Little Lost River is provided by
Mullen (1970). This accountdetailsthe author spendingthe summerof 1904 mining in the Little Lost River
valley. He indicatesthat the streamnear the mine was "teaming" with trout. Based on his description and
direction and length of travel, it appearshe was in the headwatersof Sawmill Canyon. The next referenceto
fish in the Little Lost River is found in the University of Michigan's ichthyological collection. Theserecords
indicate that Carl Hubbs collected fish from 4 locations in the drainagein July 1934. This work was later
referenced by Hubbs and Miller (1943) (R.R. Miller, University of Michigan, personal communication).
FWPWPA ( 1937)indicatesrainbow trout were "especiallycommon" in the Little Lost River. Andrews (1972)
sampledfive sectionsof the mainstemin 1970. Ball and Jeppson(1978),JeppsonandBall (1978),andUSR
file dataprovide creel censusdatacollectedbetween 1967 and 1979. Keller and Burnham (1982) and Keller
etal. (1979) describea grazingexclosureproject on Summit Creek andthe responseofthe fish population and
habitat. Corsi et al. (1986), Corsi and Elle (1986), and Elle et al. (1987) describesampling efforts completed
by the Idaho Departmentof Fish and Game in the early and mid 1980's. Corsi and Elle (1989) conductedan
intensive study of fish populationsin the drainagein 1987. Bruhn (1990) describesaBLM gtazingexclosure
project on Wet Creek and the responseof the fish population andhabitat. Gamett (1990a,1990b) and LRRD
file datadescribe mountain lake fish populations.
l5
Fishery Management l{istory
The Little Lost River drainage has an extensive history of fish introductions (Table 3). Species
inhoduced have included rainbow trout, cuffhroat trout, brook trout, mountain whitefish, golden trout, and
grayling. Although not introduced by the Department of Fish and Game, brown trout have apparently been
introduced into the lower portion of the drainage.The presenceof guppy, green swordtail, amelanicconvict
cichlids, Mozambique tilapia (Courtenay et al. 1987) and goldfish (USR file data) in Barney Hot Springs
indicate thesespecieshave also beenintroduced. Idaho Departmentof Fish and Game records indicate fish
had been introduced into the Little Lost River drainageby at least 1915. At that time, 10,000rainbow trout
and i5,000 brook trout were stocked. Likewise, cutthroattrout may have been introducedinto Dry Creek in
1915 (see Part2: Species,CutthroatTrout). Since thattime, fish have been stockedinto the mainstem
(including Sawmill Creek) and every major tributary including BadgerCreek,Big Creek,Big SpringsCreek,
Deer Creek, Dry Creek, Mill Creek, Summit Creek,Uncle Ike Creek, Wet Creek, and possibly SquawCreek.
Fish have also beenintroducedinto Big CreekLake#2, CopperLake, Mill Creek Lake, Nolan Lake, Shadow
Lake#1, ShadowLake#2, SwaugerLake#7, SwaugerLake#2, andDryCreekReservoir. Undoubtedly,
unrecorded fish introductions have also taken place throughout the drainage.
With the exception of Big Springs Creek and mountain lakes,the Little Lost River drainage has been
managedfor wild ffout production since 1985. Hatchery introductionsinto most streamsbeganto be phased
out in the 1970's and early 1980's. With the exception of Big Springs Creek and mountain lakes, hatchery
introductions were completely discontinued in the drainage after 1984. Currently, Big Springs Creek is
stocked with catchable rainbow trout (Bruce Rich, IDFG, personal communication). Swauger Lake #1,
SwaugerLak e #2,llr/Jll Creek Lake, and Upper Big CreekLake are stockedevery 3 yearswith cutthroattrout
fry
In l994,wild trout regulations were implemented in the majority of the drainage. Prior to that time,
the Little Lost River drainagewasmanagedunder a generaltrout regulation. The wild trout regulation allows
for the harvestof 2 trout per day inthe river and hibutaries aboveBig SpringsCreek.The drainagebelow Big
Springs Creek, Big Springs Creek, and high mountain lakes remain under the statewide general trout
regulation, which allows 6 trout to be harvested. However, only 2 cutthroattrout or cutthroat trout hybrids may
be harvested from any drainage stream. The statewide regulation allowing an additional 10 brook trout
remains in effect throughout the drainage. As with most of the state,bull trout harvest was closed in 1994.
Creel censusdatawere periodically gatheredfrom drainagestreamsbetween 1967and 1987(seeBall
and Jeppson1978;Jeppsonand Ball 1979; Corsi and Elle 1989; USR file data) and from mountain lakes in
1990 and 1994 (seeGamett 1990aandLRRD file data)(seeTable 4 for drainagesummaries;Appendix C for
completeresults). Catchratesfor salmonidsin drainagestreamsaveraged| .4, I.3, and 1.6 fishlhour in 1977,
7978, and 1987,respectively(Ball and Jeppson1978;Jeppsonand Ball 7979; Corsi and Elle 1989).
Catch rates for rainbow trout in drainage streamsremained relatively unchanged following the
cessationofhatchery introductions. In 1978,catch ratesfor all rainbow trout (both wild and hatchery) from
drainage streamswas 1.1 fishihour (review of Jeppsonand Ball 1979). In 1987, after stocking had been
discontinuedin all but Big SpringsCreek, catch ratesfor rainbow trout were 1.2 fish/hour (review of Corsi
and Elle 1989).
t6
Table 3.
Summary of waters and speciesstocked in the Little Lost River drainage(adaptedfrom Idaho
Department of Fish and Game stocking records).
SpeciesPlanted
Water
rainbowtrout, brooktrout
BadgerCreek
rainbowtrout, cutthroattrout, brooktrout
Big Creek
Big CreekLake#2
rainbowkout, cutthroattrout
Big SpringsCreek
rainbowtrout
CopperLake
cutthroattrout
DeerCreek
rainbowtrout
Dry Creek
rainbowtrout, cutthroattrout
rainbowtrout
Dry CreekReservoir
Little Lost River (includingSawmillCreek)
rainbowtrout, brooktrout, cutthroattrout, mountain
whitefish"
rainbowtrout,brooktroutb,cutthroattroutb
Mill Creek
rainbowtrout,cutthroattrout, grayling
Mill CreekLake
goldentrout
Nolan Lake
ShadowLake#l (lower)
cutthroattrout
ShadowLake#2 (upper)
rainbowtrout, cutthroattrout
SquawCreek
brooktroutb,cutthroattroutb
SummitCreek
rainbowtrout
SwaugerLake#l (lower)
rainbowtrout, cutthroattrout
SwaugerLake #2 (upper)
cutthroattrout
brooktrout
UncleIke Creek
rainbowtrout, cutthroattrout
Wet Creek
; ihese fish are recordedas "whitefish" from "MACKAY SALVAGE". Likely thesewere mountain
whitefish Prosopium williamsoni salvagedfrom the Big Lost River drainage.
b The stocking records indicate that these fish were stocked into Mill Creek and Squaw Creek in Custer
county. However, it is not clear if these particular specieswere stocked into these streamsin the Little
Lost River or another stream in Custer county with the samename'
t7
Table 4.
Mean angler catch rates and speciescomposition for the Little Lost River drainage.
Hours
Fish/
Interviewed Fished
Hour
# Anglers
Year
Composition
Species
Wrb Hrb
8
BI
Bk
1987
47
73.5
1.6
7
1978
157
309
1.3
6 1 2 1 1 6 2
r977
350
69r
1.4
3
5
6
4
6
I
t
Ct
CorsiandElle 1989
b
4
Source
andBall 1979
Jeppson
4
r
andBall 1978
Jeppson
" USR file dataindicates all of these cutthroat trout were caught in Dry Creek.
Habitat Management llistory
Severalfisheries habitatimprovement/restorationprojectshave been implementedin the Little Lost
River drainage. Each of theseprojects is summarizedunder the tributary in which it took place.
Between 1994 and 1997, frshhabitat data were gatheredfrom drainage streamsusing the Forest
ServiceR1/R4 Q.{orthem/IntermountainRegions)Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory Proceduresdescribedby
Overton et al. 1997 (Appendix F). By the end of 1997,the survey had been completed on all fish bearing
streamson National Forest lands in the drainage. In addition, habitat data have been collected by the Idaho
Falls and SalmonBLM districts.
Part2: Snecies
Introduction
Bull trout, brook trout, rainbow trout, cutthroattrout, rainbow trout x cutthroat trout hybrids, brook
trout x bull trout hybrids, grayling, shortheadsculpin, guppy, green swordtail, amelanic convict cichlids,
Mozambique tilapia, and goldfish have been documentedin the Little Lost River drainage (present study,
Gamett 1990a,Gamett 1990b,Corsi and Elle 1989,Courtenayet al. 1987,Elle et al. 1987,Corsi et al. 1986,
Corsi and Elle 1986,Ball and Jeppson1978,JeppsonandBall 1978,Andrews I972,USR file data,UMMZ).
During the current study, salmonidswere found to occupy most streamsin the basin (Figure 5). Mountain
whitefish have not beenfound in fish collectionscompletedin the drainage.However, local residentsindicate
whitefish were presentin the Little Lost River in the early 1900's(JamesWaymire, local resident, personal
communication). Although not documented,brown trout have apparently been caught in the lower portion
of the drainagein recent years (Will Marcroft, LRRD, personal communication). A single introduction of
golden trout did not establish a population. A drainagewide overview of each of the speciesis presented
below.
l8
Areaof Detail
N
g
lrount *i' '
Brcitcnbach
sP"
6r Mackay
5
F
Scale
5
0
l0Kilometers
Legend
I
A,
Laker'Reervoir
PercnnialS'trqm
gf,6satmia
Kins-*
lrountain.
/A
lt J
,n
1
.-
o Howe
a%<.oOe.sor,
Dstrilutio
o Moore
L9
Fisure 5.
Current distribuLion of all salmonids in Lhe LiLtle
(present study).
LosL River drainage
Bull Trout
Distribution
Although bull trout are widely distributed in the drainage,their distribution is fragmented. Data
collectedduring the presentstudy indicatebull trout occupyapproximately164km of stream(Figure 6). Bull
trout are the only salmonid presentin approxim ately 32 km of stream. During the presentstudy, bull trout
were found in the upper reach of Badger Creek, the upper reach of Big Creek, the lower reach of Bunting
Canyon Creek, the lower reach of Camp Creek, Firebox Creek, Hawley Creek, Iron Creek, JacksonCreek, the
mid and upper reachesof the mainstem(including Sawmill Creek),Mill Creek,Quigley Creek,Redrock Creek,
Smithie Fork, an unnamedtributary to Smithie Fork, Summit Creek, Timber Creek, Squaw Creek (Sawmill
Canyon), North Fork Squaw Creek, the lower reach of Slide Creek, the upper reach of Warm Creek, Wet
Creek (except the mid section),and Williams Creek. Bull trout comprised25Yoor more of the salmonids
captured in the lower reach ofBunting Canyon Creek, the lower reach of Camp Creek, Firebox Creek, Hawley
Creek, Iron Creek,JacksonCreek,the mainstem(including Sawmill Creek) aboveIron Creek Road, Mill
Creek, Quigley Creek, Redrock Creek,the lower reach of Slide Creek, Smithie Fork, an unnamed tributary
to Smithie Fork, upper SquawCreek (Sawmill Canyon),North Fork SquawCreek,Timber Creek, the upper
reach of Warm Creek, the lower and upper reach of Wet Creek, and Williams Creek.
Some bull trout populations were highly localized. For example, in Wet Creek 2 sampling sites
6
located km apartsuggestedbull trout were not presentin the upper portion of the stream. However, at the
request of the BLM, an additional site was sampledmidway between these 2 sectionsand bull trout were
found. Additional sampling indicated a relatively large, undocumentedbull trout population occupied the
sectionof streambetween the2 initial sampling sites. Similar localization was found in Warm Creek. Only
rainbow trout were found in Warm Creek 400 m abovethe Little Lost River in June 1995. However, only bull
trout were collected at a site approximately 3 km above the Little Lost River the sameday. This degreeof
localizationcan make the detection of bull trout extremely difficult even with intensive sampling efforts and
could result in bull trout going undetectedin a stream or watershed.
Historic Distribution
It is difficult to determinethe precisedistribution of bull trout in the Little Lost River drainageprior
to the arrival of Europeanman. Likely, bull trout were historically presentin all streamsin which they are
cugently found. The presenceof bull trout in the mainstemnearHowe in 1983(Corsi et al. 1986)prior to the
annualdewateringof this section of sffeam indicatesthat bull trout occupied the entire mainstem from the
headwatersto the sinks. Although not found in the presentstudy or in 1987 (Corsi and Elle 1989),creel
censusdata indicate bull trout were presentin Big SpringsCreek as recentas 1977 (Appendix C). Similarly,
bull trout were found in lower Squaw Creek in the Wet Creek drainage in 1987 (Corsi and Elle 1989).
However, bull trout were not collected from Squaw Creek during the presentstudy. Apparently, bull ffout
were also historically presentin Dry Creek. JesseStrope,who moved to the Little Lost River valley in 1910,
indicatedthat in the 1920'shecaughtonly "dolly varden" in Dry Creek Reservoir and Dry Creek above the
reservoir (personalcommunication). Rob Stauffer,an arearesident,indicatedthat in the early 1960's"dolly
varden" comprised about l0%oof the fish he caught in Dry Creek (personal communication).
20
Areaof Detail
N
SummitCr.€k
..*"""to*d
Mount *l
Breilsbach'-
oPf"
+S.rile
bdir
r
{
o Mackay
5
0
r
Scale
5
l0Kilometers
Legend
I
nt
Lat<vReseruoir
Perennial
Stream
KjnS +
Mountain
O Howe
/A
lt l
t
l
& .t*t*t^
iBtr$ &rtlTrat Dstributis
*at"
o Moore
Figure 5.
CurrenL distribution
(present studY).
of bull
trout
in the LiLtle
l,osL River drainage
An early record of bull trout in Wet Creekwas made by Carl Hubbs while collecting fish inthe area
during the summer of 1934(UMMZ). Although he did not collect any bull trout from Wet Creek (see Wet
Creek in Part 3), he recordedthe following in his field notes:
Dr. Baker, druggist af Mackay and a lang-time resident of the region, says that there are several
"bottomlessholes" in the courseof Wet Creek, which until they were dynamited afew months ago
were "full" of bull trout (Dolly Vardens).
Although bull trout were presentin the mainstembelow Summit Creek in the early part of this century,
fwo accountssuggestthey were not abundantin this reach. Wilma Mays hasbeena residentof the Little Lost
River valley since shewas born there in 1919(personalcommunication). She first fished the stream with a
safety pin, piece of white twine from the grocery store,and a greenwillow. Sheindicatedthat in the 1920's,
most of the fish she caught in the mainstemnear Williams Creek were rainbow trout. "Dolly varden" were
not very abundant. In the mainstembelow Summit Creek in the 1930'sand 1940's,only about 1 in 25 or 30
fish were bull trout and the remainderwere rainbow trout. The bull trout caughtwere approximately 150 to
175 mm in length. She does not remember any brook trout at that time. Similarly, in 1934, Carl Hubbs
collected fish from the Little Lost River betweenBadger Creek and Wet Creek with a seine (UMMZ). He
collected 2 rainbow trout (136 mm and 56 mm), one bull trout (136 mm), and shortheadsculpin (22mm).
Anna Sermon, a local residentand valley historian,has fished in the drainagesinceabout 1938 (personal
communication). In the 1940's,her family fished in the drainageall but about five days each season. In the
river below Big SpringsCreek,they caughtabout300 fish eachyear. In the samearea,they would also catch
about 100 fish annually from irigation ditcheswhen they went dry. However, only about 2 or 3 of the 400
fish caught each year in this areawere bull trout.
Accounts from anglerssuggestbull trout were not historically presentin Deer Creekand Horss Creek.
Arura Sermonhas fished Deer Creek since about 1938 (personal communication). However, she has never
caught a bull ffout in that stream. In addition, her family often fished Deer Creek between the late 1930's and
the late 1940's. Although they would catch between50 and 150 fish in Deer Creek on a single outing, none
of the fish were bull trout. Neil Reed, who has fished the Little Lost River drainagesince the late 1930's,
regularly fished Horse Creek. However, he has never caught a bull trout from that stream (Anna Sermon,
valley historian,personalcommunication)'
It is likely that bull trout were not able to becomeestablishedin many streamsand streamreachesdue
to their natural isolation. SomeisolatedsffeamssuchasUncle Ike Creek,SouthCreek,SummerhouseCanyon
Creek, and Hurst Canyon Creek have probably not had connectionsto other streams in the drainage for
hundreds or thousandsof years. Other stream reaches,such as the upper portion of Long Lost Creek, are
isolated by large waterfalls. If bull trout invaded the Little Lost River basin after these streamsor stream
reachesbecameisolated,they would not have been ableto accessthesestreams. It is also possible that bull
trout were never abundantor presentin some streamswith naturally high water temperaturessuch as Deer
Creek, Horse Creek, and Summit Creek.
Life History Strategies
Bull trout in the Little Lost River use both resident and fluvial (migratory) life-history strategies.
Residentfish spendtheir entire lives in small streamssuchasWilliams Creekwhile fluvial fish spenda portion
of their lives in the mainstem and migrate to headwaterstreamsto spawn. Similarly, Fraley and Shepard
(1989) found both resident and migratory forms of bull trout in the FlatheadRiver drainage in Montana.
22
Bull trout in the mainstem(including Sawmill Creek) below Iron CreekRoad are fluvial and migrate
to headwaterstreamsto spawn. During the current study, the smallestbull trout captured in the mainstem
below Iron CreekRoad ( 10 samplingsites)was 15 I mm in length. Otherdatafrom below the Forestboundary
(Corsi etal. 1986;Corsi andElle 1986;Elle et al. 1987;CorsiandElle 1989)alsoindicatesa lack of small bull
trout in the mainstem below this point. ln 1987,Corsi and Elle (1989) found age one and age2bull trout in
the Little Lost River drainagewere 99 mm and 155mm in length,respectively. The lack of young-of-the-year
and ageone bull trout in the mainstembelow Iron CreekRoad indicatethat thesefish are migrating elservhere
to spawn.
It appearsthe primary spawning areasfor fluvial fish are tributary streamsin the Sawmill Canyon
drainage. Large bull trout over 300 mm in length have beenobservedin many streamsin Sawmill Canyon in
July, August, andlor September(presentstudy, Corsi and Elle 1989),the spawningperiod. The large size of
these fish relative to the size of the stream suggeststhey are migrant spawnersthat have moved into these
streams to spawn. If this is true, some bull trout may be currently migrating over 30 km to spawn and
historically may have moved over 80 km, the length of the river. The high densitiesof young bull trout in
Smithie Fork, the mainsteur above Smithie Fork, and Firebox Creek suggestthese streams are the most
important spawningand rearing tributaries for fluvial bull trout. In 1995,bull trout densities (fish >70 mm)
were as high as 30.3 fish/l00m2 in Smithie Fork and 20.4 frsh/100m2in the mainstemabove Smithie Fork.
The size of bull trout in Big Creek suggeststhey arealso part of a fluvial population. Creel census
and electrofishing data indicatethat bull trout up to 430 mm have been caught in Big Creek (USR file data,
personalobservation). In 1994,a 389 mm bull trout was capturedimmediately below the large beaver pond
near the head of Big Creek. Another fish measuring455 mm that appearedto be a brook ffout x bull trout
hybrid was capturedin the samelocation. In 1997,an anglercaught a635 mm,3.9 kg brook trout x bull trout
hybrid from the large beaverpond (Big Creek Lake) nearthe headof Big Creek. The large size of thesefish
relative to the size of the streamsuggeststhey may be fluvial fish that havemigrated into Big Creekto spawn.
If so, they are likely migrating from lower Wet Creek and/or the mainstem of the Little Lost River.
Likewise, some of the bull trout found in the upper reach of Wet Creek may be fluvial fish. Bull trout
over 300 mm in length were observedwhile snorkeling in the beaverponds immediately below Hilts Creek
on July 2,1996. The large sizeof thesefish relative to the size of Wet Creek suggeststhey arefluvial fish and
have migrated into theseareasto spawn. As with Big Creek,they are likely migrating from lower Wet Creek
and/or the mainstem of the Little Lost River. Length frequency data suggestthe bull trout in Wet Creek above
the falls located 0.8 km aboveHilts Creek are residentfish. It is likely that the old diversion structure, falls,
and cascadesbelow this population limit the migration of fish upstreaminto this reach.
There is not sufficient datato determineif the bull trout found in Mill Creek, Quigley Creek, Squaw
Creek (Sawmill Canyon), Slide Creek, North Fork Squaw Creek, Warm Creek, and Badger creeks are
associatedwith a fluvial population. Length frequencydistribution dataand length at sexualmaturity suggest
that the bull trout in upper SquawCreek (Sawmill Canyon) are residentfish, It is likely that fluvial bull trout
from the mainstemhistorically usedall of these streamsfor spawning and rearing. However, the bull trout
currently found in these streamsmay now only comprise remnantsof a former fluvial population that has
revertedto residency. In addition, resident fish may be synpafric with fluvial fish in streamslike Smithie Fork,
although this distinction is difficult.
Although fluvial bull trout likely historicallymigratedinto Williams Creek,thesefish arenow resident.
Williams (1973) indicatesthat Williams Creek has beenusedfor irigation purposessincethe late 1800's.
Curyently,Williams Creek is permanentlydiverted from the mainstem of the Little Lost River. As a result,
bull trout are not able to migrate into Williams Creek'
^a
Diet
The diet of bull trout in the Little Lost River hasnot beenstudied. However,datafrom elsewheregive
an indication of what they eat. Juvenilebull trout in streamsin the FlatheadRiver drainage,Montana, fed on
aquatic inseotsin approximately the sameproportion they were available in streams(Fraley and Shepard 1989).
However, once fish exceeded110 mm in length they beganeating small lrout and sculpin. After bull trout
moved into Flathead Lake they fed almost exclusively on fish. In Iron Creek, a stream in the upper Little Lost
River drainage, a260 mm bull trout had a 152 mm bull trout in its stomach(USR file data).
Growth
ln 1987,Corsi and Elle (1989) studiedbull trout growth in the Little Lost River drainage (Table 5).
Most of the scalescollected for this analysiswere from bull trout in the mainstem(including Sawmill Creek)
and tributaries in Sawmill Canyon(Chip Corsi, IDFG, personalcommunication). It is likely most ofthese fish
were associatedwith the mainstem/SawmillCanyon fluvial population. Mean length was 99, 155,240, and
314 mm at age1,2,3, and4, respectively.
Tabte 5.
Comparison of bull trout lengths at annulusfrom the Little I-ost River to other systems.
Lensthat Annulus
1
2
3
4
s
6
7
Location
N
Little Lost Riveru
85
99
Little Lost River
(SawmillCreek)
|
145 235 350 404 475 555 635b
1s5 240 3r4
8
Source
CorsiandElle 1989
UpperSnake
Regionfile data
EastFork Salmon
River, Id"
r44
75
150 237 349 431 527 647
Elle 1995
CrookedRiver,Id"
106
66
rl9
189 286 371 424
Elle 1995
SouthFork Salmon
River.Id"
nJa
68
110 ls4
North Fork Flathead 929
River,Mt"
73
117 165 301 440 538 s74
Middle Fork
FlatheadRiver, Mt"
LAfi s2
217 284
Thurow1987
Fraleyand Shepard
1989
100 165 297 399 488 567 6ss FraleyandShepard
1989
; This sample may have included a combination of fluvial and resident fish.
b This was a male caughtby an angler on July 14,1984. The 635 mm length is the length of the fish at the
time it was caught.
" This data representsfluvial populations.
24
Although the drainageis small, bull trout do reach large sizes. In July 1983,a six year old male
measuring 635 mm was caughtby an angler in the Little Lost River (Sawmill Creek) (USR file data). Other
fish 400 mm and longerhave beendocumented(presentstudy,Corsi and Elle 1986, Corsi and Elle 1989,USR
file data). The largest bull trout found during the presentstudy was a 445 mm fish captured in Wet Creek
immediately below Big Creek on July 2,1997. The largestbull fout from the Sawmill Canyon drainagewas
a 406 mm fish collected in 1995 from the mainstem(Sawmill Creek)behind the Fairview Guard Station. In
1997, a430 mm bull trout was caughtin Williams Creek. How this fish was able to get this large in a small,
disjunct stream is not clear.
Sexual Nlaturity
There is little dataavailablerelating to ageand length atmaturity for bull trout in the Little Lost River
drainage. A literature review by Rieman and Mclntyre (1993) found most bull trout mature between5 andT
years of age. However, bull trout maturing as early as age 3 has been reported (Scotf and Crossman 1973).
Dissection of a286 mm femalebull trout from lower SmithieFork (likely a fluvial fish) indicatedthe fish was
mature. The length frequency dishibution of bull trout from this site and age at length data for bull trout from
the Little Lost River (Corsi and Elle 1989)suggestthis fish was 4 yearsold.
Limited data indicateresidentfish mature at approximately age4. Dissectionof a 199mm 4 year old
female bull trout (age determinedby scaleanalysisand length frequency) from upper Williams Creek indicated
the fish was mature. A2 yearold (120 mm) and a3 yearold (approximately140mm) bull trout from the same
site were not mature. Similarly, a 184 mm 4 year old female bull trout from upper Squaw Creek (Sawmill
Canyon) was mature. Although length at maturity appearsto differ between fluvial and resident fish, age at
maturity appearsto be similar,
Spawning, Incubationo and Rearing
Although there is little information regarding bull trout spawning, incubation, and rearing for the Little
Lost River drainage,they have been studied extensively elsewhere. Fraley and Shepard (1989) studied
adfluvial bull trout in the FlatheadRiver drainage,Montana.They found that spawningadfluvial bull trout left
FlatheadLake and beganmigrating upstreamin April. The fish remainedat the mouth of spawning streams
for 2to 4 weeks, fhen enteredthe streamsat night betweenJuly and September.However, spawning,which
'C, did not take place for a month or more after the
occurredwhen streamtemperaturesdroppedbelow 9 to I 0
fish enteredthe streams.
Swanberg(1997) studiedthe seasonalmovementand habitatuseof fluvial bull trout in the Blackfoot
River drainage,Montana. He found that upstreammigrations, which began in June,were associatedwith a
decline in runoff and an increasein streamtemperatures.The majority of bull trout began migrating during
peaksin streamtemperatures(mean streamtemperature17.7"C). Migration rateswere correlatedto average
maximum daily temperatureand ranged from 1.9 to 11.8 km/day. Fish enteredtributaries in late June and
early July, where they remainedfor up to 77 daysbeforespawningin late September.Bull trout beganmoving
downstreamshortly after completion of spawning. Eighty-six peroentof the fish returnedto the samelocation
occupied in the spring. Winter movements of bull trout were never greaterthan about 300 m.
25
In 1995 and 1996, the maximum daily stream temperature in headwater streams in the Sawmill
Canyon drainagefluctuated aboveand below 10'C throughoutthe summer(seeAppendix D). Hor,vever,in
September, a sharp drop in stream temperaturesoccurred in which the maximum daily stream temperatures
fell and remainedbelow 10'C. In 1997,the maximum daily streamtemperaturein headwaterstreamsin
Sawmill Canyon remainedabove 10'C throughoutthe summer. Howevet, the maximum daily temperature
in many of thesestreamsdroppedand remainedbelow 10"C in mid September.This temperatureshift may
indicate the onset of bull trout spawning. In 1998,redds were observedin the drainage above Moonshine
Creek in early October indicating at least some bull trout had spawnedby that time.
In the Flathead River drainage, bull trout were highly selective in determining spawning sites.
Spawning siteswere characterizedby gravel substrates,low compaction, low gradient, groundwater influence,
and proximity to cover (Fraley and Shepard1989). The high degreeof selectivity resulted in spawning bull
trout utilizin gonly 28o/oofavailable streams; Mean fecundity for 32 fluvial fish from Flathead Lake averaging
645mm in length was 5,482 eggs. Residentfish (300 mm) in Washingtonhad lessthan200 eggs(Mullan et
al. 1992). In Coal Creek, a tributary to the FlatheadRiver, 50% hatch occurred 113 days (340 temperature
units) after deposition(Fraley and Shepard1989). Fry remainedin the gravel for an additional 110 days(295
temperatureunits) before emerging. Eighteenpercentofjuvenile migratory bull trout left tributary streams
in the FlatheadRiver drainageat ageone,49%oat age2,32yo at age3, and lYo at age4. Lenglh frequencydata
from the Little Lost River suggestthat fluvial bull trout probably spendone or two years in headwater streams
before moving into the mainstem.
I{abitat C haracteristics
Rieman and Mclntyre ( 1993) identified 5 habitatoharacteristicsthat were critical to bull trout. These
are channelstability, substratecomposition,cover)temperature,and migratory coridors. During the present
study, the highest densitiesof bull trout were found in the upper sectionof SmithieFork, which had 30.3
fish1100mt 1fish>70 mm). Streamhabitat data were gatheredfrom this stream in 1994 (Table 6). Stream
temperature data were collected in 1997 (Figure 4).
Stream temperaturesare believed to be the most important factor affecting bull trout distribution
(Rieman and Mclntyre 1993). An extensive literature review completed by these authors found that
temperaturesin excessof about l5"C appearto limit distribution. A comparisonof streamtemperaturedata
collected in 1997from the mainstemof the Little Lost River and Wet Creek with population data collected
between 1995-1997supportsthis conclusion. Although bull trout were found in water that was 2}"C,they
comprised lessthan 50%oof the salmonid composition in streamsthathad a maximum summer temperature
that exceededabout 15'C (Figure 7 and8, Table 7 and 8). When the maximum summer streamtemperature
exceededabout 17"C, bull trout generallycomprisedlessthan 10% of the speciescomposition.
High groundwatertemperaturesandlor harshwinter conditions may precludethe successfulincubation
of bull trout eggsin some streamsin the drainageand subsequentlylimit the distribution of bull trout in those
samestreams. McPhail and Munay (1979) found that water temperaturesof 2 to 4" C were ideal for bull trout
egg incubation. At waters temperaturesof 8 to 10'C egg survival was 0 to 20%. Available datafrom the
Little t-ost River drainage indicate that bull trout are generally not found in streamswhose primary source
springshave water temperaturesgreaterthan about 7"C. It is possiblethat water in these streamsemerges
from the ground too warm to successfullyincubatebull trout eggs. For example,bull trout were not found in
the North Fork Deer Creek and South Fork Deer Creek. Both of these streamsemerge frorn large single
26
Table 6.
Comparisonof bull trout densitiesand habitat characteristicsfrom Smithie Fork (relatively high
density) and Timber Creek (relatively low density).
StreamReach
Smithie#1
Smithie#2
Timber#1
Bull trouti100m'z(1995)
26.4
30.3
4.6u
Other salmonids present
rainbowtrout
no
rainbowtrout
110
no
shortheadsculpin
1203
3238
2949
2
2
Mean width (m)
3.0
2.4
2.6
Mean width:depth ratio
15.3
12.7
15.9
Side channel:total reach length ratio
.09
.08
.04
Maximum summer stream
temperature"C (1997)
15.5
n/a
15.8
% Pools
48
50
aa
JJ
oZUndercut bank
25
43
4
o/oBankstability
94
99
85
o/oFines
15
12
10
%oSmall Gravel
l2
6
8
%aGravel
20
15
2I
% Small Cobble
27
27
28
Yo Cobble
22
2l
l9
YoSmall Boulder
9
21
15
% Boulder
8
aa
JJ
0
o/oBedrock
a
J
10
0
I 1.0
9.7
Characteristic
Other fish present
Reach length (m)
Stream order
a
3
Substratecoverage
Mean o/osurface fines
13.9
4.3
4.9
7.9
by multiplying the total trout densityby the percentof fish capturedthat werebull trout.
" Culgrrtutud
#Large woody debris/l00 m
27
Figure7.
Relationshipbetweentrout speciescomposition(1995,1996,or 1997)andmaximumsummer
in 1997in themainstemof the Little LostRiver,
streamtemperature
{Rainbow QBrook EBull
q
O
o\
18
16
20
Maximum SummerWaterTemperature(C)
Relationshipbetweentrout speciescomposition(1995,1996,or 1997)andmaximumsummer
n 1997in Wet Creek.
streamtemperature
Figure8.
)(Rainbow EBull
a
O
Maximum SummerWaterTemperature(C)
28
Table 7.
Relationshipbetweentrout speciescomposition(1995, 1996,or 1997) andmaximum summer
stream temperaturein 1997 in the mainstem of the Little Lost River.
Maximum
Summer Stream
Temperature(" C) (1997)"
Year
Population
Above Smithie Fork
12.5
r995
0
0
100
Near Moonshine
13.4
1997
26
0
74
Below Timber Creek
15.1
1997
48
0
s2
Above Squaw Creek
18.1
r997
B7
11
J
Below Summit Creek
19.2
r997
6r
34
5
Reach
Data
Collected
SpeciesComposition
Rainbow
Brook
Bull
7T
T4
14
1997
23.7
Above Summit Creek
u Stream temperature monitoring sites were not always located in the exact location of the population
monitoring sites but should reflect maximum summer temperatures experienced at the population
monitoring sites.
(1995,1996,or 1997)andmaximumsummer
betweentroutspeciescomposition
TableB. Relationship
streamtemperaturein 1997in Wet Creek'
Year
Population
Maximum
Summer Stream
Temperature("C) (1997)
Data Collected
Rainbow
Bull
Above Hilts Creek
tr.7
1996
37
63
Above Coal Creek
15.6
r996
-a
2',1
At Forest Boundary
17.8
1996
96
Reach
SpeciesComposition
t)
4
0
100
t997
2r.3
Above Dry Creek
rstream temperature monitoring sites were not always located in the exact location of the population
monitoring sites but should reflect maximum summer temperatures experienced at the population
monitoring sites.
29
13'ConJune 6,1997 andMay 19,1998. Similar
springs. Thewatertemperatureatbothofthesespringswas
Creek
Horse Creek. Downstreamof thesesprings and
as
Summit
and
such
other
streams
occur
in
conditions
extreme
winter conditions (freezing or near freezing
groundwater
influence,
in other reaches lacking
temperaturesand anchor ice) may preclude the successfulincubation of bull trout eggs. However, further
researchis neededbefore any definite conclusionscan be drawn.
Population Trend
Limited dataprecludedetermininga populationtrend for bull trout in most of the drainage. However,
sufficient datahave beencollectedto determinea trend for the mainstemabove Summit Creek. Becausenot
enough fish of each species were captured to calculate a speciesdensity estimate, it was estimated by
multiplying the percent speciescomposition by the total salmonid density. Although these data should be
viewed cautiously due to differencesin samplingtimes, temperatureregimes, and natural fluctuations, they
indicate that bull trout in this sectionhave declinedsince 1984. Between 1984 and 1993,the number of bull
trout per km of streamdeclined9lo/ointhemainstem betweenSummit Creekandthe Forestboundary (Figure
9, Table 9). In the mainstembetweenthe Forestboundaryand Smithie Fork, the number of bull trout per km
of stream declined 62o/obetween1987and 1995(Figure 10, Table 10). Thesedeclineswere likely the result
of low water resulting from drought,high streamtemperaturesresulting from drought and degradedhabitat
conditions below Warm Creek, and angler harvest.
Despite declinesin the late 1980's and early 1990's,bull trout numbersin the mainstemappearto be
increasing. Sampling in 1997indicatesthat bull trout have increasedin both sectionsof the mainstem(Figure
9 and 10, Table 9 and 10). It is likely that subsidingdrought conditions,habitat improvementsfrom changes
in management, and the closure of bull trout to harvest in 1994 have resulted in increasesin bull trout
densities.
Although bull trout numbers have increasedin the mainstem, they appearto be declining in other
areas. As previously mentioned,bull trout have beenfound historically in Big SpringsCreek, Squaw Creek
(Wet Creek drainage),and the lower reachof the Little Lost River. Creel censusdataindicatesbull trout were
presentin Big SpringsCreek as recentas 1977(Appendix C). However, additional creel censusdata, which
was completedin 1978, 1979, and 1987 (Appendix C), and electrofishingdatafrom 1987 (Corsi and Elle
1989) and 1993 (presentstudy) indicatebull trout areno longer presentin this tributary. Similarly, Corsi and
Elle (1989) found small numbers of bull trout electrofishing2 sites in lower Squaw Creek (Wet Creek
drainage)in1987.However,bulltroutwerenotfoundelecffofishingthesesame2sitesin7992.In1983,bull
trout were found in the mainstemnearHowe (Corsi et al. 1986). However, the annualdiversion of this reach
for winter flood control since i985 has renderedthis portion of stream of little value to bull trout.
Bull trout appearto have beencompletely extirpatedfrom Dry Creek. JesseStrope, who moved to
the Little Lost River valley in 1910,indicatedthat in the 1920'she caught only "dolly varden" in Dry Creek
Reservoir and Dry Creek above the reservoir (personal communication). Rob Stauffer, an arearesident,
indicated that in the early 1960's"dolly varden" oomprised about l\Yo of the fish he caught in Dry Creek
(personal communication). He also reported catching brook trout and rainbow trout in Dry Creek. However,
bull trout were not caughtby anglersthat were surveyedon Dry Creek in 1969, 1977, 1978, and 1979 (USR
file data,Appendix C). Likewise, bull trout were not found in Dry Creek in electrofishingsampling in 1987
(Corsi and Elle 1989) or 1995 (presentstudy).
30
13'ConJune6, 1997andMay19,1998. Similar
springs, Thewatertemperatureatbothofthesespringswas
Horse Creek. Downstream of these springs and
and
as
Summit
Creek
such
streams
in
other
conditions occur
winter conditions (freezing or near freezing
extreme
groundwater
influence,
in other reaches lacking
incubation
of bull trout eggs. However, further
the
successful
temperaturesand anchor ice) may preclude
research is neededbefore any definite conclusions can be drawn.
Population Trend
Limited dataprecludedetermininga populationtrend for bull trout in most of the drainage. However,
sufFrcient data have been collected to determine a trend for the mainstem above Summit Creek. Becausenot
enough fish of each species were captured to caloulate a speciesdensity estimate, it was estimated by
multiplying the percent speciescomposition by the total salmonid densify. Although thesedata should be
viewed cautiously due to differences in sampling times, temperature regimes, and natural fluctuations, they
indicate that bull trout in this sectionhave declinedsince 1984. Betweenl9S4 and L993,the number of bull
trout per km of stream declined 9 1% in the mainstem between Summit Creek and the Forest boundary (Figure
9, Table 9). In the mainstembetweenthe Forestboundaryand Smithie Fork, the number of bull trout per km
of streamdeclined 62Yobe,tween1987 and 1995(Figure 10, Table 10). Thesedeclineswere likely the result
of low water resulting from drough! high stream temperaturesresulting from drought and degraded habitat
oonditions below Warm Creek, and angler harvest.
Despite declinesin the late 1980's and early 1990's,bull trout numbersin the mainstemappearto be
increasing. Sampling n lggT indicatesthat bull trout have increasedin both sectionsof the mainstem(Figure
9 and 10, Table i and 10). It is likely that subsidingdrought conditions,habitat improvementsfrom changes
in management, and the closure of bull trout to harvest in 1994 have resulted in increasesin bull trout
densities.
Although bull trout numbers have increasedin the mainstem, they appeatto be declining in other
areas. As previously mentioned,bull hout have beenfound historically in Big Springs Creek, Squaw Creek
(Wet Creek drunage),andthe lower reachofthe Little Lost River, Creel censusdataindicatesbull trout were
present in Big Springs Creek as recent as 1977 (Appendix C). However, additional creel censusdata, which
ias completea rn Wt, 1979, and 1987(Appendix C), and electrofishingdatafrom 1987 (Corsi and Elle
1989) and 1993 (presentstudy) indicatebull trout are no longerpresentin this tributary. Similarly, Corsi and
fne ipAO; found small numbers of bull trout electrofishing 2 sites in lower Squaw Creek (Wet Creek
same?sitesin 1992.In1983,bull
drainage)11_lg87.However,bulltroutwerenotfoundelecffofishingthese
trout were found in the mainstem near Howe (Corsi et al. 1986). However, the annual diversion of this reach
for winter flood control since 1985 has renderedthis portion of streamof little value to bull trout'
Bull trout appeartohave beencompletely extirpatedfrom Dry Creek. JesseStrope,who moved to
the Little Lost River valley in 1910,indicatedthat in the 1920'she caughtonly "dolly varden" in Dry Creek
Reservoir and Dry Creek above the reservoir (personal communication). Rob Stauffer, an afea resident,
indicated that in the early 1960's"dolly varden" comprised about l\Yo of the fish he caught in Dry Creek
(personalcommunication). He also reportedcatchingbrook trout and rainbow trout in Dry Creek' However,
bull trout were not caughtby anglersthat were surveyedon Dry Creek in 7969,1977, 1978, and 1979 (USR
f1e data,Appendix C). Likewise, bull toout were not found in Dry Creek in eleckofishing sampling in 1987
(Corsi and Elle 1989) or 1995 (presentstudy).
30
Comparisonof estimatedtrout/kmin theLittle Lost Riverbetween1984and1997(Elle et al. 1987,
CorsiandElle 1989,presentstudy).
Figure9.
Little Lost River between
Summit Creek and Forest Boundary
300
250
200
=a
150
100
50
0
r 988
Figure 10. Comparisonof estimatedtrout/kmin the Little Lost Riverbetween1987and1997(Elle et al. 1987,
CorsiandElle 1989,presentstudy).
Little Lost River between
Forest Boundary and Smithie Fork
800
'100
600
500
J
q
400
300
200
100
0
t987
I99l
31
Tabte 9.
Comparison of estimated trout/km in the Little Lost River between the Forest boundary and
Summit Creek between 1984 and 1997 (Elle et al. 1987,Corsi and Elle 1989,present study).
Total trout/kmu
Rainbow trout/km
Brook trout/km
Bull trouVkm
July 1997
24s
208
l6
21
August1993
227
203
20
+
Iuly 1987
226
150
52
24
July 1986
189
123
2l
45
July 1985
r76
83
JZ
61
October1984
24s
173
27
45
Sampling Date
n
n This number representsthe sum of the individual speciesdensities and may different slightly from the
actual mean density due to rounding errors.
Table 10. Comparisonof estimatedtrout/km in the Little Lost River from the Forest boundary to Smithie
Fork between 7987 and 1997(Corsi and Elle i989, presentstudy).
Total trout/km"
Rainbow trout/km
Brook trout/km
Bull trout/km
Iuly 1997
527
366
74
87
August/
1995
September
594
499
JJ
62
Ivly 1981
675
+zJ
90
SamplingDate
-t6is
162
number representsthe sum of the individual speciesdensitiesand may different slightly from the
actual mean density due to rounding errors.
a^
Similarly, bull trout havenearly disappearedfrom Big Creek. Ted Rothwell, a longtime local resident,
fishedBig Creekin the 1940's,1950's,and 1960's(personalcommunication).When he first beganfishing
the sfream inthe 1940's,most of the fish caughtwere bull trout up to 450 mm in length. A similar account
is made by Albert Fullmer, h. (arearesident,personaloommunication).In the 1950's,most of the fish he
caught in Lower Big Creek Lake (beaver pond) were bull trout up to 1.8 kg. A photographtaken by Mr.
Fullmer showsseveralbull trout approximately300 to 500 mm in lengththat were caughtin Lower Big Creek
Lake (beaverpond) on June4, 1958. Although the number of bull trout caughtby anglersin Big Creek varied
in the 1970's,creel censusdata indicatethat in l974bull trout comprised 63%oof the fish caught by anglers
in Big Creek (Appendix C). In 1978, brook trout were introduced into the stream. By 1990, brook trout
comprised95Yoof the fish caughtby anglersin the large beaverpond nearthe headof the stream(Lower Big
Creek Lake) (Gam ett 1990a). During the curent study,brook trout comprisedup to 77%oof the fish captured
greaterthan I 00 mm in length. Of the 5 samplingsitesin Big Creek (401 m total length) no bull trout smaller
than 100 mm were found and only 2 bull trout over 100 mm were captured. Sevenother fish appearedto be
brook trout x bull trout hybrids. Similar bull trout declinesassociatedwith brook trout appearto be occuring
in Mill Creek and lower Squaw Creek (Sawmill Canyon drainage)'
Threats to Bull Trout Populations
Severalfactors appgarto affect the distribution andlorabundanceof bull trout in the Little Lost River
drainage. Theseinclude high streamtemperatures;hybridization,competition,and predationby exotic brook
trout; disruption ofmigratory ooridors; sediment;lossthrough inigation ditches;artificial migration bariers;
angler harvest;and loss of cover andhabitatcomplexity. All of theseissuesare discussedbelow.
In addition, Rieman and Mclntyre (1993) demonstratedthat other factorssuchas stochastic(random)
and geneticprocessesare important to the long term persistenceof bull trout populations. Although these
factors are not assessedin this paper,they will need to be addressedto ensurethe long term survival of the
population.
Stream Temperature - Although severalfactors appeartobelimitingthe abundanceand distribution
of bull trout in the drainage,high streamtemperaturesappearto be the most significant. A literature review
by Rieman and Mclntyre (1993) found that water temperaturesgreaterthan about 15'C appearto limit bull
trout distribution. As previously discussed,data from the curuentstudy supportthis conclusion. Stream
temperaturedata collectedin 1997indicatesthat approximately 50Yoof all fish bearing streamshad stream
temperaturesexceeding15'C for 50 days or more. Among thosereachesexperiencingthis degreeof heating
were the entire mainstemdownstreamfrom Warm Creek, all of Big SpringsCreek, and approximately 50Yo
of Wet Creek. Although many streamreachesexperiencewater temperaturesexceedingthose preferred by
bull trout, the degreethat managementactivities have alterednatural streamtemperatureregimesis not clear.
Temperature datafrom severalyears are available for somelocations,including the mainstem at the
Forestboun dary andaboveSummit Creek. Data were collectedfrom these2 sitesin 1987, 1988, 1994,1995,
and 7997(AppendicesD and E). Thesedataindicatethat maximum streamtemperaturesat both stationswere
consistently above l5"C during the summer and often reachedabove 20"C. During 1994, a hot, dry year,
streamtemperaturesat the Forestboundaryexoeeded20"C for 17 days but did not exceed25"C. However,
in the mainstem above Summit Creek, streamtemperaturesexceeded20" C fot 55 days and exceeded 25" C
for 10 days. Further down the mainstem, cooler waters from Wet Creek resulted in lower temperatures. The
maximum streamtemperaturerecordedin this streamreachwas 27"C atthe old gauging station in July 1994.
aa
JJ
The high streamtemperaturesin the reachbelow Warm Creek appearto be a result of poor ripaian
and stream habitat conditions compounded by low stream flows as a result of several years of drought. SCS
and BLM (1985) indicate thataftre burnedthe reachof the Little Lost River (Sawmill Creek) from Summit
Creek to the Forest boundary. According to this report, the upper portion of this reach experiencedgood
regeneration of riparian species,but heavy grazing along the lower portion did not allow woody riparian
speciesto reestablish. Resulting streambank erosionhas led to an unstablechanneland stream meandering
(SCS and BLM 1985). In turn, the stream'swidth to depthratio hasincreasedresulting in an unnaturallywide,
shallow stream.
This condition has likely affectedsffeamtemperaturein at least3 ways, First limited woody riparian
vegetationalong the lower portion ofthis reachhasresultedin a lack of streamshading. Second,the increased
width of the streamhas resultedin a larger stream surface area increasingthe surfaoe areato volume ratio.
Subsequently,a greaterpercentageofthe streamis exposedto solar radiation. Third, the increasedstream
width has reducedstreamvelocities. When theseconditions were combined with low flows resulting from
severalyearsofdrought, extremelyhigh streamtemperaturesresulted. Streamtemperatureslikely would have
remained more tolerable for bull trout had theseconditions occurred independentof each other.
The poor condition of the habitat in and alongthe mainstembelow Warm Creek hasbeenrecognized.
In 1987,a streamimprovementproject was implementedalong this reachas mitigation for flood control
'Little Lost River, Mainstem' for a complete description of the flood control and
measuresnear Howe (See
mitigation projeot.) In 1993,the riparian, ohannel,and bank conditions along the project areahad greatly
improved (IFD file data). As conditions along this reach continue to improve, stream temperaturesshould
decline to limits more acceptableby bull trout.
Hybridization. Competition. and Predation blExotic Brook Trout - Exotic brook trout appear
to pose a significantthreatto bull trout in the Liftle Lost River drainage. Hybridization, predation, and
competition betweenbull trout and introducedspeciescan negatively impact bull trout populations (Rieman
and Mclntyre 1993). Theseauthorsbelieved thathybridization betweenbrook trout and bull trout could lead
to the elimination of bull trout. In SouthFork Lolo Creek, Montana,the rapid displacementof bull trout by
brook trout was accompaniedby extensivehybridization betweenthe 2 species(Leary et al. 1993). Similarly,
Mullan et al. (1992) believed that hybridization between brook trout and bull trout may have led to the
elimination of bull trout in some streamsin Washington.
In the Little Lost River drainage,the extirpation or decline of bull trout in some streamshas been
accompaniedbytheintroductionand/orexpansionofbrooktrout.Theapparentextirpationofbulltroutfrom
Dry Creek appearslinked to the introduction of brook trout. JesseStrope,who moved to the Little Lost River
in 1910, reported catchingonly "dolly varden" in Dry Creek Reservoirand Dry Creek above Dry Creek
Reservoirinthelg20's(personalcommunication).AtsometimebrooktroutwereintroducedintoDryCreek.
By the early 1960's, "dolly varden" comprised only about 10% of the fish caught by Rob Stauffer, an area
resident(personalcommunication). However, no bull trout were found in Dry Creek in creel censuswork
completedby the Idaho Departmentof Fish and Game in 1969, 1977,1978, and 1979 (Appendix C) or in
electrofishing sampling completedin 1987(Corsi and Elle 1989). During the presentstudy, none of the 159
fish collected in Dry Creek were bull trout (157 were brook trout and 2 were rainbow trout x cutthroat trout
hybrids). Likewise, the introduction of brook trout into Big Creek in 1978 coresponds with the near
disappearanceof bull trout in that stream. Similar declinesappearto be occuring in Mill Creek and Squaw
Creek (Sawmill Canyon drainage). If thesetrends continue, it appearsbull trout will disappearfrom these
streams. Furthermore,an expansionof brook trout into additional bull trout streamssuch as Smithie Fork or
Wet Creek may result in the elimination of bull trout in additional streams.
34
The early ageat which brook trout reachsexualmaturity is likely one reasonbrook trout may replace
bull trout. An extensiveliteraturereview by Rieman and Mclntyre (1993) indicated bull trout reach sexual
maturity in 5 to 7 yearcalthoughmaturation as early as 3 years has been reported (see Scott and Crossman
1973). On the other hand, brook trout may mature as early as age one (presentstudy, Corsi and Elle 1989).
During the presentstudy, age atmaturity for brook trout in Mill Creek and Squaw Creek (Sawmill Canyon
drainage)was determined. Sexualmaturity was determinedby analysisof the gonads. Age was determined
through scaleanalysis.Ninety-one brooktrout from Mill Creekand 43 from SquawCreekwere studied. Male
brook trout beganmaturing at age one in both streams. All of the fish that could be distinguished as males
were mature by age 2. Femalefish also beganmaturing at age one in both streams. Over half were mature
by age 2 and all by age 3. If bull trout in these streamsdo not reach maturity until age 3 or 4, the earlier
maturity of brook trout could lead to a decline in bull trout, particularly when combined with hybridization.
Hybridization is likely another factor leading to bull trout declines. Althoughhybridization in the
Little Lost River drainagedoesnot appearwidespread,it doesappearto be a threatto bull trout in Big Creek,
lower Squaw Creek (Sawmill Canyon),and Mill Creek. During the presentstudy,fish appearingto be brook
trout x bull trout hybrids were found in lower and mid SquawCreek (Sawmill Canyon drainage),Mill Creek,
the mainstem near Mill Creek, and the upper reachof Big Creek. These samestream reachesalso had very
few fish appearingto be pure bull trout. A fish that appearedto be a brook trout x bull trout hybrid measuring
455 mmwas capturednear the headof Big Creek in August 1994. In 1997,an angler caught a 635 mm,3.9
kg fish from Big CreekBeaverPondthat appearedto be a brook trout x bull trout hybrid. I'his was confirmed
by genetic testing at the University of Montana.
The extent of predation on bull trout by other speciesin the Little Lost River drainage is not clear.
Rainbow trout and brook trout do ttilize other fish for food (Simpson and Wallace 1982, Wydoski and
Whitney 1979). Although the extent is not known, it is likely bull trout fry andjuveniles are utilized by brook
trout and rainbow trout, particularly in spawning and nursery streams'
The extent of interspecific competition betweenbull trout, brook trout, and rainbow trout, and the
impact on bull trout populationsin the drainage,is not known. A literature review by Rieman and Mclntyre
(1993) found that declinesin bull trout populationshave been associatedwith the introduction of nonnative
fishes such as rainbow trout and brown trout. However, the decline in bull trout abundanceaccompaniedby
an increasein rainbow trout abundancein the mainstemLittle Lost River is likely explainedas a function of
higher stream temperaturesduring drought selecting againstbull trout rather than direct competition from
rainbow trout.
Disruption of Migratory Corridors - Migratory coridors are streamreachesthat connectmainstem
adult habitat reachesto headwater spawning and nursery sffeams. The most important migratory corridors in
the Little Lost River drainage are the Little Lost River between Summit Creek and Smithie Fork, and Wet
Creek from the Little Lost River to Big Creek. Bull trout appearto be using both of thesereachesto move
between the mainstem and headwaterstreams.
Although the movement of fluvial bull trout through both of thesereacheshas been affected, these
problems are being rectified. An aerial photographtaken on July 20,1959, indicatesthat at approximately
8 k* b"lo* Warm Creek, all of the Little Lost River was diverted acrossthe alluvial fan into Summit Creek.
This appearsto haveresultedin the completedewateringof approximately5 km of the Little Lost River above
Summit Creek. This was likely doneto reducewater loss in the main channel. Unless fluvial bull trout could
negotiatethis route, or if they migratedat a time when the diversionwas not being used,they would havebeen
blocked from spawningtributariesin Sawmill Canyon. However,this diversion was discontinuedafter about
1960 (James Andreason, local landowner, personalcommunication).
35
In the 1970's,a diversion structurewas constructedon Wet Creek 1.5km abovethe Little Lost River
(JamesAndreason,landowner,personalcommunication). This structuremay have been a complete barrier
to upstreamfish migration (Pat Koelsch, BLM, personalcommunication). If so, it would not be possiblefor
fluvial bull trout in the Little Lost River or Wet Creek below the diversion to accessheadwaterspawning
tributaries in Wet Creek. In l992,the BLM, in cooperationwith the Idaho Departmentof Fish and Game and
the Challis National Forest, constructeda fish ladder at this diversion to provide fish passage.
Loss Through Irrigation Ditches - Loss of bull trout through irrigation ditchesmay negatively affect
populations. In the Little Lost River drainage,there are numerousdiversionsthat divert all or a portion of the
stream for irrigation and/or hydroelectric uses. However, the number of bull trout lost through irrigation
ditchesis not known.
The extent of this problem could easily be assessedby sampling irrigation ditches following the
closure of the head-gate.If bull trout loss is significant, self-cleaningscreenscould be installedto eliminate
the problem. This methodhasbeenusedsuccessfullyin Montanato preventbull trout lossto irrigation ditches
(Swanberg 1997).
Artificial Migration Barriers - Artificial bariers prevent the natural movement of fish. These
barriers may prevent bull trout from moving into streamreacheswhere they have been extirpated, prevent
genetic exchangebetweenpopulations,and preclude the movement of fluvial fish. In the Little Lost River
drainage,potential artificialbarriers include diversion structures,culverts,and dewateredor degradedstream
channels. A preliminary assessmentsuggestsbridges and culverts have not seriously impacted bull trout
populations in the drainage. However, dewateredstreamohannelsare a significant factor. For example, the
diversion of lower Williams Creek has resultedin the isolation of bull trout in that stream. An effort should
be made to identify each artificial migration barrier and correct the problem if possible.
Angler Harvest - Angler harvesthas likely impactedbull trout populations in the Little Lost River
drainage. Prior to 1994, anglerscould harvestup to 6 bull trout per day. In 1987,bull trout comprised 530lo
of the fish caught by anglers in the Sawmill Creek reach of the Little Lost River (Corsi and Elle 1989).
Seventy-onepercent of the bull trout caught were harvested. In 7994,brtll trout harvest was closed in the
drainage.
However, illegal angler harvestmay still be impacting bull trout populations. Bull trout and brook
trout can be difficult to distinguish. This likely results in anglers accidentally harvesting bull trout. To
overcomethis problem, the Forest Serviceand Idaho Departmentof Fish and Game have initiated education
efforts to help the public distinguish the 2 species. This involved a kiosk display in Mackay, placement of
large signs at the Forestboundary in Sawmill Canyon and at the Timber Creek Campground,placement of
small signs at key locations throughout the drainage, and distribution of bull trout pamphlets. However,
discussionswith anglers suggestthat many are still not able to identify bull trout (personal observation)'
Loss of Cover and Ilabitat Complexitv - Bull trout require a high level of stream ohannel
complexity, complex cover being an important element(Rieman and Mclntyre 1993). Stream channelsand
corr"i itt most headwaterstreamsappearto be moderatelyto highly complex. Headwatertributary streamssuch
as Smithie Fork have particularly complex cover and streamchannels,largewoody debrisbeing an important
component. On the Little Lost River between Warm Creek and Summit Creek past channelizing, heavy
grazing,streambank erosion,and streammeanderinghave led to a relatively homogeneousstream ohannel
with little to no cover. However, this situation is being corected through restoration efforts.
36
Sediment - Sedimentis likely impacting bull trout spawningsuccessin somestreams.R1/R4 stream
indicates that surface frnes are less than25o/oin most bull trout spawning streams(Appendix F).
data
habitat
However, some bull trout spawning streams such as Redrook Creek, Wet Creek upstream from the old
diversion aboveHilts Creek, and Badger Creek aboveBunting Canyon Creekhad surfacefines of 65%,52yo,
and37Yo,respectively(Appendix F). This level of sedimentis likely having a negative impact on bull trout
spawningsuccess.In addition, other streamsthat could potentially supportbull trout spawningalsohave high
sedimentlevels. For example,bull trout were not found in Basin Creek andjuvenile bull trout were not found
in Quigley Creek. Basin Creek (which also hashigh streamtemperatures)had 68% surfacefines and Quigley
Creek had 32o/osurface fines (Appendix F).
Brook Trout
Distribution
Although brook trout are widely distributedin the drainage(Figure 11), they are only abundant in a
few streamreaches. Data indicatethat brook trout occupy approximately 140km of stream in the drainage.
During the presentstudy, brook trout were found in Big Creek, Big Springs Creek, Dry Creek, an unnamed
tributary to Meadow Creek, Mill Creek, Squaw Creek (Sawmill Canyon), an unnamedtributary to Squaw
Creek (Sawmill Canyon),North Fork Squaw Creek,upper Summit Creek,Uncle Ike Creek, Wet Creek, and
portions of the mainstem. Brook trout comprised2l%oor more of the salmonidscapturedin upper Big Creek,
Dry Creek, the mainstemnearMill Creek, an unnamedtributary to Meadow Creek,Mill Creek, lower Squaw
Creek (Sawmill Canyon),an ururamedtributary to SquawCreek(Sawmill Canyon),the lower reachof North
Fork Squaw Creek, and Uncle Ike Creek'
The rangeof brook trout hasincreasedwithin the drainageduring the last25 years. In 1970,Andrews
(1972) sampledthe mainstemnearMoonshine Creek,nearthe Forestboundary,near Summit Creek,nearBig
SpringsCreek, and nearHowe, and did not find any brook trout. Likewise, brook trout were not caught in the
SawmillCreeksectionofthemainsteminl8hoursof anglingeffort inI970 (USRfiledata). In 197L,2brook
trout were collected in200 m of the mainstemnear the Forest boundary (USR file data). In the 1980's and
1990's,brook trout were found throughoutmost of the mainstem(Corsi et al. 1986,Corsi and Elle 1986,Corsi
and Elle 1989, presentstudy). Similarly, creel censusdata indicate that brook trout were not present in Big
Creekuntil the late 1970's (seeAppendix C). Brook trout were introducedinto Big Creek in 1978. In the
sectionsof Big Creek sampledduring the presentstudy, brook trout comprised l9Yo to 77Yoof the salmonids
captured.
Despite recentexpansions,the upper limit of brook trout distribution in Sawmill Canyon appearsto
have remainedstablesince 1987. Data collectedby Corsi and Elle (1989) indicatedthatin 7987 the upper
limit of brook trout distribution in Sawmill Canyonwas in the mainstembetweenBear Creek and Moonshine
Creek. During the presentstudy,the upper limit was in the mainstembetweenMill Creek and Timber Creek,
still within those boundsobservedin 1987.
Although the distribution of brook trout has recently expanded,high streamtemperaturesand steep
sfreamgradientsmay be limiting further brook trout expansionin the drainage. Fausch(1989) found that in
Rocky Mountain streamscontaining sympatric populations of brook trout and cutthroat trout, brook trout
generally cornprised a greaterpercentageof the speciescomposition at low stream gradients. Similarly,
Areaof Detail
N
"q
'/ )
^*
,f)
$,
rl
Mount)F
_-
../
f
-
Breitenbach
]
)
t1l
*r*#
#
s
s srf
Fak
{
0
Scale
5
l0Kilometers
Legend
rf
LakdRseNoif
.\-./\ FbrcnnialStream
SlF
-*Satfi*
'-bd*
? v P
\\k, I
o Mackay
5
ffi
d
King+ _
Mounbin
i1
l, l
groa<trot oistrilutia
o Howe
<rte,
-<$r^
't4.*
"4fo
o Moore
38
Fieure 11.
Current distribuLion
(present studY).
of brook trout
in Lhe Lit.tle
IosL River drainage
Chisholm and Hubert ( i 986) found that gradient had a negative influence on brook trout abundancein streams
containing only brook trout. Mullan etal. (1992) believed streamtemperaturesinfluenced whether rainbow
trout or brook trout prevailed in a stream. They believedthat when meansurnmertemperatureexceededl8'C
rainbow trout would prevail, andtemperaturesbelow 15'C would favor brook trout. Data from the Little Lost
River suggestthat both streamtemperatureand stream gradient affect the abundanceand/or distribution of
brook trout. However, further study is neededbefore the relationship can be defined.
Maturity
Brook trout in SquawCreekand Mill Creekbegin maturingatage one. During the presentstudy, age
at maturity for brook trout in Mill Creek and Squaw Creek (Sawmill Canyon drainage) was determined.
Sexual maturity was determined by analysis of the gonads. Age was determined through scale analysis.
Ninety-one brook trout from Mill Creek and43 from Squaw Creek were studied. Male brook trout began
maturing at age one in both streams.All ofthe fish that could be distinguishedasmaleswere matureby age 2.
Female fish also beganmaturing at ageone in both streams.Over half were mature by age2 and all by age 3.
No brook trout over 3 yearsof age were found. Similarly, Corsi and Elle (1989) believed thatmany brook
trout in Medicine Lodge Creek were mature at age one (114 mm), and most were matureby age2 (l62mm).
In the rrpperBig Lost River, brook trout beganmaturing at age2 (1 16 mm), and most were mature at age3
( 1 5 0m m ) .
Growth
Brook trout in the Little Lost River drainageexperiencegrowth rates similar to brook trout in Medicine
Lodge Creek (Table 11). Brook trout over 400 mm havereportedlybeencaughtby anglersin Dry Creek, and
a365 mmbrook trout was capturedin the Little Lost River (Sawmill Creek) in 1987 (Corsi and Elle 1989).
The largestbrook trout capturedduring the curent study was a 301 mm fish from Dry Creek 150m abovethe
Forest boundary. Another fish measuring 455mm that appearedto be a brook trout x bull trout hybrid was
captured in Big Creek immediatelybelow the large beaverpond near the head of the stream. In 1997,an
angler caught a 635 mm, 3 .9 kg fish from Big CreekBeaverPondthat appearedto be a brook trout x bull trout
hybrid. This was confirmed by genetictesting at the University of Montana. The oldestreportedbrook trout
from the Little Lost River drainage is age 3 (Table i 1)'
Rainbow Trout
Distribution
Rainbowtrout arethe mostwidely distributedfish speciesin the Little Lost River. Datacollected
duringthe presentstudyindicaterainbowtrout oaaupyapproximately274 km of streamandarefoundin most
streamsin the drainage(Figurel2). Theywerealsoreportedcaughtby anglersin Mill CreekLake duringa
voluntarycreelsurveyconductedby theForestServicein 1994(LRRD file data)'
39
Table 11. Comparisonof brook trout lengthsat annulusfrom the Little Lost River drainagewith brook ffout
from other systems.
Lensth at Annulus
Source
Location
N
Mill Creek
91
123
157
186
presentstudy
Little Lost River (Sawmill
Creek)
n/a
130
213
253
Corsiet al.1986
Summit Creek (grazed)
22
ls6
218
247
Corsiet al. 1986
Summit Creek (ungrazed)
l0
126
179
27r
Corsiet al. 1986
Squaw Creek
+J
ta
t2t
172
21.3
presentstudy
Medicine Lodge Creek
l2
114
162
Big Lost, West Fork
42
92
142
181 228
Big Lost, Summit Creek
36
99
149
186
Corsi1989
Big Lost, East Fork
t4
94
143
186
Corsi1989
Lower Big Lost
10
164
262
360
40r
Lawrence Creek, WI
n/a
94
170
208
292
40
CorsiandElle 1989
367
Corsi1989
CorsiandElle 1989
353
366
Wydoskiand
Whitney1979
Areaof Detail
N
OBoise
O
ldahoFalls
g
Mount *l_Brcitenbach
s
F.
s
"F
t1l
,tt
-.d
"#>-
w*
kat
o Mackay
0
5
r
Scale
5
l0Kilometers
Legend
LakeJR€smir
i
aV\ Peranlgl stream
$q$
a
@Howe
XinS+
Mounlain
lt , tI
1%,
.crr&r.
Ralnbm Trot Distribuliq
"
Rdnbw Trat Di*ibution (LakePopulatim)
o Moore
How Rd.o
41,
Ffuzure L2.
of rainbow trouL in the Little
Current distribution
(present sLudy, Gamett L990a).
Lost River drainage
Data indicate that since 1987,rainbow trout in Sawmill Canyonhave expandedinto arms previously
occupiedby only bull trout. In 19?0and 1987,only bull ffoutwere collected in the Sawmill Canyon drainage
above Mill Creek (Andrews l97|,Corsiand Elle 1989). Specifically, nei*ter Andrews (1970) nor Corsi and
Elle (1989) collected rainbow trout in the mainstem near Moonshine Creek. However, rainbow trout
comprised26Yo and l3Yo of the salmonidscapturedin this reach in 1995 and 1997,respectively. Likewise,
bull trout were the only salmonidcapturedfrom lower Timber Creek in 1987(Corsi and Elle 1989). In 1995
and 1997, runbow trout comprised74YoandSYoaf the salmonidscollectedin this reach,respectively- These
data suggest that between 1987 and 1995, rainbow trou-t ldvanced between 1.9 km and 6'6 km up the
mainstem and into the lowerreaches ofTimberCreek. Possible changesin strearntemperaturesresulting from
drought and a large fire in the headwatersof the drainage may explain this expansion. If so, the upper limit
of rainbow trout distribution may contract if stream ternperaturescool.
Growth
Rainbow ffout growth in the mainstem ofttre Little Lost River is similar to that exhibited by rainbow
trout in the upper Big Lost River (Table l2). As expected,growth in the upper porfion of the drainage is
slower relative to that in the lower drainage.
Table 12. Comparison of rainbow trout lengths at annulus from the Little Lost River drainage with rainbow
trout of other systems.
Lensthat Annulus
5
Location
Source
"UpperLittle Lost" andSawmill
Creek
nla
78
139
t97
CorsiandElle 1989
Little Lost River (Sawmill Creek)
27
79
138
202
borsi et al. 1986
SummitCreek(ungrazed)
40
104
158
r97
Corsiet al. 1986
Little Lost River
nla
97
171
229
27r
Corsi andElle 1989
89
132
209
254
Bruhn 1990
374 Corsi1989
Wet Creek
Big Lost River, WestFork
9
99
163
220
303
Big Lost River, Twin BridgesCreek
12
89
132
186
L+J
Big Lost River, Lower EastFork
8
9l
r42
196
258
Birch Creek,Lower
29
92
157
202
251
CorsiandElle 1989
Birch Creek,Upper
98
94
i50
197
241
CorsiandElle 1989
FishLake,UT
n/a.
74
191 315
391
42
Corsi1989
349 Corsi 1989
Shorthead Sculpin
The shorthead sculpin appearsto be the only sculpin speciespresent in the drainage. During the
presentstudy, 45 sculpin were collectedandpreservedfrom 8 locations. All of thesefish were later identified
as shorthead(Table 13, Figure 13). Sculpin were also collectedfrom the Little Lost River drainageby Carl
Hubbs inl934(UNIMZ), Simpsonin1949 (IMMZ), andAndrews(1972)in1970. All ofthe sculpininthese
collections were shorthead(Table 13,Figure 13). Likewise, Simpsonand Wallace (1982) reportedshorthead
as the only sculpin speciesin the Little Lost River drainage. The largest voucher specimencollected for
identification during the presentstudy was a 133mm specimenfrom Wet Creek abovethe Forest boundary.
The shortheadsculpin is widely distributedin the drainagebelow 2,280 m elevation. Sculpin were
not found abovethis point an;.wherein the drainagealthoughthey had accessto higher streamreaches. This
suggests some factor or oombination of factors is limiting their distribution. Data from Sawmill Canyon
suggestthat streamgradientsgreaterthan about4o/orestrictthe distribution of shortheadsculpin. Sculpin were
absentfrom all streamsnot currently connectedto the drainagenet (Dry Creek,Uncle Ike Creek, SouthCreek,
North Creek, CedarRun Creek,Deep Creek,Bell Mountain Creek, and Mahogany Creek) except Williams
Creek and Horse Creek.
Cutthroat Trout
Cutthroattrout havebeenintroducedthroughoutthe drainage.The earliestcutthroattrout introduction
in the drainage may have been in Dry Creek in 1915. It is difficult to determine where fish were stocked
before 1953 becauseintroductionsprior to this time arelisted only by hatcheryand/or counfy. This makes it
difficult to distinguish 2 water bodies bearing the samename. However, state stocking records from 19I 5
indicate that on June 1, 25,000"natives" (likely cutthroattrout), 10,000brook trout, and 55,000rainbow trout
were given to E.H. Motts in Mackay for "Dry Creek." The June2,1975 edition of the Mackay Miner (a local
newspaperbasedin Mackay) indicatesthat fish had been planted in Dry Creek. Since the Dry Creek in the
upper Little Lost River drainageis the only Dry Creek in either the Little Lost River or Big Lost River, it is
possible these fish were introduced into the Dry Creek in the upper Little Lost River. Cutthroat trout had
definitely been introduced into the drainageby 1936 when26,2$0 cutthroat trout were introduced into the
Little Lost River. Cutthroattrout were specifically introducedinto Big Creek and Wet Creek by atleast 1947
and Dry Creek in1964. Likewise, cutthroattrouthave beenintroducedinto Big CreekLake#2, CopperLake,
Mill Creek Lake, Shadowlake #1, Shadowlake #2, Swaugerlake #1, and Swaugerlake#Z. ltappears that
other cutthroat trout introductionsoccurredin the drainagein streamssuch as Mill Creek and Squaw Creek
although this determination cannot be definite due to the method in which the introductions were recorded.
Most of the cutthroat trout introduced into the drainage have been the Yellowstone subspecies.
However, westslopecutthroattroutwere introducedinto severallakesin 1988. Westslopecutthroattroutmay
have also been introduced into the drainageby early settlersfrom the PahsirneroiRiver drainage.
The currentdistribution of cutthroattrout is limited primarily to mountain lakes(Figure 14). In 1994,
anglersreportedcatchingcutthroattrout in SwaugerLake#2 andMill CreekLake. The authorfound cuffhroat
trout in SwaugerLake#2 in 1989, 1990,and1993;SwaugerLake #1 in 1993;and Mill Creek Lake in 1989
(personal observation). Cutthroat trout are stocked regularly in each of these lakes.
43
Table 13. Summaryof sculpincollectionsfrom the Little Lost River drainage.
Number Collected
Sampling
Date
Total
Location
Location
BadgerCreek
T9N R27ES35
9/20195
4
Big Springs
Creek
T8N R28E531
6/14/95
2
Big Springs
Creek
nearsource
7/19/34
91
DeerCreek
T8N R26ES12
6/1s19s
A
HorseCreek
T9N R27ES13
6/2!9s
Little Lost
River
T9N R27E
Little Lost
River
Adults
Juveniles
Species
Source
J
shorthead
present
study
2
0
shofihead
present
study
n/a
nla
shorthead
UMMZ
4
0
shorthead
present
study
J
a
J
0
shorthead
present
study
7t20134
I
0
t
shorthead
UMMZ
nearMoonshine
Creek
10/'/0
5
n/a
n/a
shorthead
Andrews
r972
Little Lost
River
nearF.S.
boundary
t0/70
26
n/a
nla
shorthead
Andrews
1972
Little Lost
River
nearSummit
Creek
r0/70
2
nla
nla
shorthead
Andrews
1972
Little Lost
River
nearFlowe
r0t70
86
nla
nla
shorthead
Andrews
1972
Little Lost
River
ttupper"
9lt7l49
J
nla
nla
shorthead
UMMZ
SummitCreek
T11NR26ES33
6t22t95
5
4
I
shorthead
present
study
SummitCreek
"mouthto head"
n/a
JZ
nla
nla
shorthead
UMMZ
TimberCreek
T12NR26E56
8/07195
6
5
t
shorthead
present
study
Wet Creek
l0 km above
mouthu
7120134
12
n/a
nla
shorthead
UMMZ
Wet Creek
T8N R25E 52
7125195
8
6
z
shorthead
present
study
Wet Creek
1.6km above
Big Creek
7/20134
10
nla
nla
shorthead
UMMZ
Wet Creek
T8N R25E S15
8/07/9s
13
9
shorthead
present
study
Total
a 1 a
J I J
A
a
shorthead
u The collection recordsrecord this site as "Big Creek,trib of Little Lost River, ca 6 mi above mouth..," However,
this seemsto be presentday Wet Creek.
44
Areaof Detail
N
), ,l
"*7
l E1
I (
a/
.qrjS/
\..9
I
.."4
do
!"e
)
dl
"*d
+ Saddle
l&urtrin
,{
r
o Mackay
5
0
r
Scale
5
Legend
al
.Jl
O
(collected
in 1970from
channelthatis nowintermittent)
l0Kilometers
Lak€tR6eryoir
o
XjnS -l*llouhbin
.A
l r
oHowe
FerennistSrtream
Snctneaa Scutpin Spscim€n Coll€otion Locatbns
45
Figure 1-3. |fuseumspecimen.collect,ion sites for,shorthea{ sq:lnin in the Litt,Ie Lost
River drbinage (see Appendix A for aLL sites in viLrich sculpin were found
during Lhe present studY).
Areaof Detail
N
;li
E)
-")
.\
I
-
OBoise
O
ldahoFalls
tsY
j , s
u,
O</
fl
'",lliH'"'its
.,/
f
"f
'
)
g
$l
dl
b.
\R.
o
5
0
r
Scale
5
grtr
t'
*rs
--bd-
8)
t
l0Kilometens
Legend
I
utaaeservoir
^Jl
PeHnial slream
O
Cuttiroat Trcut Distribution
IGrayling
a
Distribdion
Guppy,cren $rcrdtail, Am€laniccoNict
Cichlid , Goldfish(no longer presnt),
Mozffibique Tilapia,
Dstib,ution
King +l
lroutrtain
i4
(t I
o Moore
/+6
Figure 14.
of cuLthroat Lrout, grayling, guppy' green swordtail, amelanic
Distribution
convict cichlidr goldfish (no lon[er' preEenl)r-bnd-Mozambique tilapia in the
T-ost River drainage (presenL study and Courtenay et aL. L9B7).
Little
The current distribution of cutthroattrout in streamsis very limited. The specieswas caught in Dry
Creek by anglersin 1969, 1977, and 1978(Appendix C) and was collectedduring electrofishingsampling in
1987 (Corsi and Elle 1989). Although pure cutthroat trout were not found in Dry Creek during curent
sampling efforts, in the fall of 1997,a Forest Serviceemployeecaughtwhat appearedto be a pure cutthroat
trout in a small spring adjacentto Dry Creek above the Forest boundary. Cutthroat trout were introduced into
Dry Creek in 1964 and possibly in 1915. It is likely that this introduction is the reasonfor this species
occurrencein this stream,rutherthanthe fish being native. Migration of cutthroattrout out of SwaugerLakes
into Dry Creek is unlikely (personalobservation). It is also possiblethat one of the fish collectedin Meadow
Creek in 1995 was a pure cutthroat trout. Rainbow trout from Deer Creek, Big Creek, Badger Creek, and
Meadow Creek showed strong evidenceof hybridization with cuttl,roattrout. Severalrainbow trout from Deer
Creek and Badger Creek were sentto Dr. Robert J. Behnke at Colorado StateUniversity who confirmed the
influence of cutthroat trout (Dr. Robert J. Behnke, Colorado StateUniversity, personal communication).
Goppy, Green SwordtailoAmelanic Convict Cichlids, Mozambique Tilapia, and Goldfish
Severalspeciesof tropical fish have beenfound in Barney Hot Springs and Barney Creek. Guppy,
green swordtaiT,amelanicconvict oichlids, and Mozambiquetilapia were collectedfrom Barney Hot Springs
in September1985(Courtenayet al. 1987). At this sametime, guppy, greenswordtail, and amelanic convict
cichlids were collected in Barney Creek immediately below Barney Hot Springs. These4 speciesappeared
to be presentin brief checksof the hot springsin 1995 and 1997(personalobservation). Although goldfish
were presentin Barney Hot Springsin 1977(USR file data),none were found in 1985(Courtenayet al. 1987).
In May 1997,no fish were found in a visual survey of 50 m of Barney Creek approximately t km
'C
below Barney Hot Springs,where the water temperaturewas 20 (personalobservation). This suggeststhat
the distribution of thesetropical speciesis limited to Barney Hot Springsand a short reach of Barney Creek
immediately below the hot springs.
Brown Trout
Brown trout have not been documented in the Little Lost River drainage. However, they have
reportedly been caught in the lower portion of the drainagein recent years (Will Marcroft, LRRD, personal
communication).
Golden Trout
There has been a single introduction of golden trout into the drainage. In i986, 2,000 golden trout
were introduced into Nolan Lake in the Wet Creek subdrainage.Due to the small, shallow natureof the lake,
it is unlikely these fish survived. In October 1990,the lake was dry (personal observation).
A'I
a t
Mountain Whitefish
Mountain whitefish may have beenpresentin the drainageat one time. Mountain whitefish have not
been found in fish collections completedin the drainage(presentstudy, Gamettl990a, Gamett 1990b,Corsi
and Elle 1989,Courtenayetal. 1987,Elleet al. 1987,Corsiet al. 7986,Corsi andElle 1986,Ball and Jeppson
1978, Jeppsonand Ball 1978,Andrews I972,USR frle data,UMMZ). However, this specieswas reportedly
present in the Little Lost River in the early 1900's. JamesWaymire, a local resident, indicated that the
Basingerfamily and other early residentsofthe valley reportedcatchingwhitefish in the Little Lost River near
Wet Creek (personal communication). The last whitefish that Mr. Waymire knew of in the drainage was
caught in 1939. Thesefish could either have beennative or originatedfrom introductions. On May 2,7960,
500 whitefrsh from'.MACKAY SALVAGE'were releasedinto the Little Lost River. Likely thesefish were
mountain whitefish salvagedfrom the Big Lost River drainage.However, the lack of whitefish in recent
sampling indicatesthe specieshas not persistedin the drainage.
Grayling
ln 1995,grayling were introducedinto Mill CreekLake. In July 1997, a243 mm grayling was caught
from the lake by an angler and turned into the Lost River RangerDistrict Office (personalobservation). This
speciesmay be able to reproducein the lakes inlet, and a reproducing population may become established.
Outmigration from the lake into lower Mill Creek cannot occur due to the lack of an overland connection
between the lake and Mill Creek.
Part 3: Subdrainages
Introduction
Between 1992 and 1997, eachsubdrainagein the Little Lost River drainagewas evaluatedfor fish.
This sectionpresentsan overview for the subdrainages,which are listed alphabetically. Lakes and reservoirs
within these subdrainagesare discussedseparatelyin Part 4'
AspenCreek
Aspen Creek,a tributaryto the mainstemof the Little Lost River (Sawmill Creek),is locatedin
from anaerialphotograph,but
SawmillCanyon.Theorigin of AspenCreekcouldnot be clearlydetermined
2.5km long. In November1995,a visual surveyof the streamwas
to be approximately
the streamappears
with theLittle Lost River. Flowswerelimited, and
km
theconfluence
above
1.5
approximately
conducted
(personal
observation).
nonexistent
fish habitatwasessentially
48
Badger Creek
Badger Creek, located in the southern end of the Lemhi Mountain Range, is a hibutary to the
mainstem ofthe Little Lost River. BadgerCreekoriginatesat 2 springs2.4km abovethe Forestboundary and
1998"Total
isatotalofl0.8kminlenglh. Thewatertemperatureatthese2springswas6"ConJune29,
l.Skm,respectively.
Thestreamis
and
1.4,7.6,
lengthsonForest,BLM,andprivatelandsare
stream
intermittently diverted for irrigation approximately200 m abovethe Little Lost River. Streamtemperatures
were monitored in Badger Creek in 1997 (Appendix E). The Forest Service R1/R4 Fish Habitat Standard
Inventory (Overton et al. 1997) was conducted on Badger Creek in 1997 (Appendix F). At this time, the
inventory crew found a falls created by debris approximately 1.5 m high located on Badger Creek
approximately3.0 km abovethe Little Lost River.
Both rainbow trout and brook trout have been introduced into Badger Creek. Available records
indicate BadgerCreekwas stockedwith rainbow trout betweenl94l and 1965. A singleintroduction of brook
trout was made in 1943.
In 1995,rainbow trout, bull trout, and sculpin were found in Badger Creek (Table 14,AppendicesA
and B). While rainbow trout occupy the entire stream,bull trout appearto be confined to the upper reaoh
above the Forestboundary. Although trout densitiesnear Bunting Creek were higher in 1995 compared to
1987(Table 14),this may be due to differencesin the location and time ofthe sample. The 1995sampletook
place in Juneand was abovethe confluencewith Bunting Creek. The streamhere is entirely spring fed and
fish may have been concentratedfor spawning. As expected,fish densitiesare higher in the canyon (above
Forest boundary) comparedto the lower stream reach,where the high gradient nature of the stream limits
habitat.
Table 14. Summary of electrofishing data from Badger Creek'
Species
Composition (%)
BK
BI
Site
Date
Fish/100m2
Rb
0.3km aboveprivateiBlM
boundary
7198
6.0
100
IdahoDivisionof
Environmental
Quality
3.2km aboveLittleLost
River
9195
ila
100
presentstudy
1.4km aboveForest
boundary
9195
nla
92
presentstudy
0.3km aboveBuntingCreeku
7197
44.4
100
presentstudy
0.3 km aboveBuntingCreeku
6/95
64.1
94
presentstudy
0.3 km aboveBuntingCreeK
8t87
33.1
100
Corsi& Elle 1989
Source
" Although the 1987 site could not be relocated,the 1995site shouldbe in the samearea.
b Young-of-the-year bull trout were captured.
49
In 1997,the site aboveBunting Creekwas resampled(Table 14,AppendicesA andB). Rainbow trout
and bull trout young-of-the-year were found.
In 1998, the Idaho Division of Environmental Quality sampled a 100 m section of Badger Creek
located 300 m above the private/BlM boundary (Table l4). As in 1995, only rainbow trout were found.
Sculpinwere found atthe location3.2km abovethe Little Lost River in 1995 (Appendix A). Four
were collected,preserved,and later identified as shorthead(Table l4). The lack of sculpin at the
fish
of these
upper 2 sampling sites suggestssculpin distribution is limited to the streambelow the canyon mouth.
Barney Creek (Including Barney Hot Springs)
Barney Creek, locatedin the upper, central portion of the Little Lost River Valley, is a tributary to
Summit Creek. BarneyHot Springs,apool approximately15 m wide and maximum depthof I m, is the point
of origin for Barney Creek. The stream flows for 5.0 km to Summit Creek. In September1985, the water
temperaturealong the edgeof Barney Hot Springswas?7"C (Courtenayet al. 1987). On June20,l996,the
temperatureat the outflow of the pool was 28"C. The water temperatureon May 31, 1997,was 28"C (air
temperature20"C) at the outflow and within the pool. The presenceof tropical fish in the hot springsand its
closeproximity to the tittle Lost\Pahsimeroiroad makeBarneyHot Springsa popularathactionfor swimmers
and picnickers.
Severalspeciesof tropical fish have been found in Barney Hot Springs and Barney Creek. Guppy,
greenswordtail, amelanicconvict cichlids, and Mozambiquetilapia were collectedfrom Barney Hot Springs
in September1985(Courtenay etal. 1987). At this sametime, guppy, greenswordtail, and amelanicconvict
cic|lids were collected in Barney Creek immediately below Barney Hot Springs. These4 speciesappeared
to be presentin brief checksof the hot springsin 1995 and 1997 (personalobservation). Although goldfish
were presentin Barney Hot SpringsIn 1977(USR file data),none were found in 1985(Courtenayet al. 1987).
In May 1997, no fish were found in a visual survey of 50 m of Barney Creek approximately 1 km below
Barney Hot Springs,where the water temperaturewas 20"C (personal observation). This suggeststhat the
distribution of these tropical speciesis limited to Barney Hot Springs and a short reach of Barney Creek
immediately below the hot springs(personalobservation).
BarneyHot Springs
SeeBarnev Creek
Basin Creek
Basin Creek, locatedin the central portion of the Lost River Mountain Range, is a tributary to Wet
Creek. Basedon a review of an aerial photographtaken on August 3, 1979, and vegetationpatternsobserved
in the streamchannel,it appearsthat the streambetweenPine Creek and Black Tail Canyon is intermittent'
Below Pine Creek, the streamflows for 2.4 km to Wet Creek; 1. 1 km oocur on Forest and 1.3 km on BLM'
50
weremonitoredin BasinCreekin 1997(AppendixE). TheForestServiceR1/R4Fish
Streamtemperatures
onBasinCreekbetweenWet CreekandPine
(Overtonet al. 1997)wasconducted
Inventory
Standard
Habitat
(Appendix
F).
Creekin 1997
A andB). Visual surveys
In 1997,rainbowtroutwerefoundin BasinCreek(Table15,Appendices
6.5km aboveWet Creekinearly July 1995,and0.5km aboveWet Creekin
wereconductedapproximately
1995(Table15,AppendixA). No fishwerefoundatthese2 sites.In July1997,138m of Basin
September
300m belowPineCreek(TableI 5,AppendixA). Two rainbowtrout
approximately
Creekwereelectrofished
were capturedat this site.
Table15.
Summary of electrofishing data from Basin Creek.
Species
Composition (%)
Site
Date
Fish/100m2
0.4km aboveWet Creek
9t95
none
300 m belowPineCreek
7197
n/a
6.4km aboveWet Creek
7/95
none
Rb
BI
BK
Source
presentstudy
presentstudy
100
presentstudy
R1/R4 survey dataindicates that stream habitf between Wet Creek and Pine Creek is in poor
oondition (Table 16). This 2,473 m stream reach was characterizedby a high width to depth ratio, low
percentageof pools, no large woody debris,moderatebank stability, low percentageof undercut banks, and
high surfacefines. Streamsuryeyorsfound that in someareasthe streamhad downcut 1.5 m resulting in up
to 2 m of raw bank. In 1997, streamtemperaturesin Basin Creek immediately abovethe confluencewith Wet
Creek exceeded20"C for 49 days and25"C for 3 days (Appendix E). Water temperaturesat 7 of the springs
6andl0'ConJune29,1998.
feedingBasinCreek(6ofwhichwereinPineCreek)hadtemperaturesbetween
before
enteringWet Creek. Poor
This indicatesthat water temperaturesin Basin Creek increaseconsiderably
habitatand high stream temperatureslimit this stream's ability to support fish.
Table16.
Habitatcharacteristicsof Basin Creek between Wet Creek and Pine Creek in 1997 (Forest
Service R1/R4 stream habitat inventory).
Reach
Length
(m)
Map
Gradient
(%)
Mean
Width
(m)
2,473
4.4
0.9
Pools
Mean
Width:Depth (%)
243
0.8
51
Large
Woody
Debris/100
m
0.0
Bank
Stability
(%)
-a
t)
Undercut
Banks
(%)
Surface
Fines
(%)
25
68
Basinger Canyon
SeeBell Mountain Creek (Basinger Canyon)
Bear Canyon
Bear Canyon is locatedwest of Sawmill Canyonin the Lemhi Mountain Range. A review of an aerial
photographtaken August 6,1979 indicatedthere is a small perennialstreamin Bear Canyon. However, flows
appearvery limited and the streamruns only about 1.5km before sinking. Due to the disjunct nature of the
stream and limited flow, the presenceof fish is unlikely. Therefore, the streamwas not surveyed.
Bear Creek
Bear Creek, a tributary to the Little Lost River (Sawmill Creek), is locatedin Sawmill Canyon. The
origin of Bear Creek could not be clearly determinedfrom an aerial photograph,but the streamappearsto be
approximately 5.6 km long. Streamtemperatureswere monitored in Bear Creek in 1997(Appendix E). The
Forest ServiceRliR4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overtonet al. 1997)was conductedon the fish bearing
portion of Bear Creek in 1994(Appendix F)'
In 1995,rainbow trout were found in Bear Creek (Table 17, AppendicesA and B). Fish distribution
appearsto be limited to approximatelythe first 1.2 km of stream. The upsheam distribution of fish appears
limited by streamgradient. Unlike other tributaries in Sawmill Canyon with fish populations, no bull trout
were found in Bear Creek. High streamtemperaturespossibly explain the absenceof bull trout. The high
numbers of small fish indicate Bear Creek is an important spawning and nursery areafor rainbow trout.
Seventy-fivepercentof the 20 fish sampledwere under 100 mm and were likely age one fish. In addition,
numerous young-of-the-year rainbow trout (approximately 30 mm in length) were observed.
Table17.
Summary of electrofishing data from Bear Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
Site
Date
Fish/100m'z
Rb
0.6 km above Sawmill Road
9/9s
nla
r00
BK
BI
Source
presentstudy
The stream andiparianhabitat of lower Bear Creek has beendegradedby grazing. In 1994,the Forest
ServiceR1/R4 streamhabitatsurveywas conductedon the lower 1.5km of Bear Creek(Table 18). The stream
was characterizedby a high width to depth ratio, a high percentageof pools, low amounts of large woody
debris, high bank stability, low percentageofundercut banks, and high surface fines. In 1997, stteam
52
temperaturesin Bear Creek immediately abovethe confluencewith the Little Lost River exceeded15"C for
58 days, 20"C for 1 day, and did not exceed25"C (Appendix E).
Table 18. Habitat characteristicsof the lower 1.5 km of Bear Creek in 1994 (Forest Service R1/R4 stream
habitatinventory).
Reach
Length
(m)
1,593
Map
Gradient
(%)
Mean
Width
(m)
5.5
3.8
Pools
Mean
Width:Depth (%)
lg.s
44
Large
Woody
Debris/100
m
Bank
Stability
(%)
l.l
97
Undercut Surfaoe
Banks
Fines
(%)
(%)
44
BeII Mountain Creek (Basinger Canyon)
Bell Mountain Creek, located in the central portion of the Lemhi Mountain Range, is disjunct from
the Little Lost River. The entire streamis diverted into the Telford pipeline approximately I km below the
Forestboundary.Thepointoforiginwasnotclearlydetermined.In1995,thereweregoodflowsinthestream
above the large spring nearthe point of diversion, However, limited flows observedin 1997 suggestthe
stream above this spring may be intermittent.
No fish were found in Bell Mountain Creek. In June 1995, the stream was electrofished for
approximately 10 m at the diversion pool and electrofished/visuallysurveyedfor approximately50 m 0.4 km
abovethe diversion (Appendix A). No fish were found at either of these2 sites. Any fish presentwould likely
have been detected,particularly at the diversionpool.
Big Creek
Big Creek, located in the central portion of the Lost River Mountain Range, is a tributary to Wet
Creek. Big Creek originatesat a seriesof springs6.6 km abovethe confluencewith Wet Creek. The stream
flows for 4.5 km on Forest land, 0.8 km on private land, 0.8 km on BLM land, then re-entersprivate land for
0.5 km, where it entersWet Creek. Both dispersedrecreationand grazingalongthe lower reachof the stream
are heavy and appearto be having negative impacts on the riparian area (personal observation). Stream
were monitoredin Big Creek in 1995,1996(Appendix D), and 1997(Appendix E). In 1997,
remperarures
the streamtemperatureat the sourceof Big Creek was 7oC. The Forest ServiceR1/R4 Fish Habitat Standard
Inventory(Overtonetal.1997)wasconductedonBigCreekinlg94(AppendixF). Atthistime,theinventory
crew found a series of falls and cascadesapproximately 4 km above the Forest boundary' These falls and
cascadesshould be quantified to determine their impact on fish movement.
There is one lake and one large beaverpond (known locally as Big Creek Lake) in Big Creek. Due
to the beaverponds large size and semi-permanentnature,the Forest Servicecatalogedit as a mountain lake
in 1990. (SeeLower Big Creek Lake and Upper Big CreekLake in Part 4).
53
Big Creek has beenstockedwith rainbow trout, cutthroattrout, and brook trout. Rainbow trout were
introduced by at least 1941, and cutthroat trout were introduced by at least 1947. A single introduction of
brook trout was made in 1978.
lnlgg4,rainbowtrout, brooktrout, bulltrout, brooktroutxbull trout hybrids, and sculpin were found
in Big Creek (Table 19, AppendicesA and B). Rainbow trout were the most abundantspeciesbelow the
beaverpond. Above the beaverpond, brook trout becamethe dominant species.Bull trout were found only
in the immediate vicinity of the beaver pond.
Table 19. Summary of electrofishing data from Big Creek.
Species
(%)
Composition
Site
Date
Fish/100m2
Rb
BK
0.8 km aboveWet Creek"
9/96
nla
86
l4
presentstudy
0.8 km aboveWet Creeku
8194
8.0
81
t9
presentstudy
0.8 km aboveWet Creeku
8/87
r4.3
100
20 m above F-orestboundary
9196
nla
37
63
presentstudy
At trailhead
9/94
33.6
52
48
presentstudy
Immediately below beaver
pond
8/94
42.3
60
3g
2b
presentstudy
Above beaverpond
9/94
18
77
6
presentstudy
l Jt
BI
Source
Corsi& Elle 1989
" Although the 1987 site could not be relocated,the 1994 site should be in the samearea.
b One bull trout appearedto be a hybrid.
" All bull trout appearedto be hybrids.
Rainbow trout nearthe beaverpond showedevidenceof hybridizationwith cutthroattrout. Thesefish
had extremely large spotsover much of the body indicatingaYellowstone cutthroattrout influence. It is likely
that this was the subspeciesof cutthroat trout introduced into Big Creek.
In 1996,brook trout, rainbow trout, and sculpin were found in Big Creek (Table 19, Appendices A
and B). Two siteswere sampledin Big Creek in 1996. The lower sitewas in approximatelythe samelocation
asthe lower 1994 site. As in 1994,rainbow trout were the dominant trout speciespresent. At the site near
the Forest boundary,brook trout comprisedthe majority of the salmonidssampled. No bull trout were found
in either location. Sculpin were collectedin both locations.
Brook trout do not appearto have been presentin Big Creekuntil the 1970's. Ted Rothwell, a local
resident,fishedBig Creekin the 1940's,1950's,and 1960's(personalcommunication).When he first began
fishing the streamin the 1940's,most of the fish caughtwere bull trout up to 450 mm in length. A similar
accouirtis madeby Albert Fullmer, Jr. (arearesident,personalcommunication). In the 1950's,most of the fish
54
he caught in Lower Big Creek Lake (beaverpond) were bull trout up to 1.8 kg. A photographtaken by Mr.
Fullmer showsseveralbull trout approximately300 to 500 mm in lengththat were caughtin Lower Big Creek
Lake (beaverpond) on June4,1958. Creelcensusdataareavailablefrom Big Creek for 1969,1971,1972,
1974" 1977, and 1979(USR file data). Between 1969 and 1974,47 anglerswho had fished a total of 177
hours were interviewed. Although theseanglerscaught 197 fish (170 rainbow trout and 27 bull trout), they
did not catchany brook trout. \n1977,33 anglersfishedfor 70 hours,catching58 rainbowtrott,12 bull trout,
and 5 brook trout. In 1978,2,025 fingerling brook trout were releasedinto the stream. By 1990,brook trout
comprised 95o/oof the fish caught by anglers in the large beaver pond in the head of Big Creek (Gamett
1990a). In 1994,brook trout were found in all 4 of the sites sampledin Big Creek,where they comprisedup
to 77Yoof the speciescomposition(Table 19,Appendix A).
The bull trout found in Big Creek may be fluvial fish that migrate from lower Wet Creek andlor the
mainstem of the Little Lost River to the headwaters of Big Creek to spawn. Large bull trout up to
approximately 430 mm in length have been caughtin Big Creek (personal observation,USR file data). An
apparentbrook trout x bull trout hybrid measuring455 mm was captured in 1994(presentstudy). The large
size of thesefish would indicate they are not residentto Big Creek. If this is true, they are likely migrating
from lower Wet Creek or the mainstem of the Little Lost River to spawn.
Hybridization and competition betweenbrook trout and bull trout appearto be a significant threat to
bull trout in Big Creek. ln 1994,no bull trout young-of-the-yearwere capturedin Big Creek, and it is likely
many arc falling prey to brook trout. All 6 bull trout capturedabovethe beaverpond appearedto be hybrids,
and i of the 3 bull trout capturedbelow the beaverpond appearedto be a hybrid. It is likely that competition
and hybridization will lead to the extinction of this bull trout population.
Big Springs Creek
Big SpringsCreek, locatedin the lower centralportion of the Little Lost River Valley, is a tributary
to the Little Lost River. The stream originates at severalsprings on private land and flows 15.0 km to the
mainstem of the Little Lost River. The water temperatureat 5 of thesespringsrangedbetween6 and 9"C on
May 19, 1998. Approximately half of the stream is on BLM land; the remainder is on private. Stream
temperatureswere monitored in Big Springs Creek in 1997 (Appendix E)'
Rainbow trout have been introducedinto Big Springs Creek. It is currently stockedwith catchable
rainbow trout and is the only stream in the Little Lost that is stocked (Bruce Rich, USR, personal
communication).
In 7993,wild rainbow trout, hatcheryrainbow trout, and brook trout, were found in Big SpringsCreek
(Table 20, AppendicesA and B). Trout densitieswere similar in 1987 and 1993.
Sculpin were found in the mid sectionof the streamin 1995(Appendix A). Two of these fish were
collected,preserved,and later identified as shorthead(Table l3). In lg34,CarlHubbs collected91 shorthead
sculpin, a brook trout, and 7 rainbow trout from Big Springs Creek (UMMZ).
Creel censusdata indicate bull trout were presentin Big SpringsCreek as recent as 1977 (Appendix
C). However, additional creel censusdata,which were collected in 1978, 1979, and 1987(Appendix C), and
electrofishing datafrom i 987 (Corsi and Elle I 989) and 1993 (presentstudy), indicate they are no longer
present.
55
Table20. Summaryof electrofishingdatafrom Big SpringsCreek.
Species
Composition(%)
BI
Site
Date
Fish/100m'?
Rb
BK
0.8 km aboveroad orossingu
9/93
20.9
80
20
presentstudy
0.8 km aboveroad orossingu
8/87
20.r
g4b
6
Corsi& Elle 1989
c
Source
c
UMMZ
nla
7 t34
the
area.
be
in
same
" Although the 1987sitecouldnot be relocated,the 1993site should
b Onehatcheryrainbow.
" Sevenrainbowtrout38-48mm, Onebrooktrout60 mm.
"near souroe" (T8N R27E)
Birch Basin
Birch Basin is locatedin the centralportion of the Lemhi Mountain Range.A field surveyof the basin
in June 1995 indicated a small perennial spring and no fish habitat (Appendix A).
Bird Canyon
Bird Canyon is locatedin the southernend of the Lost River Mountain Range. Thereare no perennial
streams in the canyon (personal observation).
Black Canyon
Black Canyon is located in the southern end of the Lemhi Mountain Range. A review of aerial
photographs taken on July 31, 1979 and a field inspection indicated there are no perennial streamsin this
drainage(personal observation; JanetValle, LRRD, personal communication).
Black Creek
Black Creek, locatedin the central portion of the Lemhi Mountain Range,is disjunct from the Little
Lost River. The only perennialflow in the canyonis from a small spring. The streamhas a20Yogradient(map
gradient). The water from this spring flows for approximately 0.8 km, where it is diverted into a pipeline
approximately 1 km abovethe Forestboundary. This pipeline entersthe Deep Creek pipeline 1.8 km south
of the point of diversion.
56
In July 1997, avisual survey of the diversion pool and the stream immediately above the pool was
completed (Appendix A). No fish were found, and fish habitat is essentially non-existent.
Black Tail Canyon
Black Tail Canyon is located in the southernend of the Lost River Mountain Range. A field review
in July 1995 indicated there are no perennial streamsin the subdrainage.
Boulder Creek and Fowler Springs
Boulder Creek and Fowler Springsare locatedin the southernend of the Lemhi Mountain Range. A
review of an aerial photographtaken on August 3,7979 indicatedthat, with the exceptionof Fowler Springs,
there are no perennialwaters in this subdrainage.Fowler Springshasa limited flow approximately 1 km long.
Due to the limited flow and disjunct natureof Fowler Springs,it is unlikely fish are present. Therefore, the
stream was not surveYed.
Briggs Canyon
Briggs Canyon is located in the southernend of the Lost River Mountain Range. A field check of
Briggs Canyon at the Forest boundary in November 1995 indicated there are no perennial streams in this
subdrainage(personal observation).
Buck Canyon
Buok Canyon is located in the southernend of the Lost River Mountain Range. There are no perennial
streamsin this subdrainage(personal observation)'
Bull Creek
Bull Creek, a tributary to the Little Lost River (Sawmill Creek), is located in Sawmill Canyon" The
origin of Bull Creek could not be clearly determined from an aerial photograph, but it appears to be
approximately2.5 km long.
No fish were found in Bull Creek. ln 7995,the streamwas electrofishedfor approximately 70 m at
0.8 km above the Little Lost River and for approximately 30 m at 1.2km above the Little Lost River
(Appendix A). No fish were found at either site.
57
Bunting Canyon
Bunting Canyon Creek, locatedin the southernend of the Lemhi Mountain Range, is a tributary to
Badger Creek. The origin of the stream could not be clearly determinedfrom an aerial photograph, but it
appearsto be a spring 3.4 km abovethe confluencewith Badger Creek. The entire stream is on Forest land
except for the extreme lower portion, which is private. The Forest Service R1/R4 Fish Habitat Standard
Inventory (Overton et al. 1997) was conductedon lower Bunting Creek in 1997 (Appendix F).
The fish population in Bunting Canyon Creek is very limited. In 1987,one bull trout and 2 rainbow
trout were capturednear the confluencewith Badger Creek (Corsi and Elle 1989). In 1997,43 m of stream
in this same area were sampled (Table 21, Appendices A and B). Three bull trout, 3 rainbow trout, and 3
young-of-the-yearbull trout were captured.Although the high streamgradientlimits fish habitat,it is possible
that bull trout from Badger Creek use this stream for spawning.
A falls, 1 m in height, locatedapproximately300 m above Badger Creek, appearsto be a barrier to
fish migration. In 1995,the streamwas electrofishedfor approximately60 m 0.4 km aboveBadgerCreek and
No fish were fioxndateitherforapproximately5O m 2-0-knabove3adger Creek (Table 2l,AppendixA)of these2 sites.
Table2l.
Summary of electrofishing data from Bunting Canyon Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
BI
Source
50
50
presentstudy
67
a a
JJ
CorsiandElle 1989
Site
Date
Fish/100m2
Rb
775 m aboveBadger Creeku
7/97
nla
175 m aboveBadger Creeku
8t87
nla
0.8 km aboveBadser Creek
6l9s
none
BK
presentstudy
presentstudy
none
6/95
o Althoueh the 1987 site could not be relocated,the 1997 site should be in the samearea.
2.0 km aboveBadgerCreek
Cabin Fork
See Cedarville Canyon
Camp Creek(SawmillCanyon)
CampCreek,a tributaryto TimberCreek,is locatedin SawmillCanyon.Althoughthetributary is
it as Camp
unnamedon the USGSorthophotoandForestServicemap,a signalongthe streamdesignated
58
Creek. The streamis locatedimmediately southof Redrock Creek. The origin of Camp Creek could not be
clearly determinedfrom an aerial photograph,but it appearsto be approximately2.4 km long. Stream bank
erosion has createda barrier approximately 1 m high immediately above Timber Creek. This barrier likely
restrictsfish movement into the stream. The ForestServiceR1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overton
et al. 1997) was conductedon Camp Creek in 1997 (Appendix F).
In 7995, bull trout were found in Camp Creek (Table 22, AppendicesA and B). Two sites were
electrofished. The lower sitewas approximately 100m aboveTimber Creek. The upper sitewas nearthe road
1.6 km aboveTimber Creek, In the lower section,5 bull trout were.collected. All of thesefish were between
84 mm and 137mm in length. No fish were found at the secondsamplingsite. Basedon sampling and a field
review of the drainage, fish distribution appearsto be limited to approximately the lower 1 km of stream.
Table 22. Summaryof electrofishingdatafrom Camp Creek (Sawmill Canyon).
Species
Composition(%)
Fish/100m'z
Site
Date
100m aboveTimberCreek
9195
nla
1.6km aboveTimberCreek
9/95
none
Rb
BI
Source
100
presentstudy
BK
presentstudy
Camp Creek (Southern Lemhi Mountain Range)
Camp Creek is located in the southern end of the Lemhi Mountain Range. A review of an aerial
photograph taken August3, 1979 indicated there are no perennial streamsin this subdrainage.
Cedar Run Canyon and Mud Spring
CedarRun Canyon Creek and Mud Spring are locatedin the central portion of the Lemhi Mountain
Range. Although flows do intermittently reachthe mainstem, the stream is usually disjunct from the Little
Lost River. The streamssourceappearsto be a spring 1.5 km abovethe Forestboundary. The stream flows
for I km, where it is diverted into a canal. Mud Spring, which is located near the mouth of the canyon, is
diverted into this canal.
No fish were found in Cedar Run Canyon Creek or Mud Spring. Cedar Run Canyon Creek, Mud
Spring, and the canal they are diverted into were surveyedfor fish in June 1995. Cedar Run Canyon Creek
was electrofished near the diversion for approximately 50 m, Mud Spring was visually surveyed for
approximately 50 m, and the canal into which they are diverted was electrofished/visually surveyed for
approximately 50 m (Appendix A). No fish were found at any of the sites.
59
Cedarville Canyon (including North Fork and Cabin Fork)
The Cedarville Canyondrainage,includingNorth Fork and CabinFork, is locatedin the southernend
of the Lost River Mountain Range. A review of aerialphotographstaken on August 3, 1979 indicated there
are no significant perennialstreamsin Cedarville Canyonor North Fork. One perennialstreamwas found in
the Cabin Fork. The streamoriginatesat alarge spring near the end of the road in Cabin Fork. This spring
emits enough water to sustain a flow for severalhundred meters. The stream is I to 2 m wide and has an
approximatemean depth of 0.1 m. No fish were observedduring a visual survey of approximately 50 m of
the streamin November 1995(Appendix A).
Chicken Creek
Chicken Creek, located in the central portion of the Lost River Mountain Range, is disjunct from
Squaw Creek. A review of an aerialphotographtakenAugust 3, 1979indicatesthe stream'ssourceis a spring
1.8 km abovethe Forest boundary. The streamcrossesForest land for i.8 km, private land for 0.8 km, then
sinks after crossingapproximately3'2km of BLM land.
No fish were found in Chicken Creek. The stream was electrofished and visually surveyed for
approximately 20 m at the BlM/private property line in September1995 (Appendix A). Fish habitat was
essentially nonexistent, and no fish were found'
Coal Creek
Coal Creek, located in the central portion of the Lost River Mountain Range, is a tributary to Wet
Creek. Basedon a review of an aerialphotographtaken on August 3,1979, Coal Creek originatesat a spring
0.8 km above its confluencewith Wet Creek. The entire sffeamis on Forest land. Streamtemperatureswere
monitored in Coal Creek in 1997(Appendix E). The Forest ServiceRl/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory
(Overton et al. 1997) was conductedon Coal Creek in 1997 (Appendix F).
In 1995,rainbow trout were found in Coal Creek(Table 23, AppendicesA and B). It appearsfish are
confined primarily to the upper reach of the streambecausehabitat in the lower reach is limited due to the
steep stream gradient.
Table23. Summaryof electrofishingdata from Coal Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
Site
Date
Fishil00 m'?
Below Gate
7/95
tt.2
Rb
100
60
BK
BI
Source
presentstudy
Corral Canvon Creek
Corral Canyon Creek, locatedin the southernend of the Lost River mountainrange,is a tributary to
Horsethief CanyonCreek. In July 1997, avisual surveyof approximately30 m of streamwas conducted20 m
above Horsethief Canyon Creek (Appendix A). No fish were found. Vegetation patterns and flows near
Horsethief Canyon Creek suggestthe stream is intermittent.
Corral Creek
Corral Creek, locatedbetweenSquawCreek andDry Creek,is disjunct from Wet Creek. The stream
is approximately0.5 m wide. Fish habitatis limited by the stream'ssrnall size and limited flow.
In June 1997,50m of streamwere visually surveyedapproximately I km abovethe Wet Creek Road
(Appendix A). No fish were found.
Cub Canyon
Cub Canyon Creek, located west of Sawmill Canyon in the Lemhi Mountain Range, is disjunct from
Little
Lost River. The point of origin is a series of springs approximately 1.5 km above the Forest
the
boundary. After leaving Forest lands,the stream crossesapproximately 1.5 km of private land, where the
water is storedin a pond for livestock use. A field checkof the streamin Septemberand November 1995
indicated habitat was limited due to small flows.
Deep Creek
Deep Creek, locatedin the cenffal portion of the Lemhi Mountain Range,is disjunct from the Little
Basedon a review of an aerialphotograph,the stream'ssourceis a spring 2.3 km abovethe Forest
River.
Lost
boundary. The streamflows 1.5 km, where it is diverted into a hydroelectric pipeline. The settling pond at
the point of diversion is approximately 15 m wide and2 m deep. A small, unnamedtributary enters Deep
Creek from the southjust above the sefiling pond'
No fish were found in Deep Creek. Three locationswere surveyedin 1995(Appendix A). A visual
survey was conductedof the diversion pool. The streamwas electrofishedimmediately above the diversion
pool and approximately 200 m abovethe diversion pool. A total of approximately 50 m was electrofished.
No fish were found at any of these sites.
Deer Creek (seealso Deer Creek, North Fork; Deer Creek, South Fork)
Deer Creek, located in the southern end of the Lost River Mountain Range, is a tributary to the
mainstem of the Little Lost River. Deer Creek originatesat the confluenceof the SouthFork Deer Creek and
61
North Fork Deer Creekand flows for 8.2 km to the Little Lost River. The streamoriginateson Forestland and
flows for 1.3,6.4, and 0.5 km on Forest,BLM, and private lands,respectively. Streamtemperatureswere
monitored in Deer Creek in 1997(Appendix E). The Forest ServiceR1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory
(Overton xal. 1997) was conductedon Deer Creek in t997 (Appendix F),
Accounts from anglerssuggestbull trout were not historically presentin Deer Creek. Anna Sermon
hasfished Deer Creeksinceabout 1938 (personalcommunication).However, shehasnevercaughta bull trout
in that stream. In addition, her family often fished Deer Creek betweenthe late 1930'sand the late 1940's.
Although they would oatchbetween50 and 150 fish in Deer Creek on a single outing, none of the fish were
bull trout.
A single introduction of 1,200rainbow trout ranging between 13 cm and 20 cm in length was made
in 1954.
Rainbow trout and sculpin were found in Deer Creek (Table 24, AppendicesA and B). In 1992, the
lower 2 transectswere sampled. Thesesamesiteswere also sampledln 1987(Corsi and Elle I 989). Densities
decreasedfrom 1987to 1992in both of thesetransects.In 1995,an additional site was sampledatthe Forest
boundary. Rainbow trout were the only salmonid collectedfrom Deer Creek in 7987, 7992, and 1995. It is
likely the naturally high streamtemperatureof Deer Creekprecludesbull trout from successfully spawning
in Deer Creek,North Fork Deer Creek,and SouthFork Deer Creek. This may explainthe absenceof bull trout
in these streams.
In 1998,the Idaho Division of EnvironmentalQuality sampleda I 00 m sectionof Deer Creek located
300 m abovethe privatelBlM boundary (Table 24). This was done to help confirm the absenceof bull trout
in this stream. Only 2 rainbow trout20-29 mm in length were captured'
Sculpin were found nem the Forest boundary in 1995 (Appendix A). Four of thesefish were collected,
preserved,andlater identified as shorthead(Table 13). No sculpin were found in the South Fork Deer Creek
or North Fork Deer Creek. A small falls, 0.6 m in height near the Forest boundary, has likely blocked their
passage.
Deer Creek. North Fork
North Fork Deer Creek, locatedin the southernend of the Lost River Mountain Range,is a tributary
to Deer Creek. North Fork Deer Creekoriginatesat a spring 0.8 km abovethe confluencewith the SouthFork
o
Deer Creek. The water temperatureat this spring was I 3 C on June 6, 1997, and on May 19, 1998. The
Forest ServiceR1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overton et al. 1997) was conducted on North Fork
Deer Creek in 1997 (Appendix F)'
In 1995,rainbowtrout were found in the North Fork Deer Creek (Table 25, AppendicesA and B).
The 357.4 fis|/|00 m2density likely reflects a high ooncentrationof spawning fish. This high density may
also be explained by fish moving into the transectbetweenpasses.It is doubtful densitiesremain this high year
round, particularly due to the lack of habitat (i.e.- pools, cover, etc.). Fish occupythe entire streamreach. It
is likely the naturally high streamtemperatureprecludesbull trout from successfullyspawningin the stream.
This may explain the absenceof bull trout in this streamand Deer Creek.
62
Table 24. Summary of electrofishing data from Deer Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
Rb
BK
BI
Source
Site
Date
Fish/100m2
0.3 km above private/BlM
boundary
7t98
0.0
2.1km aboveLittle Lost
River -BLM #1b
8/92
22.4
100
presentstudy
2.1km aboveLittle Lost
River -BLM #lb
8187
45.9"
100
Corsi& Elle 1989
1.6 km below Forest
boundary -B.L}rl#2d
8192
20.7
100
presentstudy
1.6 km below Forest
boundary -BLM#2d
8/87
28.2
100
Corsi& Elle 1989
IdahoDivisionof
Environmental
Quality
100
42.5
6195
At Forest boundary
o Only two rainbow trout20-29 mm in length were captured'
b Old BLMsite#2.
presentstudy
" Bureau of Land Management file data indicates there was an error in the 1987 mean stream widths
suppliedto the Departmentof Fish and Game for Deer Creek. Subsequently,the fish densities in Corsi
and Elle ( 1989)were incorrect. Fish densitiesfor Deer Creekshownherefor 1987havebeenrecalculated
basedon the streamwidth in 1992. Therefore,they do not match thosereportedfor Deer Creek in 1987
by Corsi and Elle (1989).
d Old BLM site #3.
63
Table25. Summary of electrofishing data from Deer Creek, North Fork.
Species
Composition(%)
Site
Date
Fish/l00 m2
Rb
BK
BI
Source
presentstudy
100
6/9s
357.4
0.2km above SouthFork
o More fish were capturedin this transectthan could be held betweenpasses.Therefore,fish were released
below the transectbetweenpasses.It may be possiblethat someof thesefish moved back into the fransect,
were recaptured,and recounted.
I)eer Creek. South Fork
SouthFork Deer Creek, locatedin the southernend of the Lost River Mountain Range,is a tributary
to Deer Creek. SouthFork Deer Creekoriginatesat a spring 0.9 km abovethe confluencewith the North Fork
Deer Creek. The water temperatureat this spring was 13"C on June6, 1997,and on May 18, 1998. The
Forest ServiceRiiR4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overton etal. 1997) was conductedon South Fork
Deer Creek in 1997(Appendix F).
In1995,rainbow trout were found in SouthFork Deer Creek (Table 26, AppendicesA and B). Fish
occupy the entire streamreach. It is likely the naturally high streamtemperatureprecludesbull trout from
successfullyspawningin the stream. This may explainthe absenceof bull trout in this streamand Deer Creek.
Table26. Summary of electrofishing data from Deer Creek, South Fork.
Species
(%)
Composition
Site
Date
0.5 km aboveNorth Fork
6195
Fish/100m2
37.5
Rb
r00
BK
BI
Source
presentstudy
Dry Creek
Dry Creek, located in the central portion of the Lost River Mountain Range, is disjunot from Wet
Creek and the Little Lost River. The origin of Dry Creek could not be clearly determined from an aerial
photograph. However, in August 1995,the streamwas flowing 7.5 km abovethe Forestboundary,indicating
ihe streamis at least 13.2km long. The streamflows at least7.5 km on Forestland and 5.8 km on BLM land,
where it is diverted into a hydroelectricpipeline. Thereare 8 lakesin Dry Creek. At one time, a reservoir (Dry
Creek Reservoir)existedon Dry Creekbelow Long Lost Creek,but hassincefailed. (SeeDry Creek Lake #1,
Dry Creek Lake #2,Dry Creek Lake #3, Dry Creek Lake #4,Dry Creek Pond, Dry Creek Reservoir,Copper
64
Lake, Swauger Lake #1, Swauger Lake #2, and Swauger Lake #3 in Part 4.) Stream temperatureswere
monitored in Dry Creek in 1997(Appendix E). The Forest Service Rl/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory
(Overton et al. 1997) was conductedon the fish bearing portion of Dry Creek and an unnamedtributary in
1997 (Appendix F).
Severalwater developmentprojeotshavebeencarriedout on Dry Creek. Theseinclude construction
of a dam (see Dry Creek Reservoir in Part 4), wooden pipeline, cement canal, and hydroelectric pipeline.
Williams (1973) indicatesthat in the late 1800'sor early 1900's,a canal was constructedin Dry Creek in an
effort to reducewater loss in the main channel. Later, a 1.2m wide redwood pipeline was usedto carry water
from Dry Creek Reservoirto Wet Creek (Rob Stauffer,arearesident,personalcommunication). In the mid
1960's,a cementcanalwas builtto carry water from approximately2,5 km below the dam site to Wet Creek.
In the 1980's,this canalwas replacedby a hydroelectricpipeline,which originatesat the samepoint as the
canal. The pipeline terminatesat a power plant near Wet Creek. Except in periods of high water, the entire
stream is diverted into the pipeline.
Dry Creek was stocked with rainbow trout between 1948 and 1964. A single cutthroat trout
introduction was madein 1964. Cutthroattrout, rainbow trou! andbrook trout may havebeenintroducedinto
Dry Creek in 1915 (seePart 2: Species,CutthroatTrout).
ln 1995,brook trout and rainbow trout x cutthroattrout hybrids were found in Dry Creek (Table 27,
Appendices A and B). Fish densities were the highest above the dam site and lowest near the diversion.
Although Corsi and Elle (1989) found cutthroattrout in Dry Creekin 1987,nonewere found during sampling
efforts in 1995. In 1997,a Forest Serviceemployeecaught what appearedto be a pure cutthroat trout from
the large spring adjacentto Dry Creek 1.2km abovethe Forestboundary.
No fish were found in the upper reachof Dry Creek. A single waterfall 4.5 m in height is located on
Dry Creek approximately 1.5 km abovethe Forestboundary. Four locationsabovethesefalls were surveyed
in August 1995. The first 2 sections,a 60 m section0.4 km abovethe falls and an 80 m section0.8 km above
the falls, were electrofished. The other 2 sections,a seriesof beaverponds adjacentto Dry Creek 3.2km
abovethe falls and a 30 m reachof stream4.8 km abovethe falls, were visually surveyed. No fish were found
at any of thesesites. Likewise, a Forest ServiceR1/R4 fish habitat crew found no fish in a visual survey of
portions of a 1.5 km reachof Dry Creek abovethe falls.
The cutthroattrout and associatedhybrids found in Dry Creek (USR file data, Corsi and Elle 1989,
present study) are likely the result of introductionsof this species.Corsi and Elle (1989) speculatedthat
emigration of cutthroattrout from SwaugerLakes to Dry Creek may explain the occurrenceof this speciesin
this stream. However, the nature of the outlet betweentheselakesand Dry Creek suggeststhat movement of
fish betweenthe lakes and Dry Creek is unlikely (personal observation).
Apparently, bull trout were historically presentin Dry Creek. JesseStrope,who moved to the Little
Lost River valley in 1910,indicatedthat in the 1920'she caughtonly "dolly varden" in Dry Creek Reservoir
and Dry Creek above the reservoir (personal communication). Likewise, Rob Stauffer, an arearesident,
indicated that in the early 1960's,"dolly varden" comprised abott l0o/oof the fish he caught in Dry Creek
(personal communication). He also reported catching brook trout and rainbow trout in Dry Creek.
65
Table27. Summary of electrofishing data from Dry Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
Site
Date
Fish/100m2
Rb
BK
BI
Source
50 m abovediversion pool
8/95
nla
67u
JJ
0.8 km above diversion
8/9s
4.1
100
presentstudy
I 50 m aboveForest
boundary'
8195
8.9
100
presentstudy
i50 m aboveForest
boundaryb
8/87
3.9
87"
Corsi& Elle 1989
Pool adjacentto above sited
8t95
nla
100
presentstudy
Spring adjacentto Dry Creek
1.2 km aboveForest
boundary
8195
nla
I 00"
presentstudy
0.4 km abovethe falls
8/9s
presentstudy
0.8 km abovethe falls
8/9s
presentstudy
Beaver ponds adjacent to Dry
Creek 3.2km abovethe fallsr
8t95
presentstudy
presentstudy
presentstudy
8l9s
4.8 km abovethe fallsr
o These fish were rainbow trout x cutthroat trout hybrids.
b Although the 1987 site could not be relocated,the 1995 site shouldbe in the samearea.
" Cutthroattrout comprised13% of the sample.
d This was a pool adjacentto the stream,and fish were likely concenfated in the pool following high flows.
" All fish were between70 and i40 mm.
r These sites were visually surveyed.
East Canyon
East Canyon is located in the southern end of the Lemhi Mountain Range. A review of aerial
photographs taken on July 31, 1979 and field observationsindicate there are no perennial streams in this
subdrainase.
Eightmile Canyon (including Right and Left forks)
Eightmile Canyon is looatedin the southernend of the Lost River Mountain Range. A field review
indicated there areno perennial streamsin this subdrainage(personal observation).
66
Fallert Springs
Fallert Springs is located in the southern end of the Lemhi Mountain Range. Water flows for a short
distancefrom the springs,where it is diverted into the Uncle Ike Creek pipeline. The steepstream gradient
(75o/omapgradient)and limited flows limit fish habitat,and it is doubtful any fish are present. Therefore,the
stream was not surveyed.
Fallert Springs Creek
Fallert SpringsCreek,locatedin the lower, centralportion of the Little Lost River Valley, is a tributary
to the Little Lost River. It originatesat a spring on private land and flows 6.3 km to the mainstemof the Little
Lost River. Approximately 1.2 km are on private land, the remainderon BLM. The streamtemperaturenear
the sourcespring was i5'C on June 17,1997. The temperatureat the sourcespring was 9"C on May 19,
1998. Streamtemperatureswere monitored in Fallert Springs Creek in 1997 (Appendix E).
In l993,rainbow trout were found in Fallert SpringsCreek(Table 28, AppendicesA and B) . ln 1987,
both rainbow trout and brook trout were found (Corsi and Elle 1989). In 1993,denseaquaticvegetationmade
sampling very difficult and a population estimatewas not possible.
Table28. Summaryof electrofishingdata from Fallert SpringsCreek.
Species
Composition(%)
Rb
Site
Date
Fish/l00 m2
Upstreamfrom Fallert
SpringsBridge
9t93
n/a
100"
Upstreamfrom Fallert
SpringsBridge
8187
0.8
80
BK
BI
Source
presentstudy
20
Corsi& Elle 1989
o One hatchery rainbow trout collected'
Firebox Creek
Firebox Creek,a tributary to the mainstemof the Little Lost River, is locatedin Sawmill Canyon. The
origin of Firebox Creek could not be clearly determined from an aerial photograph, but it appearsto be
approximately2.5 kmlong. The majority of the drainagewas burnedin 1988. The ForestServiceR1/R4 Fish
Habitat StandardInventory (Overton et al. 1997)was conductedon Firebox Creek in 1994 (Appendix F).
In 1997,bull trout were found in Firebox Creek(Table 29, AppendicesA and B). Densitieswere
relativelyhigh at 16.6fisl/100 m2. The largestbull trout capturedwas 403 mm. In 1994,a Forest Service
habitatcrew observedbull trout up to approximately350 mm in the stream (LRRD file data). At that time,
67
smaller bull trout were observedin streamreacheswith gradientsin excessof l0o/o.The presenceof large bull
trout suggeststhat Firebox Creek servesas a spawning and rearing areafor fluvial bull trout.
Table 29. Summary of electrofishing datafrom Firebox Creek.
Species
Composition (%)
Site
Date
Fish/100m'z
400 m aboveLittle Lost River
7/97
16.6
Rb
BK
BI
100
Source
presentstudy
Fowler Springs
SeeBoulder Creek
Garfield Creek
Garfield Creek, a tributary to the Little Lost River (Sawmill Creek), is located in Sawmill Canyon.
Garfield Creek originates at a spring 2.5 l,rrr above the Little Lost River. The stream flows for 2.2 km on
Forestland,then 0.3 km on BLM land. Limited streamflows (approximately0.5 m wide and 0.1 m deep)limit
fish habitat.
No fish were found in Garfield Creek. The streamwas electrofishedfor approximately75 m,200 m
above the Forest boundary (Appendix A)' No fish were found.
Ilawley Canyon
Hawley Canyon is locatedon Hawley Mountain in the centralportion of the Little Lost River Valley,
There are no perennial streamsin this subdrainage(personal observation),
Hawley Creek
Hawley Creek, a tributary to Iron Creek, is locatedin Sawmill Canyon.The origin of Hawley Creek
could not be olearly determinedllom an aerial photograph,but it appearsto be approximately 2.5 km long.
The Forest ServiceR1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overlon ef al. 1997) was conductedon Hawley
Creek in 1997 (Appendix F).
In 1995,one bull trout measuring 199mm was capturedin Hawley Creek (Table 30, Appendices A
and B). The streamwas electrofishedfor 47 m immediatelyabovethe Iron Creek Road. Based on length at
68
age datafor bull trout in the Little Lost River (Corsi and Elle 1989),this was probably an age2 fish. In 1997,
a Forest Service R1/R4 fish habitat crew observedseveral bull trout up to 200 mm in length in the stream
approximately 1,500m aboveIron Creek.
Table 30. Summaryof electrofishingdata from Hawley Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
Site
Date
Fish/l00 m'z
Immediately above Iron
Creek Road
9lgs
nla
Rb
BK
BI
Source
100
presentstudy
IIeII Canyon
Hell Canyon Creek, locatedin the centralportion of the Lost River Mountain Range,is a tributary to
Long Lost Creek. The stream originates at ShadowLakes and flows approximately 3.0 km to Long Lost
Creek. However, aerial photographssuggestthe streamis intermiffent for much of this distance. Although
the streamwas not surveyed, limited flow and fish habitat suggestthat fish are not present in this stream. This
conclusionis also supportedby the lack of fish in Long Lost Creek.
Hilts Creek
Hilts Creek, located in the central portion of the Lost River Mountain Range, is a tributary to Wet
Creek. The origin of the stream was not apparentfrom an aerial photographtaken August 3,1979, but the
stream appearsto be approximately 1.5 km long. Due to limited flows and potential winter freezing, fish
habitat is limited, and it is unlikely fish are presentin this stream.
Horse Creek
Horse Creek, locatedin the southemportion ofthe Lemhi Mountain Range,is disjunct from the Little
Lost River. Horse Creek originatesat springsnearthe ForestBoundary and flows for 5.8 km on BLM land.
Upon enteringprivate land, it is either diverted for inigation or sinks into the ground (Connie Oar, landowner,
personal communication). The water temperature atthe 3 main springs feeding Horse Creek ranged between
8 and 9"C on June29,1998.
One accountfrom an anglersuggeststhat bull trout were not historically presentin Horse Creek. Neil
Reed,who fished the Little Lost River drainagesincethe late 1930's,regularly fished Horse Creek. However,
he has never caught a bull trout from that stream(Anna Sermon,valley historian,personalcommunication).
69
In 1995 and 1997, rainbow ffout and sculpinwere found in Horse Creek(Table 3 1, AppendicesA and
B). Although densities are relatively high, riparian habitat along the lower reach of the stream has been
negatively impactedby grazing. Three sculpin were collected, preserved,and later identified as shorthead
(Table 13). It appearsthat sculpin and rainbow trout occupy the majority of the streamreach.
Table 31. Summaryof electrofishingdatafrom Horse Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
Site
Date
At BLM / privateline
7197
0.8km belowForest
boundary
6t9s
Fish/I00 m'z
38.8
Rb
BK
BI
Source
100
presentstudy
100
presentstudy
Horse Lake Creek
HorseLake Creek,a tributary to the Little Lost River (Sawmill Creek),is locatedin Sawmill Canyon.
The origin of Horse Lake Creek could not be clearly determined from an aerial photograph, but it appears to
be approxim ately 1.5 km long. There is one lake in Horse Lake Creek (seeHorse Lake in Part 4).
No fish were found in Horse Lake Creek. In June 1997, approximately75 m of streamwere visually
surveyed 300 m above the Little Lost River (Sawmill Creek) (Appendix A). No fish were found. Steep
stream gradients and low flows limit fish habitat. Furthermore, it is unlikely fish can accessthe stream due
to the complexity of the stream channel near the Little Lost River.
Ilorsethief Canvon Creek
HorsethiefCanyonCreek,locatedin the southernend ofthe Lost River Mountain Range,is a tributary
to Hurst Creek. In July 1997, a30 m sectionof streamlocated20 m aboveCorral Canyon Creekwas visually
surveyed(Appendix A). No fish were found, Flows andvegetationpatternssuggestthe streamis intermittent.
Hurst Canyon
Hurst Canyon Creek, locatedin the southernend of the Lost River Mountain Range,is disjunct from
the Little Lost River. In July 1997, avisual survey of approximately50 m of streamwas conducted near the
right and left forks (Appendix A). No fish were found. Flows and vegetationpatterns suggestthe stream is
intermittent below the Forest boundary.
70
Iron Creek
Iron Creek, atribtfiary to the Little Lost River (Sawmill Creek), is located in Sawmill Canyon. The
origin of Iron Creek could not be clearly determined from an aerial photograph, but it appears to be
approximately 4.8 km long. Streamtemperatureswere monitored in Iron Creek in 1996 (Appendix D) and
1997 (Appendix E). The Forest Service R1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overton et al. 1997) was
conducted on Iron Creek in 1994 and the forks of Iron Creek in 1997 (Appendix F).
In 1995,bull trout were found in Iron Creek(Table 32, AppendicesA and B). In 1987,Corsi and Elle
(19S9) found both rainbow trout and bull trout 1.5km below the 1995 site. A comparisonof their data with
that gathered in 1995 indicates rainbow trout are confined to the lower 0.8 km of the stream and have not
advancedfurther up Iron Creek.
In 1996,the 1995site was resampledto veri$, the absenceof brook trout and rainbow trout (Table
32, AppendicesA and B). Only bull trout were found.
Table 32. Summary of electrofishing data from Iron Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
BK
BI
Site
Date
m'z
Fish/100
Just above Iron Creek Roado
9t96
nla
100
presentstudy
Just above Iron Creek Road"
8/95
10.1
100
presentstudy
96
Corsi& Elle 1989
Rb
6.6
7/87
0.5 km abovethe Little Lost
(Sawmill
Creek)
River
u The 1995 and 1996 sitesare approximately1.5 km abovethe 1987 site.
Source
Iron Creekappearsto be an importantspawningareaforfluvial bull trout. On August 23,1995,14
bull trout were collected in Iron Creek. Two of thesewere372 mm and 274 mm in length. The size of these
fish relative to the small size of the streamsuggeststhesefish are fluvial bull trout that have moved into the
stream to spawn. The remainder of the fish collected were between 77 and 159 mm.
In October 1997, aForest ServiceR1/R4 fish habitat crew found bull trout in the right and left forks
of Iron Creek. In the right fork, fish were only observeda short distanceabovethe forks, andtheir distribution
is limited by a lack of habitat. Fish movementinto the left fork appearsrestrictedby a falls approximately 1 m
high, which is createdby alargedownedtree. While this falls likely blocks the movementof fluvial bull trout
into this fork, bull trout were observedfor approximately500 m abovethe falls. At this sametime, a large pair
of bull trout approximately350 mm long (likely fluvial fish) were observedin Iron Creek immediately below
the forks.
71
Jackson Creek
JacksonCreek, a tributary to Iron Creek, is locatedin Sawmill Canyon.The origin of JacksonCreek
could not be clearly determinedfrom an aerial photographbut it appearsto be approximately 2.5 km long.
The Forest ServiceR1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overton et al. 1997) was conducted on Jackson
Creek in 1997(Appendix F).
In 1995,bull trout were found in JacksonCreek (Table 33, Appendices A and B). The stream was
electrofishedfor 73 m immediately abovethe Iron CreekRoad. Only 2 bull trout measuring134 and 155mm
were captured.Basedon length atage datafor bull trout in the Little Lost River (Corsi and Elle 1989) these
were likely age 2 fish. Although the streamdoesnot support large numbersof fish, it appearsthe stream serves
as a rearing area for bull trout.
Table 33. Summary of electrofishingdata from JacksonCreek.
Species
(%)
Composition
Site
Date
Just above Iron Creek Road
9195
Fish/100m2
nla
Rb
BK
BI
Source
100
presentstudy
Jumpoff Canyon
Jumpoff Canyon is located in the southernend of the Lost River Mountain Ranqe. There are no
perennial streamsin this subdrainage(personal observation).
Little Lost River, Mainstem (including Sawmill Creek)
(Note: That portion of the mainstem of the Little Lost River from Summit Creek to Timber Creek is
referredto as Sawmill Creek. The streamaboveand below this reachis the mainstemof the Little Lost River.
For purposesof uniformity, Sawmill Creek will be treatedas part of the mainstem of the Little Lost River.)
The mainstemof the Little Lost River originatesin the headof Sawmill CanyonaboveFirebox Creek.
The river continuesdown Sawmill Canyon and the Little Lost River Valley where,when undiverted, it sinks
southeastof the town of Howe. The mainstem is approximately 88 km long. Stream temperatureswere
monitoredintheLittleLostRiverin 1987,1988,1994,1995,1996(AppendixD), and 1997(AppendixE).
The Forest ServiceRllR4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overton et al. 1997)was conductedon the Little
Lost River betweenthe Sawmill Canyon road (#101) near the Forestboundaryand Firebox Creek (excluding
private sections)in 1994(Appendix F). That portion aboveFirebox Creek, including an unnamed tributary
(described as "right fork" by the inventory crew), was inventoried in 1997 (Appendix F).
72
Speciesintroducedinto the mainstemofthe Little Lost River (including Sawmill Creek)have included
rainbow trout, brook trout, cutthroat trout, and mountain whitefish.
The mainstemhasundergoneextensiveahutnelizationand diversion. Williams (1973) indicatedthat
sefflersto the valley in the late eighteenor early nineteenhundreds"found certain streamsin the valley in
which most of the water was going to waste becausethe channelsoverflowed most of the time or followed long
routesthrough porousgravel,allowing the waterto sink." This referencespecifically mentionsthe "'Saw Mill
Canyon Rights' where old channelswere repairedand new onesmadewhere necessary."Indeed,reviews of
aerial photographsindicate that much of the mainstembetweenthe Forest boundary and Summit Creek has
been channelized. Currently, there is no effort to maintain this channelization and the stream channel is
returning to a natural condition.
An aerial photograph taken on July 20, 1959 indicates that at that timer all of the Little Lost River was
being diverted acrossthe alluvial fan into Summit Creek. The point of diversion was approximately 8 km
below Warm Creek. This appearsto have resultedin the completedewateringof approximately 5 km of the
Little Lost River above Summit Creek. This was likely doneto reducewater loss in the main channel. This
diversion has not been used since 1960(JamesAndreason,local landowner,personalcommunication).
Since 1985,the lower portion of the mainstemhas beendewateredannually for winter flood control.
The following summary of this flood control project and related mitigation project on the Little Lost River
between Warm Creek and Summit Creek (lower Sawmill Creek) is taken from the Little Lost River Flood
Control MeasurePIqn and EnvironmentalImpact Statement(SCSand BLM 1985),Devoe (no date),IFD file
data,andAnderson(1988).
Prior to I985,freezing on the lower Little Lost River resulted in severeflooding in and around the
community of Howe. Limited streamflow and low streamgradientin the lower reachof river resulted in the
formation of ice in the river channel. Subsequently,water would leavethe channeland flood between600 and
2,900 hectaresannually. Mean annual damagesfrom flooding were approximately $75,400. However, in
1969,an estimated$442,600in damagesoccured.
In the early 1980's, aplanto alleviateflooding was developed.In 1985,a draft environmentalimpact
statement(EIS) had been preparedwhen the threat of severeflooding prompted emergencyaction. During
this time, the selectedalternativefor flood control identified in the draft EIS was partially irnplemented. This
involved diverting the entire river into two 0.8 km long 3 m deepinfiltration trenchesapproximately 14 km
north of Howe. This resultedin the total dewateringof the lower 16.9km of the river and an estimated loss
of 4.200 trout. Later, the remainderof the project was implemented,and the river continuesto be dewatered
on an annualbasis.
To offset the loss of trout, a mitigation project was designedfor the mainstem above Summit Creek
(Sawmill Creek). The purpose of the project was to improve fishery habitat betweenthe Sawmill Canyon
Road and the old USGS gauging stationabove Summit Creek. Most of the riparian vegetation in this reach
had beenburned by a rangefire severalyearsbefore. Although regenerationin the upper portion ofthis reach
was good, the re-establishmentof tree and shrub riparian speciesin the lower reach was limited by heavy
grazing. Subsequently,stream bank erosion beganto occur. The purpose of the rnitigation project was to
establishenoughpermanentfishery habitat in this reachto replacefish lost in the lower Little Lost River as
a result of flood control. The specific objectives of the mitigation project during the first 20 years were to
increasefish populationsby 50o%,decreasestreamwidth by 3\Yo,increasestreamdepthby 30Yo,and increase
woody riparian speciesby 75%. This was to be accomplishedby fencing the entire streamreachto eliminate
73
or temporarily excludewarn seasoncattle grazingon 81 hectares,piping water to provide a water sourcefor
cattle,placing rock and rock diversions in the upper stream reach,planting vegetation in both reacheswith
emphasison the lower reach, and installing log deflectors in the lower reach.
Implementation of the project beganin 1986. Atthattime, the exclosurefence was constructed. In
1987,the pipeline was installed,andwillows were plantedin 1988. Vegetationbeganto respondimmediately
after implementation. However, due to drought and browsing by big game,willow survival was only 25o/o.
By 1993, riparian habitat and channel and bank conditions within the project area had improved. The
placement of rocks and structuresis to take place once the streambanks have stabilized.
Rainbow trout, brook trout, bull trout, and sculpin were found in the mainstem (including Sawmill
Creek) during the current study (Table 34, AppendicesA and B). Fish occupythe entire mainstem. Bull trout
are the only speciespresentin the upper reach. Rainbow trout are the dominant speciesbelow Iron Creek.
Trout populationsdeclinedsharply in the mainstembetween 1987 andthe 1990's (Table 34; seealso
Part2,Bull Trout). This is particularly evident in the transectbelow Big SpringsCreek andthe transectbelow
Deer Creek. Thesetwo sites are permanentstationsthat were sampledin 1987by Corsi and Elle (1989) and
resampledduring the presentstudy. In 1987,the site below Big SpringsCreekhad a population estimate of
348 fish and a densityof 35.9 fish/100m2(CorsiandElle 1989). In 1993,only 6 fish were capturedfrom the
samesite. In 1987,the site below Deer Creek had a populationestimateof 108 fish and a density of I 1.1
fislii 100 m2(Corsi and Elle 1989). In 1993,the samesite had a population estimateof 16 fish and a density
o f 1 . 6f i s h / 1 0 0m 2 .
.
The reasonfor thesedeclinesis not clear. It is possiblethe declineis relatedto droughtduring the late
1980's and early 1990's. It is also possiblethat whirling disease,which has recently been detectedin the
drainage(SteveElle, Idaho Departmentof Fish and Game,personalcommunication),is linked to the decline.
However, fuither study is neededbefore any conclusions can be drawn.
In lg34,CarlHubbscollected2rainbowtrou!abulltrout,andashortheadsculpinfromthemainstem
befween Badger Creek and Wet Creek (UMMZ).
Table 34. Summary of electrofishing data from mainstem Little Lost River (including Sawmill Creek).
Species
Composition(%)
BK
BI
Site
Date
Fish/i00 m2
Rb
Near Howe below first road
culvert north of Howe
9/83
nla
88
Corsiet al.1986
Near Howe below first road
culvert north of Howe
10/70^
n/a
100
Andrews1972
Below Big SpringsCreek
9/93
nla
100
presentstudy
Below Big SpringsCreek
8187
35.9
100
Corsi& Elle 1989
nla
100
Andrews1972
Below Big SpringsCreek
l0/70
74
Source
Table34. Continued.
Species
Composition (%)
Site
Date
Fish/l00 m'z
Rb
Below Buck and Bird Road
9t93
1.6
92
Below Buck and Bird Road
8t87
11 . 1
100
BK
BI
Source
8
presentstudy
Corsi& Elle 1989
b
b
UMl,[Z
Between Badger and Wet
Creek
7/34
nla
Clyde Campground
9/93
14.3
96
I
3
presentstudy
Clyde Campground
1t/87
nla
64
34"
2
Corsi& Elle 1989
Clyde Campground
7/87
28.2
95
4
Corsi& Elle 1989
BLM Sawmill#A - Lower end
of lower pasture
7197
1.8
71
14
14
presentstudy
BLM Sawmill#4 - Lower end
of lower pasture
8193
2.7
93
7
BLM Sawmill #4 - Lower end
of lower pasture
7187
4.1
45
BLM Sawmill#4 - Lower end
of lower pasture
7/86
5.2d'"
BLM Sawmill#4 - Lower end
of lower pasture
7/85
1.0d
100
BLM Sawmill# - Lower end
of lower pasture
r0/84
L0d
67
BLM Sawmill# - Lower end
of lower pasture
10170
nla
100
BLM Sawmill#3 - Above
Mahogany Creek Rd crossing
7/97
2.2
75
BLM Sawmill#3 - Above
Mahogany Creek Rd crossing
8t93
2.0
70
BLM Sawmill#3 - Above
Mahogany Creek Rd crossing
7/87
2.2
BLM Sawmill#3 - Above
Mahogany Creek Rd crossing
7/86
BLM Sawmill #3 - Above
Mahogany Creek Rd crossing
BLM Sawmlll#3 - Above
Mahogany Creek Rd crossing
4a
/J
I
presentstudy
aa
JJ
22
Corsi& Elle 1989
A
23
Elleet al.1987
Elle et al. 1987
33
Elle et al.1987
Andrews7972
17
presentstudy
20
10
presentstudy
68
18
14
Corsi& Elle 1989
1.3d
64
l8
18
Elle et al. 1987
7/85
L6d
22
56
22
Elle et al.1987
r0t84
3.0d
59
l2
29
Elle et al.7987
75
Table34. Continued.
Species
Composition(%)
Date
Fish/100m2
Rb
BLM Sawmill#2 - Lower
portion of upper exclosure
7/97
3.5
93
BLM Sawmill#2 - Lower
portion of upper exclosure
8193
6.6t
9
BLM Sawmill#2 - Lower
portion of upper exclosure
7/87
1.5
43
57
BLM Sawmill#2 - Lower
portion of upper exclosure
7186
3.7d
50
l i
l.+
36
Elle et al.1987
BLM Sawmill#2 - Lower
portion of upper exclosure
7185
4.4d
50
t2
38
Elle et al.1987
BLM Sawmill#z - Lower
portion of upper exclosure
r0/84
4.ld
80
l3
7
Elle et al. 1987
BLM Sawmill #1 - 2.4km
below Sawmill Canyon Rd
7197
5.7
90
3
presentstudy
BLM Sawmill #1 - 2.4km
below Sawmill Canyon Rd
8193
7.0
91
BLM Sawmill #1 - 2.4km
below Sawmill Canyon Rd
7187
6.2
77
t7
6
Corsi& Elle 1989
BLM Sawmill#l -2.4km
below Sawmill Canyon Rd
7/86
3.ld
72
12
16
Elle et al.1987
BLM Sawmill #1 - 2.4km
below Sawmill Canyon Rd
7185
3.7d
48
11
4l
Elleet al.1987
BLM Sawmlllffi -2.4km
below Sawmill Canyon Rd
l0/84
). /*
72
11
l7
Elle et al.7987
At Forest boundarys
7/97
4.2
92
J
5
presentstudy
At Forest boundaryg
9/95
tl.2
93
4
3
presentstudy
At Forest boundarys
7/87
7.1
89
2
9
Corsi& Elle 1989
At Forest boundarys
l0/70
nla
86
14
Andrews1972
Behind Fairview Guard
Stations
7/97
6.4
87
11
3
presentstudy
Behind Fairview Guard
Stations
9/95
8.1
93
4
3
presentstudy
76
Bk
BI
Site
3
2
Source
7
presentstudy
5
presentstudy
Corsi& Elle 1989
presentstudy
Table34.Continued.
Species
(%)
Composition
Rb
BK
BI
Source
10.1
63
16
2l
Corsi& Elle 1989
7/97
9.6
65
35
Above Mill Creeks
9/9s
8.8
80
l4
6
presentstudy
Above Mill Creeks
7/87
7.8
51
t6
33
Corsi& Elle 1989
10 m above Iron Creek Road
8/97
nJa
39
a
J
58
presentstudy
10 m above Iron CreekRoad
9/96
nla
60
40
presentstudy
0.4 km below Timber Creek
7197
4.5
48
52
presentstudy
0.4 km below Timber Creek
9/95
3.6
65
35
presentstudy
0.8 km above MoonshineCks
7t97
8.1
13
87
presentstudy
0.8 km above MoonshineCks
8t95
4.6
26
74
presentstudy
0.8 km above MoonshineCks
7/87
3.9
100 Corsi& Elle 1989
0.8 km above MoonshineCks
70170'
nla
100
1.6km aboveSmithieFork
8/9s
20.4
100 presentstudy
400m aboveFireboxCreek
7197
wa
100 presentstudy
Site
Date
Behind Fairview Guard
Stations
7/87
Above Mill Creeks
Fish/l00 m2
presentstudy
Andrews1972
u Andrews (1972) sampling locationswere in the approximatelocation of these sites with one exception.
The site that is reportedhere under Sawmill (BLM #4) was approximately 1.6 km downstreamfrom the
actual location of the Sawmill Creek (BLM #4) transect.
b One bull trout 136 mm, 2 rainbow trout 56 and 136 mm.
" Brook trout spawning.
d Thedensitiesreportedforthese4streamsectionsonpage36ofElleetal.(1987)andpage32ofCorsiand
Elle (1989) is inconect. Thesereports indicate thatlhenumber shown representsfish/l00 m2 when it is
actually fish per 100 linear m of stream. The fish density in this report has been changedto fish/100 m2
basedon the populationestimateand sectionlength provided by Elle et al. (1987) and Corsi and Elle
(1989) and the meanwidth of thesesectionsin 1987providedby Corsi and Elle (1989).
" Due to an apparenttypographicalerror in Elle et al. (1987), the length of this transectwas reportedas 10
meters. However, basedon the population estimate and density indicated in the report, it appearsthis
transectwas actually 100 meterslong. Therefore,the densityreportedherewas calculatedfor a transect
length of 100 meters.
r The BLM Sawmill transects were establishedin 1985 to monitor changes resulting from a habitat
improvement project. Therefore,thesesiteshave establishedlengths. However, when this transect was
sampledin 1993,theBLM crew mistakenlysampledan extra44 metersoutsideof the establishedtransect.
Theseresults include those fish captured in the additional section.
e Although the 1987 sites were not relocated,the 1995 sites should be in the sameapproximate location.
77
Long Lost Creek
Long Lost Creek, located in the central portion of the Lost River Mountain Range,is a tributary to
Dry Creek. The point of origin seemsto vary dependingon runoff, but is approximately 10.3 km abovethe
oonfluence with Dry Creek. From this point, the sfream flows 8.5 km on Forest land and 1.8 km on BLM
land, where it entersDry Creek. Aerial photographsand personalobservationsindicate that in someyears,
sectionsof the stream are irftermittent. A waterfall, approximately 10 m high, is locatedon Long Lost Creek
4.0 km above its confluence with Dry Creek, and 1.8 km abovethe Forest boundary. This waterfall serves
as a complete fish migration barrier. There are 3 lakes in Long Lost Creek (see Shadow Lake #i (lower),
Shadow Lake #2 (upper), and Long Lost Creek Lake in Part 4).
No fish were found in Long Lost Creek. In 1995,Long Lost Creek was elecffofishedat 4 locations
(Appendix A). The first transectwas approximately 50 m long and was located 3.2 km above Dry Creek
(below the falls). The secondtransectwas approximately80 m long and located0.8 km abovethe falls. The
third transect was approximately 100 m long and located 1.5 km below Hell Canyon Creek" The fourth
transectwas approximately 100 m long and was located 100 m abovethe third transect. No fish were found
at any of these sites despitethe upper 2 transectshaving good stream flows and habitat. It is possible that
fish from Dry Creek intermittently occupy the lower reach of Long Lost Creek below the falls. However,
the intermittent nature of the stream does not allow it to support a permanentfish population.
Magpie Springs
Magpie Springs is a seriesof springs located in the central portion of the Lemhi Mountain Range
betweenBasinger Canyon and Mahogany Creek. Water from the springs flows approximately I km where
it is diverted into a canal at the Forest boundary. This canal terminates in the Telford Pipeline (see Bell
Mountain Creek). A visual check of approximately 5 m of the outflow between the springs and cartal
revealedlimited flows (approximately 0.5 m wide and 0.1 m deep) and poor habitat (Appendix A). No fish
were observed.
Mahogany Creek
Mahogany Creek, located in the central portion of the Lemhi Mountain Range,is disjunct from the
Little Lost River. The point of origin is a spring 1.8 km abovethe Forest Boundary. The streamis diverted
at the Forest boundary into a canalthat terminatesin the Telford Pipeline (seeBell Mountain Creek). There
has been severedownward erosion of the streamchannel; nenly two meters in areas.
No fish were found in Mahogany Creek (Appendix A). In June 1995, atotal of approximately 75
m of stream was electrofished andlor visually surveyed at 3 separatelocations above the diversion. The
canal was also eleotrofishedfor approximately 20 m 200 m below the diversion. No fish were found at any
of theselocations.
78
Main Fork Little Lost River
The sectionof the Little Lost River aboveTimber Creek is sometimesreferredto asMain Fork Little
Lost River. For purposesof uniformity and clarity, the mainstemfrom the sinks to the headwaters,including
Sawmill Creek and Main Fork Little Lost River, is treated as part of the mainstem of the Little Lost River.
Therefore,information pertainingto the Main Fork Little Lost River reach can be found under that heading
(seeLittle Lost River, Mainstem).
Massacre Creek
Massacre Creek, located in the central portion of the Lost River Mountain Range, is a tributary to
SquawCreek. MassacreCreek originatesat a spring 1.1 km abovethe confluencewith Squaw Creek. This
portion ofthe streamis on BLM land. Thereis someperennialwater in the headofthe canyon,but it is limited
and not connectedto the lower stream reach.
In lggT,rainbowtroutwerefound in MassacreCreek(Table35,AppendicesA andB). A 200 m long
sectionof MassacreCreekbeginning40 m aboveSquawCreekwas electrofishedin July 1997. Two fish were
observedbut uncaptured. One of thesewas positively identified as a rainbow trout.
Table 35. Summary of electrofishing data from MassacreCreek.
Species
Composition(%)
Site
Date
40 m above Squaw Creek
7197
Fish/l00 m'z
Rb
nla
100
BK
Bl
Source
presentstudy
Meadow Creek
Meadow Creek, atributary to the Little Lost River (Sawmill Creek), is locatedin the central portion
of the Lemhi Mountain Range. A review of an August 1979 aeialphotograph and a field check at the Forest
boundary on June 28,1995 indicated there are no perennial streamsin Meadow Creek above the unnamed
tributary near the Forest boundary. The Forest Service R1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overton et
al. 1997)was conducted on Meadow Creek and the unnamedtributary (grouped collectively as "Meadow
Creek" by the inventory crew) in 1997 (Appendix F).
This unnamedtributary originatesat a spring in an unnamed canyon north of Meadow Creek. The
stream flows for i.3 km on the Forest and acrossBLM, where it intermittently reachesthe Little Lost River.
79
A andB).
In 1995,brooktrout andrainbowtroutwerefoundin this tributary(Table36,Appendices
the
of
fish
sampled.
One
of
fish
collected
at this
comprising88% the
Brooktrout werethe dominantspecies,
site may have beena pure cutthroattrout. The streamwas alsoelectrofishedandvisually surveyedfor
50 m 0.8km abovetheForestboundary.No fish werecollectedat this site. This indicatesthe
approximately
upperlimit of fish distributionextendsjust abovethe Forestboundary.
Table36. Summaryof eleotrofishingdatafrom an unnamedtributaryto MeadowCreek.
Species
(%)
Composition
Site
Date
At Forest boundary
6/9s
Fish/100m2
35.s
none
6t95
0.8 km above Forest
boundary
o One of these fish may have been a pure cuffhroat trout'
Rb
BK
120
88
B1
Source
presentstudy
presentstudy
Middle Canyon
Middle Canyon is located in the southernend of the Lemhi Mountain Range. A review of aerial
photographstaken in July 1979 indicated there are no perennial streamsin this subdrainage.
MiIl Creek
Mill Creek, a tributary to the Little Lost River (Sawmill Creek), is locatedin Sawmill Canyon. The
origin of Mill Creek could not be clearly determinedfrom an aerial photograph,but the streamappearsto be
approximately 5.5 km long. There is one lake in Mill Creek (see Mill Creek Lake in Part 4). Stream
temperatureswere monitored in Mill Creek in 1996(Appendix D) and 1997(Appendix E). The Forest Service
R1/R4 Fish Habitat Standard Inventory (Overton et al. 1997) was conducted on Mill Creek in 1994
(Appendix F).
Rainbow trout, cutthroat trout, and grayling have been stocked in Mill Creek Lake. However,
outmigration of thesespeciesinto Mill Creek is not possiblebecausethere is no overlandoutlet fiom the lake
to Mill Creek. Brook trout and cutthroattrout may havebeenintroducedinto Mill Creek. However, the nature
of the stocking records make this determination difficult.
Brook trout, rainbow trout, and bull trout were found in Mill Creek (Table 37, AppendicesA and B)'
In l995,Mill Creekwas samplednearthe trailhead. Brook trout were the dominant species,comprising 52%6
of the fish captured. Hybridization between brook trout and bull trout was also evident. This site was
resampledin 1997(Table 37, AppendicesA and B). Although densitiesremainedrelatively unchanged,the
bull trout composition dropped from 36Yoto 4Yo. These numbers may have been skewedby the ability to
distinguishhybrids improving between 1995 and 1997.
80
Table37. Summaryof electrofishingdatafrom Mill Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
Fish/100m'z
Rb
819'7
20.7
3
At Mill CreekCampground
8t95
20.0
12
0.5km abovetrailhead
9t96
nla
Site
Date
At Mill CreekCampground
9
BK
BI
3
4
presentstudy
52
36
presentstudy
67
aa
JJ
presentstudy
Source
o One rainbow trout was observedwithin the transectbut not captured; 3 of the 6 fish captured showed
evidenceof hybridization.
ln !996,two additional siteswere sampledin Mill Creek (Table 37 and Appendices A and B). The
first site was located in the main channel of Mill Creek approximately 0.5 km above the trailhead.
Hybridization betweenbrook trout and bull trout appearedto be extensivein this reach with 3 of the 6 fish
capturedshowing evidenceof hybridization. A small tributary that entersMill Creek approximately 0.5 km
abovethe trailhead was electrofishedfor approximately25 m. No fish were found. The small nature of this
tributary limits fish habitat. Thereare not sufficient datato clearly determinewhetheror not fluvial fish utilize
Mill Creek for spawning.
In 1994,a Forest Servicehabitatcrew observedbult trout in Mill Creek up to the landslidethat forms
Mill Creek Lake (Brett Gamett,USFS, personalcommunication). Migration further up the stream and into
the lake is prohibited by the landslide. In August 1995,no fish were found in a visual survey of Mill Creek
above the lake (Appendix A).
Recreation activity associatedwith the trailhead is negatively impacting the north stream bank near
the trailhead. In June 1996, bank stability along the north bank (the same side as the trailhead) was
approximately ll%(Jeff Knisley, USFS, personalcommunication). This oould be remediedby relocatingthe
trailhead and campground.
Moffett Creek (including Moffett Springs)
Moffett Creek, located in the upper central portion of the Little Lost River Valley, is a tributary to
Barney Creek. The stream originates at Moffett Springs. The stream temperaturenear the Howe-ClydeGoldburgroad on May 20,1996 andMay 3l,1997 was 16"C.
Moffett Springs
See Moffett Creek
8l
Moonshine Creek
Moonshine Creek, a tributary to the mainstemof the Little Lost River, is locatedin Sawmill Canyon.
The origin of Moonshine Creek could not be clearly determinedfrom an aerial photograph,but the stream
appearsto be approximately1.5km long.
Despite good habitat,no fish were found in MoonshineCreek(AppendixA). In Septemberl995,two
seotionsof Moonshine Creek were electrofished. The first section,located immediately below the Sawmill
Canyon Road, was electrofishedfor approximately5 m. The secondsection,locatedimmediately abovethe
Sawmill Canyon Road, was electrofished for approximately 20 m. No fish were found at either location.
Another 72 m section located 250 m above the Sawmill Canyon Road was electrofished in June 1997.
Likewise, no fish were found at this site. The culvert under road #101 may be restricting fish movement into
the stream.
Mormon Gulch
Mormon Gulch is locatedin the southernend of the Lemhi Mountain Range. A review of an aerial
photograph taken August 1979 indicated there are no perennial streamsin this subdrainage.
Mud Springs
See Cedar Run Canyon
North Creek
North Creek, located in the southernend ofthe Lemhi Mountain Range,is disjunct from the Little Lost
River. A review of aerial photographsindicate North Creek originates at a spring 2.5 km above the Forest
boundary. At the Forest boundary,the streamis diverted for irrigation. The entire stream is on Forest land
with the exception of 0.5 km that is private. It appearsfrom vegetation patterns that undiverted water
intermittently flows for about 1 km pastthe diversion, where it sinks into the alluvial fan. The Forest Service
R1/R4 Fish Habitat Standard Inventory (Overton et al. 1997) was conducted on North Creek in 1997
(Appendix F).
In 1995,one rainbow trout was capturedin North Creek (Table 38, AppendicesA and B). Two sites
were sampledin August 1995. The first site was located 0.4 km above the Forest boundary. One rainbow
trout approximate$ 100 mm in length was captured. Oncethe presenceof fish in the streamwas confirmed,
samplingwas discontinued. Therefore, only2m of sffeamwere sampled. The secondsite, approximately 0'8
km abovethe Forestboundarywas electrofishedfor approximately40 m. No fish were collected at this site'
82
Table 38. Summary of electrofishing data from North Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
Site
Date
Fish/100
m'z
0.4 km aboveForest
boundary
8/95
n/a
0.8 km aboveForest
boundary
8/95
none
Rb
100
BK
BI
Source
presentstudy
presentstudy
North Fork (Cedarville Canyon)
SeeCedarville Canyon
Pine Creek
Pine Creek, located in the centralportion of the Lost River Mountain Range,is a tributary to Basin
Creek. Pine Creek originatesat a spring on ForestLand2.Okm aboveBasin Creek. Basedon a review of an
aerial photograph,flows are limited. The water temperaturenearthe souroeof Pine Creekwas I 3 " C in 1997.
No fish have beenfound in Pine Creek. No fish were observedin Pine Creek in the summer of 1995
(JanetValle, USFS, personaloommunication).In June1997,a 100 m sectionof Pine Creek located I km
aboveBasin Creekwas visually surveyed.No fish were found. Likewise, in September1997,a ForestService
R1/R4 fish habitat crew found no fish in a visual survey of a 50 m reach of Pine Creek immediately above
Basin Creek. Although no fish were observed,there was suitable fish habitat in this section.
Quigley Creek
Quigley Creek, a tributary to the Little Lost River (Sawmill Creek), is located in Sawmill Canyon.
The origin of Quigley Creek could not be clearly determinedfrom an aerialphotographbut the streamappears
to be approximately 2.5 km long. The Forest ServiceR1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overton et al'
1997) was conducted on the fish bearing portion of Quigley Creek in 1997 (Appendix F).
A single bull trout was found in Quigley Creek in 1997 (Table 39, AppendicesA and B). Two
sectionsof Quigley Creek were sampledin June 1997. The first was a2l m section25 m abovethe Sawmill
Canyon Road. A single bull trout measuring 195 mm was capturedat this site. The secondsection was an
87 m section located 200 m above the Sawmill Canyon Road. Although good habitat was present at this site,
no fish were found. A seriesof old decadentbeaverdamsimmediatelybelow this site may be interfering with
the movement of fish into this reach.
83
Table 39. Summary of electrofishing data from Quigley Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
Site
Date
Fish/100m2
25 m aboveSawmill
Canyon Rd
6t97
nla
200 m above Sawmill
Canyon Rd
6t97
none
Rb
BK
BI
100
Source
presentstudy
presentstudy
Redrock Creek
Redrock Creek, atributary to Timber Creek, is located in Sawmill Canyon. The origin of Redrock
Creek could not be clearly determined from an aerial photograph, but it appearsto be approximately 2.5 km
long. The Forest Service R1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overton et al. 1997) was conducted on
Redrock Creek between Timber Creek and the forks in 1997 (Appendix F).
In 1995 and1997,bulltrout werefound in RedrockCreek(Table40, AppendicesA andB). In 1995,
a 42 m section of stream 200 m above Timber Creek was electrofished. In 7997, another90 m section of
stream below rcad 460A was electrofished. Bull trout were found at both sites.
ln 1997,no fish were found in the right and left hand forks of Redrock Creek (Appendix A). A 52 m
sectionof the right fork located400 m abovethe left fork was electrofishedin Jwe 1997. At this sametime,
a56 m section of the left fork located 200 m abovethe right fork was also electrofished.No fish were found
at either site. The lack of bull trout in the right and left hand forks suggeststhat the distribution of bull trout
in Redrock Creek extendsupstreamto the forks.
Table 40. Summary of electrofishing data from Redrock Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
BK
BI
Source
nla
100
presentstudy
6t97
nla
100
presentstudy
Right fork 400 m aboveleft
fork
6197
none
presentstudy
Left fork 200m aboveright
fork
6197
none
presentstudy
Site
Date
0.2km aboveTimber Creek
9195
Top end of transectis
road4604
Fish/l00 m'z
84
Rb
Roclqy Run Creek (Sunny Bar Canyon)
Rocky Run Creek, located in the southernend of the Lemhi Mountain Range, is disjunct from the
Lost
River. Rocky Run Creek is diverted into a pipeline approximately 0.8 km below the Forest
Little
boundary.
No fish were found in Rocky Run Creek(Appendix A). A 101m sectionof the streamlocated0.5 km
abovethe diversion was electrofishedin July 1997. No fish were found. Due to the small natureof the stream
and steep stream gradient (17% map gradient), fish habitat is limited.
Sands Canyon
SandsCanyon is located in the southernend of the Lost River Mountain Range. Based on a field
review in October 1996, there are no perennial streamsin the drainage.
Sands Creek
SandsCreek, locatedin the centralportion of the Lost River Mountain Range, is a tributary to Wet
Creek. A review of an aerial photographindicatesSandsCreek originateson Forest land at a spring 4.3 km
above its confluencewith Wet Creek. SandsCreek flows for 2.4krn on ForestLand,1.3 km on private land,
and 0.6 km on BLM land. In July l99l,therehad beenextensivebeaver activity along SandsCreek on Forest
land. The water temperaturenear the springsin the right fork were 6 and7"C in 1997. In the left fork near
the sourcesprings,the water temperaturewas l2"C in 1997.
No fish were found in SandsCreek (Appendix A). Forty metersof streamwere electrofished200 m
above the Forest boundary. Another 100 m sectionlocated 1.2km abovethe Forest boundary was also
electrofished. In addition, two beaver ponds 0.8 krn above the Forest boundary were visually surveyed.
Despite moderateflows and large, relatively deepbeaverponds, no fish were found. It is possible that fish
have not been able to naturally gain accessto the upper portion of SandsCreek due to the nature of the lower
reach of stream.
Sawmill Canyon
Seeindividual streams
Sawmill Creek
The sectionof the Little Lost River betweenSummitCreekandTimber Creekis sometimesrefered
to asSawmillCreek.The streambelowthis reachis theLittle Lost Riverandthe streamabovethis reachis
85
the Main Fork Little Lost River. For purposesof uniformrty and clarity, the mainstem from the sinks to the
headwaters,including Sawmill Creek and Main Fork Little Lost River, is treated as part of the mainstem of
the Little Lost River. Therefore,information pertainingto the Sawmill Creek reachcan be found under that
heading (see Little Lost River, Mainstem).
Sixmile Canyon
Sixmile Canyon is located in the southern end of the Lost River Mountain Range. There are no
perennial streamsin this subdrainage(personal observation).
Slide Creek
Slide Creek, atributary to Timber Creek, is located in Sawmill Canyon. The origin of Slide Creek
could notbe clearly determinedfrom an aerial photograph,but it appearsto be approximately2 km long. The
Forest ServiceRllR4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overton etal.1997)was conductedon the fish bearing
portion of Slide Creek in 1997(Appendix F).
In 1997,bulltrout were found in SlideCreek(Table41, AppendicesA andB). Two sectionsof Slide
Creek were electrofished. The firstwas a 107m sectionlocated 100m aboveTimber Creek. Eight bull trout
were captured at this site. Although a population estimate was not completed, the small number of fish
collected indicatesthe density is low. The secondelectrofishingsitewas a65 m section0.9 km aboveTimber
Creek. Despite high quality habitatno fish were found. It may be that a gradientbanier betweenthe first and
secondsampling sites prevents fish from accessingthe upper reach of Slide Creek.
Table 41. Summary of electrofishing datafrom Slide Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
Site
Date
Fish/100m2
100m aboveTimberCreek
6197
nla
0.9km aboveTimber Creek
6t97
Rb
BK
BI
Source
100
presentstudy
presentstudy
Smithie F''ork
SmithieFork,a tibutary to themainstemof theLittle LostRiver,is locatedin SawmillCanyon'The
originof SmithieForkis a seriesof springsneartheheadofthe right fork ofthe canyon.Thestreamis 6'0 km
monitoredin SmithieForkin 1997(AppendixE). TheForestServiceR1/R4
long. Streamtemperatures.were
86
Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overton et al. 1997)was conductedon Smithie Fork in 1994(Appendix F).
The unnamedtributaries (describedas "right fork" and "west fork" by the inventory crew) were inventoried
in 1997 (Appendix F). At thattime, a Forest Service habitat crew found a falls approximately 1.5 m high
located on Smithie Fork in reach2 of the survey
Although a large fire burnedmost of the drainagein 1988,fish populationsandhabitat are in excellent
condition. In 1988,an intensecrown fire burned approximately75% of the Smithie Fork drainage. Prior to
this fire, approximately 95% of the streamriparian areawas dominatedby large coniferoustrees. Following
the fire, live large coniferoustreesremainedalong only 14o/oofthe stream(review of aerial photographsfrom
1979, i987, and 1991). Following thefne,adense, lush, deciduousriparian areadevelopedalong the stream.
By l994,bank stability along the main streamrangedfrom94-99o/s(Appendix F). Percentsurfacefines were
ll-14%. Large burned treesfalling into the streamhave increasedfhe amount of large woody debris in the
stream. This appearsto have increasedhabitat complexity, the number and size of pools, and cover.
ln 1995,bull trout and rainbow trout were found in Smithie Fork (Table 42, AppendicesA and B).
At the upper site, the bull trout densitywas 30.3 fish/l00 m2(fish >70 mm). This is the highestbull trout
density ever reportedin the Little Lost River drainage. Basedon ageat length datafor bull trout in the Little
Lost River (Corsi and Elle 1989)and length frequencydatafrom samplingin 1995,approximately90% of the
bull trout in Smithie Fork are age one or age2 fish. Bull trout young-of-the-yearmeasuringbetween30 and
52 mm in length were also capturedand observedat the upper sampling site in August 1995. In 1994, bull
trout were found nearthe sourceof the stream(Brett Gamett,USFS,personalcommunication),indicating bull
InTggT,thelowersitewasresampled(Table42).In1997,one
troutoccupythemajorityofthestreamreach.
'oWestFork Smithie
bull trout was found in a 45 m sectionof the unnamedtributary to Smithie Fork (tenned
Creek by the Forest ServioeR1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory crew) locatedapproximately4 km above
the Little Lost River (Table 42, AppendicesA and B).
Table 42. Summary of electrofishing data from Smithie Fork.
Species
Composition(%)
BK
BI
Source
20.r
97
presentstudy
819s
28.4
93
presentstudy
3.2km aboveLittle Lost
River
B/95
30.3
100
presentstudy
Unnamed tributary
9197
nla
100
presentstudy
Site
Date
Fish/100m'z
Just above Sawmill Road
Bridge
7/97
Just above Sawmill Road
Bridge
Rb
Smithie Fork appearsto be one of the most important spawningand rearingtributariesfor fluvial bull
ffout in the Little Lost River drainage. On August 2,1995, one bull trout 364 mm in length was collected in
87
the upper transectand anotherapproximately400 mm in length was observed. Thesefish appearedto be a
spawning pair and are likely fluvial fish from the mainstem that had moved into the stream to spawn. The
presenceof thesefish and the length frequencydistribution suggestSmithie Fork is usedby fluvial bull trout
for spawning and rearing.
Rainbow trout densitiesin Smithie Fork are low, and their rangeappearsto be restrictedto the lower
portion of the stream. It appearsthat rainbow trout have moved into Smithie Fork since 1987.
South Creek
South Creek, located in the southemend of the Lemhi Mountain Range,is disjunct from the Little Lost
River. A review of aerialphotographsindicatesSouthCreekoriginatesat a springnearthe headofthe canyon.
The streamflows approximately 8.5 km where, when undiverted, it sinks into the South Creek alluvial fan;
6 .4 km of the stream are on Forest land, 0.3 on BLM land, and 1.8 on private land. There is an irrigation
diversionjust below the ForestBoundary. Overflow from the diversion continuesonto the alluvial fan, where
it sinks before reaching the Little Lost River. The Forest ServioeR1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory
(Overton et al. 1997) was conductedon South Creek in 1997 (Appendix F).
In 1995,rainbow trout were found in South Creek (Table 43, AppendicesA and B). Although the
streamgradient at the site 2.0 km above the Forest boundary was 8oZ(field gradient), the density was 33.9
fish/|00 m2. The lack of fish at the upper site suggestsfish occupy approximatelythe lower half of the stream.
In 1998,the Idaho Division of EnvironmentalQuality sampleda 100m sectionof SouthCreek located
60 m above the diversion (Table 43). This was doneto help confirm the absenceof bull trout and sculpin in
this stream. As in 1995, only rainbow trout were found'
Table 43. Summary of electrofishing data from South Creek.
Species
(%)
Composition
Rb
BK
BI
Source
Site
Date
Fish/100m2
At diversion
6/95
nla
100
presentstudy
60 m above diversion
7198
ZJ.J
100
IdahoDivisionof
Environmental
Quality frle data
200 m above diversion
8/95
none
2.0 km aboveForest
boundary
8195
33.9
3.2km aboveForest
boundary
8195
none
88
presentstudy
100
presentstudy
presentstudy
Squaw Creek (Sawmill Canyon)
SquawCreek,atributarytotheLittleLostRiver(Sawmill Creek),is locatedin Sawmill Canyon. The
origin of Squaw Creek could not be clearly determined,but it is at least 4.3 km long. Streamtemperatures
were monitored in Squaw Creek in 1997 (Appendix E). The Forest Service Rl/R4 Fish Habitat Standard
Inventory (Overton et al. 1997)was conductedon the lower andmid reachof SquawCreek in 1994(Appendix
F). The upper reachof SquawCreek and anunnamedtributary (describedas"south fork" by the survey crew)
were inventoried in 1997 (Appendix F). ln 1994,the Forest ServiceR1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory
crew found awaterfall approximately 1 m high locatedon SquawCreek below North Fork Squaw Creek. It
is likely this fall is interfering with fish passageinto the upper reach of the stream.
Rainbow trout, brook trout, bull trout, and sculpinwere found in SquawCreek(Table 44, Appendices
A and B). Squaw Creek was sampledin 1995, 1996, and 1997. Brook trout are the dominant speciesat all
but the upper site. Several of the fish capturedat the site 4.0 krn above the Sawmill Canyon Road showed
signs of hybridization. Hybridization was not evident at the other sites. Only bull trout were found in the
upper site, which had a7.\Yo gradient(field gradient). The lower sampling sites in which brook trout were
found had streamgradientsof 4.6 and 3.6%. This suggeststhat streamgradientmay be affecting brook trout
distribution within Squaw Creek. Fish appearto occupy the majority of the streamreaoh.
Table 44. Summary of electrofis hing datafrom Squaw Creek (Sawmill Canyon drainage).
Species
Composition(%)
Fish/100m'z
Site
Date
0.8 km above Sawmill
Canyon Rd
9196
4.0 krn above Sawmill
Canyon Rd
7/97
24.r
4.0 km above Sawmill
Canyon Rd
8t9s
t2.3
0.9 km above North Fork
8196
nla
Unnamed tributary above
Squaw Creek #2 on south
side of road
8l9s
nla
fila
Rb
BK
BI
Source
aa
JJ
52
l5
presentstudy
41
48
l1
presentstudy
58
t9
presentstudy
100
presentstudy
a a
JJ
67
presentstudy
Squaw Creek (Sawmill Canyon)o North Fork
North Fork SquawCreek, atributary to SquawCreek, is located in Sawmill Canyon. The origin of
North Fork Squaw Creek could not be clearly determined,but the streamappearsto be approximately 5 km
89
long. The Forest Service Rl/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overton et al. 1997) was conducted on
North Fork Squaw Creek in 1997 (Appendix F).
In 1996 and 1997, brook trout and bull trout were found in North Fork Squaw Creek (Table 45,
Appendices A and B). In 1996,a 57 m sectionof North Fork SquawCreek located0.6 km above Squaw
Creek was electrofished. Both brook trout and bull trout were captured. Brook trout were the dominant
speciescomprising 56Yoof the trout collected. In 1997,a ll4 m sectionof streamlocated 1.8 km above
Squaw Creek was electrofished. At this section, only one of the 12 fish capturedwas a brook trout; the
remainder were bull trout.
Table 45. Summary of electrofishingdxa from Squaw Creek (Sawmill Canyon), North Fork.
Species
(%)
Composition
BK
BI
Source
nla
56
44
presentstudy
nla
13
88
presentstudy
Site
Date
Fish/l00 m2
0.6 km above SquawCreek
9t96
1.8 km above SquawCreek
6t97
Rb
Squaw Creek (Wet Creek)
Squaw Creek, located in the centralportion of the Lost River Mountain Range,is a tributary to Wet
Creek. The exact point of origin was not determined.However, aerialphotographstaken in August 1979 and
September1991 indicatethe origin of SquawCreek is approximately 11.4km abovethe confluencewith Wet
Creek (3.2km abovethe confluencewith MassacreCreek). On thesephotographs,it appearedthat portions
of Squaw Creek aboveMassacreCreekwere dry during the low water year of 1991, although beaver ponds
continued to hold water. Squaw Springs, a seriesof large springs approximately I km above Wet Creek,
contribute most of the streamflow to lower SquawCreek. A reachof SquawCreekbetweenMassacreCreek
and SquawSpringswas dry during the droughtofthe late 1980'sandearly 1990's(Pat Koelsch,BLM, personal
communication). Stream temperatureswere monitored in Squaw Creek below Squaw Springs in 1997
(Appendix E).
Rainbow trout and sculpin were found in Squaw Creek (Table 46, Appendices A and B)' In 1992,
two siteswere samplednear the confluencewith Wet Creek. Trout densitieshave declined in both of these
sectionssince 1987 (Table 46). This declinemay be associatedwith a similar decline in Wet Creek (seeWet
Creek). ln 1996,a 30 m streamreachapproximately 1.9 km below MassacreCreek was sampled. Rainbow
troutwere collected atthis site. ln1997,a 100m sectionof stream65 m aboveMassacleCreekwas sampled.
Likewise, rainbow trout were found at this location. Sculpin were collected from all 4 sampling locations.
Although bull trout were collected in the lower 2 sitesin 1987 (Corsi and Elle 1989),they were not collected
in Squaw Creek during the present study.
90
Table 46. Summary of electrofishing data from Squaw Creek (Wet Creek).
Species
Composition(%)
BK
BI
Site
Date
Fish/100m'z
Rb
Just above Wet Creek Road
8t92
43.9
100
presentstudy
Just above Wet Creek Road
8/87
79.0
g7b
CorsiandElle 1989
1 6 8m a b o v e # l
8t92
36.2
100
presentstudy
168 rn above#1
8t87
57.8^
99
CorsiandElle 1989
100
presentstudy
L9 km below MassacreCreek 6t96
n/a
Source
"7197
presentstudy
nla
100
65 m aboveMassacreCreek
IFD file data indicatesthere was an eror in the 7987mean streamwidth datasuppliedto the Department
ofFish and Game for SquawCreek. Subsequently,the fish densitiesshownfor SquawCreek in Corsi and
Elle (1989) were incorrect. Densitiesfor SquawCreek in 1987shown here have beenrecaloulatedbased
on the streamwidth in 1992. For this reasonthey do not match thosereportedfor Squaw Creek in 1987
by Corsi and Elle (1989).
Two percent of the fish capturedwere listed as rainbodcutthroat hybrids.
The lower reach of Squaw Creek may be an important spawning area for rainbow trout. The reach
of tlre streambelow Squaw Springshasexcellent spawningand rearing habitat(IFD file data). In the spring
of 1992, many rainbow trout were observed spawning in section I (IFD file data). The majority of fish
collectedin this reach in August 1992wete under 130 mm.
SummerhouseCanvon
SummerhouseCanyon Creek, located west of Sawmill Canyon in the Lemhi Mountain Range, is
disjunct from Summit Creek. The point of origin is not clear. In July 1995, the point of origin appearedto
be a spring in the head of the canyon3.2km abovethe Forestboundary. However, aerial photographstaken
on August 2, 1979and August 9, lggl suggestportions of the stream1.8km below this spring may be dry by
late summer. Assuming this is true, the perennialportion of the streambegins 1.4 km above the Forest
boundary and continues for approximately 3.2km acrossBLM land, where it sinks into the valley floor.
Additional water is contributed to the stream from a small tributary which originates at a spring near the
canyon mouth and flows for approximately 1.2 km to SummerhouseCanyon Creek. Streamtemperatureswere
monitored in SummerhouseCreek in 1997 (Appendix E).
No fish were found in SummerhouseCanyon Creek (Appendix A). The stream was surveyed at 4
locations. Three sectionswere electrofished. Theseincluded a 100 m section approximately 1.2 km below
the Forest boundary,a 50 m section 1.6km abovethe Forestboundary,and a 100m section3.21<rnabovethe
Forest boundary. Another site approximately100 rn long was visually surveyed0.8 km abovethe Forest
boundary. No fish were found at any of these locations.
91
Summit Creek
Summit Creek, locatedin the upper, centralportion of the Little Lost River Valley, is a tributary to
the Little Lost River. Summit Creek originatesat springsbelow Summit CreekReservoirand flows 19.3km
to the mainstem of the Little Lost River. There is one reservoir in the drainage (see Summit Creek Reservoir
in Part 4). A small canal brings water from Big Gulch Creek in the PahsimeroiRiver drainageinto the upper
portion of the Summit Creek drainageabove Summit Creek Reservoir. Water from this canal intermittently
runs into Summit CreekReservoir. As a result, it may be possiblefor fish (particularlybull trout and shorthead
sculpin which arepresentin Big Gulch Creek)to move from the PahsimeroiRiver drainageinto the Little Lost
River drainage. The Forest Service R1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overton et al. 1997) was
conductedon Summit Creek abovethe Summit Creek Campgroundin 1995(Appendix F).
The majority of Summit Creek originates at Iron Springs, which has relatively constant flow and
temperature.In both August 1977 andAugust 1978,the streamflow 0.8 km below Iron Springswas 0.27
m3ls,despite 1977being a dry year (Keller etal.1979). Between Januaryl0 and May 10, 1978, stream
temperaturesnearthe springsremainedbetween9"C and 13"C. However,3.2 km downstream,stream
temperaturesfluctuatedbetween 1"C and l6'C. On May 19,1998,the water temperatureat Iron Springs
varied between 9 and 10'C depending on the individual spring. Stream temperatureswere monitored in
Summit Creek in 1994,1995(Appendix D), and 1997(Appendix E).
The relatively constant temperature and flow in the upper portion of the streamprovides an excellent
spawning and winterin g areafor trout. Keller et al. (1979) reported "Idaho Department of Fish and Game
Biologists believe that the upper few miles of Summit Creekfurnish most of the spawninghabitatfor the entire
Little Lost fuver and that it is amajor wintering areafor fish escapingthe harshwinter environment lower in
the drainage."
The Idaho Departmentof Fish and GameandBureauof Land Managementhave implementedhabitat
improvementprojectsin the upperportion ofthe stream.The objectivesof theseprojectswere to improve and
protect fish habitat and increasetrout densities. In 1968,an experimentaltrash collector was constructedon
In I9Tl,ninemoretrash
upperSummitCreek,andtroutpopulationsincreasedinthevicinity(USRfiledata).
0.4
km and 7.2 km below
collectors and 12 bridge timbers and plankswere installed in the streambetween
Iron Springs. By 1997,most of thesestructureswere dysfunctional(personalobservation).
In I97 5,3 .2 km of Summit Creeknearthe BLM campgroundwere fencedto protect the riparian area
and improve fish habitat. The project and improvementsin the fish population and habitat are described in
detail by Keller and Burnham (1982) and Keller et al. (1979). The project, which created a 122 hectare
exclosure,resultedin dramatic improvementsin the streamand riparian habitat and the trout population. By
1978, therc had been a subsequentincreasein bank stability, reinvigoration of birch and willow along the
stream,a generalnarrowing and deepeningof the stream,andthe establishmentof islandsofvegetation within
the stream. By 1979, trout densities were higher in the ungrazed section relative to the grazed section
(Table 47).
92
Table 47 . Mean trout densitiesfor three grazed(untreated)a:rdthree nngrazedsections(treated)of Summit
Creek in 1979 (adaptedfrom Keller and Burnham 1982).
Mean Density (fish/100m2)
GruzedSections
Species
Rainbowtrout
Brook trout
Unsrazed Sections
77.6
111.3
4.9
17.1
82.s
All trout
128.4
Rainbow trout, brook trout, bull trout, and sculpin were found in Summit Creek during the present
(Table
48, AppendicesA and B). In 1992,three sectionsof Summit Creekwere sampledbelow the
study
Sawmill CanyonRoad. Rainbow trout were the only speciescollected atthe upper2 sites,while rainbow trout
and lessernumbers of brook trout were captured at the lower site. Two additional siteswere sampled near Iron
Springsin 1997. Rainbow trout were collectedat thesesites.
Table 48. Summary of electrofishingdata from Summit Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
BI
Site
Date
Fish/l00 m2
Rb
BK
Near mouth
8t87
40.4
99
1
CorsiandElle 1989
4.0 km belowSawmillRoad
(BLM #3)
8192
16.0
91
9
presentstudy
4.0km belowSawmillRoad
(BLM #3)
818"1
26.4
82
18
CorsiandElle 1989
1.6km belowSawmillRoad
(BL}|4#2)
8/92
24.3
100
presentstudy
1.6km belowSawmillRoad
(BLM #2)
8187
18.7
91
CorsiandElle 1989
0.8km belowSawmillRoad
(BLM # 1)
8192
39.4
100
presentstudy
At countyline
8/87
8.8
98
0.4km belowSawmillRoad
1019s
nla
95
100m belowIron Spring
6/97
nla
100
presentstudy
Iron Springs
6/97
nla
100
presentstudy
93
.')
L
a
^
Source
CorsiandElle 1989
presentstudy
Although bull trout were not found in Summit Creek during sampling in 1992 and 1997, an angler
caught 2 bull trout in Summit Creek at the Sawmill Canyon Road crossing in May 1995 (Dan Cunderman,
USFS, personal communication). Likewise, a single bull trout approximately 200 mm long was captured
0.8 km downsffeamof this point during diseasesampling in October 1995 (Table 48, AppendicesA and B).
Corsi and Elle (1989) also reportedsmall numbersof bull trout in Summit Creek in 1987(Table 48).
Five sculpinwere collectedand preservedfrom Summit Creek 0.8 km below the Sawmill Canyon
Road in 1995 (Appendix A). Thesefish were later identified as shorthead(Table 13).
Sunny Bar Canyon
SeeRocky Run Creek
Taylor Canyon
Taylor Canyon is located in the southern end of the Lost River Mountain Range. There are no
perennial streamsin the subdrainage(personal observation).
Timber Creek
Timber Creek, a tributary to the Little Lost River (Sawmill Creek), is located in Sawmill Canyon. The
origin of Timber Creek could not be clearly determined from an aerial photograph, but it appearsto be
approximately 5.6 km long. Streamtemperatureswere monitored in Timber Creek in 7997 (Appendix E).
The Forest ServiceR1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overton et al. 1997)was conducted on Timber
Creek betweenthe Little Lost River and Slide Creek in 1994 (Appendix F). That portion of Timber Creek
above Slide Creek was inventoriedin 1997(Appendix F).
In 1995,bull trout, rainbow trout, and sculpin were found in Timber Creek (Table 49, AppendicesA
and B). In August 1995,a 133 m sectionof streamlocated0.8 km abovethe mainstemLittle Lost River
(Sawmill Creek) was electrofished. Bull trout comprised86% of the trout captured,and rainbow trout made
up the remainder. Rainbow trout were not found in this site in 1987 (Corsi and Elle 1989) and have likely
moved into Timber Creek since that time. Basedon length at age datafor bull trout in the Little Lost River
(Corsi and Elle 1989),it appearsapproximately 20% of the bull trout in this reachwere age one or younger.
Most of the remaining bull trout appearedto be age2 (Appendix B). This may indicate that the lower reach
of Timber Creek doesnot seryeas a spawningareafor bull trout, but that fish move into this reach after age
one. It is possiblethat bull trout spendtheir first summerin tributariessuchasRedrockCreekand Slide Creek,
then move into lower Timber Creek at the end of their first summer. This section was resampled in 1997
GuUt" 49, AppendicesA and B). Fish densitieswere similar to other years.
94
Table49. Summaryof electrofishingdatafrom TimberCreek.
Species
Composition(%)
BI
Source
95
presentstudy
83
presentstudy
7.5
100
Corsi& Elle 1989
nla
l00b presentstudy
Site
Date
Fish/100m'z
0.8 km above Little Lost
Riveru
7/97
6.9
0.8 km above Little Lost
Riveru
8/95
5.5
0.8 km aboveLittle Lost
Rivero
7187
100 m above Slide Creek
6t97
Rb
l7
BK
" Although the 1987 site was not relocated,the 1995 site should be in the samegeneral location.
b Hook and line sample.
In July 1997,the streamwas sampledwith hook and line 100 m above Slide Creek. One bull trout
165 mm in length was captured. Approxim ately 5 other bull trout I 00 to 200 mm in length were observed.
No rainbow trout were caught or observedat this site. The presenceof bull trout in this reach indicates that
fish occupy most, if not all, of Timber Creek.
Six sculpin were collectedandpreservedfrom the stream0.8 km abovethe mainstemof the Little Lost
River. These were all later identified as shorthead(Table 13).
Uncle Ike Creek
Uncle Ike Creek, located in the southern end of the Lemhi Mountain Range,is disjunct from the Little
Lost River. Uncle Ike Creek originatesat a seriesof springsnearthe headof the canyonand flows for 8.2 km,
where it is diverted into a pipeline immediately abovethe Forestboundary. The Forest Service R1/R4 Fish
Habitat StandardInventory (Overton et al. 1997)was conductedon Uncle Ike Creek in 1997 (Appendix F).
Uncle Ike Creek was stockedwith 960 brook trout 19 to 25 cm long in I 953.
In 1995,rainbow trout and brook trout were found in Uncle Ike Creek (Table 50, AppendicesA and
B). Fish appearto occupy approximately the lower half of the stream.
95
Table50. Summaryof electrofishingdatafrom UncleIke Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
Site
Date
Fish/100m'z
Rb
BK
At diversion
9t95
nla
33
67
presentstudy
1.6 km above diversion
9t95
nla
67
33
presentstudy
4.8 km aboveForest
boundary
9195
BI
Source
presentstudy
Van Dorn Canyon
Van Dorn Canyon is located in the southern end of the Lost River Mountain Range. Perennial water
is limited to springs near the head of the canyon which sink near their source(personal observation).
Warm Creek
Warm Creek, located in the centralportion of the Lemhi Mountain Range,is a tributary to the Little
Lost River (Sawmill Creek). The streamoriginates at a spring 3.6 km abovethe confluencewith the Little Lost
River. It flows for 1.4 km on Forest,crossesBLM land for 1.3 km, re-entersand crossesForest land for
0.8 km, then re-entersBLM land and flows for 0.1 km to the mainstem. The Forest ServiceR1/R4 Fish
Habitat StandardInventory (Overton etal. 1997)was conductedon Warm Creek in 1997 (Appendix F).
In l995,rainbow trout and bull trout were found in Warm Creek (Table 51, Appendices A and B).
Although fish appearto occupy the entire streamreach, only rainbow trout were found in the lower stream
reach,andonly bull trout were found in the upper streamreach. It is not clear if the bull trout population is
resident,migratory, or a combinationof both. However,the presenceof small bull trout indicatesreproduction
is occurring.
96
Table 51. Summary of electrofishing data from Warm Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
Site
Date
Fish/100m2
0.4 km aboveLittle Lost
River
6t95
6.7
0.6km aboveupperForest
boundary
6t95
nla
Rb
BK
BI
Source
presentstudy
100
100" presentstudy
o Two other bull trout approximately 70 and 110 mm in length were seenin transect.
Warm Springs Creek
Warm SpringsCreek, locatedin the lower centralportion of the Little Lost River Valley, is disjunct
from the Little Lost River. This stream is also referred to by some local residentsas Tiny Creek. Warm
Springs Creek originatesat springson BLM land. Prior to October 199i, Warm SpringsCreek was diverted
into a canal immediately below the highway (approximately0.4 km below the streamsource). Water flowed
through this canal for approximately 1.5km, then re-enteredthe natural streamchannel. In October 1991,the
streamwas diverted back into the naturalstreamchannel. The streamnow flows for about4 km where it sinks
into the valley floor. The water temperatureat the primary sourcespring for Warm SpringsCreek was 10'C
on May 19,1998.
In 1993, rainbow trout were found in Warm Springs Creek (Table 52, Appendices A and B).
Numerous young-of-the-year rainbow trout were present'
Table 52. Summary of electrofishing datafrom Warm Springs Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
Site
Date
Fish/l00 m2
Immediatelybelow highway
8/93
24.8
Rb
100
BK
BI
Source
presentstudy
Wet Creek
Wet Creek, locatedin the centralportion of the Lost River Mountain Range,is a tributary to the Little
River.
Wet Creek originates near the Loristaca Campground and flows approximately 3 t km to the
Lost
mainstem of the Little Lost River. The streamcrossesapproximately 5 km of Forest land,2l km of BLM land,
97
3 km of private land, and 2 km of state land. Mangum (1983) stated that grazing within the Wet Creek
drainage had reduced the ability of the aquatic ecosystemto support a macroinvertebratecommunity or a
fishery. lnlgg5,grazingutilizationalong Wet Creekonthe Forestwas 40-69%(LRRD file data). However,
the private land aboveCoal Creek hasbeenexcludedfrom grazingfor about 5 years. Bruhn (1990) describes
an extensiveriparianfencing project on lower Wet Creekand the responseof the habitat and fish community.
Streamtemperatureswere monitored in Wet Creek in 1994, 1995,1996 (Appendix D), and 1997 (Appendix
E). The Forest ServiceR1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overton et al. 1997) was conducted on that
portion of Wet Creek between the diversion structure above Hilts Creek and the 2 mhigh falls in 1996
(Appendix F). That portion of Wet CreekbetweenBasin Creek and the diversion structureaboveHilts Creek
were inventoried in 1997 (Appendix F).
A diversion structurethat was constructedon Wet Creek i.5 km abovethe Little Lost River in the
(James
Andreason,landowner,personalcommunication)was aflear completebarrier to upstreamfish
1970's
migration (Pat Koelsch, BLM, personalcommunication). In 1992,the BLM, in cooperation with the Idaho
Department of Fish and Game and the Challis National Forest, constructeda fish ladder at this diversion to
provide fish passage.
Rainbow trout, bull trout, brook trout, and sculpin were found in Wet Creek (Table 53, Appendices
A and B). With the exceptionof the extremeupper reach,rainbow trout are the dominant speciesthroughout
Wet Creek and are the only salmonid speciesfound in the middle reach of the stream (Corsi and Elle 1989,
presentstudy). Although brook trout are found throughoutBig Creek (a tributary to upper Wet Creek), this
specieswas completely absentfrom Wet Creek in 1987(Corsi andElle 1989). During the presentstudy, they
were found in Wet Creek only below the Pancheridiversion and immediately below the mouth of Big Creek.
It appearsthat some factor or group of factors (possibly streamtemperature)is preventingbrook trout in Big
Creek from expanding into Wet Creek.
A falls approximately 2min height is locatedon Wet Creek 1.5km aboveHilts Creek. It appearsthis
has
actedas a completebamierto fish migration. Although there is good fish habitat available, no fish
fulls
were found in the 135 m of streamthat were electrofishedabovelhese fulls in 1995(Table 53, Appendix A).
In 1995,a previously undocumentedlocalizedpopulation of bull trout was found in the upper reach
of Wet Creek below thesefalls. Thesebull trout are generallyconfined to the 3.2 km stream reach between
Coal Creek and the 2 mhigh falls 1.5km aboveHilts Creek.
It appearsthat this population is at leastpartially divided into two sub-populationsby an old diversion
structureand gradientbarrier located0.8 km aboveHilts Creek. This diversion structureand gradientbarrier
at least partially, if not totally, restrict the upstreammovement of fish. Sampling data suggestthat the bull trout
found above this diversion and gradient barrier are resident fish and the population is comprised of less than
200 ageone and older bull trout. Rainbow trout comprisedbetween28 and36%oof the fish sampled in this
reach.
98
Table 53. Summaryof electrofishingdatafrom Wet Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
Rb
BK
BI
Source
Site
Date
Fish/i00 m2
Just below Pancheri diversion
_BL}|4#7
8/92
6.4
Just below Dry Creek hydro BLM#6^
8192
r.2
75
Just below Dry Creek hydro BL.]|.l#6^
8/87
5.4
100
Corsi& Elle 1989
3.6 km below SquawCreekBLM #5b
8/92
5.1
96
presentstudy
3.6 km below Squaw Creek BLM #5b
8187
6.9
97
Corsi& Elle 1989
2.0km below SquawCreek BLM #4"
8/92
5.9
100
presentstudy
2.0 km below SquawCreek BLM#4'
8/87
5.5
96
Corsi& Elle 1989
2.0 km below SquawCreekBLlll#4'
7B4d
nla
1.2km above SquawCreekBLM #3f
8/92
6.6
94
presentstudy
7.Zkm above SquawCreekBL}/r#3f
8/87
8.8
100
Corsi& Elle 1989
0.8 km below BLM #l BLM#29
8/92
5.2
100
presentstudy
0.8 km below BLM #1 - BLM
8/87
14.3
100
Corsi& Elle 1989
2.4km below Forestboundary
_ BLM #lh
8192
5.7
100
presentstudy
2.4 km below Forestboundary
- BLM #1"
8/87
10.9
100
Corsi& Elle 1989
Top end of transect is Big
Creek
7/97
nla
8l
presentstudy
25
presentstudy
UMMZ
1+1c
99
IJ
presentstudy
Table53. Continued.
Species
Composition(%)
Site
Date
Fish/l00m'
Rb
BK
BI
0.6 km above Forest boundary'
7196
nla
96
presentstudy
0.6 km above Forestboundary'
7/9s
8.3
100
presentstudy
0.6 km aboveForestboundaryi
8187
t2.1
100
Corsi& Elle 1989
250 m above Coal Creek
7196
nla
73
250 m above Coal Creek
7134i
nla
k
At Hilts Creek
8197
18.8
At Hilts Creek (in beaver
ponds)
7196
nla
0.5 km aboveHilts Creek (top
end of private land)
8195
0.8 km above Hilts Creek (in
meadow)
27
Source
presentstudy
UMMZ
63
presentstudy
401
60r
presentstudy
2.4
75
25
presentstudy
6196
tl.3
28
72
presentstudy
0.8 km above Hilts Creek (in
meadow)
8195
12.1
3l
69
presentstudy
108 m above previoussite
6/96
8.2
36
64
presentstudy
presentstudy
none
7l9s
u This sitereplacedthe 1987sitewhichcouldnot be located.This siteis likely 150m to 300 m above
originalsite.
o The 1992sitewasmoved2.4km upstreamsincebeaveractivity prohibitedresamplingthe 1987site.
" Old BLM station#20 (BLM file data).
d The locationof the 1934collectionis describedas "Big Creek,trib of Little Lost River, ca 6 mi above
mouth.,."However,this seemsto be presentdayWet Creekat this approximatelocation.
" Sixteenrainbowtrout30-188mm.
t Old BLM station#l4 (BLMfile data).
c Old BLM station#4 (BLM file data).
t' Bearreractivity prohibited resamplingthe 1987 site. The 1992 site was moved downstream
approximately460m.
' The 1995siteis locatedapproximately
0.8km belowthe 1987site.
j
The locationof the 1934site is describedas "Wet Creek,in Lost River Mountains,ca 1 mile above
locationof the 1996site.
mouthinto Big Creek..,"This seemsto be in theapproximate
k Four rainbowtrout22-196mm, onerainbowtrout x cutthroattrout hybrid 146mm.
t An approximation.
2.2km aboveHilts Creek
100
Fluvial bull trout appearto be using lower Wet Creek as a migration corridor to Big Creek and
possibly as an adult rearing area. Howeveq it is not clear if the bull trout in Wet Creek between Coal Creek
and the diversion structureaboveHilts Creek arc part of a fluvial population. It is likely that fluvial bull trout
historically migrated from lower Wet Creekandthe mainstemof the Little Lost River into this reachto spawn.
The Wet Creek fishery appearsto be in a downward trend. Trout densitiesdecreasedin all but one
of theT transectsthat were sampledin 1987and resampledin 1992or 7995. The causeof this decline is not
clear.
Twenty-one sculpin were collected from 2 sites in Wet Creek, preserved,and later identified as
shorthead(Table 13).
In 1934,Carl Hubbs collectedfish from Wet Creek. He collected 16 rainbow trout and 12 shorthead
sculpin from Wet Creekt approximately 10 km above the Little Lost River (UMMZ). At another site
approximately 1.6km aboveBig Creek,he collected4 rainbow trout, a cuffhroattrout x rainbow trout hybrid,
and l0 shortheadsculpin. The lack of bull trout in thesesites suggeststhat this specieswas not abundantin
these streamreachesat the time of this collection in 1934. However, Carl Hubbs recorded in his 1934 field
notes (UMMZ) that:
Dr. Baker, druggist of Mackay and a long-time resident of the region, says that there are several
"bottomlessholes" in the courseof Wet Creek, which until they were dynamited afew months ago
were "full" of bull trout (Dolly Vardens).
There is a small unnamedtributary that entersWet Creekjust below the confluenceof Wet Creek and
Coal Creek. This streamoriginatesat springsapproximately2.3 km above the confluence with Wet Creek.
The entire stream is on Forest land. In 1997, the water temperaturenear the sourcesprings in the right and
left hand forks was 13'C and 12'C respectively. The Forest ServiceR1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory
(Overton et al. 1997) was conductedon this tributary in 1997 (Appendix F).
In 1995 and 1997,rainbow trout were oapturedin this stream (Table 54, Appendices A and B). In
September1995, a34 m sectionof streamlocatedapproximately 100 m aboveWet Creek was electrofished.
All of the fish capturedat this site were rainbow trout between 35 and 65 mrn in length. No other species
were found. In July 1997, a91 m sectionlocated0.6 km aboveWet Creek was electrofished. Rainbow trout
were the only speciescollected. The length frequencydistribution of fish from this stream suggeststhat the
stream may serve as a spawning and rearing areafor rainbow trout from Wet Creek.
I This collection site is describedas "Big Creek,trib of Little Lost River, ca 6 mi abovemouth..."
However, this seemsto be presentday Wet Creek'
101
Table 54. Summaryof electrofishingdatafrom an unnamedtributaryto Wet Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
Site
Date
Fish/l00 m'z
100 m above Wet Creek
9/95
nla
nla
7/97
" All fish capturedwererainbowtrout 35-65mm.
0.6 km above Wet Creek
Rb
BK
BI
Source
presentstudy
100
presentstudy
Williams Creek
Williams Creek,locatedin the centralportion ofthe Lemhi Mountain Range,is disjunctfrom the Little
Lost fuver. The origin of Williams Creek was not clearly determined,but it appearsto be a spring 2.3 km
above the Forest boundary. The streamflows a total of 3.9 km, where it is intermittently diverted for irrigation.
Approximately 1.5 km below this diversion, the entire stream is diverted into a pipeline. Williams (1973)
indicates that Williams Creek has probably been used for irrigation purposessince the 1880's. Aerial
photographsand a field review suggestthat due to the diversionsthe streamdoesnot regularly flow into the
Little Lost River. This was confirmed by Don Phillips, a local landowner (personal communication). It
appearsa large amountof sedimentwashistorically addedto Williams Creekfrom acanalcoming from Cedar
Run Canyon. Stream temperatureswere monitored in Williams Creek in 1997 (Appendix E). The Forest
ServiceR1/R4 Fish Habitat StandardInventory (Overton et al. 1997) was conductedon Williams Creek in
1997 (Appendix F).
In 1995,bull trout and sculpin were found in Williams Creek (Table 55, AppendicesA and B). This
bull trout population is unique in that it is the only bull trout population in the Little Lost River drainagethat
is completely disjunct from other streams.Although bull trout ilppearto occupy the entire stream, densities
are low in the lower reach. Only onebull trout was capturedina75 m sectionof streamthat was electrofished
approximately1.6km below the Forestboundary. In 1997,a 430 mm bull trout was caughtin Williams Creek.
Although sculpin were present in the lower sampling site, they were not found in the upper site.
On June 7, lg97 , a small beaverpond nearthe Forestboundarywas sampledby hook and line to help
confirm the absenceof brook trout in this stream. Sevenbull trout measuringbetween 190 and 237 mm in
length were captured. No other specieswere caught or observed.
t02
Table 55. Summaryof electrofishingdata from Williams Creek.
Species
Composition(%)
Rb
BK
BI
Site
Date
Fish/100m2
1.6 km below Forest
boundary
6l9s
nla
100
Beaverpond at Forest
boundary
6/97
nla
100" presentstudy
1.6 km above Forest
boundary
u Hook and line sample.
6/95
10.4
100
Source
presentstudy
presentstudy
Y Springs
Y Springsis locatedin theoenfal portionof theLemhiMountainRange.Waterfrom Y Springsflows
approximately1.5km, whereit sinksinto the valley floor. A field checkon June28, 1995indicatedflows
were limited, andavisualsurveyof a sectionof the streamrevealedno fish (AppendixA).
UnnamedTributary (1 km southof Warm Creek)
This small,unnamedtributaryis locatedin theLemhiMountainRangeapproximately1 km southof
WarmCreek.Thestreamis disjunctfromtheLittle Lost River. A 50m sectionof the streamneartheForest
boundarywasvisually surveyedin June1995(AppendixA). Habitatis limited,andno fish were found.
Other unnamed drainages
Basedon field reviews,personalobservations,reviews of maps,andlorreviews of aerialphotographs,
unnameddrainagesin the Little Lost River drainage,other than those previously discussed,have no fishery
habitator it is so limited that fish are likely not present.
Part 4: Lakes and Reservoirs
Introduction
andseveralprivatepondsin theLittle Lost
reservoirs,
TherearelT lakes,1reservoir,3 dysfunctional
Riverdrainage(LRRD file data,personalobservation).All of the lakesin the drainagearesmall (lessthan
103
6 hectares)mountain lakes. This sectionpresentsan overview ofthe lakesandreservoirs;small private ponds
are not included. Subdrainagescontaining lakesare listed in alphabeticalorder. Individual lakes are listed
in the ascendingorder of occurrencewithin a subdrainage.
Big Creek
Lower Big Creek Lake (beaver pond)
Lower Big Creek Lake is actually alarge semi-permanentbeaverpond locatedon the main channel
of Big Creek 6.1 l<maboveWet Creek. The pond, which has existed since at least 1955 (Bud Gamett, area
resident,personalcommunication),is approximately 1.0hectaresin size. It is referredto locally asBig Creek
Lake or Big Creek BeaverPond. Due to the pond's relatively large sizeand semi-permanentnature,the Forest
Servicecatalogedit as a lake in 1990(Gamett 1990b). Easy access(aflat,2 km hike) makes it a popular
recreafiondestination. Accessto the lake is currently closedto motorizedvehicles.
The Forest Servicecollectedangling datafrom 21 anglersvisiting the pond in 1990(Gamett 1990a).
Theseanglershad fished atotalof 80 hours and caught 155 fish (1.94 fish/hour). Ninety-five percent of the
fish caught were brook trout, and the remaining 5%owerc rainbow trout. Harvest rates for brook trout and
rainbow trout were 42Yo and}Yo,rcspectively. Fish averagedapproximately 230 mm in length.
Big Creek Lake#2
Big Creek Lake#2,located in the headof Big Creek, is approximately1.0hectaresin size. Although
the lake has been stookedwith both rainbow trout and cutthroat trout since 1959,it is not known if the lake
sustainsfish. Although stockingrecordsindicate fish were introducedinto the lake in 1984and 1988,no fish
were found in the lake in 1990 (Gamett 1990b). However, it is possiblethe lake was not identified correctly
in 1984and 1988 and not actuallyplanted. Therefore,the lake will continueto be stockedwith 500 rainbow
trout every 3 years until determination can be made as to whether or not it will support fish. Outmigration of
fish from the lake into Big Creek is unlikely (personalobservation).Accessto the lake is closedto motorized
vehicles.
Dry Creek
Dry Creek Reservoir
Dry Creek Reservoir was locatedon Dry Creek immediately below the confluence of Long Lost Creek
and Dry Creek. Constructionon the dam beganin 1909 and was completed in 1925. The dam consistedof
a concreteexterior and earthfilled interior. Surveyrecordsindicatethe spillway was24.4 m in elevation,the
reservoir surface area was 39.4 hectares,and the reservoir volume was 2.95 million m' lJohn E' Hayes
Collection, Special Collections and Archives, University of Idaho Library). In the mid 1930's, the dam was
dynamited ina water war. In June 1956,high water resultedin the failure of the dam and the ensuing flood
104
killed 2 peoplebelow the reservoir. A remnantof the dam remainstoday. Apparently, bull trout were present
in the reservoir in the 1920's. JesseStrope,who moved to the Little Lost River valley in 1910,indicatedthat
in the 1920'she caught only "dolly varden" in the reservoir and in Dry Creek above the reservoir (personal
communication). Stocking recordsindicate the reservoirwas stockedwith rainbow trout between 1951 and
1953. However, rainbow trout were caught in the reservoir as early as 1942 (Mounty Dick, area resident,
personalcommunication) indicating this specieshad been introducedinto the reservoir andlorDry Creek by
at least 1942. Rainbow trout up to 460 mm were caughtin the reservoir (Mounty Dick, arearesident personal
communication).
Copper Lake
Copper Lake, located on the ridge betweenLong Lost Creek and Dry Creek, is approximately 1.0
hectaresin size. In 1990,no fish were observedin the lake despiteintroductionsin both 1984 and 1988
(Gamett 1990b). Fish were again introduced in the fall of 1990, and small fish were observed in the lake
approximately 3 weeks later (Gamett 1990b). However, no fish were found in the lake in 1993 (personal
observation). It is likely the lake's shallow depth doesnot allow it to overwinter fish. Therefore,stocking is
being discontinued. It is unlikely that any fish introduced into the lake were able to move into Dry Creek
(personal observation). Access to the lake is open to motorized vehicles.
Dry CreekPond
Dry Creek Pond, locatedin the bottom of Dry Creek, is approximately0.5 hectaresin size. There is
no record of the lake being stocked,and no fish were observedin the lake in 1988 or 1995 (personal
observation). Recreation atthe lake appearslimited and is likely incidental to recreation associatedwith upper
Dry Creek and Swauger lakes.
Dry Creek Lake #1
Dry Creek Lake #l,located on the ridge betweenLong Lost Creek and Dry Creek, is approximately
1.0 hectaresin size. There is no record of the lake being stocked,and the lake appearsto receive very little
use. No fish were observedin the lake in 1990(Gamett 1990b)'
Swauger Lake #1
SwaugerLake#l,located on the ridge betweenDry Creek and Long Lost Creek immediately below
SwaugerLake#2,is approximately0.25 hectaresin size. The lake's outlet sinks into the talus slope nearthe
mouth of the lake. In the fall of 7976, an attemptwas madeto sealthis sink and increasethe size of the lake
(LRRD file data). This involved removing rock from aroundthe seepagearea,applying alayer of bentonite,
then refilling the hole with fine soil. Although the lake increasedin size and depthduring runoffthe following
spring, it was within 0.3 m of the original level by July'
t0s
Following completion of the project in 1976, cutthroat trout were introduced into the lake. This
Asingleintroductionofrainbowtroutwasmadein1982.
specieshasbeenstockedregularlysincethattime.
generally
it
supportsfish. In 1995,a 560 mm cutthroattrout was
winterkills,
Although the lake occasionally
caught in the lake by an angler. There doesnot appearto be any natural recruitment into the lake (personal
observation). The curent managementplan calls for the lake to be stockedevery 3 yearswith 500 cutthroat
trout. Outmigration of fish into Dry Creek is unlikely (personal observation). Recreationaluse at the lake
appearsmostly incidental to use at SwaugerLake #2. Access to the lake is open to motorized vehicles.
Swauger Lake#2
SwaugerLake#Z,located on the ridge betweenLong Lost Creek and Dry Creek immediately above
Swauger Lake #1, is approximately 1.0 hectaresin size. Recreationaluse at the lake is relatively high.
Cutthroattrout, which were first introducedin 1962,have beenthe only speciesintroducedinto the lake. The
length frequency offish observed and caught in the lake in 1990 and 1993 suggeststhere is no natural
recruitment into the lake. In 1994,theForest Servicecollectedcreel datafrom 39 visitors to the lake (LRRD
file data). Theseanglershad fished 140hours and caught23fish (0.2 fislr/hour). Cutthroattrout were the only
speciescaught, 78% of which were harvested. Thirteen anglersrated their angling experience. Thirty-one
percentrated it as poor, 38Yoas fair, l5Yo as good, and 15Yoas excellent. Fourteen anglers indicated their
angling methods. Twenty-nine percentfished with bait; 140/owith lure; l4Yowith bait and lure; 7Yowithbait
and fly; 7o/owllhlure and fly; and zgyowithbait, fly, and lure. To improve catch rates, the stocking rate was
increasedin 1995 from 2,000 fish every 3 yearsto 3,000 fish every 3 years. The lake is open to accessby
motorized vehicles.
Trout growth in the lake is relatively rapid. Becausethe lake has traditionally been stocked with
Yellowstone cutthroattrout, a singleintroduction of westslopecutthroattrout in 1988provided an opportunity
to monitor growth rateswithin the lake. The westslopecutthroattrout were young-of-the-yearat the time of
their introduction in 1988. In 1990,thelake was sampledby hook and line (Gamett 1990b). The average
length of the westslopecutthroattrout captured@aQ was 34 cm. The rapid growth rate is likely due to the
high density of macroinvertebratesin the lake (personal observation).
Swauger Lake#3
SwaugerLake #3,locatedon the ridge betweenLong Lost CreekandDry Creek,is approximately0.25
hectaresin size. There is no record of the lake being stocked,and the lake likely receives little use.
Dry Creek Lakell2
Dry Creek Lake #2,located on the ridge betweenLong Lost Creek and Dry Creek, is approximately
0.5 hectaresin size. There is no record of the lake being stocked. The lake likely receives little use due to
difficult access.
t06
Dry Creek Lake #3
Dry Creek Lake#3 is looatedon the ridge betweenDry Creek and West Fork Bumt Creek (Pahsimeroi
River drainage). An aerial photographtaken July 1, 1961 indicatesthe lake was about 0.25 hectaresin size.
However, an aerialphotographtakenAugust 4,1979 indicatesthe lake was nearly dry. This suggeststhis lake
is intermittent. There is no record of the lake being stocked. The lake likely receiveslittle use due to difficult
access.
Dry Creek Lake#A
Dry Creek Lake#4,located on the ridge betweenUpper CedarCreek (Big Lost River drainage) and
Dry Creek, is approximately 0.25 hectaresin size. There is no record of the lake being stocked. The lake
likelv receiveslittle use due to difficult access.
llorse Lake Creek
llorse Lake
Horse Lake, located in Horse Lake Creek in the Sawmill Canyon drainage, is approximately 0.5
hectaresin size. There is no record of the lake being stocked,and the lake likely receivesvery little use. No
fish were observedin the lake in June 1997 (personalobservation).However, spottedfrogs Rana luteiventris
were abundant.
Long Lost Creek
Shadow Lake #L (lower)
Shadow Lake#l,located in Hell Canyon, is approximately 0.5 hectaresin size. Although the lake
was stocked with cutthroat trout in 1984 and 1990, no fish were caught or observed in the lake in 1993
(personal observation). Due to the lake's apparentinability to supportfish, it will no longer be stocked.
Outmigration of any fish introduced into the lake into Hell Canyon Creek or Long Lost Creek is unlikely
(personalobservation).
Shadow Lake#2 (upper)
Shadow Lake#2,located in Hell Canyon immediately above ShadowLake#1, is approximately 1.5
hectaresin size. Rainbow trout, stockedinto the lake in 1964,werethe first fish introducedinto the lake. The
firstintroductionofcutthroattroutwasmadein1975.Between1982andl994,rainbowtroutwereintroduced
t07
5 times. However, in 1993no fish were observedin the lake (personalobservation).During a volunteer
trailhead survey conductedby the Forest Servicein 1994,two anglersreportedfishing one hour in "Shadow
Lake" (LRRD file data). This was likely ShadowLake #2. They did not catch any fish. The one anglerthat
respondedratedthe angling experienceas poor. Due to the lake's apparentinability to supportfish, it will no
longer be stocked.
Long Lost Creek Lake
Long Lost Creek Lake, locatedon the ridge betweenLong Lost Creek and Upper CedarCreek (Big
River
d rainage),is approximately0.25 hectaresin size. Thereis no recordof the lake being stocked. The
Lost
lake likelv receiveslittle use due to difficult access.
Mill Creek
Mill Creek Lake
Mill Creek Lake is locatedin Mill Creek in the Sawmill Canyon drainage. The lake was formed by
a landslidethat blocked Mill Creek. At maximum level the lake is 5 to 6 hectaresin size. However, seepage
out of the lake through the landslidereducesthe surface areaby late summer. Historically, the lake was about
one hectarein size by late summer(LRRD file data). In the early 1970's,a liner was installed near the seep
to maintain higher water levels year round (LRRD file data). Although seepagecontinuesto lower lake levels
by late summer, it appearsthe lake maintainsa higher minimum level than before the project was completed
(personal observation).
In l94l and l969,rainbow trout were introducedinto the lake. Cutthroattrout have been stockedin
recentyears, anda single introduction of grayling was made in 1995. The current managementplan calls for
the introduction ofcutthroattrout every 3 years.
ln 7994,the Forest Servicecollectedcreel data from 25 visitors to the lake (LRRD file data). These
anglershad fished 53.5 hours and caught40 fish (0.8 fish/hour). Cutthroat trout comprisedT5o/oof the fish
caught; rainbow trout comprised the remainder. Twenty-five percent of the fish caught were harvested. Ten
ungi"tr rated their angling experience.Thirty percentrated it as poor, 20Yoas fait, 40Yoas good, and I|Yo as
excellent. Ten anglersindicatedtheir angling methods. Twenty percentfishedwith bait; 5|o/owtthlwe10%o
with bait and lure; and2\Yo with lure and fly. In 1997,a243 mm grayling caught from the lake was turned
into the Lost River Ranger District (personal observation).
The length frequencydistribution of fish caughtin the lake andthe presenceof rainbow trout in reoent
yearsindicatesthere is somenatural recruitment into the lake. Outmigration of fish from the lake into lower
ivtill Creet is not possibledue to the lack of an overlandconnectionbetweenthe lake and the stream. No fish
were observedin an ocular surveyof approximately100m of Mill Creekimmediatelyabovethe lake in August
1995. However, it is likely that fish from the lake use it for spawning (personalobservation). The grayling
introduced in 1995may also spawn in the streamand establisha reproducing population.
108
Summit Creek
Summit Creek Reservoir
Summit Creek Reservoir, located near the Little Lost River and Pahsimeroi River divide, is
approximately 40 hectaresin size at maximum capacity. There is no record of fish being introducedinto the
reservoir, and it is not known if it contains a fish population. The reservoir is utilized during the spring,
summer, and fall by a variety of waterfowl speciesand probably servesas a nesting area.
Wet Creek
Nolan Lake
Nolan Lake, located in the head of Wet Creek, is approxim ately0.25 hectaresin size. A single
introduction of goldentrout was made into the lake in 1986. However, thesefish likely did not survive due
InOctoberlgg},thelakewasdry(personalobservation)andisnolonger
tothelake'ssmall,shallownature.
into
Wet Creek is not possible (personal observation),
fish
of
stocked. Outmigration
109
RECOMMENDATIONS
Habitat Management
1.
Improve riparianhabitat and reduce sediment levels in the Wet Creek subdrainage. Reachesof
emphasisare Wet Creek aboveBasin Creek,Coal Creek,the unnamedtributary to Wet Creek below
Coal Creek, Basin Creek, and SquawCreek. This could be accomplishedthrough riparian pastures
to better regulate grazing.
2.
Relocatethe Mill Creektrailheadto reduceimpactsto the streamassociatedwith this development.
3.
Relocate the Timber Creek trail below the confluence of Slide Creek and Timber Creek. This would
involve moving the trail approximately 50 to 100 m downstreamof the presentlocation. It would
result in the trail crossing only Timber Creek insteadof Timber Creek and Slide Creek.
4.
Assess potential culvert bariers in Moonshine Creek and Redrock Creek.
5.
If there are willing sellers,acquire land or easementson private land along perennial streamreaches
to prevent housing development.Emphasisshouldbe on Wet Creek,Big Creek, Summit Creek,
Badger Creek, Squaw Creek (Wet Creek drainage),and the Little Lost River.
6.
Evaluateremoving natural "semi-permanent"barriersthat may be blocking the migration of fish into
severalstreamreaches.Theseinclude bariers on Badger Creek 3.0 km abovethe Little Lost River,
Bunting Creek 300 m aboveBadgerCreek,Quigley Creekapproximately400 m abovethe Little Lost
River, and Camp Creek immediately above Timber Creek.
-
Evaluate reconnecting Williams Creek to the Little Lost River.
8.
Evaluateirrigation diversionbarrier andconnectivitybetweenBadgerCreekandthe Little LostRiver.
9.
Evaluatethe potential for Horse Creek to supportbull trout. If it is suitable,evaluatethe possibility
of reconnecting the streamto the Little Lost River'
10.
Relocatethe Williams CreekRoad (# 405) abovethe streamcrossingapproximately 1 km abovethe
Forest boundary out of the ripaian atea.
11.
Work with cooperatinglandownersto improve riparianhabitat on private land. Emphasisshouldbe
on the Liffle Lost River between Badger Creek and the private property line above Summit Creek.
t2.
Reduce summer streamtemperafureswherever possible. Emphasis should be on the Little Lost River
and tributaries above Summit Creek and the Wet Creek drainage.
13.
Reduce sediment levels and streamtemperaturesin Bear Creek.
14.
Reducesedimentlevels in Deer Creek and RedrockCreek'
15.
Reduce sediment levels and improve riparian conditions on Meadow Creek.
ll0
Fish Management
1
I.
Continue to monitor the Little Lost River at Iron Creek and Wet Creek at the Forest Boundary for
brook trout expansion. These sites are above the upper limit of brook trout distribution in these2
subdrainagesand are being monitored to detect an expansionof brook trout into key bull trout streams.
2.
Control brook trout expansionwherever possible.
3.
Eradicatebrook ffout in Big Creek, SquawCreek (Sawmill Canyon),Mill Creek, and the Little Lost
River above Summit Creek.
4.
Confirm the existence of brown trout. If foundowork to eradicatethis speciesbefore it becomes
establishedelsewherein the drainage.
5.
Assessthe lossof bull trout through irrigation diversionson Williams Creek,Wet Creek,and Sawmill
Creek near Timber Creek.
6.
Assessthe feasibility of eradicating brook trout in Meadow Creek and Dry Creek and introducing bull
trout.
n
Determine the degreeof illegal and unintentional bull trout harvest.
Education
t
Continue efforts to educatethe public about the no harvest bull trout rule and identification of bull
trout through annual placementof identification postersthroughout the Little Lost River drainage.
2.
Maintain the large bull trout identification signs at the Timber Creek Campground and Sawmill
Canyon at the Forest Boundary.
3.
Expand efforts to educatethe public aboutthe no harvestbull trout rule and identification of bull trout
by placement of large bull trout identification signs at the PassCreek/Wet Creek summit, at the
Summit Creek summit, and north of Howe.
4.
Expand efforts to educatethe public aboutthe no harvestbull trout rule and identification of bull trout
through distribution of bull trout pamphletsthrough Forest Service,Fish and Game, and Bureau of
and tourism centers.
Land Managementpersonneland offices; local businesses;
5.
Begin efforts through the news media and other meansto inform the public about fish ecology, fish
management,and fish managementissuesin the Little Lost River drainage. Emphasisshould be on
bull trout and bull trout recovery efforts being made by various agencies.
6.
Increase enforcement activities relating to the no bull trout harvest rule. Efforts should be
concentratedalong the Little Lost River and tributaries above Summit Creek.
111
LITERATURE
CITED
Anderson,M.W. 1988. The Little Lost River flood control plan: A casehistory. Journalof Soil and
Water Conservation 43 :39| -393.
Andrews, D.A. 1972. An ecological study of the Lost Streamsof Idaho with emphasison the Little Lost
River. Master's Thesis. Idaho StateUniversity, Pocatello,Idaho.
Ball, K. and P. Jeppson. 1978. Regional FisheriesManagementInvestigations. Region 6 Streams
Investigations. Job PerformanceReport. Project F-71-R-2,JobNo. VI-c. Idaho Departmentof Fish
and Game,Boise,Idaho.
Behnke,R.J. 1992. Native Trout of WesternNorth America. Monograph6. American FisheriesSociety,
Bethesda,Maryland.
Bond, J.G. 1978. Geologic map of Idaho. Idaho Departmentof Lands,Bureau of Mines and Geology.
Bruhn, D. 1990. Changes in a semiarid riparian stream ecosystemafter fencing to minimize grazing.
Master's Thesis. Universify of Idaho,Moscow, Idaho.
Chisholm, I.M, and W.A. Hubert. 1986. Influence of streamgradienton standingstock of brook trout in the
Snowy Range,Wyoming. Northwest Science60 (2):137-139.
Corsi, C. 1989. RegionalFisheriesManagementInvestigations.Region 6 Rivers and StreamsInvestigationsBig Lost River Survey. Job PerformanceReport. Project F-71-R-ll, Job No. 6 (IF)-c2. Idaho
Deparfmentof Fish and Game,Boise,Idaho.
Corsi,C., B. Spateholts,V. Moore, and T. Williams. 1986. RegionalFisheryManagementInvestigations.
Region 6 StreamInvestigations. Job PerformanceReport. Project F-73-R-8, Job No. VI-c. Idaho
Departmentof Fish and Game,Boise,Idaho.
Corsi, C. and S. Elle. 1989. Regional FisheriesManagementInvestigations. Region 6 Rivers and Streams
Investigations- Big Lost and Little Lost Rivers, and Birch and Medicine Lodge Creek Survey. Job
Performance Report. Project F-71-F.-12,Job No. 6 (IF)-c'z. Idaho Department of Fish and Game,
Boise.Idaho.
Corsi, C. and S. Elle. 1986, RegionalFisheriesManagementInvestigations. Region 6 Streamsand Rivers
Investigations. Job PerformanceReport. ProjectF-71-R-10,JobM-c. Idaho Departmentof Fish and
Game, Boise,Idaho.
Courtenay,W.R., C.R. Robins, R.M. Bailey, andJ.E.Deacon. 1987. Recordsof exotic fishesfrom Idaho and
Wyoming. Great Basin Naturalist47:523-526'
Devoe, G. (no date). Sawmill Creek Project. Case Studiesand Catalog of WatershedProjects in Western
Provinces and States. Report 22. Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources. University of
California.
l12
Elle, S. 1995. Bull Trout Investigations. Annual PerformanceReport. Grant F-73-R-17. Idaho Department
of Fish and Game,Boise,Idaho.
Elle, S., C. Corsi, and D. Aslett. 1987. RegionalFisheriesManagementInvestigations. Region 6 Rivers and
Streams Investigations. Job PerformanceReport. Project F-71-R-ll, Job No. 6(IF)-c2. Idaho
Department of Fish and Game, Boise, Idaho.
Fausch,K.D. 1989, Do gradientandtemperatureaffect disffibutionsof, and interactionsbetween,brook chan
(Salvelinusfontinalis) and other residentsalmonidsin streams?PhysiologicalEcology Japan1:303-
322.
Fraley, J.W. and B.B, Shepard. 1989. Life history, ecology,and populationstatusof migratory bull trout
(Salvelinus confluentus) in the Flathead Lake and river system, Montana. Northwest Science
63(4):133-r43.
FWPWPA (FederalWriters' Projectsof the Works ProgressAdministration). 1937. Idaho, a guide in word
and picture. The Caxton Printers, Ltd., Caldwell, Idaho.
Gamett,B.L. 1990a. Big and Little Lost rivers mountain lake anglerssurvey - results. Unpublished report.
Lost River Ranger District Challis National Forest, Mackay, Idaho.
Gamett,B.L. 1990b. Little Lost River mountain lake catalog. Unpublishedopen report. Lost River Ranger
District Challis National Forest, Mackay, Idaho.
Hubbs, C. and R. Miller. 1948. The zoological evidence: correlation between fish distribution and
hydrographic history in the desertbasinsof the western United States. Bulletin University of Utah
38(20):18-126.
1991-1995.IdahoDepartment
IdahoDepartmentofFishandGame. (nodate). FisheriesManagementPlan
of Fish and Game,Boise,Idaho.
Jeppson, P. and K. Ball. 1978. Regional FisheriesManagementInvestigations. Region 6 Streams
Investigations. Job PerformanceReport. Project F-71-R-3, Job VI-c. Idaho Departmentof Fish and
Game, Boise, Idaho.
Keller, C.R. and K.P. Burnham. 1982. Riparian fencing, grazing,and trout habitat preferenceon Summit
Creek, Idaho. North American Journalof FisheriesManagement2:53-59'
Keller, C., L. Anderson,and P. Tappel. 1979. Fish habitatchangesin Summit Creek,Idaho after fencing.
Pages46-52inO.B. Cope,editor. Proceedingsofthe forum - grazingandriparian/streamecosystems.
Trout Unlimited.
Leary,R.F., F.W. Allendorf, and S.H. Forbes. 1993. Conservationgeneticsof bull trout in the Columbia and
Klamath River drainages. ConservationBiology 7(4): 856-865.
Lee, D.C., J.R. Sedell,B.E. Rieman,R.F. Thurow, and J.E. Williams. 7997. Broadscaleassessmentof
aquatic speciesand habitats. U.S. Forest Service General Technical Report, PNW-405 (volume
3 ) : 10 5 7 -r4 9 6 .
113
Locke, S.B. 1929. Whitefish, grayling, trout, and salmonof the Intermountain region. Bureau of Fisheries
DocumentNo. 1062. Departmentof CommerceBureauof Fisheries,Washington,D.C.
Mangum, Fred A. 1983. Aquatic ecosysteminventory macroinvertebrateanalysis. Annual progressreport
Challis National Forest 1983. USDA-Forest Service,IntermountainRegion Aquatic Ecosystem
Analysis Laboratory, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah.
May, B. 1996. Yellowstone cuffhroat trout Oncorhynchusclarki bouvieri. Pages 11-34 in D.A. Duff,
technical editor. Conservation assessmentfor inland cutthroat trout statusand distribution. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,Intermountain Region, Ogden, Utah.
McPhail, J.D. and C.B. Muray. 1979. The early life-history and ecology of Dolly Varden (Salvelinusmalma)
in the upperArrow Lakes. Departmentof Zoology andInstitute ofAnimal ResourceEcology, U.B.C.,
1979.
Mullan, J.W., K. Williams, G. Rhodus,T. Hillman, and J. Mclntyre. 1992. Production and habitat of
salmonidsin mid-Columbia River tributary streams.Monogram 1. U.S. Departmentof the Interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service,WashingtonD.C.
Mullen, W.J, 1970. Lost river wilderness. StudioPress,Pocatello,Idaho.
Mundorff,M.J.,H.C.Broom,andC.Kilburn. 1963. ReconnaissanceofthehydrologyoftheLittleLostRiver
Basin, Idaho. USGS Water-Supply Paper, 1539-Q. United StatesGovernment Printing Office,
Washinglon,D.C.
Oberg, P.M. 1970. Betweenthesemountains,history of Birch Creek Valley, Idaho. Exposition PressInc.,
Jericho, New York.
Overton,C.K., S.P.Wollrab,B.C. Roberts,andM.A. Radko. 1997. R1/R4 (Northem/IntermountainRegions)
Fish andFish Habitat StandardInventory ProceduresHandbook. USDA ForestServiceIntermountain
ResearchStation. GeneralTechnicalReportINT-138'
pierce,K.L. and W.E. Scott. 1982. Pleistoceneepisodesof alluvial-graveldeposition,southeasternIdaho.
1n B. Bonnichsenand R.M. Breckenridge,editors, CenozoicGeology of Idaho. Idaho Bureau of
Mines and Geology Bulletin 26:685-702.
Platts,W.S.,W.F.Megahan,andG.W.Minshall.1983.Methodsforevaluatingstream,riparian,andbiotic
conditions. USDA-Forest Service,Intermountain Forest and RangeExperiment Station. General
'Iechnical
Report INT-138.
Rember, W.C. and E.H. Bennet. 1979a. Geologic map of the Dubois quadrangle,Idaho. Idaho Department
of Lands, Bureau of Mines and Geology.
Rember. W.C. and E.H. Bennet. 1979b. Geologic map of the Idaho Falls quadrangle,Idaho. Idaho
Department of Lands, Bureau of Mines and Geology.
Rieman.8.E., D.C. Lee, and R.F. Thurow. 1997. Distribution, status,and likely future trendsof bull trout
within the Columbia River and Klamath River basins. North American Journal of Fisheries
Managementl7 :l ll1-l 125.
r14
Rieman,B.E. and J.D. Mclntyre. 1993. Demographicandhabitatrequirementsfor conservationof bull ffout.
USDA-Forest Service, Intermountain ResearchStation. General Technical Report INT-302.
Rieman,B.E. and K.A. Apperson. 1989. Statusand analysisof salmonidfisheries. Westslopecutthroattrout
synopsisand analysisof fishery information. Project F-73-R-l l, SubprojectNo.II, JobNo. l. Idaho
Departmentof Fish and Game,Boise,Idaho.
Bulletin 184. FisheriesResearchBoard
Scott,W.B.andE.J.Crossman.1973. FreshwaterfishesofCanada.
of Canada,Ottawa, Canada.
SCS(Soil ConservationService)and BLM (Bureauof Land Management). 1985. Little Lost River flood
control measureplan and environmental statement. U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Land
Management and U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil ConservationService, Boise, Idaho.
Simpson,J.C. and R.L. Wallace. 1982. Fishesof Idaho. The University of Idaho Press,Moscow, Idaho.
Sonnenkalb,O. 1925. Reminiscenoesof Oscar Sonnenkalb,Idaho surveyor and pioneer. Idaho State
University Press,Pocatello,Idaho.
Stone,M.A.J., L.J. Mann, and L.C. Kjelstrom. 1993. Statisticalsummariesof streamflowdata for selected
gaging stationson and nearthe Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Idaho, through September
1990. U.S. GeologicalSurvey in cooperationwith U.S. Departmentof Energy. Water-Resources
Investigations Report 92-4196.
Swanberg,T.R. 1997. Movements of and habitatuse by fluvial bull trout in the Blackfoot River, Montana.
Transactionsof the American FisheriesSociety 126:735-746.
Thurow, R.F. 1994. Underwater methods for study of salmonids in the Intermountain west, General
Technical Report INT-GTR-307. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain
Region, Ogden, Utah.
Thurow, R.F., D.C. Lee, and B.E. Rieman. 1997. Distribution and statusof sevennative salmonids in the
interior Columbia River Basin and portions of the Klamath River and Great Basins. North American
Journal of FisheriesManagementl7 :1094- | 110.
Thurow, R.F., C.E. Corsi, and V.K. Moore. 1988. Status,ecology,and managementof Yellowstone cutthroat
trout in the Upper SnakeRiver drainage,Idaho. American FisheriesSociety Symposium4:25-36.
Van Eimeren, P. i996. Westslope cutthroat troal Oncorhynchusclarhi lewisi. Pages 1-I0 in D. A' Duff,
technical editor. Conservation assessmentfor inland cutthroat trout statusand distribution. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,Intermountain Region, Ogden, Utah.
1973. AaronHenryWilliams.Unpublished
Williams,R.H,H.R.Williams,A.W.Saxton,andC.C.Williams.
family history available at Lost Rivers Community Libtary, Arco, Idaho.
Wydoski, R.S. and R.R. Whitney. 1979. Inland fishesof Washington. University of WashingtonPress,
Seattle, Washington.
115
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
Appendix ^d Summary 615ampling efforts and results in the Little Lost River drainage between 1992 and
BLM sitessamnledbetween1992and 1994which are for fish >100mm.
Stream
Aspen Creek
ts
Location
1.5km aboveLittle
Lost River
Sampling
Methoil
visual
Watcr
Date
lll95
Total Captureil
>70mm
BadgerCreek#1
3.2km abovetheLittle
I,ost River
I pass
4 (4)
BadgerCreek#2
1.4km abovethe
Forestboundary
I pass
12(14)
BadgerCreek#3
0.3 km aboveBunting
CanyonCreek
2 pass
2 pass
1.8
1.4
7
7
16(19)
1 7( 1 8 )
BameyCreek
I kmbelowBamey
Hot Springs
visual
0.5
20
noneobserved
BasinCreek#1
0.4 km aboveWet
Creek
visual
0.752
noneobserved
BasinCreek#2
300 m belowPine
Creek
1 pass
7/91
1.1
2Q)
BasinCreek#3
6.4 km aboveWet
Creek
visual
7/95
BearCreek#l
0.6 km aboveSawmill
CanyonRoad
BearCreek#2
0.8km above#1
I pass
Bell Mt. Creek#l
in springat diversion
I pass
BellMt. Creek#2
3 separatelocatiors 0.4
km abovediversion
1 passi
visual
Big Creek#1
0.8 km aboveWet
Creek
Big Creek#la
20 m aboveForest
F
@
502
0.52
Fish/100 tf
^
Rb
Species (%)
Bk
Bl
302
12
noneobserved
6/95
LO2
22
noneobserved
6/95
502
1.52
noneobserved
I pass
2 pass
68
95
2.2
2.7
7 (r4)
t6
I pass
54
2.4
30 (36)
Sculpin
Present
Comments
dueto limited
habitat afish
survey was not
conducted
92
(16-18)
(17-18)
100
94
no
no
llo
noneobserved
20 (2o)
53
(Calculations are for fish 270mm exceptfor
habitat limited
100
l5-25o/ogadient
limitedhabitat
ttris sectionwas
htermittent in
1997
86
81
t4
19
Jt
0)
Appmdir A (cmtimed), Sm|rt
of r.npltrg efiortr sn|l rrJtltr in the Little Lort Riv€r drxtu gebet|y€tn1992rd 1997. (Cdcatett@rer€ for Iirh :70Dm
eraDr for BLM sit€r lrmDled bctn€.n 1992ad 1994rhtcl rrc for firh >100D|D.)
Location
F
H
Sampling
Methoil
2 pass
Date
9/94
Leneth(m)
88
Wftlth(rn)
2.2
9l
4.0
Big Creek#2
attrailhead
Big Creek#3
immediately below
beaverpond
2 pass
8/94
Big Creek#4
above beaver pond
2pass
9/94
Big SpringsCreek
(BLM)
0.8 km above Buck
andBirdRd.
2 pass
Birch Basin
at Forest boundary
visual
Black Creek
diversionpool
visual
7/97
7
Bull Creek#l
0,8kmaboveLitrle
Irst
I pass
8/95
702
Bull Creek#2
1.2km aboveLittle
Irst
I pass
9/95
BuntingCanyon#l
175m aboveBadger
Creek
I pass
BuntingCanyon#2
0.8 km aboveBadger
Creek
BuntingCanyon#3
ll7
Water
Tempog
TotalCaptured
>70mm(allfish)t
5a @/a)
Population
Estimate(Ranee)
65(56-7s)
33.6
Rb
52
Fish/lfi)
m2
Spedes(%o)
Bk
Bl
Sculpin
Present
Comments
48
123(n/a)
154(138-170)
42.3
6
r2s (nla)
160(r42-t7e)
t37
l8
77
98 (r/a)
125(109-141)
20.9
80
20
0
3
8
2
I fish appeared
to be a Bk-Bl
hybrid
all bulltrout
appearedto
be
Bk-Bl hybrids
yes
(e/e7)
dueto limited
habitat a fish
survey was not
conducted
none observed
no
12
none observed
no
302
12
none observed
7/97
43
1.6
6(e)
I pass
6t95
602
1.52
none observed
2 km aboveBadger
Creek
1 pass
6t95
502
12
none observed
Camp#l(Sawmill
Canyon)
100metersabove
Timber Creek
I pass
9/95
25
t.2
5 (5)
Camp#2(Sawmill
Canyon)
l 6 km aboveTimber
Creek
I pass
visual
9/9s
102
f
Cedarville(Cabin
Fork')
at endofroad
visual
1t/95
502
1.52
none observed
none observed
habitat limited
included2
separatesections
100
habitat limited
ApDtdltr A (c@timre!D.Sulnhrry of $uplitrg.trort! and Elult, in the Little Lolt River dniDrge betn€€rtrl9y2 e\d1!rr1. (C4l"ul.iim. rle for firh:70nm
€f,ccptfor BLM .iter lrnDl€d b€tti€en1992&rd 1994whicl rre for f|!L >100DD.)
T.arl CrFra
>70|nrdr6h)'
M. obsv.d
Popddo
Etu
oolcr
sFds (%)
n
Al
sdFr
PE at
Inotl@
ldrdsFilgidw
CedarRun#2
at divenion
1 pass
6195
502
1.52
none observed
Cedar Run #3
in canal 0.8 km above
Williams Creek
I pass/
visual
6195
502
12
none observed
habitatlimited
Chicken Creek
private/BlMproperty
line
lpasV
visual
9/95
20
.5
none observed
habitatlimited
Coal Creek
below Gate
2 pass
7/95
52
t.6
20 m above Horsethief
Canyon Creek
visual
7/97
30
6/97
502
CorralCanyon
(Arco Pass)
H
N)
wdgr
I@p"C
--
g'm
Ced&Ru#l
Creek
ld.rlod
lisd
Ih.
lagrlh\
6195
JV
uflrltup)
l.V
10
e (e)
t5
none observed
Corral Creek (Wet
Creek)
500 mabove Wet
Creek Road
Cub Canyon Creek
onprivate land
visual
9/9s
Deep Creek #l
diversion pool
visual
6/95
152
152
none observed
Deep Creek #2
immediately above
diversion pool and 200
meters above diversion
pool
I pass
6/95
502
1.52
none observed
Deer Creek (BLM) #l
2.lkm above Little
Lost River
3 pass
DeerCreek(BLM) #2
1.6km belowForest
boundarv
3 pass
8/92
t52
1.4
Deer Creek (FS)
at Forestboundary
3 pass
6/95
))
1.6
DeerCreekN.F.
O.2l,n aboveS.F.
4 pass
6/95
30
1.7
e(e)
ILtn(I)d
tt.2
Rb
100
sbearn appeaxed
htemittent
none observed
0.52
Cm.fr
habitat limited
dueto limited
habitat a survey
was not
condusted
2l (n/a)
22(2r-24)
43 (n/a)
44 (43-4',t)
20.7
100
16
38 (38)
38 (38)
42.5
100
yes
14
176(178)
357.4
t00
no
180(176-185)3
100
probably an
underestimate
dueto difrcult
sampling
Ap!.Ddit A (cmriu€d). SurDmrryof ,rmpling efiorts md rerultr in the Little Lrt River drd!.g. betwe$ 1992rd 1997, (Cdculdims arc for lisl:70nm
exceDtfor BLM aiterarmDl€dbetrr€en1992rnd 1994rhich are for 6S >1m md.)
Location
Date
6/95
Deer Creek, S.F.
0.5 km aboveNorth
Fork
Dry Creek #l
50 metersabove
diversionpool
I pass
Dry Creek#2
0.8 km abovediversion
2 pass
8/9s
Dry Creek#3
150metersabove
Forestboundary
2 pass
Dry Creek#4
pooladjacentto#3
Dry Creek#5
Length(m)
Wirlth(m)
Water
TempoC
t.2
t6
Total Captureil
>?0mrn(allffsh)1
2sQe)
Population
Esttunate(Ranse)
25 Q5:26)
Fish/100m2
37.5
Rb
Species(%)
BI
BK
Sculpin
Present
3 (4)
147
4.7
2r (2r)
28 (2t:37)
4.1
100
no
8/95
t46
4.3
52 (5'.7)
s6 (s2-60)
8.9
100
no
1 pass
8/9s
22
4.5
50 (67)
t00
no
springadjacentto Dry
Creekl.2kmabove
Forestboundary
1 pass
8/95
32
1.52
- - (10')
100
no
Dry Creek#6
0.4 km abovefalls
1 pass
8/9s
602
42
none observed
no
Dry Creek#7
0.8 km abovefalls
I pass
8/95
902
22
none observed
no
Dry Creek#8
beaverpondsadjacerf
to Dry Creek3.2 km
abovefalls
visual
8/9s
none observed
lto
Dry Creek#9
4.8 km abovefalls
visual
8/95
302
12
none observed
Fallert SpringsCreek
(BLM)
aboveFallert Springs
bridge
I pass
9/93
139
4.8
14 (nla)
FireboxCreek
400 m aboveLittle
Lost River
2 pass
7/97
100
2.9
36 (41)
GarfreldCreek
200 metersabove
Forestboundary
I pass
6/95
752
.)-
none observed
Hawley Creek
immediatelyabove
Iron CreekRoad
I pass
9/95
47
I (l)
o/
rainbowtrout
had a shong
cutthroat troul
influence
JJ
100
48 (36-72)
t6.6
Comments
100
5.3
H
N)
ts
Sampling
Method
2 pass
I hatchery
rainbowtrout
353mm
100
habitatlimited
100
habitatlimited
ApDtDtlir A (.onttnued). Sum{rrt drtDpling €fiortr rnd ltn tr in the Lifflc Irlt River drain.gebetw€rd19,2 snd1r97. (CrlcuhlioN |re for lilh:70mm
€xc4ptfor BLM .it€3 lrnDleil betwefl 1992rtrd 1994wlich dr for fiih >100nD.)
sdlltlg
SttEu
wdq
lond c.phFd
sF.rd (%)
PoFh{6
So&
lroih
'-
--
Wet Creek
-_
"
"
habitat afish
survey was not
conducted
2 pass
7/97
88
1
l7
22 (22)
24 (22-29)
27.3
100
yes
0-8 km below Forest
boundary
3 pass
6/95
34
1.3
10
r7(r7)
t7 (r7-r8)
38.8
100
yes
HonseLake Creek
300 m above Forest
boundary
visual
752
1.02
Horsethief Canyon
Creek
20 m above Corral
Canyon Creek
visual
7/9'.7
Hurst Creek
confluence ofleft and
right forks
visual
7/97
hon Creek
justabovehonCreek
Road
lpass
2 pass
9/96
8/95
88
93
2.2
2.2
14(r4)
Jackson Creek
justabovelronOreek
Road
I pass
9/95
73
2.1
2 (2)
LittleLost#l (BLM)
0.8kmbelowBig
SpringsCreek
I pass
9/93
t44
6.7
6 (n/a)
Little lost #2 (BLM)
0.4 km belowBuck
andBird Road
2 pass
9/93
208
4.7
12 (n/a)
Little Iost #3 (BLM)
at ClydeCampground
2 pass
9/93
234
7.l
125(n/a)
Little Lost #4
(BLM Sawmil#a)
lower end oflower
pasture
2 pass
2 pass
1/97
8/93
108
105
5.0
Little Lost #5
above Mahogany
(BLM Sawmill#3)
CreekRoadcrossing
2 pass
2 pass
7/97
8/93
131
109
Little Lost #6
(BLM Sawmill#2)
lowerportionofupper
exclosure
2 pass
2 oass
7197
8193
131
94
Horse Creek #1
atBllWprivate
I{orse Creek #2
ts
dr'lolilrild
line
30
none observed
ZL
none observed
steam appeared
intermittent
none observed
lovrer sec'tion
appeared
inlermitterf
N)
N)
4 (8)
zoftlar>
ro.r
100
100
no
no
100
no
100
t.6
92
238(158-318)
14.3
96
I
3
14(r4)
A(nla)
l4 (14-16)
1.8
2;7
7l
93
t4
7
:_
::
8.6
5.0
24 Q4)
l0 (n/a)
25Q4-28)
l r (r0-12)
a n
t)
70
8
20
t'7
10
1T
7.2
7;7
27 (27)
42 hla\
33(27-46)
3.5
6.6
93
93
;
$$2a3)
14(r+r4)
48 @2-59\
yes
habitat limited
ApFndix A (c@riN€d). SummrrTof rsDpling efio.fi ond rcrultr in fie Little Inrt River dninage betwce.d
1992s 11997. (Crtq rlionr arr fortilh:70mm
erceptfor BLM liter irdrl€d Dctweetr1992and 194 which rre for lirh >100pm")
saiqtns
Mdod
Dd.
2.4 km below Sawmill
2 pass
7/97
I l0
(BLM Sawmill #l)
CanyonRoad
2 pass
8/93
110
t-J
Little Lost #8
(FSSawmill#1)
at Forestboundarv
2 pass
4 pass
7/97
9195
t82
t26
9.3
8.5
II
13
63 (63)
104(r05)
7[ (63-83)
129(104-136)
Little Inst#9
(FSSawmill#2)
behindGuardStation
2pass
3 pass
7197
9/95
158
162
9.2
7.6
11
7
'75('19)
97 (97)
Little Lost#10
(FSSawmill#3)
above Mill Creek
2 pass
3 pass
7/97
9/95
ll2
103
7.8
5"7
12
12
62 (62)
sha!
Lftlel.r:lst#1
r.cdd
Loi6td
tuftt(4l
1'
Wdq
topoc
l0
To.rrC4tu d
4o!@(dlrht'
40 (40)
43 (nla)
s2(s2)
P.!qt d6
Itid;re(R.|!
)
4l (40-54)
55 (44-68)
FLh/lmd
Rn
bd6(%)
n(
5.7
7.0
9 0
91
4 '
rt.2
9
9
93 (7s-117)
99(97-102)
6.4
8.0
87
93
ll
4
84 (62-lt7)
53,(52-55)
9.6
9.0
65
79
35
15
8
9
2
3
sethh
lisd
n
3
y
e
cm.s
s
-3
4
5
3
no
no
3
3
no
yes
yes
I fishappeared
to be a Bk-Bl
hybrid ('97)
2 fish appeared
to be Bk-Bl
hybrid (97)
some fish
appearedtobe
Bk-Blhybrid
('e7)
ts
N)
(/)
Littlelost#lOa
(FS Sawmill#3a)
lOmabovehonCreek
Road
lpass
1 pass
8/97
9/96
100
91
9.1
8.4
13
6
3l (34)
2e (30)
Little Lost#11
(FS Sawmill #a)
0.4 km belowTimber
Creek
2 pass
2 pass
7/97
9t9s
t23
t22
8.1
8.3
1a
2s (28)
26Q6)
41Q5-ro4)
36(2648)
LftrleInst#12
(FS Savunill#5)
0.8km above
MoorshineCreek
2 pass
3 pass
7/97
8/9s
tl4
tt6
5.3
5.5
45 (46)
27 Q7)
4?(4s-s6)
2eQ7-33)
8.1
4.6
Little Lost #13
(FS Savunill#6)
1.6km aboveSmithie
Fork
2 pass
8/9s
83
3.0
26 (27)
5l (26-88)
20.4
Little Lost #14
(FS Sawnill#7)
400 m aboveFirebox
Creek
I pass
Long I-ost Creek#1
3.2 km aboveDry
Creek(belowfalls)
I pass
8/95
502
22
noneobserved
Long Lost Creek#2
0.8 km abovefalls
I pass
8/95
802
22
noneobserved
Long Lost Creek#3
at endofroad (1.5km
belowHell Canyon)
I pass
8/95
1002
22
noneobserved
Long Lost Creek #4
100 meters above #3
I pass
8/95
1002
22
none observed
MaFi.Sui@
rtor@.I
1@
6195
5t
0.5"
8
IJ
6
39
66
58
34
yes
yes
/ <
48
3.6
b)
52
35
yes
yes
l3
26
87
74
yes
no
100
22 (26)
--
@.ohddlrd
ltbitdlioit
d
AppendixA (c@thuelt), sudmrlt of .rnFliag €ffort! snd IE ultt in the Little Ltt Rlier ttraimgp betweer1992ed 1997.(cstoldioBs st€ for fth tomm
€xceDtfor DLM ritet rrmDleilbetwecnDq! 'ltd 1994which .re for lilh >100mm.)
sb!
Mff
lld
To..l@
t0@(.[ft!l'
t@oh.di!.1
Popdd@
E drd.(Rolcl
8!.ds(96)
E|r
8"ddn
hgot
Ircdm
c$lo2hEt
di\tlsi@
Mahogany Creek #2
3 locatiors above
diversion
Massacre Creek
40 mabove Squaw
Creek
I pass
7/97
200
Meadow Creek #l
(umamed tributary)
at Forest boundary
2 pass
6/95
o/
.75
17 (Le)
Meadow Creek #2
(unnamed tributary)
0.8 km above Forest
boundary
visual/
I pass
6/95
502
.52
none observed
Mill Creek #l
atMill Creek
Campground
2 pass
2 pass
8/97
8/95
73
70
4.t
3.6
Mill Creek #2
0.5 km above trailhead
I pass
9/96
Mill Creek#3
upsheamfromMill
CreekLake
visual
8/95
502
l.o2
none observed
Mill Creelq umamed
tributary0.5 kmabove
trailhead
50 meters above Mill
Creek
I pass
9/96
252
0.52
none observed
habitatlimited
Moffit Creek
above Little Lost/
Palsimeroi Road
visual
5/97
102
252
none observed
habitatlimited
Moonshine Creek #l
immediately below
SawmillRoad
I pass
Moonshine Creek#2
immediately above
Sawmill Road
I pass
F
N)
F'
lw
Dj.
Iariifo)
6195
2t
visual./
I pass
752
9/95
rvurntd
wrlg
Tdrp'C
SaEr
M.lo6rycG.k#r
12
J.L
m/tmE'
Rn
&
CoEott
none observed
l4
8
l0
100
I (1)
s4 (57)
42 (44)
6 (6)
52
none observed
2A2
none observed
l8 (r7-r9)
35.5
12
88
habitatlimited
62 (54-74)
s0 (43-57)
20"7
20.0
3
12
9
3
52
4
36
n
o
no
someflsh
appearedtobe
Bk-Bl hybrid
('es &'97)
3 fish appeared
to beBk-Bl
hybri4 I
rainbowirout
wasobservedbut
uncapured
App€ndir A (c@timed). $tDmtry of lroplitrg €fiort, r|td r€$lts ir the Little L.6t Rtver drrinrge betw€.n 1992rnd 1997.(Calcd.ti@! rre for lilh :70DD
€$eDt lor BLM ritq ,ampledbetw€ctr1992strd 1994wlich ,re for firh >100m.)
st|td
Iio6!hi@
ts
N)
(Jl
#3
L..ntm
25oarboresahill
R@d
so|Phs
M.t!o.r
lpd
he
6gi
Iatth(pl
n
ttAtXXm)
\.9
f
Wdg
Iop"c
7
roi.lcqhtid
_
0rb)'
t0@(
t@otcdwd
North Creek#l
0.4 km aboveForest
boundary
I pass
8/9s
22
North Creek#2
0.8 km aboveForest
boundary
I pass
8/95
402
1.52
none observed
PineCreek
1"0km aboveBasin
Creek
visual
6197
1002
o 5
none observed
QuigleYCreek#1
25 maboveSawmill
CanyonRoad
I pass
6/97
t1
QuigleyCreek#2
200 m aboveSawmill
CanyonRoad
I pass
6/97
8'.7
1.2
none observed
RedrockCreek#l
0.2 km aboveTimber
Creek
I pass
9/95
42
1.9
8 (8)
Re(hockCreek#2
top endoftransectis
culverton road460A
I pass
6/97
90
RedrockCreek,Rig[rt
Fork
400 m abovekft Fork
lpass
6/97
52
RedrockCreek,Left
Fork
200 m aboveRiglrt
Fork
I pass
RockyRun Creek
0.5 km abovepipeline
diversion
I pass
'7/9',7
Sands Creek #l
0.2 km aboveForest
boundary
visual
7/95
Sands Creek #2
2 beaverponds
0.8km
aboveForestboundary
visual
7/95
Sands Creek #3
1.2km aboveForest
boundary
I pass
7/95
1 0( 1 0 )
none observed
none observed
)6
lot
0.9
none observed
402
1.52
none observed
none observed
1002
1.52
Fr'b100d
Rb
6D.d6(%)
BL
Br
I (l)
r (1)
t-a
Po[lldd
E rM.(Rat.)
none observed
100
100
S."t&
Pwr
c@.rt
App€ndirA (@nttureo. Sldesry of rtmpling effortt ad rerolt! ir tie Little LoctRiver drelnagebdm4
for BLM sites
Stream
Creek #l
f9t mi!1997. (Crlcalrtimr rI€ for filh:70Dm
between1992and 1994which are for fish >100mm.
Location
100m aboveTimber
Creek
Sampling
Methoil
Watcr
Total Captureil
>70mm(all
Date
1pass
6/97
8 (8)
none observed
Slide Creek #2
0.9 km aboveTimber
Creek
I pass
6/9'.1
Smithie Fork #l
just aboveSawmill
Roadbridge
2 pass
2 pass
7/97
8/95
SmithieFork #2
3.2 km above Little
l,ost River
2 pass
SmithieFork Trib.
(umamed)
200 m above
confluence
1 pass
SouthCreek#1
at diversion
SouthCreek#2
79
71
J.J
4.2
7
t2
68(6e)
75(77)
8e(e2>
126
3.4
9/97
45
1.5
I (t)
I pass
6/95
302
1.52
--(5)
200 m above diversion
I pass
8/95
202
1.52
noneobserved
SouthCreek#3
2.0 km above Forest
boundary
3 pass
8t95
<1
1.6
SouthCreek#4
3.2 km above Forest
boundary
I pass
8/95
252
1.52
SquawCreek#l
(Sawmill Canyon)
0.8 km above Sawmill
CanyonRoad
I pass
9/96
t)
3.3
ll
2',7Q4)
SquawCreek#2
(Savmill Canyon)
4.0 km above Sawmill
Road
2 pass
3 pass
7/97
8/95
56
66
2
3.3
9
l0
27 (40)
26 (2e)
tr'isb/100
rnz
71(68-83)
83(77-89)
r30(r02-158)
Rb
Species (%)
Bk
Bl
Sculpin
Present
100
no
20.1
28.4
97
93
no
no
30.3
100
Comments
mean width does
not include side
charmelthat was
inclu&d in
transect
ts
l\)
o\
at \zt)
100
no
no
27(27)
no
noneobserved
JJ
2TQ7-28)
2T\(26-2e)
24.1
t2.3
+l
ZJ
5t
15
48
58
ll
t9
no
no
some fish
appearedto be
Bk-Blhybrid
('9s&'e7)
SquawCreek#3
(Sawmill Canyon)
O.9kmaboveNorth
Fork
I pass
Squaw Creek, North
Fork #1 (Sawmill
0.6 km above Squaw
Creek
I pass
12(re)
9196
5'.7
1.7
10
e (12)
100
56
44
Appeddir A (contimr€d).SuDmrry 0flrmptrg efrort! end re, t! in the Uttle Lrt Rilcr drririge betn€to 1992snd 19!t7.(C{tculrtioDrsre for tilL:?omm
erceDlfor BLM rit€r srmllcd between1992sntl 1994rhich ar€ for filh U100@,)
P
N)
!
S.r{|hC
!d.tb.d
I pass
D.t
6/97
Iarltlh)
tt4
wlixd
1.8
tributary aboveSquaw
Creek#2onsouthside
ofroad
I pass
8/95
47
0.9
3 (3)
just aboveWet Creek
Road
2 pass
8/92
t07
1.0
a0 @/a)
47 (40-52)
43.9
43 (37-49)
36.2
StEo
SquawCreek,Norlh
Fork #2 (Sawmill
Can.)
Ia.dd
l.8kmabove Squaw
Creek
SquawCreek,
urmamedtributary
(SawmillCanyon)
SquawCreekBLM #1
(Wet Creek)
TdD"C
T.,t rc.I'hlril
>70m(.ll!rh)'
8 (8)
PoIEld@
Ecdr!d.(nor.)
IElnmf
Ab
SD.d.(%)
Efl
B(
13
88
33
Squaw Creek BLM #2
(Wet Creek)
168 metersabove #l
2 pass
8/92
99
t.2
37 (n/a)
Squaw Creek #2a
2.0 km above Wet
Creek
I pass
6t96
502
0.52
noneobserved
Squaw Creek #3 (Wet
Creek)
1.9 kmbelow
Massacre Creek
I pass
6/96
302
1.52
Squaw Creek #4 (Wet
Creek)
65 m above Massacre
Creek
I pass
100
1.5
Summerhouse Canyon
#l
1.2 km below Forest
boundary
I pass
7/95
1002
.5
Sunnnerhouse Canyon
#2
0.8 km above Forest
boundary
visual
7/95
1002
noneobserved
Summerhouse Canyon
#3
1.6 km above Forest
boundarv
I pass
7/95
502
noneobserved
Summerhouse
Canyon 3.2 km above Forest
#4
boundary
I pass
7195
1002
1.02
noneobserved
SummitCreek#1
(BLM#3)
4.0 kmbelow Sa\i.rnill
Rd
2 pass
8/92
97
1.8
23 (n/a)
28 (2335)
16.0
SummitCreek#2
(BLM#2)
1.6 kmbelow Sawmill
Rd
3 pass
8/92
106
2.8
70 (n/a)
72 (70-76)
24.3
100
SummitCreek#3
(BLM#l)
0.8 km below Sawmill
Rd
3 pass
8/92
ll0
3.0
129(n/a)
39.4
100
l5
Sotlh
lrqcrl
no
(M
67
100
habitatvery
degraded
5 (5)
100
4 (4)
100
noneobserved
130(129-133)
yes
App€ndixA (cmti ed). SuDDrry of srnplirg efrorf! nlrt rerult, tr the Little Lo,rtRiver drriDsgebetween1992a[d 1997.(Crtqrlelton! rr€ for firh =70nd
erceDtfor ELM .its r{DDledbetwc€n1992rtrrt 1994which rrc for fi,h >100trm.)
Sibd!
L..dd
solhs
rLalon
Dll.
Logtb{r)
$rdo!@)
wdq
T@p"C
Tot l c. 4.d
:70@(dlti)'
ei 1eS1
PoIIldo
E!tuj.(ndi.)
7.2
12
2 (2)
100
yes
100
yes
nruro{ ol
Rh
9s
$.d.r e/5)
E
Br
3
2
s@llhr
PEd
y6
C
CanyonRoad
SummitCreek#5
100 mbelow Iron
Springs
1 pass
6/97
59
SummitCreek#6
Iron Springs
I pass
6/97
170
l.J
1)
6 (6)
Timber Creek#l
0.8 km above Little
Lost River
3 pass
2 pass
7/97
8/95
133
133
4.7
3.6
10
10
42 (46)
23 (23)
TimberCreek#2
100 m above Slide
Creek
hook and
line
6/97
1002
2.02
43 (424s)
26(2330)
6.9
5.5
5
l7
--
I (l)
95
83
yes
y€s
100
no
app. 5 other bull
troutbetween
100-200mm
were observed
('e7)
F
t\)
@
Uncle Ike Creek #1
atdivenion
I pass
9/9s
53
t <
Uncle Ike Creek#2
1.5 kmabove diversion
I pass
9/9s
59
2.1
Uncle Ike Creek #3
4.8 kmabove diversion
visual
9/95
102
.52
Warm Creek #l
O.4kmabove Little
I,ost
2 pass
6/95
47
2.6
Warm Creek #2
0.6 km above upper
Forest boundary
I pass
6/95
34
2
Warm SpringsCreek
(BLM)
below Little Lost
Highway
2 pass
Wet Creek(BLM #7)
just below Pancheri
diversion
3 pass
8/92
118
Wet Creek(BLM #6)
justbelow Dry Creek
hydro
2 pass
8t92
94
Wet Creek(BLM #5)
3.6 kmbelow Squaw
Creek
2 pass
). t
6
5 (e)
33
67
no
3 (4)
67
33
no
none observed
l0
8 (8)
no
8 (8-e)
6.7
100
no
t00
I (l)
86 (nla)
e4 (88-99)
24.8
100
27 (n/a)
28 (27-3r)
6.4
85
4 (nla)
5 (4-6)
t.2
25 (n/a)
29 (2s-3s)
5.1
96
habitat limited
no
2 bull trout app.
70 and110mm
wereobserved
but uncaptured
AppendixA (conttnueo. Sumrmryofrrmplitrg effort! rtrd rc$tltr itrlhe Littl€ LodtRiv€r drrimge befw€en1992rr|tl1997. (Crlculrtim! rr€ forfirh:708m
€rceptfor BIIII !it€! .aDDleilbetw€en1992trd 1994which rle for firh >100m.)
Wet Creek (BLM #4)
ts
Location
2.0 km below Squaw
Creek
Sampling
Methoil
Date
Lenqth(m)
3 pass
Width(m)
Wate^r
Temp"C
Total Capfirred .
>70mm(allfish)r
Population
Estimate(Ranse)
Fish/100m2
Rb
3.9
2l (n/a)
22(2r-24)
2.8
L7(n/a)
2r (17-26)
6.6
94
Wet Creek (BLM #3)
1.2 km above Squaw
Creek
2 pass
8/92
Wet Creek (BLM #2)
0.8 kmbelow #1
2 pass
8192
rt7
3.3
19(n/a)
20(1e-2r)
5.2
100
Wet Creek (BLM #1)
2.4kmbelow Fonest
boundary
2 pass
8/92
89
4.3
2l (n/a)
22(2r-24)
5.7
100
Wet Creek#O
topendoftransectis
Big Creek
lpass
7/97
t70
5.1
l0
l6 (16)
Wet Creek #l
0.6 km above Forest
boundary
I pass
3 pass
7/96
7/95
104
t92
2.2
2.2
t0
l5
28 (28)
34 (34)
Wet Creek #la
250 m above Coal Cr.
I pass
7/96
87
2.3
12
l5 (15)
Wet Creek #l aa
beaverpondbelow
Hilts Creek
snorkel
7/96
Wet Creek #lb
at Hilts Creek
2 pass
8/97
t02
3.6
WetCreek#2
0.5 km above Hifts
Creek (top end of
pn"at")
2 pass
8i9s
151
3.5
Wet Creek #3
0.8 km aboveHilts
Creek(inmeadow)
3 pass
2 pass
6/96
8/95
138
95
3.6
2.8
Wet Creek #3a
108m above#3
2 pass
6/96
48
Wet Creek #4
2.2 km aboveHilts
Creek
I pass
7t9s
135
Wet Creek,unnamed
tributary(across from
Coal Creek)#1
100 meters above Wet
Creek
I pass
81
zs pi-zt1
8.3
96
100
It
Species (%)
BK
BI
13
Sculpin
Present
6
yes
:.
yes
yes
,1
yes
Commerrts
N)
10
402
602
65 (6e)
69(65:76)
18.8
37
63
yes
12(13)
13(12-14)
2.4
75
25
yes
10
8
54 (54)
2e Qe)
s6 (54-60)
32(2e36)
11.3
t2.l
28
3l
72
69
no
no
2.8
9
1 1( l l )
11(11-12)
8.2
36
64
2.0
7
1.0
17
t2
noneobserved
included 3
sections onmain
charmeland I on
a side channel
- - (30')
all fish were
rainbowtrout
35-65 mm
Appotdir A (cmlided). $mtlary of srmpl|ngetrort! rtrd rcrulfi itr the Little Lolt River dirilrge betwern1992rnd 1997.(Crtculrtionsrt€ for 6d:?oton
€rceDtfor BLM .itc. ramDledbetween1992.rd 1994which {IE for firh >100mm.)
St|€D
w.rctds'n.-.d
tibulry(!ro
tm
L.d@
0.6h!.!4 wd
Ot*
S.ldllht
M.tlrd
llrs
lta.
787
Iagilor)
91
752
uddiud
1,2
rd!"C
l0
lot l Cqhtd
>70@(.[ fhtr)'
20(21)
PoFHo
E rhd.G!$)
ILMooD'
Rh
100
sr.d6 (%)
BL
I!
sorF
PEd
Cl'@c!
Coal Creek)#2
F
(^)
Williams Creek#l
1.6kmbelowForest
boundary
I pass
6/95
Williams Creek#2
beaverpondat Forest
boundary
hookand
line
6/97
Williams Creek#3
1.6km aboveForest
boundary
3 pass
6195
Y Springs
at Forestboundary
visual
6/95
12
1.4
I (1)
100
't (7)
100
7 (12)
Urmarnedtributary
202
.)at Forestboundary
none observed
visual
6/9s
approximatelyI km
southof Waf,mCreek
' For BLM sitessampledbetween1992 alr.d1994this columnindicatesnumberof fish > 100mrn
'Representsan estimateor an approximation.
tM6fSe!crydr.dh1iilt
*trh&@ldb.h.ldb.tee@Ft4
t!..fq.,filhk6Fld!.dD.ldwlb.te!..tbct,ap.s6
pcehEiL.!d'e6r.d
7 (7-8)
yes
100
dueto limited
habitat a survey
was not
condusted
habitat limited
It@yh.lcdftelhdloedth*fAtuEdbr.*idoter..!6ed,ME
APPENDIX B
Appendix B. Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the Little Lost
River drainage.
BadgerCreek#l- (9120/95)
3.2 km aboveLittle LostRiver
RainbowTrout(n=4)
50
45
40
35
r 3 0
7,
20
l5
l0
5
L€ngth (mm)
L32
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
BadgerCreek#2 - (9120195)
1.4 km abovethe Forest boundarY
RainbowTrout(n=13)
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
o
z
1,o
15
l0
5
Bull Trout(n=1)
'
Length (mm)
133
156
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
BadgerCreek#3 - (7116197)
0.3 km aboveBunting CunyonCreek
RainbowTrout (n=17)
Ifngth
(mm)
Bull Trout(n=2)
r34
Appendix B (continued).Lenglh frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drunage.
BadgerCreek#3 - (6120195)
0.3 km aboveBunting CunyonCreek
RainbowTrout (n=17)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
Z 2 0
15
r0
5
Length (mm)
BullTrout(n=1)
I*ngth
(mm)
13s
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
BasinCreek#2 - (7/02/97)
300 m belowPine Creek
RainbowTrout (n=21
Ls6
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River dtainage.
Bear Creek#l - (9195)
0.6 km aboveSawmill CanYonRoad
RainbowTrout (n=20)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
Z 2 0
l5
l0
5
hngth
r37
(mm)
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Big Creek#l - (9/13196)
0,8 km sbove WetCreek
RainbowTrout (n=13)
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
2 2 0
t5
l0
Ixngth
(mm)
BrookTrout(n=1)
I*ngth (mm)
138
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Big Creek#l - (8/1L194)
0.8 km aboveWet Creek
RainbowTrout (n=13)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
2 2 0
l5
l0
5
If,ngth
(mm)
BrookTrout(n=3)
45
40
35
30
25
E, 20
15
l0
5
Irngth
L39
(mm)
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drunage.
Big Creek#La- (9113196)
20 metersaboveForestboundary
Trout(n=16)
Rainbow
(mm)
I*nglh
BrookTrout(n=20)
i@
,56
a@
kngth (mm)
L40
350
4oo
45o
Joo
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Litfle Lost River drainage.
Big Creek#2 - (9115194)
At trailhead
RainbowTrout (n=28)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
Z 2 0
l0
5
0
I*ngth
(nm)
BrookTrout(n=26)
50
45
40
35
o
30
25
Z
2T
l5
l0
5
-.,,''id'.'lob''.ilb'''dob''.j:6'..j06'..j:6','do6'.',i'd...j0.
I*ngth
L4L
(mm)
AppendixB (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Big Creek#3 - (8/11194\
ImmediatelybelowbeaverPond
RainbowTrout(n=741
50
45
35
30
25
20
l5
l0
Irength (mm)
BrookTrout(n=46)
50
45
40
35
30
25
z
20
l0
5
o
kngth (mm)
Bull Trout(n=3)
a hYbrid
appeared
Onebulltrout
50
45
40
35
r 3 0
Z 2 0
l0
5
0
""'5d'"iob"'irb"'iob
i:b
ioi
kngth (mm)
L42
i5i
106
'i50
5m
AppendixB (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Litfle Lost River drainage.
Big Creek#4 - (91L5194)
Immediately abovebeaverPond
RainbowTrout (n=23)
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
t0
kngth
(mm)
BrookTrout(n=1241
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
l0
5
0
""'!0".-i@"'i56"'r@"'i5i---,@
If,ngth
350
400
450
500
450
J@
(mm)
Bull Trout(n=7)
all bull trout appearedto be hybrids
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
a q <
2 2 0
l5
l0
5
0
""'!d"'ioi"'iii
"ioo---z5b--i@
I*ngth
L43
(mm)
350
400
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Big SpringsCreek- (9110/93)
0.8 km aboveBuck and Bird Road
RainbowTrout (n=85)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
2 2 0
l0
5
I*ngth
(mm)
BrookTrout(n=20)
50
45
40
35
r 3 0
2 2 0
l5
l0
5
500
Icngth
L44
(mm)
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Bunting CanyonCreek#1 ' (7116197)
175 m uboveBadger Creek
RainbowTrout (n=3)
(mm)
kngth
BullTrout(n=6)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
=".
Z 2 0
t5
t0
5
0
"
"'
i o '" '
io'
.'
..'
i c i "t '
ir6
isb'
.'
iod''' i56''' ioi
I*ngth (mm)
L45
- --
-150' ioa
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Litfle Lost River drainage.
CampCreek#l - (9112195)
100 metersaboveTimber Creek
Bull Trout (n=5)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
Z 2 0
l5
l0
5
I*ngth
(mm)
L46
AppendixB (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
CoalCreek- (716195)
Below gate
RainbowTrout (n=9)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
2 2 0
l5
10
5
I*ngth
(mm)
L47
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drunage.
DeerCreek(BLM) #1 - (814192)
2.1 km aboveLittle Lost River
RainbowTrout (n=211
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
Z 2 0
l0
5
Iength
(mm)
L48
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Deer Creek(BLM) #2 - (814192)
7.6 km belowForest boundary
RainbowTrout (n=48)
50
45
40
3J
! 3 0
Zzo
l0
5
kngth
(mm)
L49
Appendix B. Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the Little Lost
River drainage.
Deer Creek(ForestService)- (6115195)
At Forestboundary
RainbowTrout(n=38)
I*ngth
(mm)
150
Appendix B (continued).Leng1hfrequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
DeerCreekoNorth Fork - (6119195)
0.2 km sbovecontluencewith South Fotk
RainbowTrout(n=178)
ilt
ti--ilt;.
:lll_.llllllh_
I€ngth
L5I
(mm)
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drunage.
DeerCreek,SouthFork - (6115195)
0.5 km aboveconfluencewith Notth Fork
RainbowTrout (n=29)
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Litfle Lost River drainage.
Dry Creek#l - (819195)
50 meterssbovediversionPool
Rainbowx GutthroatTrout(n=2)
50
45
40
35
o
30
25
z
20
15
l0
BrookTrout(n=21
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
Z 2 0
l5
l0
5
If,ngth
(mm)
153
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Litfle Lost River drunage.
Dry Creek#2 - (8123195)
0.8 km abovediversion
Brook Trout (n=211
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
=
.
<
2 2 0
l0
If,ngth
(mm)
t54
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Litfle Lost River dral;nage.
Dry Creek#3 - (819195)
150metersaboveForestboandary
BrookTrout(n=57)
kngth
(mm)
155
Appendix B (continued).Lenglh frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Dry Creek#4 - (8/9195)
Pool adjacentto #3
BrookTrout(n=67)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
2 2 0
l5
-
t0
5
If,ngth
(mm)
156
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Fallert SpringsCreek- (9110193)
Above Fsllert SpringsBridge
RainbowTrout (n={6}
Irngth (mm)
Ls7
Appendix B (continued).Lenglh frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Firebox Creek- (7l3ll97)
400 m aboveLittle Lost River
Bull Trout (n=41)
Irngth (mm)
158
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Hawley Creek- (9112195)
Just aboveIron CreekRoad
Bull Trout (n=1)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
=^.
2 2 0
l0
5
Irngth
(mm)
159
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenrydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
HorseCreek#l - (7116197)
Beginning at private proPefiYline
RainbowTrout(n=221
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
HorseCreek#2- (612195)
0.8km belowtheForestboundary
Trout(n=17)
Rainbow
45
40
35
o
z
30
20
l5
l0
s
t6L
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenrydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Iron Creek- (9116196)
Just aboveIron CreekRosd
Bull Trout (n=8)
50
45
40
35
I*ngth
(mm)
t62
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Iron Creek- (8123195)
fust sbovelron CreekRoad
Bull Trout (n=14)
50
40
L 3 0
Z 2 0
t5
l0
5
0'''''id'''iob''.i:b'''ioh'''ish'..jod'''j:6...j06...,i56...j06
Irngth
(mm)
763
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
JacksonCreek- (9112195)
fust aboveIron CreekRoad
Bull Trout (n=21
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
=..
2 2 0
l0
5
Length (mm)
164
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Litfle Lost River drainage.
Little Lost River #l - (9/6193)
0.8 km belowBig Springs Creek
RainbowTrout (n=6)
L65
AppendixB (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Little Lost River #2 - (916/93)
0.4 km belowBuck and Bird Road
RainbowTrout (n=11)
50
45
40
35
30
25
z
l5
" | | | r | ! d | | | i o 6| I ' i r b" '
L o b", L s L" ' d o d ' , 'j s d" , . i o ,
I*ngth (mm)
BullTrout(n=1)
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
= ..
2 2 0
10
5
0
(mm)
L66
" i r o' ' ' j o 6
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Little Lost River #3 - (917193)
At Clyde Campgroand
RainbowTrout (n=1291
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
= ..
.)
2 2 0
l5
l0
5
I*ngth
(mm)
BrookTrout(n=2)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
€".
2 2 0
l5
10
5
0
Irngth (mm)
Bull Trout(n=4)
kngth (mm)
167
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Litfle Lost River drainage.
Little Lost River #4 (BLM Sawmill #4) ' (7ll4l97)
Lowerendof lowerpusture
Trout(n=10)
Rainbow
50
45
40
35
b 3 0
Z 2 0
l5
l0
5
I*ngth
(mm)
BrookTrout(n=2)
45
40
35
30
z
l5
5
BullTrout(n=2)
50
45
40
35
& 3 0
1..
Z 2 0
1J
l0
5
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
/93)
Little Lost River #4 (BLM Sawmill#4) - (8117
Lower end of lowerpasture
RainbowTrout (n=13)
50
45
40
35
r 3 0
o
Z 2 0
l5
l0
5
'
Irngth
1oa
(mm)
BrookTrout(n=1)
50
40
35
E 3 0
o
=".
Z 2 0
l5
10
5
Irngth (mm)
L69
454)
i00
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Littte Lost River #5 (BLM Sawmill#3) - (7/14/97)
AboveMahogany CreekRoad
RainbowTrout (n=18)
50
45
35
! 3 0
Z 20
l5
I-€ngth (mm)
BrookTrout(n=2)
Icngth (nm)
Bull Trout(n=4)
Irngth (mm)
L70
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River dranage.
Little Lost River #5 (BLM Sawmill#3) - (8117193)
AboveMuhogany CreekRoad
RainbowTrout (n=7)
50
4S
40
35
L 3 0
o
Z 2 0
l5
l0
5
I*ngth
(mm)
BrookTrout(n=2)
50
45
40
35
h 3 0
2 2 0
l5
t0
5
BullTrout(n=1)
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
o
2 2 0
10
5
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Little Lost River #6 (BLM Sawmill #2) - (7ll4l97)
Lowerportion of upperexclosure
RainbowTrout(n=25)
50
45
40
35
r 3 0
Z 2 0
l5
l0
)
Bull Trout(n=2)
172
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Little Losr River #6 (BLM Sawmill #2) - (8116193)
Lower portion of upPer exclosare
RainbowTrout (n=39)
kngth
(mm)
BrookTrout(n=1)
40
3s
30
z
20
15
Irngth
(mm)
Buff Trout(n=21
Iength
(mm)
L73
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Littte Lost River #7 (BLM Sawmill#l) - (7114197)
2.4 km belowSawmill CanYonRoad
RainbowTrout(n=36)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
=..
2 2 0
t5
l0
5
0-
' ' '
io'
' ' '
ioi
' ' '
ir6
' ' '
iob
' ' '
isb
' ' '
iod
' ' '
i5d
' ' '
iod
- - ' 'ira ' '
Irneth (mm)
BrookTrout(n=3)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
2 2 0
l5
l0
5
offi
400
I*ngth (mm)
BullTrout(n=1)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
2 2 0
l5
l0
5
0
"
"
'
!d "
'
iob "
'i5b "
'iob"
i5b-
a@-
Length (mm)
t74
asd
400
too
Appendix B (continued).Length ftequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Litfle Lost River drainage.
Littte Lost River #7 (BLM Sawmill#D - $116/93)
2.4 km belowSswmill CanYonRosd
RainbowTrout (n=39)
45
40
35
30
25
z
20
l5
l0
5
BrookTrout(n=4)
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
o
Z 2 0
l5
l0
5
I*ngth (mm)
L75
Appendix B (continued).Length ftequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Little Lost River #8 (FS Sawmill#1) - (7115197)
At Forestboundary
RainbowTrout(n=58)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
= ..
2 2 0
l5
t0
I*ngth
(mm)
BrookTrout(n=2)
one brooktrout appeareda hybrid
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
220
l5
l0
5
I*ngth (mm)
BullTrout(n=3)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
i r <
2 2 0
l5
10
5
I*ngtft (mm)
L76
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Little Lost River #S(FS Sawmill#1) - (9114195)
At Forestboundary
RainbowTrout(n=98)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
Z 2 0
l5
10
5
I*ngth
(mm)
BrookTrout(n=4)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
Z 2 0
t5
l0
5
Icngth
(mm)
BullTrout(n=3)
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
E
x
2 2 0
l5
l0
5
0
""'!d"'lob'''isb
''iod
kngth
r5it ioi
(mm)
177
i56
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Litfle Lost River drainage.
Little Lost River #9 GS Sawmill#2) - (7117197)
Behind Guard Station
RainbowTrout (n=69)
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
z 20
l5
l0
5
0
Irngth
(mm)
BrookTrout(n=8)
z
Irngth (mm)
Bull Trout(n=2)
I*ngth (mm)
178
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Little Lost River #9 (FS Sawmill#2) - (9114/95)
Behind Guard Station
RainbowTrout (n=90)
50
45
40
30
z
,0
15
l0
5
0
kngth (mm)
BrookTrout(n=4)
50
45
40
35
r 3 0
Z 2 0
l5
t0
5
Bull Trout(n=3)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
2 2 0
l5
l0
kngth (mm)
L79
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Little Lost River #10 (FS Sawmill#3) - (7ll7197)
AboveMill Creek
RainbowTrout (n=40)
Ifngth
(mm)
BrookTrout(n=221
some brook trout appeared hybrids
Irngth (mm)
180
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Little Lost River #rc (F'SSawmill#3) - (9113195)
AboveMill Creek
RainbowTrout (n=41)
50
4S
40
35
r 3 0
Zzi
l5
t0
5
' ,iod
'
454t
500
BrookTrout(n=8)
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
2 2 0
l5
10
5
BullTrout(n=3)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
2 q <
2 2 0
15
t0
5
--'',!d'..iob'''i:b...iob,''isir'..jod.'.js6...,i00.'',i56...jod
Icngth
(mm)
181
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Little Lost River #lua (FS sawmill #3) - (8122197)
10 m abovelron CreekRosd
RainbowTrout {n=121
Irngth (mm)
BrookTrout(n=1)
(mm)
Bull Trout(n=211
182
Appendix B (continued).Lenglh ftequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost Rivel dtunage.
Litfle Lost River #lDa (Fs sawmitl #3a)- 9116196
10 m aboveIron CreekRosd
RainbowTrout (n=19)
50
45
35
! 3 0
Z 2 0
l5
Length (mm)
BullTrout(n=11)
kngth (mm)
183
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Little Lost River #ll (F.SSawmill#4) - (7115197)
Below Timber Creek
RainbowTrout (n=15)
50
45
40
35
k 3 0
z . <
Z 2 0
l5
l0
5
BullTrout(n=13)
i56
' ' _
ioi
-
,5d'
ioo
Length (mm)
L84
350
4oo
45o
t@
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturcdin samplingsitesin the
Litfle Lost River drainage.
Little Lost River #Il (FS Sawmill#4) - (9113195)
Below Timber Creek
RainbowTrout (n=171
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
Zzo
l5
10
5
If,ngth
Gnm)
BullTrout(n=9)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
Z 2 0
l0
5
kngth
(mm)
18s
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainase.
Little Lost River #12 (F'SSawmill#5) - (7115/97)
AboveMoonshine Creek
RainbowTrout (n=7)
45
40
-"
"
"5d"'io6"'i:6"'iai"'is6'-'i@''-3:50-(mm)
I*ngth
404
Bull Trout(n=39)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
Z 2 0
t5
l0
5
____l__
I*ngth (mm)
L86
450
i00
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapluredin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Little Lost River #12 (FS Sawmill #5) - (8/8/95)
AboveMoonshine Creek
RainbowTrout (n=7)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
2 2 0
l5
l0
5
Length (mm)
BuffTrout(n=201
r87
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Little Lost River #13 (FS Sawmill#6) - (812195)
7.6 km aboveSmithie Fork
Bull Trout (n=271
188
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydisUibutionof salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drairnge.
Little Lost River #14 (FS Sawmill #7) - (7l3ll97)
400 m aboveFirebox Creek
Bull Trout (n=26)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
2 2 0
t5
l0
5
189
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Litfle Lost River drainage.
MassacreCreek- (7l0ll97)
40 m aboveSquawCreek
Twotroutwereobservedin the transectbut notcaptured.Onewas positivelyidentifiedas a rainbowtrout.
L90
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drunage.
MeadowCreek,(unnamedtributary #1) - (6128195)
At Forestboundary
RainbowTrout(n=2)
50
45
40
35
r 3 0
2 2 0
l0
5
BrookTrout(n=171
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
P
=".
Z 2 0
t5
l0
5
i50
L91
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Litfle Lost River drainage.
Mill Creek#l - (8122197)
Below Mill Creek Campground
RainbowTrout (n=5)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
Z 2 0
l5
t0
5
0
Brook Trout(n=50)
manybrooktroutappearedhYbrids
35
L 3 0
Z 2 0
l5
t5o
BulfTrout(n=21
Length (mm)
192
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Milt Creek#l - (8116195)
Below Mill Creek CamPground
RainbowTrout(n=5)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
Z 2 0
l5
l0
5
kngth (mm)
BrookTrout (n=241
50
45
40
35
r 3 0
Z 2 0
l5
l0
5
0
I*ngth
(mm)
two bull trout appearedto be hybrids
BullTrout(n=15)
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
l5
t0
o
450
Irngth (mm)
L93
Appendix B (continued).Lenglh frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Mill Creek#2 - (9/16/96)
0.5 km abovethe trailhead
one rainbowtrout was observedin the transectbut not captured
mostbrook trout and bull trout appearedto be hybrids
BrookTrout(n=4)
50
45
40
35
!r 30
2 2 0
r5
l0
5
450
I*ngth (mm)
Bull Trout(n=2)
50
45
40
35
30
25
z
20
l5
l0
5
Irngth
(mm)
L94
ioo
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
North Creek#l - (8-17-95)
0.4km aboveForestboundarY
One rainbow trout approdmately 100mm in length wascaptured.
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
QuigleyCreek#l - (6126197)
25 m aboveSawmill CanyonRoad
Onebull trout 195 mm in length was captured.
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
RedrockCreek#I - (9112195)
0.2 km aboveTimber Creek
Bull Trout (n=8)
Irngth
(mm)
L97
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
RedrockCreek#2 - (6126197)
Topendof trunsectis culverton road 460A
BullTrout(n=10)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
= . <
zt0
l5
l0
5
Irngth (mm)
198
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SlideCreek#l - (6127197)
100 m aboveTimber Creek
Bull Trout (n=8)
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
4 2 0
l5
l0
5
L€ngth (mm)
L99
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenrydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SmithieFork #l - (7llll97)
AboveSawmill CanyonRoad bridge
RainbowTrout(n=2)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
220
t5
l0
0
"
"'io'"'ioi
"'i:6
"'i06"'is:0"'r'od'"iri''-4bo
- "i5o-
kngth (mm)
Bull Trout(n=67)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
2 2 0
t5
l0
5
L€ngth (mm)
200
5@
Appendix B (continued).Leng1hfrequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SmithieFork #l - (8123195)
AboveSawmill CanyonRoad bridge
RainbowTrout(n=5)
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
z 2 0
l5
l0
5
L€ngth (mm)
BullTrout(n=721
1oo
Length (mm)
20L
450
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SmithieFork #2 - (812195)
3.2 km aboveLittle Lost River
Bull Trout(n=92)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
2 2 0
l5
10
5
kngth
(mm)
202
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SouthCreek#1 - (6195)
At diversion
Rainbowtrout ranging from approximately75 rttmto 200 mm in length
20s
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SouthCreek#3 - (8/17195)
2.0km aboveForestboundary
RainbowTrout(n=271
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
2 2 0
l0
5
Irngth
(nm)
204
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SquawCreek#1 (SawmillCanyon)- (9/13196)
0.8 km aboveSawmill CanYonRoud
RainbowTrout (n={3)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
Z 2 0
l5
l0
5
I*ngth
(mm)
BrookTrout(n=171
50
45
40
35
6 3 0
Ezo
l5
l0
5
I*nglh
(mm)
Bull Trout(n=4)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
z ^ .
220
t5
205
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SquawCreek#2 (SawmillCanyon)- (7116197)
AboveNorth Fork
RainbowTrout (n={3}
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
2 2 0
l5
l0
5
5@
BrookTrout(n=241
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
; . <
Z 2 0
l5
l0
J
Bull Trout(n=3)
45
40
35
30
25
I*ngth (mn)
206
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SquawCreek#2 (SawmillCanyon)- (8/15195)
AboveNorth Fork
RainbowTrout (n=6)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
Z 20
15
l0
5
BrookTrout(n=18)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
Z 2 0
t5
l0
5
Irngth (mm)
BullTrout(n=5)
Appendix B (continued).Lenglh frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SquawCreek#3 (SawmillCanyon)- (8123196)
0.9 km aboveNorth Fork SquawCreek
Bull Trout (n=19)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
2 2 0
l5
t0
5
0
Irngth
(mm)
208
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the Little
Lost River drainage.
SquawCreek,North Fork #1 (SawmillCanyon)- (9ll4l9ql
4.6 km aboveSquoutCreeh
Brook Trout (n=7)
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
o
= . <
zx0
t5
10
5
0
I*ngth
(nm)
Bull Trout (n=5)
kngth (mm)
209
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the Little Lost
River drainage.
SquawCreek,North Fork #2 (SawmillCanyon)- (6127197)
1.8 km aboveSquaw Creek
BrookTrout (n=1)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
=
.
<
2 2 0
t5
l0
5
kngth (mm)
BullTrout(n=7)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
= . <
220
l5
t0
5
I*ngth
2L0
(mm)
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SquawCreek(Sawmill)(unnamedtributaryl) - (S/15/95)
aboveSquaw Creek#2 on south side of road
RainbowTrout (n=1)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
Z 2 0
l5
t0
5
L€ngth (mm)
BrookTrout(n=2)
JO
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
9- ..
Z 2 0
l5
l0
5
I*ngth
(mm)
t This tributary entersSquawCreekon the southsideofthe streama short distanceabovethe confluence
of SquawCreekand North Fork Squaw.
zLT
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SquawCreek#1 (Wet Creek)- (8110/92)
Just aboveWetCreekRoad
RainbowTrout (n=49)
If,ngth
(mm)
2L2
AppendixB (continued).Leng1hfrequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Litfle Lost River drainage.
SquawCreek#2 QVetCreek)- (8110/92)
168 metersabove#1
RainbowTrout (n=40)
150
L€ngth (mm)
2L3
Appendix B (continued).Lengttr frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SquawCreek#3 (Wet Creek)- (6117196)
7.9 km belowMassacreCreek
RainbowTrout (n=5)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
2 2 0
t5
t0
5
Length (mm)
2L4
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SquawCreek#4 (Wet Creek)- (7l0ll97)
65 m aboveMassacreCreek
RainbowTrout(n=4)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
a q <
220
l5
10
5
Irngth (mm)
2r5
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscaptued in sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SummitCreek#1 (BLM #3) - (816/92)
4.0 km belowSawmill CanYonRoad
RainbowTrout (n=211
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
=..
2 2 0
l5
t0
5
L€ngth (mm)
BrookTrout(n=21
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
zx0
l5
l0
5
I*ngth (mm)
2L6
AppendixB (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SummitCreek#2 (BLl.{ #2) - (816192)
7.6 km belowSswmill CanYonRoad
RainbowTrout (n=771
50
45
40
35
30
25
Length (mm)
2L7
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Litfle Lost River drunage.
SummitCreek#3 (BLM #1) - (816192)
0.8 km belowSawmill CanYonRoad
RainbowTrout (n=136)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
c
E r <
2 2 0
l5
l0
5
L€ngth (mm)
2L8
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SummitCreek#4 - (l0ll2l95)
400m belowSawmillCanyonRoad
RainbowTrout(n=62)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
2 2 0
l5
t0
5
0
kngth
(mm)
BrookTrout (n=21
50
45
40
35
r 3 0
o
2 2 0
l5
10
5
0
Irngth
(mm)
Onebull trout approximately200 mm long was also captured'
2L9
Appendix B (continued).Lenglh frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
SummitCreek#5 - (6127197)
100m belowlron Springsinflow
RainbowTrout(n=21
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
Z 2 0
l5
l0
5
I*ngth
(mm)
220
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Litfle Lost River drunage.
SummitCreek#6 - (6127/97)
Iron Springs
RainbowTrout(n=6)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
Ezo
10
5
I*ngth (mm)
22r
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Litfle Lost River drainage.
Timber Creek#l - (7ll1l97)
0.8 km aboveLittle Lost River (Sawmill Creek)
RainbowTrout (n=3)
50
45
35
30
25
20
l5
t0
5
kngth (mn)
Bull Trout(n=43)
Icngth
(mm)
222
Appendix B (continued).Length:frequencydiirtributionof salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin tle
',
.
Little LostRiver diainage.
.
Timber Creek#l - {8/8/95)
0.8 km aboveLittle Lost River (Swmill Cteeh)
RainbowTrout {n=4}
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
20
Z.
l5
10
J
Bull Trout (n={9)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
220
10
5
I*ngth
(m)
223
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Timber Creek#2 - (6126197)
100 m aboveSlide Creele
Onebull trout approximately165 mm in length was capturedduring approximatelyI hour of hook and
line sampling. Approximately 5 otherbull trout 100to 200 mm in length were observed.
224
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drunase.
UncleIke Creek- (9121195)
At diversion
RainbowTrout (n=3)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
Z 2 0
l5
l0
5
'
Length (mm)
BrookTrout(n=6)
Length (mm)
225
n5i
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Unclelke Creek- (9121195)
1.6 km abovediversion
RainbowTrout (n=2)
BrookTrout(n=2)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
= r <
2 2 0
10
5
Length (mm)
226
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Warm Creek#l - (6127195)
0.4 km aboveLittle Lost River (Sawmill Creek)
RainbowTrout (n=8)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
Z z o
15
10
5
If,ngth
(mm)
227
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drunage.
\ilarm Creek#2 - (6127195)
0.6km aboveupperForestboundary
BullTrout(n=1)
Irngth (mm)
Two additional bull trout approximately70 mm and 110 mm in length were seenin the transect.
228
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Warm SpringsCreek- (8117193)
Below Little Lost River HighwaY
RainbowTrout (n=86)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
2 2 0
l5
l0
5
'
Length (mm)
229
,i50
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Wet Creek(BLM #7) - (8113192)
Jast belowPancheri diversion
RainbowTrout (n=23)
50
45
40
35
30
75
Lenglh (mm)
BrookTrout(n=2)
z
L€ngth (mm)
Bull Trout (n=4)
I*ngth
(mm)
230
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Wet Creek(BLM #6) - (8113192)
fust belowDry Creek hydroelectricplant
RainbowTrout (n=3)
50
43
40
35
L 3 0
o
2 2 0
l5
l0
L€ngth (mm)
BullTrout(n=1)
' ,ioo
Irngth
(mm)
23L
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Wet Creek (BLM #5) - (8/13192)
3.6 km belowSquaw Creek
RainbowTrout (n=241
50
4S
40
35
L 3 0
o
Z 2 0
l5
l0
kngth (mm)
BullTrout(n=1)
35
30
25
20
l5
r0
Irngth
(mm)
232
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Wet Creek(BLM #4) - (8112192)
2.0 km belowSquawCreek
RainbowTrout (n=211
I€ngth
(mm)
233
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Wet Creek(BLM #3) - (8/11192)
1.2 km aboveSquawCreek
RainbowTrout (n=20)
L€ngth (mm)
Bull Trout(n=1)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
= ^.
220
l5
10
5
Length (mm)
234
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Wet Creek(BLM #2) - (8/11192)
0.8 km below BLM #1
RainbowTrout (n=211
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
e
=..
2 2 0
l5
l0
Irngth (mm)
235
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Litfle Lost River drunage.
Wet Creek(BLM #1) - (8/11192)
2.4 km below the Forest boundury
RainbowTrout (n=25)
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
o
? r<
2 2 0
l5
l0
I*ngth (mm)
236
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
WetCreek0-(7102197)
Top end of transectis Big Creek
RainbowTrout (n=13)
L€ngth (mm)
BrookTrout(n=21
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
2 2 0
l5
l0
5
0
" "'
i o . '" i o 6 " ' i : 6 . . '
ioi"' i:
(mm)
If,ngth (mn)
kngth
BullTrout(n=1)
I*ngth (mm)
237
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drunage.
Wet Creek(f'S #l) - (7103/96)
0.6 km abovethe Forest boundary
RainbowTrout (n=271
50
4S
40
3S
30
25
z
I*ngth
(mm)
BullTrout(n=1)
I*ngth
(mm)
238
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drnnage.
Wet CreekGS #l) - (7/2s/9s)
0.6 km abovethe Forest boundarY
RainbowTrout (n=34)
kngth
(mm)
239
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Wet Creek(FS #la) - (7103196)
250 metersaboveCoal Creek
RainbowTrout (n={1)
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
2 2 0
15
l0
t
I*ngth
(mm)
BullTrout(n=4)
450
Irngth (mm)
240
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Lifile Lost River drainage.
Wet Creek(FS #1b)- (8118197)
115m belowprivate road near Hilts Creeh
RainbowTrout (n=241
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
2".
Z 2 0
l5
-""'
!d"'iob"'irb"'iob"'
I*ngth (mm)
Bull Trout(n=45)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
9- n.
Z 2 0
l5
l0
5
0
(mm)
241.
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Litfle Lost River drainage.
Wet Creek(FS #2) - (817/95)
0.5 km aboveHilts Creek(top end of privateproper$)
RainbowTrout(n=10)
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
=..
Z 2 0
l5
l0
BullTrout(n=3)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
Z 2 0
l5
l0
Length (mm)
242
Appendix B (continued).Longth frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Wet Creek (FS #3) - (6/26/96)
0.8 km aboveHilts Creek(in meadow)
RainbowTrout (n=15)
e
z
I*ngth
(mm)
Bull Trout(n=39)
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
o
a o <
2 2 0
l5
l0
5
Irngth (mm)
243
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Litfle Lost River drainage.
Wet Creek(rS #3)- (8/719s)
0.8 km aboveHilts Creek(in meadow)
RainbowTrout (n=9)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
2 2 0
l0
kngth (mm)
BullTrout(n=20)
50
45
40
35
! 3 0
e
Z 2 0
l0
5
I*ngth
(nm)
244
AppendixB (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Litfle Lost River drunage.
Wet Creek(fS $a) - (6126196)
108metersabove#3(topendof meadow)
RainbowTrout(n=4)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
= r <
2 2 0
t5
l0
450
I*ngth
(mm)
BullTrout(n=7)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
o
I q <
2 2 0
l5
l0
)
kngth
(nm)
245
Afpendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin tlte
Little Lost River drainage.
Wet Creek(unnamedtributtryr #1) - (9119195)
100 m aboveWetCreek
all fish capturedwerebetween35 and 60 mm in length
t This tributary entersWet Creekfrom the oppositeside of Coal Creek0.4 km below tlre confluenceof
Wet Creekand Coal Creek.
246
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Wet Creek(unnamedtribu taryr #2) - (7102197)
0.6 km aboveWetCreek
RainbowTrout (n=21)
50
45
40
35
L 3 0
2 2 0
l5
l0
5
450
I*ngth
(nm)
t This tributary entersWet Creekfrom the oppositeside of Coal Creek0.4 kmbelow the confluenceof
Wet Creekand Coal Creek.
247
Appendix B (continued).Length frequencydistribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
WilliamsCreek#l - (6121195)
7.6 km belowForest boundarY
onebull trout capturedapproximately200 mm in length
248
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin sampling sitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Williams Creek#2 - (617/97)
beaverpond at Forestboundary
(hook and line sampling)
BullTrout(n=7)
Appendix B (continued).Length frequenry distribution of salmonidscapturedin samplingsitesin the
Little Lost River drainage.
Williams Creek#3 - (6121195)
7.6km aboveForestboundary
BullTrout(n=12)
kngth(mm)
250
APPENDIX C
Anpendix C. Summaryof creel censusdataf?omthe Little Lost River drainage(Adaptedfrom USRRfile
datat:CorsiandElle 1989;Gamett1990a,I990b
Streams
Badger Creek
Big Creek
Big SpringsCreek
Hours
Fished
Fish/ilour
Wrb
1977
1976
1968-70
6
12
2
t6
9
5
l.l
0.9
3.6
100
to
1979
t9'7'.7
1974
1972
I9'.71
1969
23
33
10
2
32
3
60
70
50
1.3
1.1
.9
58
1',|
1
l a
ll7
3
1.1
4.0
100
100
100
1987
1979
1978
1977
t976
t974
1972
N/A
30
85
97
24
68
95
4.5
102
140
190
38
169
215
2.0
1.0
1.3
1.0
1.2
.9
1.9
26a7-
1.6
Ig.7I
-J6
1967:70
Deer Creek
SpeciesComposition (7o)
# Ander
Interviewed
Yeat
r976
1974
42
't
USRRfile
USRRfile
USRRfile
USRRfile
USRRfile
USRRfile
t6
63
data
data
<lata
data
data
clata
97
0.6
2.6
100
100
USRRfile tlata
USRRfile data
1.3
1.8
l0
))
87
'14
89
99
-
1l
27
65
4 2 3
12
6 2 0
3 ' , 7
645
t6
79
10
60
27
35
I
r.9
,7,
9.0
89
N/A
44
2I
15
23
125
35
80
84
31.5
84
422
1.6
2.3
0.5
0.9
1.3
1.2
95
95
89
93
97
92
1987
t9'19
1978
1977
r970
N/A
28
t4
2l
4
27.5
85
32
50
18
1.2
0.8
1.3
0.8
0.9
4l
3
75
83
75
Squaw Creek
(Sawmill Canyon)
t976
6
ll
1.4
86
Summit Creek
t987
t919
L978
1977
1974
1972
6.5
t7
110
r04
43
115
2.8
1.3
1.3
1.8
3.6
1.8
83
23
81
9l
78
22
252
I
1
I
<l
99
1987
t977
1976
t974
t9'11
1967-70
Sawmill Creek
A
USRRfile tlata
USRRftle data
USRRfile data
l9l
J
Bl
Corsi (1989)
USRRfile data
USRRfile data
USRRfile rlata
USRRfde data
USRRfile <lata
USRRfile data
USRRfile data
USRRfile data
89
8
18
ll
L9
Little Lost River
Bk
J I
r979
r978
197',7
1969
Dry Creek
ILb
100
84
6
IO
11
7
3
USRRfile
USRRftle
USRRfile
USRRfile
data
data
data
data
a
c
J
I
7
I
6
7
5
12
53
1l
15
5
|,\
Corsi (1989)
USRRfile data
USRRfile data
USRRfile data
USRRfile data
7
USRRfile data
J
5
7
79
5
-
<l
Corsi (I989)
USRRfile data
USRRfile data
USRRfile data
USRRfile date
USRRfile data
Corsi (1989)
USRRfile tlata
USRRfile data
USRR file data
USRRfile data
USRRfile data
Anoendix C (continued). Summaryof creel censusdatafrom the Little Lost River drainage(Adapted
CorsiandElle 1989;Gamett1990a,l990bt
fromUSRRfile datal;---taqg!q
Hours
-ftb
wat€r
year
Summit Creek(conl)
1967-70
75
Fished
313
1990
2l
80
1.94
Shadowlake#2
(upper)
1994
2
I
0.0
Swaugerl,ake#l
(upper)
1994
39
140
0.16
Lalies
BigCreek Lake #1
(beaver pond)
Mill Creek
t994
Interviewed
SpeoiesComposition(7o)
Fish/[Iour
1.4
9l
lk
:
9
5
95
a:
253
--E!--::
< l
-
Source
::;::;:
i
USRRfile alata
Gamettl990a
LRRDfile
100
25
53.5
Htb
data
LRRDfile data
LRRDfde data
APPENDIX D
Appendix D. Streamtemperaturedata collectedfrom various locationsin tlte Litfle Lost River dtainage.
Big Creek
Immediately above Wet Creek
r996
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
07t01
08/01
1995
H$$$sseggHH$$Hpppppp$FFsssgggH$$H$$HHHg$$$3
&t€
255
Appendix D (continued).Streamtemperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Litfle Lost River
drainage.
Iron Creek
10 metersabovelron CreekRoad
r996
30
G25
820
v
E
rs
o
3ro
(l)
F s
0 '
07114 08/01
09/01
Date
256
10t01
Appendix D (continued).Streamtemperaturedata collectedfrom variouslocationsin the Little Lost River
drainage,
Little Lost River
Below Big Springs Creek
20
19
1a
17
15
5r,.
ft1
- 1 0
I
B
6
D
4
;;;-T--E
.
JUNE 1
*
rur-i rs
| '1
.A.,LY
I aui ru
I st# rs
AUG 1
SEPT 1
I
srpt r I
loci ro
ocT 1
2J
22
21
20
19
18
1l
16
15
1+
1J
12
o-"
EF9
H "
-
l
6
5
J
Moy 14
| lule
June 1
r s I r u r vr s
JULY1
AUG10
257
ocl r obr zo
S E P T1 5
OCI 15
Appendix D (continued).Streamtemperaturedatacollectedfrom variouslocationsin the Little Lost River
drainage-
Little Lost River
At Clyde
20
18
16
14
'12
oo
ll.
tt
10
B
6
4
2
0
1 5 r 1 0
15
15
MAY20r 15
OCT 1
1
SEP
AUG1
JU N E1 JUL1
DATE
1994
35
30
25
20
5r
10
H,
F
5
0
-5
-1
05/24
258
Appendix D (continued).Streamtemperaturedatacollectedfrom variouslocationsin the Little Lost River
drainage,
Little Lost River (Sawmill Creek)
At old gauging site near Summit Creek
22
20
18
16
14
12
P
18 0
v
g
6
. q a
2
0
-2
|
| 10
15
JULY22
15
15
MAY20I
AUG 1
SEPT1
OCT1
JULY 1
J U N E1
DATES
1994
5.)
R.
F
259
Appendix D (continued).Streamtemperaturedata collectedfrom variouslocationsin the Little Lost River
drainage,
Little Lost River (SawmillCreek)
At old gauging site neur Summit Cteek (continued)
1988
-_24
26
24
22
20
18
oc)
1+
g
H
12
10
B
6
-
2
I
AI.JG1
J U N EJ
A U G1 1
J U N E1 5
2l
20
19
,18
17
16
15
14
1J
12
ll
10
9
5
J
r
,
7
)
F
F
-1
1
0
A U G1 1
i
S E P T1
S E P T1 5
260
I
ocT 1
O C T1 5
I
OCI 27
Appendix D (continued).Streamtemperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Little Lost River
drainage.
Little Lost River (SawmillCreek)
At ForestBoundary
4
.(J
F
F
| 10
|
15
OCT 1
SEPT1
L994
30
25
20
T
F
'
t o
o
-5
-1
05124
26I
Appendix D (continued).Streamtemperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Little Lost River
drainage"
Little Lost River (SawmillCreek)
At ForestBoundury@ontinued)
23
22
21
20
t9
1B
17
l6
t5
l4
8'
l:
e|.
.6
11
ro
tt
\J
F
9
B
7
6
5
+
3
2
'
JULY1
J U N EJ
AUGl
I
JULY15
I
A U G8
1987
-.
19
l8
'17
15
'14
1J
12
11
EJ
g
H
ro
lllilill1
illlililttlnl
a
6
5
4
3
2
I
-
A U G1 1
I
SEPT1
srpirs
262
I
ocT 1
ocrrs
I
ocT 28
Appendix D (continued).Streamtemperaturedata collectedfrom various locationsin the Little Lost River
drainage,
Little Lost River (SawmillCreek)
Below Timber Creek
$H
3fHF$EB3pFF3$FpF$FFFsss$HggHH$H$HSSHHHgHHH$fi
Littte Lost River (SawmillCreek)
Below lron Creek
t99s
ggssg$* s$$Es's$gg$HHggggg3ggEsHHHHsss$ssggsHH$s
S E S g S S S F F . F F S F * r i F r r - - - - a a a i S * g S g d a b d ; ; 5 5 S S S S g
263
Appendix D (continued).Streamtemperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Little Lost River
drainage.
Mill Creek
At trailhead
1996
30
625
,OI
ru
oto1
E
=
E
o
E
o
tr
:i
07t1 4 08/01
ryr'lt{l,.
09/01
Date
264
10101
Appendix D (continued).Streamtemperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Litfle Lost River
drainage.
SummitCreek
At county line
20
1a
4 1
oE
H
F!
6
12
10
a
6
+
2
i
o
rs | ;ur-irs
uavrs I .rur.ri
J{JNE I
'{JLY 1
I aud rs
AUG I
I 'Isrpi rs
SEPI'
loci ro
OCT 1
Wet Creek
At Clyde
1994
24
22
20
l8
t6
1+
o(J
12
"fr
10
F
B
6
+
2
o
t+
I JU NE
JUNE 1
r s l . r u r - i i da u i r r
JULY 1
JULY 23
265
I
SEPT 1
sepi r s l
ocT 1
ocT 20
Appendix D (continued).Streamtemperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Little Lost River
drainage.
Wet Creek
At Deer CreekRoad crossing
20
19
1A
17
15
14
F l q
7
6
5
4
.l
2
1
0
ury rg' | ;ur.rlrd
JUNE I
| .rur-irs
JULY 1
l
AUG 1
AUG 15
.
locr to
I srpi rs
OCT 1
SEPT 1
24
22
20
18
16
14
t2
^\J
(/B
Ela
tl
2
0
I
J U N Er s l l u l i
J UNE 1
JULY 1
r s l e u i r s l s r p ir s I
AUGI
266
S E P T1
OCT 1
oq zo
Appendix D (continued).Streamtemperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Little Lost River
drainage.
Wet Creek
At Forest Boundary
t996
30
25
20
15
10
5
0 '
07to4
09/01
08/01
10101
Wet Creek
0.8 km aboveHilts Creek
L996
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
07t01
08/01
267
09/01
10to1
APPENDIX E
Appendix E. Streamand air temperaturedatacollectedftom various locationsin the Little Lost River
drainagein 1997.
Mulkey Bar (air temperature)
Near eonflueneeof Squfrwund Welereeks-
U
o
H
L
*T
-.."I 1
30f
ttl
maximum daily temperature
,0f
"l
c.)
rot
c)
r-
5l
I
o+
-5+
mininm
daily tomperatwe
-roI
Jme
July 1
September1
Augustl
Date
269
OctoberI
November I
Appendix E (continued).Streamand air temperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Little
Lost River drunagein L99'7.
BadgerCreek
At the Forestboundary
ooT
rrI
,ot
Q
c)
k
fi
t<
(.)
.-l
q)f-
"t
''t
20t
tot
't
ot
-5+
,;I
-l
June
July I
SoptemborI
August I
Octobor I
NovemberI
Date
BadgerCreek
At the Little Lost/PahsimeroiRoad
40
35
30
U 25
{)
20
k
4
}Y
15
6 10
a1
F
o
5
0
-5
-10
JuneI
July I
I
Soptombor
August I
Date
270
October I
NovomberI
Appendix E (continued). Streamand air temperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Little
LostRiver drainagein 1997.
BasinCreek
13.7m aboveWetCreek
40
35
30
rv ' \
r<
v
9t zo
I
Ek 1 5
o
ru
O.
a'1
F
(ll|-)
F
0
-5
-10
JuneI
July
September1
August I
October I
NovemberI
Date
Bear Creek
23.5 m aboveLittle Lost River
40
35
30
(,) 25
o 20
H
d
l-r
(l)
tr
()
F
15
l0
5
0
-10
JuneI
July I
SeptemberI
AugustI
Date
27L
October 1
NovomberI
Appendix E (continued). Streamand air temperatwedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Litfle
Lost River drainagein 1997.
Big Creek
91 m belowBig CreekPond(4 km aboveForestboundary)
1'T
"'
I
,ol
O
o
k
+a
Ft
c)
(I)
lJ
" l
, < I
zvT
"' olf
'l
0+
--) tl
- t oI
NovemberI
Sepfember
I
AugustI
Juno
Date
Big Creek
At the Forest/privateboundarY
40
35
30
O 25
o) 20
|<
€
15
l<
a)
o
l0
5
0
-10
June1
July 1
SeptemberI
August I
Date
272
OctoberI
November 1
Appendix B (continued).Streamand air temperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Little
Lost River drainagein 1997.
Big Creek
At WetCreekRoad
ooT
,rf
'ot
rv \
v
c)
k
t
+a
!9
(D
^- .
tr
fr
",or
l
trT
toI
'J
OT
-5t
June
Big SpringsCreek
At BlM/private boundarynearsource
40
35
30
O 25
o
li
20
€
15
k
o
F
()
10
5
0
-)
-10
JuneI
July 1
SeptemberI
AugustI
Date
273
OctoberI
November I
Appendix E (continued).Streamand air temperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Little
Lost River drainagein 1991.
Big SpringsCreek
300 m aboveLittle Lost River
40
35
30
O 25
O
20
+a
l5
li
F(
0)
t_3
-(I)
F
F
l0
-J
0
-5
-10
JuneI
July I
SeptemberI
August I
October I
NovemberI
October I
NovemborI
Date
CoalCreek
5 m aboveWetCreek
40
35
30
O 25
o
F{
20
+i
15
li
(D
(-"!
F
(l)
10
5
fd
0
-5
-10
June I
July
SoptemberI
AugustI
Date
274
Appendix E (continued).Streamand air temperaturedatacollectedfrom various
Lost River drunagein 1997.
locationsin the Little
DeerCreek
300m belowconfluenceof SouthandNorthforks
40
35
30
U 25
c)
20
li
+a
t<
c)
tr
l5
t0
o
Lr
0
-10
June I
July I
SeptemberI
August I
October 1
NovemborI
Date
DeerCreek
At BlM/privsteboundary
40
35
30
O 25
0)
li
€
!
(I)
(l)
nh
15
10
5
,4
0
-10
June1
July 1
September1
August 1
Date
275
OotoberI
NovemberI
Appendix E (continued).Streamand air temperaturedatacollectedfrom variouslocationsin
LostRiver drainagein 1997.
the Little
Dry Creek
At Forestboundary
40
35
30
a) 2s
!2 20
H
l s
H
8. to
a-
cir- )
l-.r
0
-10
June I
July I
SoptemberI
AugustI
OctoberI
November I
Date
Fallert SpringsCreek
200 m aboveLittle Lost River
40
35
30
O
o
Li
25
+a
l5
k
(I)
F.l
(l)
F
20
l0
5
0
-10
June I
July 1
SeptemberI
August I
Date
276
Octobor I
November1
various locationsin the Little
Appendix E (continued).stream and air temperaturedatacollectedfrom
Lost River drunage in 1997.
Iron Creek
18 m sboveLittle Lost River
40
35
30
U
25
o
20
a
l5
li
tr
o)
10
t1.
(DlJ
5
0
-10
June I
July 1
September1
August 1
October 1
November I
Date
Little Lost River
Approximately 2 km aboveSmithie Fork
40
35
30
O 25
o
20
-1
15
l-<
l-4
o)
F
c)
F
10
5
0
-10
JuneI
July I
SeptemborI
August I
Date
277
October I
NovomberI
in the Little
Appendix E (continued).Streamand air temperaturedatacollectedfrom various locations
Lost River drainagein L997.
Little Lost River
ApproximatelyI km aboveTimber Creek(at Timber Creek
Road)
40
35
30
rv )
r<
9zo
t s r {
}Y
_nl
x* _r "o
a-l
o t r
F
0
-5
-10
June I
July I
SeptomberI
August I
October 1
November I
Date
Little Lost River
Approximotely 500 m below Timber Creek
40
35
30
(J
,<
(l)
20
li
-.
15
L
(D
l0
H
6
5
0
-5
-10
June I
July 1
SoptomberI
August I
Date
278
Ootober1
NovomborI
Appendix E (continued).Streamand air temperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin tlte Little
Lost River drainagein 1997.
Little Lost River
At Bull CreekRoad bridge
40
35
30
r \ 25
c) 20
!
P
l5
k
o
10
a-t
(DfJ
0
-5
-10
June I
July I
September1
August I
October1
NovomberI
Date
Little Lost River
BetweenMill and Squaw ueeks
40
35
30
O 25
(D
tr
20
€
l5
lr
0)
r
C)
l0
5
0
-10
June I
July I
SeptemberI
AugustI
Date
279
OotoborI
NovemberI
Appendix E (continued).Streamand air temperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Little
Lost River drainagein 1997.
Little Lost River
At the Sawmill Road bridge (Forestboundary)
40
This hobowas out oflhe water for an
unknownperiod of timo betwoonJuly
l.
14 andapproximatelySeptonber
35
30
25
20
15
10
0
-5
-10
June I
July I
SeptemberI
August I
October I
November I
Date
Little Lost River
Approximately I km aboveSummit Creek
40
35
30
U 25
C)
li
20
€ l5
l<
()
10
-.
()
F
0
-5
-10
June I
July I
Septembor
I
August I
Date
280
October1
November I
Appendix E (continued).Streamand air temperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Little
Lost River drainagein 1997.
Little Lost River
Approximately I km above Wet Creek
40
35
30
(J
a<
c.)
20
H
€
l5
!
c)
-
l0
5
O
fr
0
-l
0
JuneI
July I
I
September
AugustI
October I
Novembor I
Date
Little Lost River
Approximately 5 km below Badger Creek (at Buck and Bird
Road bridge)
40
35
30
U
25
o
20
H
#
d
g
15
o) 1 0
*
F
o
5
0
-10
JuneI
July I
Septombor
I
AugustI
Date
28L
October I
NovemberI
Appendix E (continued).Streamand air temperaturedata collectedfrom various locationsin the Little
Lost River drunagein L997.
Little Lost River
Approximately 2 km below Big Springs Creek (at Cedanille
CanyonRoad bridge)
40
35
30
r \
v
r<
!a 20
H 1 5
fi
( D . ^
Q. lu
( D )
F
0
-10
June I
July I
SeptemberI
August I
OctoberI
NovemberI
Date
Mill Creek
100 m aboveLittle Lost River
40
35
30
O 25
Q)
!
20
€
k
O
-
F
o
l0
5
0
-10
JuneI
July 1
SeptemberI
August I
Date
282
OctoberI
NovemberI
AppendixE (continued).Streamand air temperanrredata collectedfrom various locationsin the Little
LostRiver drainagein 1997.
SmithieFork
Approximately100 m aboveLittle Lost River
aoT
,tt
30+
Crtl
E,l
=
l
E trt
.q':
I
_,+
0 +
-roI
SeptemberI
August I
June t
October1
Novembor I
OotoborI
NovemberI
Date
Creek
Summerhouse
At Forest boundary
40
35
30
25
o)
20
li
+i
15
k
o
10
d
0)
F
5
0
-10
JuneI
July 1
September
1
August1
Date
/.63
Appendix E (continued).Streamand air temperaturedata collectedfrom various locationsin the Little
Lost River drainagein 1997.
SummitCreek
200m belowconfluenceof Iron Springs
The Hobo beganfloating at sometimeafter
approximatelyJuly 15. The dataappearsto havebeen
affectedafter aboutSeptomberI which suggeststhis is
the time that the Hobo beganfloating.
35
30
C) 25
() 20
tr
€
15
ti
o
l0
0
-5
-10
JuneI
July I
SoPtemberI
August I
October 1
November1
Date
SummitCreek
At BlM/private boundaryapproximately1 km belowSawmill
CanyonRoad
40
35
30
U 25
o
r<
20
+a
15
!
O
E
o
10
5
0
-5
-10
JuneI
July I
SeptemberI
August I
Date
284
October I
November1
AppendixE (continued).Sffeamand air temperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Little
LostRiver drainagein L997.
SummitCreek
Approximately I km aboveLittle Lost River
40
35
30
o 2 5
9i 20
1
E l s
L{
o
Q. ru
6
F
5
NovemberI
SoptemberI
SquawCreek(SawmillCreek)
10 m aboveLittle Lost River
40
35
30
U 25
(l)
H
20
15
li
o 10
()
F
5
0
-10
JuneI
July I
September
1
August I
Date
285
OctoberI
NovemberI
Appendix E (continued).Streamandair temperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Little
LostRiver drainagein 1997.
SquawCreek(Wet Creek)
17 m aboveWetCreek
40
35
30
r \
r<
!2 20
d l )
tr
to
8.
a
- o
F
)
0
-5
-10 r
June1
July I
I
SePtember
AugustI
OcfoberI
NovemborI
Date
Timber Creek
Approximately200m aboveLittle LostRiver
40
35
30
O 25
C)
H
-a-l
t-r
()
6
F
C)
20
15
l0
5
0
-5
-10
JuneI
July 1
I
September
AugustI
Date
286
OctoberI
November I
Appendix E (continued).Streamand air temperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Litfle
Lost River drainagein 1997.
Wet Creek
Approximately 0.8 km aboveHilts Creek (ut old diversion)
40
35
30
O 25
o
lr
L
20
15
t<
o
t0
F
o
0
-10
June I
July I
SeptemberI
August I
October I
November I
Date
Wet Creek
Approximately 500 m aboveCoal Creek
(at F or est/privateboundary)
40
35
30
(.) 25
(I)
t-r
20
d
l5
l-r
(l)
(l)
10
5
0
-5
-10
June1
July I
SeptemberI
AugustI
Date
287
October I
NovemberI
Appendix E (continued).Streamand air temperaturedata collectedfrom various locationsin the Litfle
Lost River drainagein 1997.
Wet Creek
At the Forest boundary(approximutely300 m aboveBig Creek)
40
35
30
() 25
()
r<
+a
Lr
C)
l5
10
0
-5
-10
June1
July I
SeptomberI
AugustI
OctoberI
Novembor I
Date
Wet Creek
At Deer CreekRoad crossing
40
35
30
(.)
25
o
*i
20
--
Lr
()
l5
10
c)
Lr
0
-5
-10
June I
July I
SeptemberI
August1
Date
288
OctoborI
November I
Appendix E (continued).Streamand air temperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Little
Lost River drunagein 1997.
Wet Creek
Approximately50 m uboveDry Creekhydroelectricinflow
(approximately 6 km above Wet Creek)
40
35
30
O 25
20
15
10
5
0
-5
-10
JuneI
July I
SeptemberI
AugustI
October I
NovemberI
Date
Wet Creek
At Little Lost/PahsimeroiRoad
40
35
30
O 25
o
20
l<
.i-f
!
O
(D
Lr
l5
10
)
0
-10
JuneI
July I
SeptemberI
AugustI
Date
289
OctoberI
November I
Appendix E (continued).Streamand air temperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Little
Lost River drainagein 1997.
Wet Creekounnamedtributary approximately
500m belowCoalCreek
13.5m aboveWetCreek
40
35
30
()
25
(!)
tr
20
+a
l5
k
o
F
o)
F
t0
5
0
-5
-10
September1
August I
JuneI
October I
November I
Date
WilliamsCreek
Approximately 7.6 km sbovethe Forest boundary
40
35
30
25
() 20
€ 15
|<
k
O
r.+{
10
0)
5
F
0
-5
-10
JuneI
July I
SeptemberL
August I
Date
290
Octobor 1
NovemberI
Appendix E (continued).Streamand air temperaturedatacollectedfrom various locationsin the Little
Lost River drainagein 1997.
WilliamsCreek
Approximately3 km belowForest boundary
(at uppermostdiversion)
ooT
.'f
,'I
1 5 r
Q
o
l<
E
l-i
(I)
()
F
,ot
"t o tt
-s A
l
'l
- \ +
,;I
June I
July I
SeptemberI
AugustI
Date
297
October I
November I
APPENDIX F
(Overtonet al. 1997).
lnventoryProcedures
AppendixF. Selectedstreamhabitat parametersdeterminedby the Forest ServiceRliR4 Fish and Fish Habitat
Map
Gradient
Stream/Reach
Mean
Width (m)
MeanMax.
Deoth(m)
Width/
Deoth
L
100
Undercut
Bank(%)
Surface
Fines
Comments
BadgerCreek
Privateboundarynear Little [,ost Road to
Forestboundary(BLM section)
97
8837
4.5
2.1
0.5
t5.7
0.q
7l
69
t2
2
F.S.boundaryto l)untingCrcek
97
2569
4.2
2.5
0.6
15.7
0.6
65
64
l3
I
BuntingCreekto sourcespring
97
t637
5.9
t.6
0.4
9.0
2.3
86
72
5T
6
BasinCreek- Wet Creekto PineCreek
97
2473
4.4
0.9
0.5
24.3
0.q
73
25
68
I
BearCreek- Little L.R. upstream1,593m
94
I s93
).)
3.8
0.5
19.5
t.l
l
97
5
44
44
't459
3.6
2.0
0.5
11.2
1.0
100
32
t a
A
Big Creek
N)
\o
Wet Cr. upstream7J59 m (BeaverPond)
94
BeaverPondto sourcesprings
94
453
4.0
23.6
t.3
12.9
0.2
98
8
9
62
BuntingCr. - BadgerCr. upstream9[2 m
97
9t2
0.1
2.4
0.7
15.3
L5
8l
8
l3
<l
CampCr. - TimberCr. upstream2,299m
97
2299
8.1
t.7
0.4
25.0
5.2
7l
t4
t7
I
Coal Creek- Wet Creekupstream1,04'lm
97
t047
2.5
0.4
0.2
13.2
0.q
60
6
52
<l
Privateboundaryto Forestboundary
(BLM section)
97
7403
2;1
1.3
9.0
0.4
87
Forestboundaryto confluenceofforks
97
t 80l
4.1
1.5
0.4
16.3
2.1
DeerCreek,North Fork - entire reach
97
8t2
5.9
1.3
0.4
n.4
5.4
99
48
43
<l
DeerCreek,SouthFork - entire reach
97
937
5.5
t.2
0.2
17.0
2.1
90
29
58
J
0.7
DeerCreek
5l
Dry Creek
Hydroelectricdiversionto long Lost Cr.
97
1.6
5.9
't.2
30.0
Iong lnst Creekto Forestboundary
97
1.6
5.4
1.0
29.7
50
Forestboundaryupstream2,623m (to the
97
) A
4.0
1.0
16.5
45
26
reachincluded
beaverpond
AppendixF. Continued.
Mean
Widrh0
Stream/Reach
Dry Creek,unnamedtributary aboveForest
boundary
Mean Max.
Undercut
Bank
Surface
Fines(%
l2
Comments
3
97
r028
5.1
2.1
0.5
I8.8
0]0
85
17
FireboxCr. - Little L.R. upstream2,406m
94
2406
7.4
1.7
0.4
n.4
l l.3
100
38
Hawley Creek- lron Cr. upstream2,446 m
97
2446
9.3
1.6
0.3
16.6
't)4
89
57
Little lost River to JacksonCreek
94
rl 5 l
3.0
2.3
0.4
17.5
t:7
63
JacksonCreek to "Right Fork" Iron Creek
94
2340
4.5
1.7
0.4
l6.l
613
88
l3
2439
I t.6
2.4
0.5
20.6
5i5
80
76
t.7
0.4
26.0
s!9
0-5
ts.2
6,.2
16.2
0,.4
9l
22
ll
21.3
q.8
90
l5
9
39
I
)o
89
l8
l0
25
l0
l8
upperportron
bumedin 1988
Dry Creekto sourcesPring
5
3l
burnedin 1988
7
Iron Creek
t\)
\o
r
t4
2l
Iron Creek,"lrft Fork"
Iron Creekupstream2,439 m
l0
IronCreek,"Right Fork"
Iron Creekupstreaml,0zl4 m
97
lM4
t4
JacksonCreek
Iron Creekupstream3,806m
3806
14.9
1.7
22s0
2.6
6.1
Little lost River
Bride on Sawmill Canl'ronRoadbelow
Forestboundaryupstreamto Pdvate
boundary
0.8
Privateboundarynear SquawCreekto
private boundarynear Bull Creek
94
5261
1.4
Privateboundarynear Iron Creekto
Timber Creek
94
2267
1.9
5.9
0.6
Timber Creek to Smithie Fork
94
4678
2.4
4.1
0.6
t7.5
7,.0
95
SmithieForkto FireboxCreek
94
3.6
2.2
0.4
t2.3
l 3 .r
99
5l
l0
l9
bumedin 1988
FireboxCreekto unnamed
97
t2.o
1.9
0.8
t2.4
I1.7
76
53
t7
l7
burnedin 1988
AppendixF. Continued.
Map
Cradient
Stream/Reach
Mean
Width
MeanMax.
m
Bank
Stabilit
Width/
Undercul
Bank
Surface
Fines
Pools
Little l-ost River (continued)
bumedin 1988
Unnambedtributaryto headwaters
Little lrst River,"Right Fork"
97
t6t4
l t.0
t.5
0.4
19.3
310
87
4l
6
2
North Creek* diversionto headwaters
97
30s2
9.6
1.3
0.6
t4.4
019
8l
29
48
I
MeadowCreek- Little L. R. to headwaters
97
4937
10.0
o.7
0.3
10.2
I r0
66
)t
50
I
94
3824
7.0
3.2
0.4
18.5
4t9
94
3
t6
l0
QuigleyCr. - Little L. R. upstream4l I m
97
4ll
2.0
t.3
0.4
24.4
7lo
76
l6
RedrockCreek - fimber Creek to forks
97
677
2.5
a l
z-l
0.5
26.4
l0.l
t)
l3
65
5
SlideCreek- TimberCr. upstream965 m
97
96s
9.6
2.2
0.4
23.1
8t3
94
l5
2l
6
Little Lost River upstreamI,203 m
94
t203
3.5
3.0
0.s
15.3
7le
94
25
l4
48
bumedin [988
Endofprior sectionupstream3,238m
94
3238
3.6
2.4
0.5
t2.7
4.9
99
43
ll
50
burnedin 1988
Endofprior sectionto Right Fork
94
2t49
4.O
t.)
0.4
12.6
?e
98
37
t2
23
burnedin 1988
9.0
l.t
0.3
I 1.5
4.8
79
A1
l7
5
bumedin 1988
bumedin 1988
Little lost River to headwaters
burnedin 1988
lower portion
appears
intermittent
N)
\o
lJl
Mill Creek
Little l.ost River upstream3824 m
8
I
SmithieFork
SmithieFork,"Right Fork"
SmithieFork upstream488 m
Smithie Fork, "West Fork"
SmithieFork upstream959 m
South Creek - diversion
4,230m
lt.2
0.4
59
3
/.o
0.3
3l
<l
Appendix F. Continued.
MeanMax.
Map
Gradient
Widrh/
LW
100
Undercut
Bank
Surface
Fines
Pools
Comments
SquawCreek- Sawmill CanYon
Little Inst River to Road#l0l
94
609
t.4
2.0
0.s
9.2
0.51
82
25
35
22
2J46m
Road#tOl upstream
94
2446
2.1
1.8
0.4
9.1
4.4
99
t3
l0
5
Endofprior sectionupstream1,292m
94
1292
3.8
t.7
0.4
8.2
4.5
99
l4
7
SouthFork SquawCt. upstream2'143 m
97
2143
9.2
1.4
0.4
13.2
4'4t
86
57
22
2.9
0.4
34.2
4.9
94
l5
48
Squaw,North Fork
20t3
SquawCreekuPstream2,013m
*South Fork"
SquawCreek,
t\)
\o
o\
97
500
2.8
t.3
0.4
9.8
5.q
100
t4
55
95
2195
0.6
5.3
0.5
47.7
0.6
87
53
32
Little lost Riverto RetlrockCreek
94
2949
2.5
2.6
0.5
l5.9
4.3
85
4
l0
33
RedrockCreekto Slide Creek
94
3279
2.O
2.1
0.4
t 5.8
12.2
82
6
l2
26
Slide Creekto sourcesPrings
97
1228
1 A
2.0
0.4
20.2
7.4
92
97
3454
10.0
2.2
0.6
16.3
0.6
83
46
40
I
97
3241
7.7
0.9
0.4
13.0
0.7
82
30
33
<l
97
3452
6.3
2.0
0.4
15.2
4.4
64
36
l8
I
97
2t23
2.8
4.2
1.0
17.2
0.0
82
6I
28
22
8.5
0.7
t4.8
t.2
45
47
32
SquawCreekuPstream500 m
SummitCreek
PahsinreroiRoad upstream2,195 m
5t
Timber Creek
l7
UncleIke Creek
Diversion dam to
*Left ForK'
"lrft Fork" to headwaters
Warm Creek- Little L. R. to sourcespring
Wet Creek
BasinCreekto Big Creek
AppendixF. Continued.
Map
Gradient
Stream/Reach
Mean
Widrh
MeanMax.
Undercut
Bank
Width/
Surface
Fines
Pools
Comments
Wet Creek (continued)
28
l6
ll
23
2
25
52
39
34
66
I
86
66
2l
4
0.4
69
57
26
4
0.4
69
55
l8
2
83
0.7
Prirate section above Coal Creek
97
2332
3.0
Prirateboundaryto old diversion
97
185
4.2
2;l
0.7
12.9
70
Old diversionupstream673 m (to the
lalls)
96
673
2.7
2.3
0.5
r5.6
60
97
r550
0.e
0.3
l,ower diversionto upperdiversion
97
1235
0.8
0.4
Upper diversionto Forestboundary
97
l 869
t.4
Forestboundaryto sourcesPrings
97
2497
2.0
Wet Creek,unnamedtribularynearCoal
Creek
WetCreekupstream|,550m
N)
\o
\t
Williams Creek
reachis not
grazedand
includesbeaver
ponds