poriodic cutting and thinning may be required to maintain the proper 

 balance between trees, snrubs, grasses, and herbs for providing max- 

 imum wildlife food and cover. 



In addition, several of the larger-sized conifers such as ponderosa 

 pine will not be "^emoved from along ■^he 510 m (2,000 ft) contour level. 

 Inundation will Kill these trees and their dead snags could be attractive 

 to osprey and eagles for nesting and perching, (NLI 19^8: W4-2,3) 



Prior to certification, NLI should submit to FERC and DNRC for review, 

 and to FERC and the Montana Boa>^d of Natural Resources and Conservation for 

 approval, a detailed reclamation and restoration plan spelling out the precise 

 goals, location, and methods of habitat restoration. A map (scale - 1:400) 

 should accompany the plan, showing the new shoreline, surface contours, loca- 

 tions of :ransplanted trees and shrubs, and the type of treatment (fertiliza- 

 tion, mulching, etc.) to be employed in different areas. A series of cross- 

 section profiles, showing depth of water table, depth of fill, depth of top- 

 soil, etc. should also accompany the plan. The plan should specify the time- 

 table of restoration, as well as species of plants to be used, sources of 

 seeds, sod, and nursery stock, types of mulch and/or fertilizer to be used, 

 time sequence of topsoil removal and replacement, sources of additional top- 

 soil, and methods and season of planting (Olson-Elliott and Associates 1979). 

 It should also include ''ong-term management and monitoring speci ."ications, 

 possibly including plans for maintaining a disci imax cottonwood-dominated 

 community by control of invading conifers. 



Before such a habitat restoration plan is prepared, it is necessary to 

 identify the "target species" for which the area is to be managed; this can 

 only be done after analysis of public comment on the proposal. Creation of 

 shallow ponds and sheltered coves in the reclaimed area which would support 

 rooted aquatic vegetation and cattail marshes would benefit dabbling ducks. 

 The more stable river elevations along the pool (Figure 13) would probably 

 allow cattails and emergent vegetation to eventually become established 

 along the shore-line. Permanent ponds could also be created near the upper 

 end of the pool, where river level "fluctuations are relatively great, by 

 construction of sandbagged dikes to retain water during low flows (Figure 15) 

 or to trap water from the many springs and small streams which enter the river 

 in the Falls area. Establishment of dense grass cover would benefit small 

 mammals (especially voles) and, if accomplished in certain areas along the 

 north river shore, possibly bighorn sheep as well. Aquatic furbearers 

 (especially beaver, muskrat, and mink) would benefit from establishment of 

 willows, Cottonwood saplings, and cattail marshes along the shoreline. Bird 

 diversity and abundance would likely be increased by creating a three-layered 

 habitat with grasses and forbs, mixed shrubs, and tall deciduous and coniferous 

 trees. Taller trees and snags would benefit cavity-nesting birds and provide 

 perch sites for bald eagles and other large birds. Abundant browse could 

 benefit white-tailed deer. 



The best habitat restoration strategy would probably be aimed at creating 

 a complex mosaic of many habitats with high vertical layering and horizontal 

 patchiness, similar to that which exists in the area today. Management of the 

 south bank of the river for big game is not advisable, since the railroad and 

 Highway 2 would create the risk of mortality for animals attracted to the re- 

 claimed habitats, and since heavy big game use could impede reclamation. The 

 restored land should slope gently from the railroad fill slopes into shallow 



94 



