of cover (undercut banks and depth). WSCT use of pool/LWD association occurred at 

 levels slightly higher than the 69% availability of the sampled pool/LWD habitat-type. 

 This use of pools and LWD as cover varied by channel-type with associations with wood 

 higher in alluvial (C-type) channels, compared with moraine and bedrock controlled (B 

 and F-type) channels of the lower reach (Rosgen 1996). WSCT in the lower reach 

 occupied pools 56% of the time (29% for summering and 59% for wintering) although 

 pools comprise only 7% of the wetted charmel area. These WSCT were associated with 

 geologic cover (primarily boulder and bedrock) during all contacts. While in tributaries, 

 of the 158 WSCT habitat unit contacts, 113 (72%) were located in pools, with cover 



Private 



State 



USPS USFWS BLM Plum Creek 



Based on total mileage by ownership 



Table 7. Native fish use bv oercent land ownershio. 



associations primarily of wood (65%) and to a lesser degree, other forms of cover 

 (undercut banks and overhanging vegetation 9%, boulders and bedrock 1 5% and depth at 

 11%). 



Bull trout in upper and middle reaches used pools with LWD 79% of the time 

 (76% for wintering and 90% for wintering), compared with 67% of contacts in the lower 

 reach. All bull trout pool contacts (all reaches) were associated with cover, the form of 

 which varied by reach (Table 8). Of the 8 1 individual habitat unit contacts made in 

 tributaries, 56 (69%) were in pools. Of these pools, bull trout cover associations included 

 48% LWD, 38% boulders and bedrock, 11% depth only and 4% undercut banks and 

 overhanging vegetation. 



71 



