in the swift portions of the Kootenai River in the vicinity of 

 Kootenai Falls (Joslin 1978). It was assumed this species utilized 

 swift portions of the Kootenai River and its tributaries inundated 

 by Lake Koocanusa. 



During spring and fall the open water areas - river, ponds, 

 sloughs, and marshes - provided feeding and resting areas for 

 migrating wate'-fowl. Open water stretches were utilized by winter- 

 ing waterfowl. 



3) Population Status 



Canada goose. The portion of the Kootenai River upstream of 

 the original townsite of Rexford river (area on the Rexford topo- 

 graphic map) probably supported a viable Canada goose population. 

 This area jontained 15 vegetated islands (55.2 percent of the 

 vegetated islands) and 14 non-vegetated islands (58.3 percent of 

 the non-vegetated islands) for a total of 29 islands (61.7 percent 

 of the total number of islands) (Table 3). Itiese islands contained 

 a diversity of habitats, including 122.2 acres of gravel bars, 471.4 

 acres of sub-irrigated grasslands, 235.1 acres of shrub riparian, 

 290.1 acres of cottonwood riparian, and 353.8 acres of mixed ripar- 

 ian habitats. These islands provided the habitats needed to sup- 

 port a Canada goose population as observed by Ball et al. (1981) in 

 Washington. Additional geese probably used the portion of the 

 river downstream from the townsite of Rexford; however, it was 

 assumed this habitat was suboptimal and fewer geese were present \n 

 the area. Nesting by geese occurred on the numerous small lakes 

 adjacent to the impact area, and it was assumed a number of these 

 geese moved to the river for brood rearing once hatching had occurred. 



Ducks. Highest densities of geese and ducks probably occurred 

 during mitigation periods, when the river and associated aquatic 

 habitats were used for feeding and resting. The slow water areas, 

 backwater areas, sloughs and beaver ponds, and agricultural fields 

 provided suitable feeding sites for the migrating birds. The U.S. 

 Dep. Agric. (1965b, 1966) reported the area was used primarily for 

 rest stops during migration and resident v/aterfowl populations were 

 present throughout the Fisher River and Rexford ranger districts, 

 with a low population within the Fisher River District and a more 

 abundant population within the Rexford District. The level of 

 spring use was probably greater than the fall use due to freeze-up 

 of the waterfowl sloughs and potholes adjacent to the river. Win- 

 ter use of the area was light with common merganser and common 

 goldeneye the primary winter residents (Bealey and West 1935, U.S. 

 Dep. Agric. 1965b). 



ISio quantita.tive population estimates could be deterrrdned for 

 the various species of waterfowl; however, qualitative seasonal 

 population estimates were determined based on the available 

 information (Table 4) . 



59 



