Habitat Evaluations 



On-site habitat assessments were conducted using 

 the rapid assessment protocol (RBP Level 1, 

 scores 0-200) developed for the EPA by Barbour et 

 al. (1999) with modifications and additions by the 

 National Aquatic Assessment of the Bureau of 

 Land Management (BLM) Buglab (scores 0-24) 

 (http://www 1 .usu.edu/buglab/forms/ 

 Bug%20Protocol%20fonTi.pdO- Using the BLM 

 assessment protocols, the reach was divided into 10 

 equally spaced transects. Parameters recorded at 

 each were: wetted width, bankfull width, 3 channel 

 depth measurements, large woody debris and 

 riparian shading. Basic water chemistry 

 parameters (temperature, pH, conductivity, 

 dissolved 0,and turbidity) were recorded prior to 

 sampling using the Horiba H-10. The goal of these 

 evaluations is to characterize local reach 

 geomorphology, riparian and in-stream habitat, and 

 other characteristics that influence aquatic 

 community integrity (Figure 5). The sites ranking 

 higher using these protocols are determined to have 

 higher quality local-scale habitat. Habitat 

 assessments were performed during the same visit 

 as the biological sampling. 



Figure 5. Channel deplh measurement as part of the 

 habitat and geomarphic assessments. 



Fish Communities 



Fish sampling protocols ( MTFWP 2003) required 

 the positioning of upstream and downstream block 

 nets at the ends of the reach (300m or 40x wetted 

 width), but most of the time shallow sections and/or 

 riffle areas were sufficient to prevent fish from 



escaping while the run & pool areas were being 

 seined from the upstream to the downstream 

 direction with a 20-30 ft '/4 inch straight seine, 

 depending on wetted width (Figure 6). Fish were 

 transferred to holding buckets, identified to species, 

 enumerated in the field, examined for external 

 anomalies (e.g. deformities, eroded fins, lesions, 

 and tumors), and then released (Figure 7). Young- 

 of-the-year fish less than 20 millimeters in length 

 were noted on the field sheet (not included in the 

 totals), and released. Voucher specimens were only 

 taken in the case of uncertain field identifications of 

 the silvery minnows, Hybogttathus spp., which 

 were preserved in 10% buffered fonnalin and 

 identified in the lab. Vouchers were submitted to 

 the Montana State University fish collection. 



Figure 6. Fish sampling a run by seining with a 20 ft 

 straight seine. 



Figure 7. A western silvery minnow seined in the 

 Little Missouri River before release. 



