of some fluvial stocks occurs the lower elevations of the watershed (downstream of the 

 North Fork) and conform to the general distribution of fluvial rainbow trout (Figure 8). 

 However, genetic testing has also identified outliers to the generally low-elevation 

 distribution pattern where lake populations of hybridizing species (rainbow and 

 Yellowstone cutthroat trout) are established (Appendix M). These include wilderness 

 areas of the North Fork of the Blackfoot River and Landers Fork drainages and the 

 Nevada Creek watershed near Nevada Reservoir. We have also identified a private pond 

 in the Union Creek drainage as a source of hybridization. 



During 2002 and 2003, the genetic composition of suspected WSCT populations was 

 tested in 1 7 streams (Appendix M). Genetic testing exhibited no introgression in eight streams 

 [(Chimney Creek (n=9), Cottonwood Creek (n=24), Dick Creek (n=27), Dunham Creek, (n=30), 

 Little Fish Creek (n=27). Spring Creek in the Douglas Watershed (n=18), Wasson Creek (n=32) 

 and Wilson Creek (n=22)]. Five streams contained mildly introgressed stocks (98 to 99.9%) 

 [(Shanley Creek (n=27), Washoe Creek (n=28). Smith Creek (n=28). Fish Creek (n=25) and 

 Game Creek (n=24)]. Populations in two streams were moderately introgressed (90 and 98% 

 westslope markers) [Monture Creek (n=27) and Union Creek (n=l6)], and two other populations 

 were more heavily hybridized (<90% WSCT markers) [Spring Creek, tributary to the North Fork 

 (n=27) and Blanchard Creek (n=27)]. 



We studied the movements and habitat use of 44 fluvial WSCT in the upper Blackfoot 

 River drainage (a region of high WSCT genetic purity (Figure 6)), using radio telemetry (Results 

 Part IV). Outside of wilderness areas of the North Fork, this study identified seven upper river 

 tributaries supporting fluvial WSCT spawning, all of which have tested as genetically unaltered. 

 WSCT migration corridors, spawning and rearing areas were located primarily on private lands 

 at the lower tributary elevations, but often extend to mid-to-upper stream reaches located on 

 public lands. Of the seven streams that supported fluvial WSCT spawning, five have been 

 identified with some form of fisheries impairment (Results Part IV, Pierce et al. 2002). Most of 

 the habitat use and impairments occur on private lands. Of all WSCT-bearing streams identified 

 by FWP in the Blackfoot Watershed (outside of the Clearwater Watershed), 89% (72 of 81) 

 contain anthropogenic fisheries impairments. 



Spawning movements of Blackfoot River fluvial WSCT begin just prior to the rising 

 limb of the hydrograph with adults entering spawning tributaries near the peak of the hydrograph. 

 This movement allowed 62% of telemetered WSCT the ability to navigate intermittent reaches 

 along migration corridors. As with bull trout, WSCT in the middle reaches of the Blackfoot 

 River exhibited upstream and downstream movement before entering tributaries. Migrations of 

 telemetered WSCT from wintering areas in the Blackfoot River to spawning sites ranged from 

 0.2 to 42.2 miles. Spawning tributaries ranged from T' through 4"" order streams. In a review of 

 WSCT spawning behavior in Blackfoot tributaries, Schmetterling (2001) found spawners almost 

 extensively select for habitat units formed of instream large woody debris, which provides 

 holding areas, physical cover and retains spawning gravel. 



Recovery of WSCT began in 1990 with the adoption of catch-and-release angling 

 regulations for all Blackfoot Drainage streams and then expanded with habitat restoration. In 

 conjunction with fluvial bull trout recovery, the focus of WSCT recovery is reestablishing the 

 fluvial life-history form by: 1) reducing or eliminating controllable sources of anthropogenic 

 mortality; 2) maintaining and restoring existing spawning and rearing habitats; 3) restoring 

 damaged habitats; and 4) improving connectivity from the Blackfoot River to spawning areas. 

 Most of the current WSCT work occurs in core area watersheds or other streams containing bull 

 trout (Pierce et al. 1997, 2001, 2002; Results Part III) 



To date, restoration projects in WSCT habitat has involved 38 streams. Projects focus 

 on improving habitat conditions in both fluvial WSCT streams and streams supporting resident 



