HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA4155pt107M eUed ol atte'ted
fHt ~-dMed ~ in
~ 11~ ~~ ~a4in, ~
by
Max L. Erickson
Recreation Specialist
Montana Department of Fish and Game
TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 10
conducted by
Water Resources Division
Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation
32 So. Ewing
Helena, MT 59601
Bob Anderson, Project ~1anager
Peggy Todd and Dave Lambert, Editors
for the
Old West Regional Commission
228 Hedden Empire Building
Billings, MT 59101
Kenneth A. Blackburn, Project Coordinator
July 1977
1730 K Street, N-W-
Suite 426
The Old West Regional Commission is a Federal-State
partnership designed to solve regional . economic
problems and stimulate orderly economic growth in
the states of Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota,
South Dakota and Wyoming. Established in 1912
under the Public Works and Economic Development
Act of 1965, it is one of seven identical commissions
throughout the country engaged in formulating and
carrying out coordinated action plans lor regional
economic development.
COMMISSION MEMBERS
State Cochairman
Gov-Thomas L-Judge of Montana
Alternate: Dean Hart
Federal Cochairman
George D-McCarthy
State Members
Gov-Edgar J_ Herschler of Wyoming
Alternate: Steve F-Freudenthal
Gov-J_ James Exon of Nebraska
Alternate: Jon H_ Oberg
Gov _ Arthur A_ Link of North Dakota
Alternate: Woody Gagnon
Gov. Richard F_ Kneip of South Dakota
Alternate: Theodore R. Muenster
COMMISSION OFFICES
201 Main Street
Suite D
Washington, D-C-20006
202/967-3491
Rapid City, South Dakota 57701
605/348-6310
Suite 228
Heddon-Empire Building
Billings, Montana 59101
406/657-6665
i i
FOREWORD
The Old West Regional Commission wishes to express its appreciation for
this report to the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation,
and more specifically to those Department staff members who participated
directly in the project and in preparation of various reports, to Dr. Kenneth A.
Blackburn of the Commission staff who coordinated the project, and to the
subcontractors who also participated. The Yellowstone Impact Study was one
of the first major projects funded by the Commission that was directed at
investigating the potential environmental impacts relating to energy develop-
ment. The Commission is pleased to have been a part of this important research.
George D. McCarthy
Federal Cochairman
FIGURES.
TABLES .
ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS REPORT.
PREFACE ..... .
The River ..
The Conflict.
The Study ..
Acknowledgments
INTRODUCTION
Purpose
Scope .
Study Area.
METHODS. . . . .
Data Collection
Usc of 0uestionnaires.
She Comparison Data
Boating Data
River Stage.
Impact Assessment
EXISTING SITUATION . .
Questionnaire Response.
Pilot Study ....
1975-76 Summer Questionnaire
Observed Use ....... .
On-Ground Observations
Aerial Observations ....
Car Counter Data . . . . .
Boating . . . . . . . . . . . .
Boat Registration and Use.
Boating Questionnaire.
Boat Floats ..... .
Recent Waterfowl Hunting ..
Tributary Recreational Use.
Powder River .
Tongue River . .
Bighorn River ..
POTENTIAL RECREATION SITES
and Results
.•
iv
vi
vii
vii i
1
1
1
3
4
5
5
5
5
9
9
10
10
11
11
11
13
13
13
13
37
38
46
49
51
51
51
53
56
56
56
57
57
61
IMPACTS OF WATER WITHDRAWALS.
Projections of Future Use
Evaluation Criteria ...
Shoreline Activities
Water-based Activities
Access ...
Projected Impacts
SUMMARY
APPENDIXES
A. Projections of Future Use ........ .
B. Results of Spring 1975 Pilot Questionnaire.
C. 1975-76 Summer Questionnaire and Results.
D. Observed Use Form . . . . . . . . . . .
E. 1975 Mail Survey_Boating Questionnaire.
LITERATURE C !TED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
v
65
65
65
65
65
68
69
73
77
85
105
121
123
125
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Yellowstone River study sections .
Yellowstone River section 1
Yellowstone River section 2
Yellowstone River section 3
Sauger fishing on the Yellowstone River near Forsyth,
Montana, 1976 . .
Yellowstone River section 4
Yellowstone River section 5
Sightseeing and picnicking along the Yellowstone River
offer fine shoreline recreation ........ .
9. Swimming in the Yellowstone River near Reedpoint,
Montana, 197 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10. Subsections used in aerial observations
11.
12.
On Memorial Day, 1975 and 1976, large crowds were attracted
to Intake Fishing Access for paddlefishing ....
The Tongue River, showing 1975 Montana Department of
Fish and Game mail survey fishing pressure sampling
sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13. The upper Bighorn River, showing location of study sections
A, B, and C (from Stevenson 1975)
14. Potential recreation .......... .
15. Winningham Ranch shoreline, providing valuable access
near Miles City and a natural boat landing ..... .
16. Motorized boating on the Yellowstone River faces severe
projected impact ................... .
17. Percentage loss of navigable width in July and August in
four sections of the mid-Yellowstone under the low, inter-
mediate, and high levels of development ....... .
18. Limited Yellowstone River access near Worden, Montana,
in 1975 ....................... .
vi
7
14
19
24
25
28
31
41
42
47
51
58
59
~
63
62
66
67
68
1. Definition of sectional rating preferences (SRPs). 12
. 2. Observed recreational use by activity in section 1 38
3. Observed recreational use by activity in section 2 38
4. Observed recreational use by activity in section 3 39
5. Observed recreational use by activity in section 4 39
6. Observed recreational use by activity in section 5 39
7. Total observed recreational use for 1975 and 1976. 42
8. Relative importance of recreational activities
within each section in 1975 and 1976 (%) . . . . . 43
9. Relative importance of each section to popular
recreational activities . . . . . . . . . 44
10. Relative importance of recreational activities and
sectional rating preferences (SRP), 1975-76. . . ....... 45
11. Aerial observations of recreational activities,
August 8-December 5, 1975 ...
12. Tabulations of car counter data ........ .
13. Numbers of fishermen, hours fished, and numbers of
fish caught at Intak~ during spring, 1975.
14. Boating mail survey
15. Mailed-in questionnaire.
16. Yellowtail Reservoir and Bighorn River fishing and
boating use . . . . . . . . . . . ...
17. Numbers of duck and goose hunters, days,and average
hunters per day. . . . . .
18. Tongue River recreational use data for 1975 and 1976
19. Impact assessment for section 1.
20. Impact assessment for section 2.
21. Impact assessment for section 3.
22. Impact assessment for section 4
23. Impact assessment for section 5
vii
46
49
50
52
54
.. . . . 55
56
57
69
70
70
71
71
af
b/d
cfs
ft
ha
hm3/y
IMN
m
mi
km
km2
mw
mmaf /y
rrmcfd
rrmt/y
SRP
t/d
acre-feet
barrels per day
cubic feet per second
feet
hectares
cubic hectometers per year
impact modification number
meters
miles
kilometers
square kilometers
megawatts
million acre-feet per year
million cubic feet per day
million tons per year
sectional rating preference
tons per day
Viii
THE RIVER
The Yellowstone River Basin of southeastern Montana, northern Wyoming,
and w~stern North Dakota encompasses approximately l80,000_krnl (71,000 s~uare
milesl·92,200 (35,600) of them in Montana. Montana's port1on of the bas1n
comprises 24 percent of the state's land; where the river crosses the
border into North Dakota, it carries about 8.8 million acre-feet of water per
year, 21 percent of the state's average annual outflow. The mainstem of th~
Yellowstone rises in northwestern Wyoming and flows generally northeast to 1ts
confluence with the Missouri River just east of the Montana-North Dakota
border; the river flows through Montana for about 550 of its 680 miles. The
major tributaries, the Boulder, Stillwater, Clarks Fork, Bighorn, Tongue, and
Powder rivers, all flow in a northerly direction. The western part of the
basin is part of the middle Rocky Mountains physiographic province; the
eastern section is located in the northern Great Plains (Rocky Mountain
Association of Geologists 1972).
THE COfiFLICT
Hi stori ca 11 y, agriculture has been Hontana 's most i r.1portant industry. In
1975, over 40 percent of the primary employment in Montana was provided by
agriculture (Montana Department of Community Affairs 1976). In 1973, a good
year for agriculture, the earnings of labor and proprietors involved in
agricultural production in the fourteen counties that approximate the
Yellowstone Basin were over $141 million, as opposed to $13 million for
mining and $55 million for manufacturing. Cash receipts for Montana's
agricultural products more than doubled from 1968 to 1973. Since that year,
receipts have declined because of unfavorable market conditions; some
improvement may be in sight, however. In 1970, over 75 percent of the
Vello~1stone Basin's land was in agricultural use (State Conservation Needs
Committee 1970). Irrigated agriculture is the basin's largest water use,
consuming annually about 1.5 million acre-feet (af) of water (Montana DNRC
1977). .
There is another industry in the Yellowstone Basin which, though it con-
sumes little water now, may reqiJire more in the future, and that is the coal
developr.Jent industry. In 1971, the North Central Power Study (tlorth Central
Power Study Coordinating ~ommittee 1971) identified 42 potential power plant
sites in the five-state (Montana, North and South Dakota, Uyoming, and
Colorado) northern Great Plains region, 21 of them in Montana. These plants,
all to be fired by northern Great Plains coal, would generate 200,000 megawatts
(mw) of electricity, consume 3.4 mill ion acre-feet per year (mmaf/y) of 1~ater,
and result in a large population increase. Administrative, economic, legal,
1
and technological considerations have kept most of these conversion facilities,
i dent i fi ed in the i'lorth Central Po~1er Study as necessary for 1900, on the
drawing board or in the courtroom. There is no~1 no chance of their being
completed by that date or even soon after, which ~1ill delay and diminish the
economic benefits some basin residents had expected as a result of coal
development. On the other hand, contracts have been signed for the mining
of large amounts of Hontana coal, and applications have been approved not
only for new and expanded coal mines but also for Colstrip Units 3 and 4,
twin 700-mw, coal-fired, electric generating plants.
In 1975, over 22 million tons of coal ~1ere mined in the state, up from
14 million in 1974, ll million in 1973, and 1 million in 1969. By 1980, even
if no new contracts are entered, Montana's annual coal production will exceed
40 million tons. Coal reserves, estimated at over 50 billion economically
strippable tons (~lontana Energy Advisory Council 1976), pose no serious con-
straint to the levels of development projected by this study, which range
from 186.7 to 462.8 million tons stripped in the basin annually by the year
2000. Strip mining itself involves little use of water. How i~portant the
energy industry beco~es as a water user in t~e basin will depend on: l) how
much of the coal mined in Montana is exported, and by what means, and 2) by
what process and to what end product the remainder is converted within the
state. If conversion follows the patterns projected in this study, the energy
industry will use from 48,350 to 326,740 af of water annually by the year 2000.
A third consumptive use of water, municipal use, is also bound to
increase as the basin population increases in response to increased employment
opportunities in agriculture and the energy industry.
Can the Yellowstone River satisfy all of these demands for her water?
Perhaps in the mainstem. But the tributary basins, especially the Bighorn,
Tongue, and P01~der, have much smaller flows, and it is in those basins that
much cif the increased agricultural and industrial water demand is expected.
Some impacts could occur even in the mainstem. What would happen to
water quality after massive depletions? How would a chan9e in water quality
affect existing and future agricultural ,industrial, and municipal users?
\~hat would happen to fish, furbearers, and migratory waterfo1~l that are
dependent on a certain level of instream flow? Would the river be as
attractive a place for recreation after dewatering?
One of the first manifestations of ~lontana's gr01~ing conct!rn for ~later
in the Yellowstone Basin and else~1here in the state ~1as the passage of
significant legislation. The ~later Use Act of 1973, which, among other
things, mandates the adjudication of all existing water rights and makes
possible the reservation of water for future beneficial use, was followed
by the Hater Moratorium Act of 1974, which delayed action on major
applications for Yellov1stone Basin water for three years. The moratorium,
by any standard a bold action, was prompted by a steadily increasing rush of
applications and filings for water (mostly for industrial use) which, in two
tributary basins to the Yellowstone, exceeded supply. The DNRC's intention
during the moratorium was to study the basin's water and related land
resources, as well as existing and future need for the basin's water, so that
2
the state would be able to ~roceed wisely with the allocation of that water.
The stu~y which resulted in this series of reports \~as one of the fruits of
that intention. Several other Yellowstone water studies 1·1ere undertaken
during the moratorium at the state and federal levels. Early in 1977, the
45th f•iontana Legislature extended the moratorium to allo~1 more time to con-
sider reservations of water for future use in the basin.
THE STUDY
The Yell 0\·1stone Impact Study, conducted by the Water Resources Division
of the ~-1onta na Department of Natura 1 Resources and Conservation and financed
by the Old \~est Regional Commission, was designed to evaluate the potential
physical, biological, and water use impacts of ~1ater withdrawals and water
development on the middle and lower reaches of the Yellowstone River Basin in
Montana. The study's plan of operation was to oroject three possible levels
of future agricultural, industrial, and municipal development in the
Yellowstone Basin and the streamflow depletions associated with that develop-
ment. Impacts on river morphology and water quality were then assessed,
and, finally, the impacts of altered streamflow, morphology, and water
quality on such factors as migratory birds, furbearers, recreation, and
existing water users were analyzed.
The study began in the fall of 1g74. By its conclusion in December of
lg76, the information generated by the study had already been used for a
number of moratorium-related projects--the EIS on reservations of water in
the Yellowstone Basin, for example (Montana DNRC 1976). The study resulted
in a final report summarizing all aspects of the study and in eleven
specialized technical reports:
Report No. 1
Report No. 2
Report No. 3
Report No. 4
Report No. 5
Report flo. 6
Report No. 7
Future Development Project1ons and Hydrologic Modeling in
the Yellowstone River Basin, Montana.
The Effect of Altered Streamflow on the Hydrology and
Geomorpho I ogy of the Yell o~1stone River Basin, Nontana. ·
The Effect of Altered Streamflow on the l~ater Quality of
the Yellowstone River Basin, Montana.
The Adequacy of f1ontana' s Regula tory Framework for Water
Quality Control
Aquatic Invertebrates of the Yellowstone River Basin,
~lantana.
The Effect of Altered Streamflow on Furbearing f1ammals of
the Yellowstone River Basin, Montana.
The Effect of Altered Streamflow on Migratory Birds of the
Yellowstone River Basin, Montana.
3
Report No. 8
Report ilo. 9
Report No. 1 0
Report No. 11
The Effect of Altered Streamflow on Fish of the
Yellowstone and Tongue Rivers, t4ontana.
The Effect of Altered Streamflow on Existing Municipal
~nd Agricultural Users of the Yellowstone River Basin,
Montana.
The Effect of Altered St reamfl 0~1 on Hater-Based Recreation
in the Yellowstone River Basin, Montana.
The Economics of Altered Streamflow in the Yello•.-1stone
River Basin, Montana.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This report was reviewed by and guidance received from Orrin Ferris,
Administrator of the Water Resources Division of the Montana Department of
Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC),and Carole Massman of the DNRC's
Special Staff.
The author wishes to express his appreciation to the following Montana
Department of Fish and Game personnel: Ron Holliday, Administrator of the
Parks Division, and Keith Seaburg, Region 7 Supervisor, for their general
cooperation; Robert Martinka, Bureau Chief, Baseline Study, for his expertise,
advice, and cooperation; Larry Peterman and other members of the Fisheries
Division for their assistance and for the use of their equipment; Tom Hinz,
Neil Martin, and other members of the Game Management Division for their
geographical knowledge of the study area and the use of their equipment; and
Becky Grant and Pat Hensley for their diligent work and long hours in the field.
Other.DNRC personnel providing assistance were Janet Cawlfield, Lynda
Howell, Kr1s Macintyre and Barbara Williams, typists. Graphics were performed
by Gary Wolf and Gordon Taylor. D.C. Howard designed and drew the cover.
4
PURPOSE
The Yellowstone River, free-flowing in its entire length, provides diverse
recreational opportunities. This study was initiated to evaluate present
recreational use on the river and determine the potential effects of altered
streamflow on existing and future recreational uses. A secondary objective
was to evaluate potential recreation sites along the river. The study was
initiated in November 1974 and continued until October 1976.
SCOPE
In order to accomplish this study three major techniques have been used
to evaluate recreational behavior (Burdge and Field 1972). Two were used in
this report. The first was the measurement of demographic, social, and other
individual and group characteristics of users of this recreation area. The
second was the examination of the resource itself to determine available
recreational opportunities. The third, quantification of recreational
benefits in terms of dollars, is considered in Report No. 11 of this series.
STUDY AREA
The study area includes the Yellowstone River from Big Timber to the
North Dakota border, a distance of approximately 700 river kilometers (436 river
miles)(figure 1 ). Major tributaries include the Boulder, Stillwater, Clarks
Fork Yellowstone, Bighorn, Tongue, and Powder rivers, which within Montana
have a total combined length of 1,140 km (710 river miles). The boundaries
of five major drainages were used to divide the study area into five sections
(figure 1).
The upper reaches of the Yellowstone River are considered a cold-water
aquatic environment, the lower reaches a warm-water environment, and the
river reach between Columbus and Custer a transition zone. These varying
environments are characterized in part by a decrease in river gradient; the
westernmost section (1) has an average slope of 0.002 (2 m/km, 10 ft/mi);
the easternmost section (5) has an average slope of about 0.0004 (0.4 m/km,
2 ft/mi). Differing patterns of recreational activity result from these
variations.
Of the counties included in the study area, Yellowstone County has the
largest population, 97,400. Other county populations within the study area
are much smaller: Custer 12,000, Big Horn 10,900, Dawson 10,400, Richland
g,700, Rosebud 9,578, Carbon 7,700, Stillwater 5,300, Fallon 4,000, Sweet Grass
3,000, Powder River 2,300, Carter 1,900, Prairie 1 ,900, Wibaux 1,456 and
Treasure 1,228. (These figures are 1g75 projected estimates based on the
1970 census. )
Water flow in the two years of study differed. In 1975, a year of
floods and high runoff, the peak at Miles City of 69,800 cfs occurred on
July 9. In 1976 the runoff was much lower and steadier. The peak at Miles
City was 45,300 cfs, on June 13.
5
YEllowsTONE RIVER BASIN
YEllowsTONE RIVER STudy SECTIONs
0 10 20 40 60 80 100 Miles u-u-u I I I I I
0 10 20 40 60 80 100 Kilometers
wu-----1 I I I I
! MUSSELSHELL
MEAGHER GOLDEN\
WHEATLAND I
I -------c--J VALLEY
I ~----~-
L _ i1
. _.,.,..."-'r--"
I
_r_j
I \8(
-0 I .,, ...
s''
CARBON
------'1 -...:::..--- --+,----L-
y E L L 0 W S T 0 N E ')
NATIONAL PARK (
N YELLOWSTONE
RIVER BASIN
GARFIELD
FORSYTH
I
~
I
I I
L--~, I COLSTRIP
-----.
I
McCONE
L I J---1 c
-...--~. . , --------. r ~--------~\"e'
I
~--::..
a;
INDIAN
BIG HORN
RESERVATION f
WYOMING
I POWDER I
ASHLAND
I
... __ _j
----,J I
! l ----~
\ Tongue River ! Reservoir
Rl
,
GLENDIVE)
J
J
AERIAL OBSERVATIONS
From August B through December 5, 1975, 29 aerial flights were completed
by Region 7 Montana Department of Fish and Game personnel. The average length
of these round-trip flights.was 2.67 hours, and the average recreationist
sighting per flight was 17.3. The majority (27) of the flights were made
on weekdays. Each flight was divided into small subsections because of
various distances and directions flown. Thus, each flight was counted as one
observation of each of several subsections of the river (figure 10). Recrea-
tional pursuits were divided into five usually definable categories: fishing,
big game or bird hunting, waterfowl hunting, rest and relaxation, and agate
hunting (table 11). The number of boats was also recorded. Big game hunting
and bird (mostly pheasant) hunting were combined due to the similar, indirect
role of the Yellowstone River to these sports.
TABLE 11. Aerial observations of recreational activities, August B-December 5,
1975.
Section
2a 2b 3a 3b 4 Sa Sb Sc Total
NUMBER OF RECREATIONISTS IN EACH ACTIVITY
Fishing 2 8 30 6 28 12 5 17 3 lll
Big Game Hunting
or Bird Hunting 0 1 20 18 40 22 43 40 17 201
Waterfowl Hunting 0 0 14 8 8 3 4 3 3 43
Rest and Re 1 ax-
a tiona 0 0 8 12 14 0 2 0 2 38
Agate Hunting 0 0 13 2 19 14 25 35 6 114
TOTAL 2 9 85 46 109 51 7g 95 31 507
OBSERVATION DATA
Number of
Observations 3 5 15 14 14 11 9 10 11 92
Number of People
per Observation .66 1.80 5.66 3.28 7.793.18 7.22 g.so 2.82
Number of Boats 0 1 6 3 12 3 5 10 3 43
Number of ~ersons
per Boat 0 9.0 14.2 15.3 9.g 17.0 15.8 9.5 10.3
aAny unidentifiable activity.
bThis is the ratio of the number of people observed to the number of boats
observed. The greater the number, the smaller the relative amount of boating.
46
...
U1
TABLE 10. Relative importance of recreational activities and sectional rating preferences (SRP), 1975-1976.
Section
1 2 3 4 5
Relative Relative Relative Relative Relative
Importance Importance Importance Importance Importance
(%) SRP (%) SRP (%) SRP (%) SRP (%) SRP
Swinuning 6 2 28 3 3 1 0 1 0
Picnicking 18 3 5 1 6 2 0 1 2
Rest and
Relaxation 23 3 16 3 22 3 47 3 17
Boating 15 2 5 2 8 2 28 3 13
Horseback
Riding 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0
Bicycling 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 1 0
Motor Biking 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 2
Driving for
Pleasure 1 1 5 1 2 1 0 1 0
Playing Outdoor
Games 7 1 4 1 6 1 2 1 5
Rockhounding 2 1 0 1 0 1 4 1 18
Sightseeing 4 1 13 2 6 2 0 1 3
Walking for
Pleasure 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0
Waterskiing D 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0
Bird Watching 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0
Fishing 22 3 19 3 44 3 18 3 40
PERCENTAGE OF
ALL PEOPLE
OBSERVEDa 31 23 22 13 11
a791 people in section 1, 589 in section 2, 576 in section 3, 332 in section 4, and 27g in section 5,
for a total of 2567.
1
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
3
Table 9 shows the relative importance of each section to popular recrea-
tional activities. For example, of all the swimming observed during the
study period in 1975, 98 percent occurred in section 2. In 1976, only 57
percent occurred in section 2, and 30 percent occurred in section 1. In
addition, the fact that section 1 has the largest number of developed sites
probably accounts for the largest percentages of picnicking. Table 10 shows the
same information for the 1975 and 1976 combined observed use data, and also
shows the sectional rating preferences (SRP) assigned for each activity in
each section (see discussion of SRP's on page 11 ).
TABLE 9. Relative importance of each section to popular recreational activities.
Activity
Swi11111ing
Picnicking
Rest and Relaxation
Boating and Floating
Horseback Riding
Bicycling
Motor Biking
Driving for Pleasure
Playing Outdoor Games
Rockhounding
Sightseeing
Walking for Pleasure
Waterskiing
Bird Watching
Fishing
Swimming
Picnicking
Rest and Relaxation
Boating and Floating
Horseback Riding
Bicycling
Motor Biking
Driving for Pleasure
Playing Outdoor Games
Rockhounding
Sightseeing
Walking for Pleasure
Waterskiing
Bird Watching
Fishing
1
1
77
23
14
80
31
24
11
61
25
21
50
0
0
22
30
59
38
68
0
0
29
50
29
10
0
100
0
0
27
2
1975
98
4
18
15
0
62
38
56
9
0
49
17
0
0
27
1976
57
22
13
2
100
100
53
25
14
4
83
0
0
0
9
44
Section
3·
0
18
10
13
20
8
7
33
20
0
24
33
0
0
24
13
16
34
13
0
0
12
25
37
4
17
0
0
0
43
4
0
0
42
45
0
0
10
0
0
25
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
6
7
0
0
0
0
B
10
0
0
0
0
10
5
0
0
7
13
0
0
21
0
11
50
5
0
0
0
21
0
4
9
10
0
0
6
0
12
71
0
0
0
0
12
TABLE 8. Relative importance of activities within each section in 1975 and
1976 (%).
Activity Section
1 2 3 4 5
1975
Swimming 1 23 0 0 0
Picnicking 22 1 9 0 0
Rest and Relaxation 24 17 17 56 17
Boating 8 8 12 33 17
Horseback Riding 1 0 1 0 0
Bicycling 1 2 1 0 0
Motor Biking 2 3 1 1 4
Driving for Pleasure 1 6 6 0 0
Playing Outdoor Games 10 1 5 0 4
Rockhounding 2 0 0 3 11
Sightseeing 9 19 16 0 5
Walking for Pleasure 1 0 1 0 0
Waterskiing 0 0 0 0 0
Birdwatching 0 0 0 0 0
Fishing 18 20 31 7 41
PERCENTAGE OF ALL
PEOPLE OBSERVEDa 11 20 16 28 26
1976
Swimming 10 37 5 0 0
Picnicking 15 11 5 0 3
Rest and Relaxation 23 16 25 20 17
Boating 20 1 5 11 9
Horseback Riding 0 1 0 0 0
Bicycling 0 4 0 0 0
Motor Biking 1 4 1 0 0
Driving for Pleasure 1 1 1 0 0
Playing Outdoor Games 4 4 6 6 6
Rockhounding 1 1 1 6 25
Sightseeing 0 4 1 0 0
Walking for Pleasure 0 0 0 0 0
Waterskiing 0 0 0 0 0
Bi rdwatchi ng 0 0 1 0 0
Fishing 26 17 51 56 39
PERCENTAGE OF ALL
PEOPLE OBSERVEDb 36 18 29 6 11
a329 people in section 1, 363 1n section 2, 202 in section 3, 253 in
section 4, 140 in section 5, for a total of 1287.
b462 people in section 1, 226 in section 2, 374 in section 3, 79 in
section 4, 139 in section 5, for a total of 1280.
43
TABLE 7. Total observed recreational use for 1975 and 1976.
1975 1976
Number Percentage Number Percentage
Activity of People of Total of People of Total
Swimming 86 7 146 11
Picnicking 93 7 115 9
Rest and Relaxation 339 26 272 21
Boating-Floating 188 15 136 11
Horseback Riding 5 -2 -
Bicycling 13 1 8 1
Motor Biking 29 2 17 1
Driving for Pleasure 36 3 8 1
Playing Outdoor Games 56 4 65 5
Rockhounding 32 3 49 4
Sightseeing 136 11 12 1
Walking for Pleasure 6 1 1 -Waterskiing 0 0 0 0
Bird Watching 0 0 2 -Fishing 268 21 447 35
Total number
of people observed 1287 1280
Total number of
vehicles observed 558 411
Estimated number of
people per number
of vehicles 2. 31 3.11
Figure 9. Swimming in the Yellowstone River near Reedpoint,
Montana, 1975.
42
Figure 8. Sightseeing and picnicking along the Yellowstone River
offer fine shoreline recreation.
41
Ling (burbot) fishing has become an extremely popular late winter-early
srring recreational activity at the East Rosebud Fishing Access Site (section 3)
on the Yellowstone River. Thirty-six fishemen fished a total of 98 hours from
February 19 to 11arch 19, 1975 (Haddix 1~75). There were 251 burbot taken, a
2.56 avera9e catch per anCJler hour. From 1·1arch 1 to June 17, 1975, there were
32 fishermen and 16 people resting and relaxing during 18 observations at this
site. Since most observations (13) were not made at night when ling fishin~
success is at its best, these figures should be considered low. The convenient
access and high rate of fishing success ~reatly appeals to many people, mostly
those from 'Forsyth, Mi 1 es Citv, and Co 1 strip.
Although no use studies were undertaken during the winter of 1975-76
observations, communi cations, and common sense were utili zed to estimate use.
River ice drastically reduces recreational use, and when this condition is
coupled with inclement weather the majority of determined outdoor recreationists
prefer to engage in off-river forms of recreation such as snowmobiling, predator
hunting and trapping, and farm pond ice fishing. River ice began to accumulate
in mid-December of 1975. The Yellowstone River within the study area usually is
not completely ice-covered,. but shoreline ice is dangerous and inhibits access
to the river by recreationists. Complete ice breakup usually occurs first on the
upper reaches of the study area, with large ice jams often occurring within the
r,lendive-Sidney se9ment of the Yellowstone. As the river clears, water-based
recreation follows. Fishing pressure and angler success increase ~lith the spawn-
ing runs of various species, which, depending upon weather conditions, occurs
from midsprinCJ through su~er.
The analysis of 1975 and 1976 recreational use observed during vehicle
trips, by section, is presented below. Table 7 lists the various recreational
activities available within the study area and the number and percentage of
people participating in each activity for 1975 and 1976. In 1975, rest and re-
laxation (figure 8) was the most popular activity, 26 percent, followed by fish-
ing, 21 percent. The number of people per vehicle was found to average 2.31.
The total number of people observed was 1287.
The 1976 data reveal that fishing was the most frequently pursued activity,
35 percent, followed by rest and relaxation, 21 percent. The number of persons
per vehicle was 3, substantially higher than in 1975. Certain areas close to or
within to~ms along the Yellowstone River (e.g., East Rosebud Recreation Area at
Forsyth) are within walking or bicycling distance for many recreationists. Access
was hindered by residual water more in 1975 than in 1976, perhaps explaining the
difference.
Table 8 shows the relative importance of various recreational activities
within each section in 1975 and 1976. For example, in section 2, of recreation-
ists observed, 23 percent in 1975 and 37 percent in 1976 were engaged in swimming.
Sectional differences are apparent; for example, for both 1975 and 1976, swimming
(figure 9) was much more popular in section 2 than in other sections. Also in-
cluded in table 8 is the percentage of people observed within each section.
Section 2, which includes BillinCJS, had the highest percentage (28) in 1975, and
section 1 had the highest percentage (36) in 1976. However, in 1976, 63,percent
of the people surveyed in section 1 were from Billings.
40
TABLE 4. Observed recreational use by activity in ~ection 3. March l-Junel7, 1975.
Myers to Below
West West East Ft. Mouth of Mouth of
Myers Rosebud Rosebud Rosebud Keogh Tongue Tongue
NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS 13 13 13 18 18 30 15
NUMBER OF:
Fishermen 2 23 6 82 12 64 9
Rockhounds 9 1 9 2
Sightseers
Fishing: Boating
Canoeists
Rest; Relaxation 4 13 3 16 2
TABLE 5. Observed recreational use by activity in section 4, March 1-June 17, 1975.
NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS
NUMBER OF:
Fishermen
Rock hounds
Sightseers
Fishing; Boating
Canoeists
Rest; Relaxation
TABLE 6. Observed recreational
Terry
Bridge
NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS 10
NUMBER OF:
Fi shennen 11
Rockhounds
Sightseers
Fishing; Boating
Canoeists
Rest; Relaxation
use by activity in
Beb1een Terry
and Fallon
Bridges
11
11
2
Mouth of Powder
12
2
2
3
section 5.
Fallon
Bridge
10
39
March 1-June 17,
Between Fa 11 on
Bridge and
Glendive
11
32
3
1975.
Glendive Intake
11 9
1023
2
2
3
3
53
Total
lgs
30
0
0
0
38
Total
1077
4
2
3
3
56
air. Also included in the study were observations made by Montana Department
of Fish and Game personnel while working on the river. For each trip, the
date and the section of river traveled were noted. Observations from
vehicles are not complete due to limited accessibility, but observations
from the air are complete. These observations were made from March 1 to
June 17. 1975, and from August 8 to December 5, 1976.
ON-GROUND OBSERVATIONS
Recreational visitation frequencies within the defined Yellowstone River
sections for the spring 1975 data are presented in tables 2 through 6.
TABLE 2. Observed recreational use by activity in section 1.
Big Reed Itch-
Timber Bratten Point Kep-Pe Laurel Total
NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS
NUMBER OF:
Fishermen
Rockhounds
Sightseers
Fishing; Boating
Canoeists
Rest; Relaxation
2 2
TABLE 3. Observed recreational use by activity
Billings Huntley
NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS 7 6
NUMBER OF:
Fishermen 8
Rock hounds
Sightseers
Fishing; Boating
Canoeists
Rest; Relaxation 2
38
2
2
2 3
3 2 7
4 4
in section 2, March 1-June 17,
Custer to
Pompeys Mouth of
Pi 11 ar Custer Bighorn
6 7 7
10
,
1975
Total
8
12
r
Cross
Tabulation
CT-11
(Q. 24a and 24c).
CT-12
(Q. 17 and 24a).
CT-13
(Q. 23a and 23c).
CT-14
(Q. 23b and 23d).
CT-15
(Q. 7 and 8b).
Valid
Responses
1~
164
185
182
144
Responses
The 33 percent that replied they knew of
public land near (within 50 miles upstream
or downstream) their present site also knew
they could obtain information on these lands
free of charge. Thirty-one percent did not
know the location of proximate public land
nor the availability of free information
concerning these lands.
Thirty-five percent of all respondents
indicated they knew of the public land along
the river near their recreation site but
would like to see another site within 30
miles upstream or downstream. Forty-nine
percent indicated no knowledge of public
lands near their recreational area but
would like to see another recreational
site within 30 miles.
Forty-nine percent indicated that insects
were a problem in their area but would
return even though the problem persisted.
Fifteen percent indicated they would not
return.
Of the 30 percent who indicated that insects
had reduced the amount of recreational time
they had spent at the site, 40 percent said
that they would not return to the area.
Fifty-five percent indicated that insects
had not reduced recreational time and that
they would return to the area.
Thirty-six percent listed their favorite
activity as fishing and their length of
stay as day use only.
OBSERVED USE
Recreational use along the river was observed in two ways. First,
activities were observed at specific sites during the summer study periods of
1975 and 1976. These data were used to determine the nature of current
recreational use of the river and to evaluate the impact of such use.
Second, activities were observed along the entire mainstem of the Yellowstone
River within the study area through visual checks on the ground and from the
37
Cross
Tabulation
CT-6
(Q. 15 and 16).
CT-7
(Q. 13 and 18a).
CT-8
( Q. 14 and 18a) .
CT-9
(Q. 16 and 18a).
CT-10
(Q. 13 and 14).
Valid
Responses
194
197
171
193
141
Responses
Forty percent indicated that the area they
were enjoying was just right (concerning
crowding) and would like to see more site
development. Thirteen percent indicated
the area was not used enough but should
have more development, and 31 percent
thought the area was just right and
wanted no more development.
Eighty-one percent were Montana residents;
forty-five percent of Montanans noted a
decrease in the distance traveled to a
recreational area due to the increased
cost of gasoline, and 36 percent reported
no effect.
Fifty-four percent of all income categories
indicated that the increasing cost of
gasoline had reduced the distance traveled
to a recreational area; of the remaining
46 percent, some did not answer the cost-of-
gasoline question. Only the higher income
category, above $16,000 annually, indicated
that there was no correlation between the
cost of gasoline and the distance traveled
for recreation.
Fifty-seven percent of the 121 people who
indicated that there should be more develop-
ment at their recreational site replied that
the cost of gasoline had decreased their
recreat i ona 1 mileage, whereas 43 percent re-
plied that it had not. Of the 72 people who
indicated that they wanted no further devel-
opment for the present site, 46 percent
replied that the increasing cost of gasoline
had decreased their recreational mileage,
and 54 percent answered that it had not.
Montana residents' income categories were:
under $5,000, 16 percent; $6,000-8,000,
11 percent; $8,000-12,000, 29 percent;
$12,000-16,000, 28 percent; and over
$16,000, 16 percent.
36
Cross Valid
Tabulation Responses
CT -1
(Q. 1 and 2) 197
CT-2
(Q. 4 and 6). 137
CT-3
(Q. 5 and 6). 129
CT-4
(Q. 18b and 18c) 188
CT-5
(Q. 7 and 18c) 175
Responses
Forty-three percent replied that they were
not on vacation and recreation was the
primary purpose for the trip. Another 31
percent replied that they were not on
vacation and recreation on the Yellowstone
was not the primary purpose of their trip.
Of the 25 percent who were on vacation,
56 percent replied that recreation on the
Yellowstone was the primary purpose and 44
percent replied that it was not.
Twelve percent replied that since they
started using the Yellowstone they had
noticed better water quality and their enjoy-
ment of the river had increased. Of the 67
percent who replied water quality had remained
the same, 56 percent replied that their enjoy-
ment had increased and 48 percent replied that
their enjoyment had stayed the same.
Sixteen percent reported increased enjoyment
regardless of increased litter; 19 percent
reported increased enjoyment, with litter
about· the same as in previous years;
16 percent reported increased enjoyment and
noticeably less litter. Replies from 16
percent noted the same general enjoyment in
spite of increased litter; 17 percent
indicated that enjoyment of the site and on-
site litter remained about the same; the
11 percent who reported that litter had
decreased said their enjoyment had remained
the same.
Thirty percent indicated that this year's
recreational trip covered a shorter distance
than previous years' typical trips, and
62 percent indicated trips within the same
mileage categories.
Sixty-two percent responded that their stay was
for day use only. Sixteen percent of these
day users responded that this year's typical
recreational trip covered less than 50 miles,
21 percent responded from 50-250 miles,
10 percent from 250-450 miles, and 15 percent
over 450 miles.
35
Question
No.
14.
15.
17.
24.
Valid P.esponses
1975. 1976
28 22
29 29
29 23
24 18
28 21
Questionnaire Cross Tabulations
Responses
The household income categories were:
under $5,000
$5,000-$8,000
$8,000-$12 ,000
$12,000-$16,000
over $16,000
Percentage
1975 1976
18
11
32
25
14
9
14
27
45
5
With respect to crowding, 69 percent of
recreationists in 1975 and 70 percent in
1976 thought the area was just right; 14
percent in 1975 and 17 percent in 1976
felt it was too crowded; and 17 percent
in 1975 and 13 percent in 1976 thought
the area was not used enough.
Fifty-six percent in 1975 and 78 percent in
1976 thought the site should have more
development.
Seventy percent in 1975 and 61 percent in
1976 would like to see at least one more site
within 30 miles of the present recreational
site.
Only 39 percent of recreationists in 1975
and 43 percent in 1976 knew the location of
public lands near their recreational site.
Cross tabulations (CT) for 1975 and 1976 questionnaire responses from the
entire study area (appendix C) are presented here. Each cross tabulation
includes two questions from the questionnaire.
34
Question
No.
10.
12.
13.
Valid Responses
1975 1976
15 8
picnic facilities
rest rooms
camping sites
weed mowing
access roads
19 13
25 11
29 24
22 14
Responses
In 1975, sauger/walleye fishing and paddle-
fishing produced the most success with 40
percent and 27 percent,respectively, of
fishermen reporting catches. During 1976,
paddlefishing and sauger/walleye fishing
success were equal, 37.5 percent, with cat-
fishing third at 25 percent.
Ratings of facilities as exceptional or good
were:
Percentage Valid Responses
1975 1976 1975 1976
65 74 23 23
59 67 22 21
59 67 22 21
57 94 21 20
54 70 26 20
Provision for children's activities was rated
only fair or poor by 74 percent in 1975 and
92 percent in 1976.
In 1975 and 1976, 60 percent and 91 percent,
respectively, indicated they liked an alter-
native site along the Yellowstone as well as
the site they were currently enjoying.
Seventy-six percent in 1975 and 58 percent
in 1976 were Montana residents.
In 1975, 59 percent of section 5 recreationists
were from Glendive, 14 percent from Sidney,
and 14 percent from Wibaux. In 1976, 71 per-
cent were from Glendive, 14 percent from
Billings, and 7 percent from Sidney.
33
Question
No.
1 .
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Valid Responses
1975 1976
Responses
29
28
Season
Spring
Summer
Fall
Winter
26
24
26
29
27
27
24
23
About 69 percent of the respondents in 1975
and 54 percent in 1976 were not on vacation.
About 68 percent in 1975 and 61 percent in
1976 characterized recreation on the Yellow-
stone as the main reason for their trip.
Number of Percentage of
Visits Respondents Valid Responses
1975 1976 1975 1976
1-2 50 54 12 13
2
1
1
or more 75 57 28 24
or none 79 70 18 10
or none 100 100 7 4
17
24
20
17
In 1975, sixty-eight percent reported that
water quality had remained the same, 20 percent
noted a decrease, and 12 percent perceived
an increase.
Fifty percent in 1975 and 47 percent in
1976 had noticed a decrease in litter.
In 1975, sixty-one percent indicated an
increase in enjoyment since first association
with Yellowstone recreation.
Sixty-two percent in 1975 and 46 percent in
1976 were day users only.
Fifty-nine percent in 1975 and 50 percent
in 1976 indicated fishing was the favored
recreational activity. In 1976, rockhounding
was favorite to 35 percent of the respondents.
Thirty-three percent in 1975 and 20 percent
in 1976 indicated that sauger/walleye was the
principal fish species sought; 28 percent in
1975 and 50 percent in 1976 sought paddlefish;
and 28 percent in 1975 and 21 percent in 1976
sought catfish. Paddlefishing within
section 5 decreased from late spring through
summer. In the pilot study during late spring
in 1975, 84 percent of 63 valid responses
listed paddlefish as the main fish sought.
32
Terry
N
*s· a· adney radQe
I
I
lz lo
l;o
I~
c
l>
1:0:
10
Seven Sisters Game Management Area--1~1 I~
I
I
Boot Ramp
Interstate Bridge
Bell Street Bridge
I
\Elk Island
Game Management Area
~Visitation Sites
*1975 Vieilalion Site only
10 20 Miles
I
10 0 10 20 Kilometers
l.cl,ocW:w:::lool:==:l.' .....I
Figure 7. Yellowstone River section 5.
31
Question Valid Res~onses Res~onses
No. 1975 1976
10. 12 Attitudes toward facilities were generally
negative due to the undeveloped nature of
all sites. Access roads were rated good or
fair by 75 percent of recreationists in 1976.
11. 13 In 1976, 54 percent indicated they did not
know where they would go if their present
site were not available.
13. 18 13 Eighty-eight percent in 1975 and 92 percent
in 1976 were Montana residents.
18 13 Miles City and Terry residents were the
most numerous, with 80 percent in 1975 and
87 percent in 1976.
15. 18 13 With respect to crowding, 88 percent in
1975 and 83 percent in 1976 thought the area
was just right.
16. 18 10 In 1975, 67 percent thought their recreational
site should be more developed. Only 50 per-
cent replied similarly in 1976.
17. 17 6 Eighty-one percent in 1975 and 67 percent in
1976 would like to see an additional recreational
site within 30 miles of their present site.
24. 18 13 Only 36 .percent in 1975 .and 46 percent in
1976 knew about public lands along the river
near their recreational sites.
26. 18 13 Fifty percent in 1975 and 39 percent in 1976
indicated that from two to nine days annually
were spent at other recreational sites along
the Yellowstone.
Section 5
Section 5 (figure 7) is the·most easterly within the study area and
stretches 241 river kilometers (149.5 river miles)from the mouth of the Powder
River (which is not included) to the Montana-North Dakota state line. The average
gradient of the river through section 5 is approximately 0.0004 (0.4 m/km,
2 ft/mi). The largest town in this section is Glendive, population 6,441; the
second largest is Sidney, population 4,551. (These figures are projections based
on 1970 census). Generally, popular recreational areas occur within each section
at nearly every small community along the river, due to some convenient access.
A total of 29 questionnaires was collected in section 5 in 1975 and 24 in 1976.
Intake is the most popular recreational site of those surveyed within Section 5.
30
limited within section 4, the heaviest use being received by those areas shown
in figure 6. Due to the small number of questionnaires obtained, 18 in 1g75
and 13 in lg76, results will be brief. The flood dike along the Yellowstone
near Miles City was the most popular recreation site; there are no developed
recreational areas within section 4.
Question
No.
l.
2.
3.
7.
8.
9.
Valid Responses
1975 1976
17 12
17 12
17 13
14 6
18 13
12 12
9 9
Responses
Seventy-two percent in 1975 and 67 percent
in 1976 were not on vacation.
Sixty-seven percent in 1975 and 58 percent
in 1976 indicated recreation on the
Yellowstone was the primary purpose of the
trip.
Thirty-five percent in 1975 and 15 percent
in 1976 had not previously been to the
present site during the summer. The
undeveloped local access sites within
section 4 seem to be visited mostly by
local residents due to their proximity to
home.
Seventy-one percent in 1975 and sg percent
in 1976 were day users only.
Thirty-nine percent in 1975 responded that
they planned to engage in river floating
or motorized boating.
Thirty-nine percent in 1975 and 31
percent in 1976 indicated that they planned
to participate in rockhounding. Agate hunt-
ing is a popular recreational activity
along the river in sections 3, 4, and 5. In
1975, the Miles City Agate Club had approxi-
mately 60 members, 14 of whom reported a
total of 49 visits per year between the
mouth of the Bighorn River and Terry. These
outings average 5-6 hours each. Most agate
hunters use boats or rafts in order to reach
islands and midchannel bars.
Fifty-five percent in 1975 and 69
percent in 1976 were fishing.
Fishing was the favorite activity for 50
percent of surveyed recreationists in 1975
and 83 percent in 1976.
Catfish was the most popular species for
50 percent of the fishermen in 1975 and
67 percent in 1976.
29
Question
No.
26.
Valid Responses
1975 1976
48 74
Responses
Days spent at other sites along the
Yellowstone:
1975 1976
(%) (%)
Section 4
No days spent
at other sites
10-15 days
over 20 days
42
17
17
42
12
19
This section (figure 6) includes 57 river kilometers (35.5 river miles) of
the Yellowstone mainstem from the mouth of the Tongue River, which is not
included, to the mouth of the Powder River, which is. The river gradient
through this section averages 0.00073 (0.7 m/km, 4 ft/mi). Miles City, the
only major town, had a 1975 estimated population of 10,029. Access is rather
Mouth of Powder River
Rapids Cross Section Sito ~ Buffalo
Zoro~
*Old Roa~
Mouth of Sunday Creak........._ .
*p. "' r•vote Access---........_
. --Kinsey Cross
Flood Otke~ Section Site
• MILES CITY
N
~Visitation Sites
*1975 Visitation Site only
10 0 10 20 Miles
~~~-=~======~--~!
10 0 10 20 Kilometers
kVV:="""i
Figure 6. Yellowstone River section 4.
28
Question Valid Responses
No. 1975 1976
14. 43 42
15 0 49 42
16. 48 41
17 0 45 32
20. 46 43
23. 45 65
24. 47 45
Responses
Income categories and percentages were as
follows:
under $5,000
$5,000-$8,000
$8,000-$12,000
$12,000-$16,000
over $16,000
Percentage
1975 1976
16
12
30
23
19
19
19
14
19
29
Eighty percent in 1975 and 76 percent in
1976 noted the area was just right; 14 per-
cent in 1975 and 12 percent in 1976 replied
that the area was too crowded.
Sixty-five percent in 1975 and 59 percent
in 1976 thought there should be more
development at the site.
In 1975 and 1976, 84 percent and 81 percent,
respectively, would like to see another
recreation site no more than 30 miles from
the present site.
In 1975 and 1976, 46 and 30 percent,
respectively, listed their occupation category
as blue collar, possibly a result of coal and
energy development near section 3. The next
largest category was retired, 20 percent in
1975 and 23 percent in 1976. ·
In 1975, 58 percent noted that insects had
reduced the time spent enjoying various
recreational activities. In 1976, only
32 percent noted reduced time. The amount of
standing water in 1976, less than in 1975,
probably provided less opportunity for
mosquito breeding.
In 1975 and 1976, 34 and 40 percent,
respectively, knew of public land near the
sItes.
27
Question
No.
··;·
10.
11.
12.
Valid Responses
1975 1976
23 20
picnic facil ites
rest rooms
camping sites
Responses
In 1975, 48 percent caught sauger and walleye,
and 39 percent caught catfis~. Sturgeon, ling,
goldeye, suckers, and carp were also caught,
but since the latter three species are
generally considered trash fish, they were
seldom listed by fishermen. In 1976, cat-
fish were most often caught, 55 percent,
followed by sauger and walleye, 30 percent.
Facilities were rated as exceptional, good,
or fair by the following percentages of
respondents:
Percentage Va 1 id Responses
1975 1976 1 g7s 1976
91 94 42 35
71 61 34 28
85 88 34 32
children's activities 43 64 30 25
weed mowing 39 75 28 39
access roads 85 87 28 38
NOTE: Most sites in section 3 are more developed than
those in other sections, which would seem to explain the high
percentages in this table.
29 18
47 47
40 38
In 1975 and in 1976, 69 percent and 72 per-
cent, respectively, indicated they liked an
alternative site along the Yellowstone as
well as the site they were currently enjoying.
Eight-seven percent in 1975 and 83 percent
in 1976 were Montana residents.
Forsyth was the home of 48 percent of
recreationists in 1975, followed by Billings,
20 percent, and Miles City, 10 percent.
In 1976, Miles City ranked first, 45 percent,
followed by Forsyth, 40 percent, and Billings,
8 percent.
26
Question
No.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Valid Responses
1975 1976
34
32 38
36
40 67
35 33
32 29
Responses
Sixty-five percent in 1975 had perceived
no change in water quality.
Fifty-nine percent in 1975 and 76 percent
in 1976 indicated that litter had remained
the same or decreased.
Ninety-five. percent in '1975 replied that
their enjoyment of the river had remained
the same or increased.
Fifty-three percent in 1975 and 40 percent
in 1976 were day users only.
Seventy-seven percent in 1975 and 58 percent
in 1976 indicated that fishing was the
favorite recreational activity, followed by
rest and relaxation (11 percent) in 1g75
and rockhounding (15 percent) in 1976.
Forty-one percent in 1975 and 52 percent in
1g76 listed catfish as the most popular
species sought, followed by sauger and walleye
(figure 5) (44 percent in 1975 and 35 percent
in 1976). Fishermen interchanged the names
pike, sauger, and walleye.
Figure 5. Sauger fishing on the Yellowstone River near Forsyth,
Montana, 1976.
25
Question
No.
3.
Valid Responses
1975 1976
35 53
Responses
Concerning other reasons for a trip,
sightseeing and rest and relaxation
accounted for 54 percent in 1975 and
40 percent in 1976.
Percentage of
respo~dents visiting
site over 8 times
each season Valid Responses
1975 1976 1975 1976
spring 24
summer 44
fall 18
winter 12
N
*H h Pumping Plant ~~~~~~ ~r~es\s I ys am
Isaac Homestead
Game Management· Area\
Myers Bridge~ ':""-"',.......-..-....."'"'"--
38 50
41 48
36 50
37 42
Mouth of Tongue River
Fort Keogh Cross Section Site \
*cheyenne Island~\
8 West Rosebud
_.,.Visitation Sites
" 1976 Visitation Site only
50
49
33
27
10 0 10 20 Miles
t...r...J-J.J I I
10 0 10 20 Kilometers
l.cw-J.J~c.l::=:::l.' _ _,
Figure 4. Yellowstone .River section 3.
24
CITY
Question Valid Responses
No. 1975 1976
26. 50 35
Section 3.
ResEonses
Days spent annually at other sites on the
Yellowstone:
1975 1976
(%) (%)
No days spent at
other sites 6 34
2-3 days 12 11
4-5 days 18 11
6-9 days 18 8
10-15 days 16 9
over 20 days 22 14
NOTE: Closure of the gravel pits near
Billings in 1976 may account for the increase
in the percentage of respondents claiming to
spend no days at other sites along the river.
This'section (figure 4) includes 178 river kilometers (111 river miles) of
the Yellowstone mainstem from the mouth of the Bighorn River, which is not
included, to the mouth of the Tongue River, which is. The river gradient
averages 0.0006 (0.6 m/km, 3 ft/mi). The largest town within the section is
Forsyth, with an estimated 1975 population of 2,449. East Rosebud Fishing
Access the most popular recreational site within this section,is located at
Forsyth. A total of 51 questionnaires were collected in section 3 in 1975
and 1976.
Question
No.
1
2.
Valid Responses
1975 1976
46 74
46 45
Responses
Among the respondents, 80 percent in
1975 and 60 percent in 1976 were not on
vacation.
Forty-one percent in 1975 and 56 percent
in 1976 indicated recreation on the
Yellowstone was the primary purpose of
the trip.
23
Question
No.
15.
16.
17.
20.
23.
24.
Va 1 id Response
1975 1976
Responses
48 :
46 .
"42
41
47
48
:26·. In 1975 and 1976, 27 and ll percent, respect-
ively, thought the area was too crowded, 58
and 69 percent thought the area was just
right, and 15 and 19 ·percent thought the area
was not used enough.
23 .
20
26
33 ...
31
in 1975 and in 1976, 70 and 57 percent re-
spectively, thought there should be more
development at the site.
In 1975 and in 1976, 88 and 80 percent,
respectively, would.like to,see another
recreational site no more than 30 miles from
the site.
The following were. the primary occupations
listed:
blue collar
'self~employed blue collar
_white collar
students
professional
1975 1976
(%) (%)
42
15
17
12
15
23
31
Fifty-one percent in 1975 and 55 percent in
1976 said they thought that insects had
reduced the amount of time spent enjoying
recreational activities.
Forty-nine percent in 1975 and 32 percent
in 1976 knew of public land near the site.
22
l
Question Valid Responses
N 1975 1976 0.
10.
picnic facilities
rest rooms
camping sites
Responses
Ratings of facilities within acceptable
categories (exceptional, good, or fair) were:
Percentage Valid Responses
1975 1976 1975 ]g76
45 50 31 28
17 26 30 15
59 64 32 22
children's activities 14 24 28 21
weed mowing 19 29 31 21
access roads 67 76 39 25
12 35 35 Sixty percent in 1975 and 71 percent in 1976
said they liked an alternative site along
the Yellowstone as well as the one they
were using.
13. 48 30 Ninety-four percent in 1975 and 87 percent
in 1976 were Montana residents.
51 25 Eighty-six percent in 1975 and 96 percent
in 1976 resided in Billings.
14. 45 29 The household income categories were:
Percentage
1975 1976"
under $5,000 20 17
$5,000-$8,000 18 10
$8,000-$12,000 13 24
$12,000-$16,000 31 31
over $16,000 18 17
Question Valid Responses
~-1~5 1~6
4. 40
5. 37 37
6. 37
7. 46 38
8. 42 24
9. 28 12
Responses
Eighty-five percent said water quality
had remained the same or improved since
their first visit to the Yellowstone.
Fifty-one percent in 1975 noted an increase
in litter and 58 percent in 1976 said the
problem had remained the same.
Ninety-five percent said that their enjoy-
ment of the river had increased or remained
the same.
Seventy-six percent in 1975 and 63 percent
in 1976 indicated their length of stay as
one day only.
Fishing was the favorite activity of 43
percent of respondents in 1975 and 25
percent in·l976. In 1975, 23 percent
identified swimming as their favorite
activity; in 1976, 25 percent answered
rest and relaxation. Swimming's popularity
in 1975 may have been partly due to its
popularity at the gravel pits near Billings.
The gravel pits were closed in 1976, and
swimming dropped to third in popularity
(17 percent).
In 1975, 39 percent indicated that walleye
and sauger were the most popular species
sought; 17 percent responded suckers and
carp, and 13 percent catfish. In 1976,
42 percent rated trout the most popular
species sought; 17 percent said catfish,
and 17 percent sauger. The news media
focused public attention on trout fishing
in 1976, possibly explaining the changes in
preference.
20
N
* . Pompeys .....
Worden-13th Street
Hunt18y· Bridge
Mouth of. Pryor Creek
Huntley Diversion
waco DiversionX
Pillar· Bridge\
• HUNTLEY
* Co~lson .Po;k.
~*Two Moon Pork
• BILLINGS 10 0 10 20 Miles
Duck Creek Bridoe ---..f ~ . L....ae--!..J I I
Question Valid
No. i975
l. 51
2. 47
'\*
Grovel Pits 10 0 10
lcJnt=:j
20 Kilometers
I
~Visitation Sites
* 1975 Visitation Site only
:* 1976 Visitation Site only
Figure 3. Yellowstone River section 2.
ResQcinses ResQonses
1976 ·--
38 .Ninety percent in 1g75 and 68 percent in
1976 were not on vacation.
26 · F,i fty-seven percent in 1975 and 62
percent in 1976 stated that t·ecreation
on the Yellowstone was the main purpose
their trip.
Percentage of
respondents visting
site over 8 times
of
each season Valid Responses
1975 1976 1975 1976
spring 32 38 32 21
summer 40 40 45 32
fa 11 25 25 10 16
19
Question Valid Res~onses Res~onses
No. 1975 1976
26. 57 96 Days spent at other sites along the
Yellowstone:
1975 1976
(%) (%)
No days spent
at other sites 16 19
1 day only 14
2-3 days 23 19
4-5 days 10
6-9 days 10.5 12
10-15 days 12 13
over 20 days 12 22
Section 2
This section (figure 3) extends 135 river kilometers (84 river miles) from
the mouth of the Clarks Fork Yellowstone, which is not included, to the mouth
of the Bighorn River, which is. The average river gradient through section 4
is about 0.001 (1 m/km, 6 ft/mi). The largest city, Billings, had an estimated
1975 population of 63,729. The most popular recreation area surveyed in 1975
was a series of water-filled gravel pits located on the north bank of the
Yellowstone at Billings. This privately owned land is immediately adjacent
to the Yellowstone River, and substantial recreational development is planned
by private individuals and by the city of Billings. Of the 51 questionnaires
collected in section 2 in 1975, 28 were obtained at the gravel pits. During
1976, however, the gravel pits were closed to recreationists, so two additional
sites, Two Moon Park and Coulson Park.were surveyed. Manning Diversion on
the Bighorn River was also closed in 1976 due to washout of a bridge.
Not included in the study was another privately owned recreational area
along the river, Pompeys Pillar, approximately 35 miles east of Billings.
Sightseeing is the major attraction at this area, open from June 1 to
September 1 each year. Attendance for 1975 was 6,904 adults and 2,146 children,
each of whom was charged a fee to view Captain William Clark's name engraved
upon the pillar.
18
Question Valid Res~onses Responses
No. 1975 1976
15. 60 93 Concerning crowding, 78 percent in 1975
and 87 percent in 1976 rated the area just
right and 22 and 9 percent, respectively,
thought the area was not used enough.
16. 58 88 In 1975 and in 1976, 57 and 41 percent,
respectively,thought there should be more
development at this site.
17. 46 68 In 1975 and in 1976, 83 and 82 percent,
respectively, would like another recreatirnal
site on the river within 30 miles of the one
they were visiting.
20. 59 94 The following are the primary occupations
listed:
1975 1976
(%) (%)
blue collar 31 23
white collar 19 19
retired 15 14
professional 10 16
housewife 10
23. 56 86 . In 1975 and 1976, 41 and 38 percent, respec-
tively, noted that insects had reduced the
amount of time spent enjoying recreational
activities.
24. 58 92 Forty-one percent in 1975 and 36 percent in
1976 knew of public land near the recreational
site.
17
Question
No·.:.· __
9
10.
12.
13.
14.
Valid Responses
1975 1976
34 60
picnic facilities
rest rooms
camping sites
Responses
Ninety-seven percent in 1975 and 95 percent
in 1976 identified trout as the most popular
species sought.
Ratings of facilities within acceptable
categories (exceptional, good, or fair)
were:
Percentage Valid Responses
1975 1976 1975 1976
87 89 45 45
64 73 45 77
88 99 48 79
children's activities 39 47 26 79
weed mowing 64 51 42 74
access roads 92 85 49 84
42 64 In 1975 and 1976, respectively, 79 and 82
percent indica ted that they 1 i ked an alter-
native recreational site along the Yellowstone
as well as the one they were currently
enjoying.
63 97 Seventy percent in 1975 and 74 percent in
1976 were Montana residents.
62 71 Of those Montana residents surveyed, 61 per-
cent in 1975 and 63 percent in 1976 resided
in Billings; 25 and 24 percent, respectively,
lived in Columbus.
47 91 The household income categories were:
1975 1976
( %) (%)
under $5,000 4 7
$5,000-$8,000 15 14
$8,000-$12,000 23 24
$12,000-16,000 32 23
over $16,000 26 32
16
The town of Laurel, at the easternmost edge of section 1, is the largest with
a population of 6,459. Reedpoint, population 133, Park City, population
430, Columbus, population 1,322, and Big Timber, population 1,645 are also
in the section. (All population figures are 1975 projections based on the
1970 census). The most popular recreation area is Itch-Kep-Pe at Columbus.
Sixty-two questionnaires were completed in this section in 1975 and 100 in
1976. From personal observation, recreational use seems more dispersed in
this section than in others due to the absence of large towns and to the
convenient access at several sites.
Question
No.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Valid Responses
1975 1976
63 99
60 89
63 96
40
39 84
40
60 95
43 79
Responses
Sixty percent in 1975 and 70 percent in 1976
were not on vacation.
In 1975 and 1976, respectively, 50 and
55 percent indicated that recreation on the
Yellowstone was the primary purpose of the
trip. Twenty-nine percent in 1975 and
27 percent in 1976 were conducting business
or visiting relatives.
Twenty-nine percent in 1975 and 20 percent
in 1976 had not been to the site before;
18 and 15 percent, respectively, had been
there 2 or 3 times; 11 and 10 percent
replied 4 to 6 times; and 24 and 25 percent
responded 8 times or more.
Ninety-five percent of those surveyed in
1975 said water quality had remained the same
or improved since their first visit to the
Yellowstone.
Regarding litter, 33 percent in 1975 and
25 percent in 1976 noted an increase.
Ninety-two percent of those surveyed in
1975 indicated that their enjoyment of the
river had increased or at least remained
the same.
In 1975 and 1976, 57 and 55 percent,
respectively, indicated that their use was
for one day only.
Fifty-six percent in both 1975 and 1976
answered that fishing was their favorite
recreational activity, followed by rest
and relaxation, 26 and 11 percent in 1975
and 1976, respectively.
15
is not included in the following tabulations. For that reason, not all response
categories listed on the questionnaire are included in the following section, and
the percentage responses given for many questions do not add to one hundred
percent.
The questionnaires used for the two summers included in the study differed;
some questions were used only on the first year's questionnaire, others only
on the second. In reporting all of the responses from both years, a numbering
system was devised for the questions which is not like the sample 1976
questionnaire in appendix C. The sectional tabulations which follow use this
new n~mbering system as does the rest of this report. A complete list of the
questions and their new numbers appears in the cumulative tabulation of results
in appendix C.
Section 1
This section (figure 2) includes 124 river kilometers (77 river miles) from
the mouth of the Boulder River at Big Timber to the mouth of the Clarks Fork
Yellowstone. Access points include the town of Laurel, Itch-Kep-Pe at Columbus,
Indian Fort at Reedpoint, Bratten, and the town of Big Timber. The average
river gradient through section 1 is approximately 0.002 (2 m/km, 10 ft/mi).
N
BIG
Access
REED
Pork
Itch-Kep-Pe
,. POIN/
FishinQ Access
10 0 10 20 Miles
~~~.C~t=====ji._._..JI
10 0 10 20 Kilometers ~Visitation Sites 'rnt::=1 I
Figure 2. Yellowstone River section 1.
14
s~~
QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE
PILOT STUDY
Besides aiding in the development of a questionnaire for the summer
recreation seasons, the pilot questionnaire yielded important data about late
spring paddlefishing at the Intake Fishing access site, 27 km (17 miles)
northeast of Glendive on the Yellowstone River. Eighty-eight questionnaires
were returned, 84 percent of them from Intake. The tabulated response is shown
in appendix B. Below are listed a number of results from the study.
Fifteen percent of the respondents had perceived a deterioration in water
quality since their use of the Yellowstone River for recreation had begun;
29 percent had perceived an increase in litter. About 35 percent indicated
that either litter or a deterioration in water quality had affected their
enjoyment of the river. Approximately half of the respondents were day
users. Only about 16 percent of the respondents reported that they were on
their vacation, although almost 70 percent reported that recreation on the
Yellowstone River was the primary purpose of the trip. About half replied
that they spent one to nine days annually at other sites on the Yellowstone
River and its tributaries.
Of the many recreational activities, fishing was the most popular, followed
by rest and relaxation. Ninety percent of the respondents reported that this
particular site fulfilled recreational demands at least adequately. When asked,
"Where would you go to participate in the same activities if this site was not
available?" the following alternatives were mentioned: Fort Peck, 20 percent;
Fred Robinson Bridge, 18.5 percent; Yellowstone River, 11 percent; stay home,
9 percent; other, 7.5 percent. The remaining replies were scattered among
various alternatives. About 60 percent thought the site was too crowded whereas
37 percent thought it was just right. Of those who thought the area was too
crowded, most replied that more sites should be available. About two-thirds
thought the site they were in should be more fully developed. About 40 percent
claimed that the increase in the price of gasoline had decreased the distance
traveled for recreation. About 76 percent of the respondents were Montana
residents, most from nearby counties.
1975-1976 SUMMER QUESTIONNAIRE AND RESULTS
The characteristic nature and intensity of recreational activities varied
among sections due to variations in population, river gradient, and level of
water development. Because of these differences, the results of the summer
questionnaire are reported below by study section. Appendix C includes a
sample copy of the questionnaire and the cumulative tabulation of results
from the entire study area.
Because of the relatively small sample size, any category which drew a·
response of less than five percent of respondents was considered not valid and
13
TABLE .1. Definition of Sectional Rating Preferences (SRPs)
Sectional Rating
Preference
1
2
3
Percentage
of Observed
Recreationists
<5
5-15
> 15
For each activity in each section an impact modification number (IMN)
was subjectively assigned for each projected level of development. If a
particular level of development would have a negative impact on a
particular recreational activity in a particular section, then an JMN of
minus 1 was assigned. An JMN of 0 indicates no impact, and an IMN of plus 1
a positive impact.
For each level of development, low, medium, and high, and for each
recreational activity in each section, the product of the SRP and the JMN
determines the overall impact. A series of matrices (tables 19 through 23)
shows the impact expected on the activities considered in each section.
12
Car counters were used in six selected areas to estimate total use. Aerial
censuses were undertaken intermittently to further substantiate results. Site
visitation varied slightly in 1976 within sections in comparison with 1975 due
to limited ]g75 data collection and to the closing of some areas.
BOATING DATA
Actual observations of boat use were difficult to obtain. Instead, the
number of registered boats in 15 counties of the study area was obtained, and
questionnaires (appendix E) were randomly mailed to at least 15 percent of the
boat owners of each county. Boat owners ~1ere asked where most of their
boating occurred, their favorite activities, and the number of boating days
per year. If more than one favorite site response was received, each was given
an equal preference rating. These data are reported on pages 51 to 54 .
RIVER STAGE
During July of 1976, in order to determine the effect of changes in river
depth on recreation, channel cross sections were taken at four sites judged
to be potentially difficult for navigation (Hinz 1976). Two sites were
located in section 2 and two in section 3. At each site, the flow was deter-
mined which would provide adequate depth for passage of a 14-foot aluminum
boat powered by a 15-to-20-horsepower motor, the most popular combination
of boat and motor observed among river boaters. The results are shown in
figure 17 on page 67 .
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Recreational use at a particular site depends on a number of factors. For
the 1975 data, a multiple regression correlated the total observed number of
recreationists with the following independent variables: river section
(location), maximum air temperature, discharge, discharge squared, weather
conditions, month, date, time of day (one of two time periods), and time of
week (weekday or weekend).
For the 1976 data the multiple regression was modified somewhat. Time of
day, found to be insignificant from the 1975 analysis, was dropped. Water
turbidity, as perceived by the recreationists, was added because turbidity
seemed to be inversely related to the number of anglers.
Within each study section, the popularity of each recreation activity was
calculated using both 1975 and ]g76 observations. For each activity a sectional
rating preference (SRP), as explained in table 1, was assigned. For example, if
10 percent of the observed.recreationists at a particular site were engaged in a
particular activity, then that activity would be given an SRP of two.
11
USE OF QUESTIONNAIRES
·Pilot Questionnaire
To assist in developing an effective and workable questionnaire for the
intensive summer studies of 1975 and 1g76, a pilot questionnaire was
developed and tested. Administered between May 5 and May 27, 1g75, at the
Intake Fishing Access Site 17 miles northeast of Glendive and elsewhere on
the Yellowstone River, the questions were designed to determine the
recreationists':
1) age, sex, and residency
2) income
3) 1 ength of stay
4) recreation site preference
5) frequency of visits
6) attitudes of fulfillment
7) knowledge of public lands
8) favorite activities
g) problems (crowding, litter, insects, etc.)
The questionnaire was administered to one person from each recreating
group. A group, identified intuitively, was defined as a person or persons
who had traveled together to the area.
The pilot questionnaire and its results are shown in appendix B.
Sunvner Questionnaire
After the pilot questionnaire results were evaluated, the questionnaire
was revised and prepared for use during the summer. During the summers of
1975 and 1976, the questionnaire was administered at designated popular
recreation sites within each of the five study sections. Each section was
visited randomly via automobile one day each week, including weekends,
from June 22 to September 13, 1975, and from June 28 to September 10, 1976.
The time of survey occurred randomly either from 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. or
from 2:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. in 1975. During 1976 no survey time periods
were used. To reduce bias, sections were visited from west to east one
week and from east to west the next; thus, the time of survey was different
at each site from week to week.
Statistical analysis of the questionnaire responses was by computer at
Montana State University. Summations for each question were tabulated for
each of the five river sections (see pages 13 to 34) and in total
(appendix C). Cross tabulations of questions were also compiled (see page 34 ).
SITE COMPARISON DATA
In addition to the questionnaire which was administered at each designated
recreational site, an observed use form (appendix D) was also completed by
the observer. Observed activities within sections were then compared; it
was assumed that percentages of activities not observed were similar to
observed percentages.
10
Though the literature on recreation is voluminous, research relating
changes in recreation behavior to changes in stream environments is almost
nonexistent (Andrews et al. 1976). A study made under the auspices of the
Pacific Northwest River Basins Commission (1974) investigated the relationship
between recreation and streamflow in the Snake River. River flow was con-
trolled by regulating the outflows from dams at five different flows for three
days each. The recreational adequacy of a particular site was evaluated for
potential by a team of researchers. The Yellowstone Impact Study had a
similar objective; however, no flow controls were available because the
Yellowstone River· is virtually free flowing.
The basic method used in this study was to demonstrate the effect of
three projected levels of water development (summarized in appendix A and
explained in detail in Report No.1 of this series) on recreation activities
by use of a matrix, similar to that used by Bishop (1972). For each activity,
the impact is calculated to be the product of an intensity-of-use factor
(Sectional Rating Preference) derived from on-site recreational observation
and field data collected by a variety of other methods and a modification
factor (Impact Modification Number) subjectively derived through expertise,
literature review, and common sense. The methods by which the data were
collected which allowed the derivation of these factors is explained in the
next few sections.
DATA COLLECTION
Since most recreation use of the Yellowstone River occurred during the
summer, most data were collected during that season in both 1g75 and 1976.
During the other seasons, data were collected more extensively in areas
close to Miles City, the headquarters for the study. Such data were largely
the result of personal communication and of aerial flights; literature
review supplemented these findings.
Interviews and news releases were helpful in identifying places and dates
of organized recreation events. At such events, numbers of recreationists,
activities pursued, and means of travel were observed.
Due to the vastness of the study area, concentrated efforts to evaluate
current recreational use were limited to the Yellowstone River mainstem. For
the tributaries, car counter data, personal communication, and literature
review were relied upon.
9
YEllowsTONE RIVER BASIN
SubsECTIONs UsEd IN AERIAl ObsERVATIONs
1. Big Timber to the mouth of the Clarks Fork
2a. The mouth of the Clarks Fork to Billings
. 2b. Billings to the mouth of the Bighorn
3a. The mouth of the Bighorn to Forsyth
3b. Forsyth to the mouth of the Tongue River
4. The mouth of the Tongue River to the
mouth of the Powder River
Sa. The mouth of the Powder River to r.lendive
Sb. Glendive to the Seven Sisters r.ame
Management Area
Sc. Seven Sisters Game Management Area
to the North Dakota line
0 10 20 40 60 80 100 Miles
'titjt---j I I I I
0 10 20 40 60 80 100 Kilometers
IMJ-1 I I I I
I MUSSELSHELL
'
GOLDEN\
'
WHEATLAND I
' ------~-J VALLEY
l___ ;----~-
___] CARBON
YELLOWSTONE ' I
NATIONAL PARK ' (
N YELLOWSTONE
RIVER BASIN
GARFIELD
-----t
'\ T R E A r'S _u..,R ... E~-......:...;,..Ar
' . I
L----~ • COLSTRIP l---... -1. •
" --------~ I
~-::..
'"
INDIAN
BIG HORN
"' RESERVATION ~·
______ _. _________ ~~
WYOMING
l
I
McCONE
I
(
----,
'
------. --. ~··
POWDER I
ASHLAND
I
I
' :J
' I
' I
' ~
' I
10
I
'
I --,
\
In 1975, hunting was the most frequently observed activity in all sections
except 1, 2a, and 2b. The period of flight observations included all of the
1975 big game and bird hunting season, which began October 19 and closed
November 11. Agate hunting in these same sections was also very popular.
Within sections 3, 4, and 5, the low stream gradient and large flood plain
create an ideal whitetailed deer and pheasant habitat. In addition, the
presence of many large islands increases the chance of success of hunters
and rockhounds. Boats are used extensively in these activities, but boat
launching opportunities are inadequate in section 4, probably explaining
why hunting was relatively less popular there.
Waterfowl hunting data were limited to the flood plain; thus recreationists
hunting in fields and along small tributaries were not observed. Waterfowl
hunting success, however, is determined not only by the condition of the
Yellowstone River itself, but also by other factors, such as the climatic
conditions of the region. Migratory waterfowl are more abundant during
certain portions of the season than others.
CAR COUNTER DATA
As part of the 1976 study, car counters were placed at six recreational
areas in three of the five study sections. Sites surveyed were Indian Fort,
Bratten and ltch-Kep-Pe fishing access sites (section 1), East Roseburl
Recreation Area and Waco Diversion (section 3), and Intake Fishin~ Access
Site (section 5). All sites were developed and are owned by the Montana
Department of Fish and Game, with the exception of Waco Diversion which is
privately owned.
Car counter data revealed that some sites were visited much more heavily
than others (table 12).
TABLE 12. Tabulation of car counter data, 1976.
Total Number Average b
Site Date Cars Total Use a of Days Daily Use
Intake F.A. 5/5/76 to 9/6/76 10,069 31 '315 124 253
East Rosebud R.A. 6/25/76 to 9/5/76 8,929 27,769 72 386
Waco Diversion 5/14/76 to 9/9/76 502 1 ,561 116 14.0
Indian Fort F .A. 7/8/76 to 9/8/76 1 ,383 4,301 62 69.0
Bratten F.A. 7/8/76 to 9/8/76 1 ,301 4,046 62 65.0
Itch-Kep-Pe F .A. 7/16/76 to 9/8/76 1,362 4,236 54 78.0
aThe total number of people using each site was estimated by multiplying
the total number of cars by average number of people per car (3.1), obtained
from the 1976 observed use data.
bThe average daily use was obtained by dividing the total use by the
number of days of sampling.
49
Some error resulted from vandalism and mechanical failure of counters.
East Rosebud Recreation Area had the largest visitation of a recreation area,
but young adults are reported to drive through the area frequently (Bivins
1976), which would give an inaccurate counter reading.
Table.12·shows Itch-Kep-Pe, Indian Fort, and Bratten ranked third, fourth,
and .f.ifth, respectively, in use among the sites with car counters. With the
exception of the Yellowstone boat float in mid-July, visitation generally
increased during the latter part of summer at these areas. Waco Diversion
received the least use, probably due to the undeveloped and unpublicized
nature of the site. In addition, a completed section of Interstate 10 riow
bypasses the Waco road turnoff.
Intake Fishing Access ranked second in overall average daily use, but
72.5 percent of the use occurred from May 5 to May 31, 1976. This tremendous
pressure is due to paddlefishing during May and early June. Daily use in May
at Intake averaged 870 recreation visits.
Extensive data have been compiled concerning recreational activity at
the Intake Fishing Access (Rehwinkel 1976) to emphasize the high recreational
use there (figure 11). In 1973 and 1974, maximum numbers of recreationists
occurred on May 26 and May 28, respectively, both of which fell on a Memorial
Day weekend. The high concentrations of fishermen on the Memorial Day weekends
of those years and the low daily fishing success known to have occurred on this
holiday in 1974 (0.02 fish per hour) suggest that angler concentrations are the
result of custom and available time, not high fishing success. The estimated
number of fisherman trips was 2,386 in 1973 and 3,363 for 1974 (May 1 to
July l)(Rehwinkel 1975). From May 1 to June 3, 1976, a counter rod registered
3,384 units, depicting another use increase. In addition, table 13 illustrates
the results of a subsampling technique (Elser 1975) used to determine repre-
sentative total hours fished and number of fish caught.
TABLE 13 .. Numbers of fishermen, hours fished, and numbers of fish caught at
Intake during spring, 1975.
Week
1st week
2nd week
3rd week
4th week
1st week
2nd week
Dates
1,2,3,4
8, 9, 10, 11,
12. 13
15, 16, 17
22. 23. 25. 29
1 • 2. 3
11 • 12
Number
Fishermen
59
75
42
62
62
81
MAY
JUNE
50
Total Hours
Fished
143.20
256.25
162.00
287.00
363.25
315.50
Number Fish
Caught
0
25
29
26
54
112
-----~-~~-----~------~
Figure 11. On Memorial Day, 1975 and 1976, large crowds were
attracted to Intake Fishing Access for paddlefishing.
BOATING
BOAT REGISTRATION
Montana had seven counties with more than 1,000 registered boats from
May 1, 1975, to May 1, 1976: Missoula, 4,549; Flathead, 3,866; Cascade, 2,688;
Yellowstone, 2,584; Lake, 1 ,744; Lewis and Clark, 1 ,597; and Lincoln, 1 ,093.
Within the Yellowstone study area, Yellowstone County had by far the largest
number of registered boats.
BOATING QUESTIONNAIRE
As shown in table 14, at least 15 percent of registered boaters within
each of 15 counties were randomly selected for participation in a mail survey
(questionnaire in appendix E). Of 688 questionnaires mailed, 510 (74 percent)
were returned. The highest percentage of response (93 percent) was from
Rosebud County, the lowest (50 percent) from Prairie County.
The "number responses" column in table 14 differs from the "number
questionnaires received" co 1 umn because of incomplete answers to segments
of the questionnaire, especially the one pertaining to annual boating days.
51
TABLE 14. Boating mail survey, 1975.
Total Percentage Sampled Total
tlumbcr Number tlumber Response of Total Average Total Person Days
Registered Questionnaires Percentage Questionnaires Percentage Number Total flumber Boat Days Boat Days Boat Days of Boating
County Boats Matl~d of Total Received Response Responses Of Boat CMners Per Year Per Year Per Year Per Year
Big Horn 265 40 15. 1 33 82.5 29 12.5 541 18.6 4,929 10,992
Carbon 177 27 15.3 21 77.8 20 11.9 432 21.6 3.823 8.525
Carter 9 9 100.0 6 66.7 6 66.7 148 24.6 221 493
Custer 222 36 16.2 28 77.8 26 12.6 484 13.6 4,129 9,208
Dawson 314 48 15.3 37 77.1 37 11.8 852 23.0 7,222 16.105
Fallon 67 11 16.4 6 54.5 5 8.9 56 11.2 750 1,673
Powder River 28 8 28.6 6 75.0 5 21.4 67 13.4 375 836
(J1
N Prairie 37 6 16.2 3 50.0 3 8.1 41 13.7 507 1,1Jl
Richland 214 33 15.4 25 75.8 24 11.7 746 31.1 6,655 14,841
Rosebud 188 29 15.4 27 93.1 24 14.4 547 22.8 4,286 9,558
Stillwater 110 18 16.3 11 61.1 11 10.0 246 22.4 2,255 5,029
Sweet Grass 54 10 18.5 70.0 7 13.0 199 28.4 1,193 2,660
Treasure 23 30.4 5 71.4 5 21.7 92 18.4 423 943
Wibaux 5 5 100.0 4 80.0 4 80.0 58 14.5 72 161
Yellowstone 2584 401 15.5 292 72.8 282 11.3 5,912 21.0 54.264 121,009
MEAUS AIIO
IOTALS 4317 688 15.9 510 74. 1 491 11.8 10,421 21.22 93,920 203,164
The average number of boat-days per year was obtained by dividing the "sampled
total bo.at-days per year" by the "number responses"; "total boat-days per year"
was then determined by multiplying this average by the total number of
registered boats. The total number of person days of boating per year was
then estimated by multiplying the total boat days per year by 2.23, the
average number of persons per boat observed during the 1976 Yellowstone
Boat Float.
Yellowstone County had the largest number of total person days of boating
annually, far ahead of Dawson, Richland, and Big Horn counties. The two
smallest figures, 161 man days (Wibaux) and 493 man days (Carter), represent
80 percent and 67 percent responses, respectively, from the total number of
persons who own registered boats.
Table 15, the results of a mailed-in questionnaire, incorporates
favorite activities and visitation sites of the sampled population of the
respective counties. Within the activities segment, the "other" category
included sunbathing, camping, rest and relaxation, picnicking, sightseeing,
trapping, and scuba diving.
Within each county, fishing was the favorite activity, followed usually
by water skiing. Agate hunting interest was highest in Richland County
(22 percent), and hunting response was highest in Big Horn (12 percent) and
Stillwater (9 percent) counties.
Visitational preferences varied widely within counties, but proximity
to bodies of water, especially reservoirs, seemed to be the largest factor
influencing recreational use. Substantial use of western Montana lakes and
rivers indicates willingness to travel.
Nonmotorized boating was not considered in this study. Rubber and
wooden rafts and canoes are used extensively for all activities, especially
sightseeing, fishing, and hunting. Boat floats are discussed in the
following section.
Recent Yellowtail Reservoir and Bighorn River data are listed in table 16.
BOAT FLOATS
A major water-based recreational event along the Yellowstone is the annual
three-day, 126-mile (203-km) Yellowstone River boat float, which usually
takes place the second weekend in July. The float begins in Livingston and
terminates at Billings. Although 97 boats were registered at Livingston in
1975, a count at Columbus on July 12 revealed 60 boats carrying 239 people,
seven canoes carrying 14 people, and three kayaks carrying five people.
An aerial count on July 13 between Columbus and Billings revealed 37 boats
carrying 115 people, seven canoes carrying 14 people, and three kayaks carrying
five people. An estimated 1,000 people took part in the float as participants
or sightseers.
An aerial census was taken of the 1976 Yellowstone River boat float, which
occurred July 8, 9, and 10. From Reedpoint to Columbus, there were 275 boats
engaged in river travel, the majority (223) of which were nonmotorized rubber
53
TABL[ IS. Result~ of miled-in Q\Jestlonnatre.
E
0 . ~ ~ " • -:! Nm MO -~ ~= . ~ . ·• ..;5 cs ~~ . . .. /;! t > 7~ 7! J:~ ..
~ :5 7; :~
~ ., ·~ . ~ • ?;5 . . .!~ . , ld ~~ ·-, ~~ ~~ . /;! . ; ~I' ~E . ~ ~ ~-~ . • . ~ . ~ . ;~ . := .. ~] • 0 ~~ •• ~ ~ . •-" ~ 0 •• o< 3~ m :; ~i ~!' gg m m .It a F.worite Ac.tlvlt1e~ (Pert:entage) ;u •m j; -~ E -;: . . ~ o. ll ;: . ~;: ~~ • . ~ ~ j ~ ~ ~~ . "\. !!5 !!5 ~ , . =~ ~ • ~ e . 5 Water Agate 0 :i ~~ ~ • 8 ~ !l ·-:<I' :2 :.0 ~ . County Flsll. Sk llr1g Htmt. Hur~t. Other -m ;;; ~ • .?. ~ u ~ ~ 0
Bill Horn 61.8 17 .t II . 7 ••• 1.9 ll. 9 '-' 47.1 5. 7 3.8 1.9
Carbon 67.0 14. i 7.3 11. I 1.4 7 .I 1 .• 2.4 Z6.2 2.4 3~.] 7. I II. 9
Carter 67.0 ]].0 16.7 16.7 5. 6 16. 7 22.2 16.] 5.6
"' ... Custer 55.6 25.9 7.4 3. 7 13.0 4.3 '. 3 2.1 37.0 1 J .0 2.1 6. 5 4. 3 10.9
D.llw~Or\ 60.5 21.0 7 .• 5.1 7 .• . 7 25.4 1.7 1.7 44 .I . 7 1.7 E..Z 6.8 1.7
Fallon BO.O 20.0 42.8 14. 28.6 14.3
Pe-ller
River 80.0 20.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 10.0 10.0
Pr<1lrle 50.0 25.0 25.0 33.3 11. 1 II. 22.2 II .I II .I
Rlc.111<1nd 48.2 18.5 7.4 22.2 3.7 4.2 25.0 4.2 12. s Jl.2 1. I 10 2 I 6.3 1 .I
Roleb.JII 150.0 26.1 6. 7 3. 3 3.3 2.4 14.3 7 .I 1.4 11.9 26.2 21.4 14.3
Stllhoater 54.5 9. I 36.4 3. 7 25.9 11.1 3. 7 11. 1 " 3. 7 7. 4 7.4 3. 7
Sweet Grass 69.2 30.3 6.2 12.5 12 12 5 18.8 18.8 18.8
Treuure 67.0 33.0 37.5 12.5 12.5 25.0
Wib<IU• 60.0 <10.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
Vc1\cwstone 60.0 23.0 3.0 '.o 1.4 3.9 2.2 1.0 . 3 II. I . 5 2.9 3. I 26.5 3. 5 13.3 13.0 1.9 12.7 .2 2.0
• 4Pol<der River, Cl<1rks fork Yellow~tone, StilliiHl'r
I
River, Spotted Eaq1e Reservoir. Idaho, Wyom1ng, Cana(Ja.
TABLE 16. Yell owta i 1 Reservoir and Bighorn River fishing and boating use.
Location 1970 1971 1972a 1973 1974b 1975c
FISHERMEN
Afterbay 636 l,B36 4,212 6,239 6,B74
River 2,383 4,786 12,513 5,058 10,495
Lake 2,892 2,117 10,356 12,339 29,489
BOATS
Afterbay 526 538 614 1 ,126 973
River 904 809 1 ,951 364 1 • 765
Lake 2,912 3,601 6,298 7,399 7,297
aFigures not available
bRiver closed to both fishermen and boaters due to litigation (Finch case).
CRiver reopened. Started counting boater fishermen plus boaters in
June 1975.
rafts. Eight kayaks, 21 canoes, and 23 motorized rubber rafts were also
observed. Six hundred and twelve participants and an estimated 600 sightseers
took part in the float. Two hundred and fifty automobiles and trucks and
40 campers, trailers, and mobile homes were present. The average number of
people per vessel was 2.23 and the average number of people per car was 4.85,
a relatively high figure probably due to the fact that several groups often
floated downstream to one car or truck for a ride upstream.
Because of the special nature of the event, the 1975 and 1976 boat float
data were not incorporated in total observed use or for regressional com-
parison of 1975 to 1976 river discharge with recreational use.
Another boat float takes place annually at Terry on July 4. In 1975, 13
crafts carrying 61 people made the trip from the mouth of the Powder River to
. Terry, 11 . 9 river mi 1 es ( 19 km). Tota 1 observed use was 225 people. The
Terry boat float is an example of a specific annual event held regardless
of the Yellowstone River discharge. In 1976, 12 rafts and five boats were
observed on the Terry boat float. Forty-one people engaged in the float,
averaging three to a vessel, and 300 spectators were present.
Another boat float was held on the Powder River on July 4, 1976, from
near Broadus to the Powderville Bridge, with 12 vessels and 43 participants.
A popular fishing float trip occurs from the afterbay of Yellowtail Dam
14 miles downstream to the Bighorn Fishing Access Site.
55
RECENT WATERFOWL HUNTING
Irregular waterfowl hunting pressure is indicated by the results of the
1971-74 Montana Department of Fish and Game waterfowl hunting questionnaire
data (table 17). Completed questionnaires were obatained from a sampling
of hunters from each of 15 counties in the study area, and the numbers of
duck and goose hunters per day were calculated. The number of possible duck
and goose hunting days was also listed and divided into the number of duck
and goose hunters, respectively, to obtain an average use factor. Counties
surveyed were Big Horn, Carbon, Carter, Custer, Dawson, Fallon, Powder River,
Prairie, Richland, Rosebud, Stillwater, Sweet Grass, Treasure, Yellowstone,
and Wibaux.
TABLE 17, Numbers of duck and goose hunters, days, and average hunters per
day.
Number of Number of Number of Number of
Duck Duck NDH Goose Goose
Hunters (NDH) Days (NDD) NDD Hunters (NGH) Days (NGD)
1971 3180 90 35.3 1439 90
1972 3758 90 41.8 2182 90
1973 3596 76 47.3 2107 93
1974 2965 64 46.3 1953 93
The number of hunters per day was greatest for ducks in 1973 and for
geese in 1972.
NGH
NGD
16.0
24.2
22.7
21.0
Besides flow, factors which affect waterfowl hunting pressure are lengths
of seasons, coincidence with other hunting seasons, federal regulations
governin9 bag limits and shooting hours, the amount of leisure time within
seasons {the 1974 season had 26 weekend or holiday days, while the 1972 season
had only 20), weather conditions, and state regulations. All of these factors
may vary annually.
TRIBUTARY RECREATIONAL USE
The major tributaries of the Yellowstone River within the study area
(figure 1) are the Powder, Tongue, and Bighorn rivers. These tributaries
offer varied recreational opportunities that, with the exception of the
upper Bighorn River during spring and early summer, are not extensively
utilized.
POWDER RIVER
The Powder River, free flowing in Montana, supports a minimum of
recreational use. A boat float which occurred on July 4, 1976, is mentioned
above. DFG employees engaged in the Powder River Aquatic Ecology Project
56
for Utah International, Incorporated, witnessed set line fishing on the river
but observed only two sunbathers during the sunmer of 1976 (Rehwinkel et al
1976), and field work for that study was accomplished daily throughout late
spring, summer, and in early fall. Sauger, shovelnose sturgeon, and
channel catfish populations were found during the most recently documented
capture period, April 5 to July 7, 1976 (Rehwinkel et al. 1976), indicating
an underutilized recreational potential related to fish migration.
TONGUE RIVER
The Tongue River (figure 12) receives considerably more recreational
use than the Powder River. A 1975 Montana Department of Fish and Game mail
survey is summarized in table 18. For the purposes of this study, the Tongue
River was divided into sections as follows: s~ction A stretches·from the
Montana-Wyoming border to the southern tip of the reservoir; section B from
the Tongue River Dam to the bridge near Brandenburg; section C stretches
from just below the bridge to the mouth of the Tongue River. (Study sections
on the tributaries will be identified by capital letters to avoid confusion
with Yellowstone mainstem study sections, which are numbered).
TABLE 18. Tongue River recreational use data for 1975 and 1976.
May 1 -September 30 October 1 -April 30
Resident Nonresident Total Resident Nonresident Total
Section A 2,644 2,074 4,718 0 0 0
Section B 894 98 992 0 0 0
Section C 4,074 192 4,266 926 244 1 '170
Tongur River
Reservoir 1 '955 3,430 5,385 313 351 664
TOTAL 9,567 5,794 15 '361 1 ,239 595 1,834
SOURCE: Montana Department of Fish and Game 1975-76.
As shown in table 18, nonresident use exceeds resident use on the Tongue
River Reservoir, probably due to the greater populations within one-day driving
distances in Wyoming than in Montana·. Approximately 17,000 total annual
visitor days of water-based recreation were recorded for the Tongue River and
Reservoir.
BIGHORN RIVER
The Bighorn River (figure 13) is a unique stream which has provided most
of the trout fishing within the study area. However, as a result of a decision
by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in the Finch case, the Crow Indian Tribe
has ·closed to the public that portion of the Yellowstone River that runs through
their reservation, as of January, 1977.
57
Tongu6 Ri~6r Rtls6rvtHr \ l --
I
CITY
0 10 20 30 Miles ~~.t~.t~.t========j·~------~·
0 10 20 30 Kilometers --..C:=:l.~
______ l __ ~N_!~ __ .. -------
WYOMING
Figure 12. The Tongue River, showing 1975 Montana Department of
Fish and Game mail survey fishing pressure sampling sections.
58
'·.
During a study (_Stevenson 1975) conducted in 1972 and 1973, the catch
of brown, rainbow, and cutthroat trout ranged from 0.00 to 0.07, 0.26 to 0.67,
and 0.00 to 0.05 fish per fisherman-hour, respectively. The estimated total
number of fisherman-days was 37.4 per surface acre in the afterbay below the
dam (section A) and 3,720 and 630 per river mile in sections B and C below
the afterbay, respectively.
r---
/
/
/
/
/ ;_
/
/
/
/
Section c
/
/ ' ' /
/
/
/
N /
/ . ~'+ ~0
-.. 1 '
/
/ . fO'~ . ' ···-.. -·--. /'--..
/ '
Section B "-
/
Sec~on A
'
'
. ----------
LEGEND
Highway
-··-·· Maintained Gravel
• Census Card Depositories
A State Fishing Access
S Gaging Station
0 ' -? 0 '2 I
Miles Kilometers
Figure 13. The upper Biohorn River, showing location of study sections A, B, and C (from Stevenson 1975),
The estimated total yield was 37,321 trout caught during 18,648 fisherman-
days for an average of 2 fish/fisherman-day. The percentage of rainbow trout
in the yield decreased with downstream progression while the percentage of brown
and cutthroat trout increased. Although weekend holidays accounted for only
32 percent of the total days in the census period, they made up 58 percent of
the fisherman-days. Fishermen from Billings accounted for 81 percent of the
Montana residents. In sections A and B, bank fishing made up the greatest part
of the fishing pressure; boat fishing provided the greatest portion in
section C due to limited access.
59
Investigations of potential alternative sites have been based on need
and feasibility. Summer survey results indicate that most people surveyed
(83 percent in 1975 and 87 percent in 1976) would like. to see another site
within at least 30 miles of the one currently enjoyed. The nature of alterna-
tive sites may not allow all recreational interests to be pursued at each,
but important access would be provided.
Since most Yellowstone River frontage is privately owned, local property
listings and interviews were used to find land with recreational potential.
Areas within the 180-km (110-mile) stretch between Forsyth and Fallon were
given first priority due to the scarcity of existing sites (figure 14).
After the·initial listing, each potential site was visited and evaluated
based on the following considerations:
1) Distance to adjacent sites
2) Boat launching potential
3) Proximity to population centers
4) Existing access
Areas which received a high evaluation were appraised and described in detail.
Site acquisition preferences were then made based on Montana Department of Fish
and Game standards in conformance with Section 26-104.6, R.C.M. 1947.
Currently, the Montana Department of Fish and Game has a plan for siting
recreation areas every 20 or 30 miles along the river. Achievement of this
goal is difficult; legal problems, inflationary land prices, and landowner
unwillingness to sell are current roadblocks. ·
Along the Yellowstone River, four areas have been investigated:
1) an area north of Rosebud, 516, T6N, R42E;
2) a state-owned section near the mouth of Sunday Creek, 536, T9N, R48E;
3) a section near the mouth of the Powder River, 54, TllN, R50E; and
4) a large area of 14,000 acres near Intake, including part or all
of sections 1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26,
27, 28; and 33 in Tl8N, R57E and sections 7, 17, 18, 19, and 30
in Tl8N, R58E.
In addition, other possible Yellowstone River access sites are the
Howrey ranch adjacent to the Montana Fish and Game Isaac Homestead Game
Management area near Hysham, and the Elmer Winningham ranch 10 miles east
of Miles City (figure 15).
61
~ --~ ----------~-------,
Figure 15. Winningham Ranch shoreline, providing valuable access
near Miles City and a natural boat landing.
Two major high-priority zones exist on the Yellowstone River. The river
segment from Isaac Homestead Game Management Area near Hysham to the ltch-Kep-Pe
Fishing Access Site at Columbus, 200.7 km (126 river miles), includes no state-
owned developed recreational area. Although there are several newly developed
or partially developed privately owned sites within this segment, which contains
Billings, the largest city in Montana, more developed recreational sites are
needed.
The other higtt-priority area is the stretch of river from East Rosebud
Recreation Area at Forsyth to the newly acquired (1976) boat ramp near Fallon,
Montana. This 177.8 km (110.5 river mile) stretch provides local and private
access to the Yellowstone River in severa1 places, but no developed sites
exist that assuredly would be open to the public. A 2.6-acre area within
the city of Miles City which was recently purchased by the Montana Department
of Fish and Game will be inexpensive and simple to develop because of the
availability of electricity, tap water, gravel fill, and a boat ramp. This
recreation area will divide the 110.5-river mile stretch approximately in half.
62
\
I
YEllowsTONE RIVER BASIN
PoTENTIAl RECREATION
a-u High Priority Zones
.... Potential Recreation Sites
0 10 20 40 60 80 100 M;les
Uifit==jU1tu==~-------~~====~~------.tl======jl
0 10 20 40 60 80 100 KHomelers
~~~~ .... tl:=:=ii .... JI:=:=jl
I MUSSELSHELL
I
·I
WHEATLAND
GOLDEN\
'
I
' -------r--j VALLEY
I :------~-
L_ .
' l
'
I
CARBON
YELLOWSTONE ' I
NATIONAL PARK •
N
\
' l
I 'y--
' )
YELLOWSTONE
RIVER BASIN
GARFIELD
McCONE
-----,
I --l.
I
1
INTAKE •
DAWSON
,
GL-ENDIVE)
J
J
CUSTER
INDIAN
BIG HORN
"' RESERVATION ~-
POWDER ' ASHLAND
I ----r--r
l l ----~
\ Tongue River ~ RtJservoi,
---------~~------~ ___ ... - -l------
WYOMING FIGURE 14
I
I
ICil 0 I. c:
\!
,~
0 -\~
PROJECTIONS OF FUTURE USE
In order to adequately and uniformly assess the potential effects of water
withdrawals on the many aspects of the present study, it was necessary to
make projections of specific levels of future withdrawals. The methodology
by which this was done is explained in Report No. 1 in this series, in which
also the three projected levels of development, low, intermediate, and high,
are explained in more detail. Summarized in appendix A, these three future
levels of development were formulated for energy, irrigation, and municipal
water use. Annual water depletions associated with the future levels of
development were included in the projections. These projected depletions,
and the types of development projected, provide a basis for determining the
level of impact that would occur if these levels of development were carried
through.
To evaluate the impact of these projected levels of development on water-
based recreation, associated water flows and depths were determined by the
Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (see Report No 1). For
most types of recreation, the 50th-percentile flow (that flow which would
be exceeded in 50 of 100 years under the particular development level of
interest) was used for impact evaluation. One exception is boating, for
which the 90th-percentile low flow is important for navigability considerations.
EVALUATION CRITERIA
SHORELINE ACTIVITIES
No changes due to altered streamflow can be foreseen in some activities.
Among these are shoreline recreation other than fishing, such as picnicking,
rockhounding, rest and relaxation, horseback riding, bicycling, motorbiking,
driving for pleasure, outdoor games, sightseeing, walking for pleasure, and
birdwatching.
WATER-BASED ACTIVITIES
Included in this category were fishing, boating, water skiing, swimming,
and agate hunting from boats.
The effects of increased water demand on fishing in sections 2, 3, and
4 are unknown. Within section 5, the paddlefish spawning run in May and June
is in some way related to high flows, turbidity, or both. Thus, in section 5,
a -1 IMN value (see explanation of IMN on page 12 ) is assessed due to the
uniqueness of the sport and the possible degradation of the fishery that could
result. The other four sections are rated no effect. I
1The author wishes to emphasize that temporary improvements in trout fishing
sometimes occur when the river is low and clear. Such a temporary improvement .
could result from the projected levels of development in section 1.
65
Water-based rockhounding would probably be adversely (_-1) affected by
increased water demand. Even though more rocks would be exposed for a few
years, agate hunters would soon pick most good agates. If high flows were
not sufficient to induce annual erosion, washing, and exposure, long-term
quality agate hunting would decrease.
Motorized boating (figure 16) is given a -1 IMN due to the projected
loss of the 20-inch water depth necessary for passage. During July and August,
the most popular months for motorized boating, 90th-percentile low flows in the
Mid-Yellowstone Subbasin are approximately 4,600 and 9,200 cfs, respectively.
Increased water demands in July under low and high levels of development
range from 2,300 to 3,500 cfs, respectively, and for August from 2,200 to.
3,300 cfs, respectively.
Figure 16. Motorized boating on the Yellowstone River faces severe
projected impact.
Figure 17 is a compilation of cross-sectional data taken in 1976 from four
Yellowstone River sites near Miles City. From gage height and cross-sectional
data, the navigable width of each section was calculated based on a 20-inch
navigation depth. The effects of the low, intermediate, and high levels of
development on these cross sections and navigable widths are shown in figure 17.
The greatest percentage of navigable width loss would occur under the high
level of development at the Kinsey and Fort Keogh cross sections. Losses in
66
-c:
Ql
E
Q.
0 a;
>
Ql
0
"" -..., o·
Ql >
Ql
...J
HIGH
! ... l ,..-I I ,.. I
I / I I .. •
I I / I
I / I
I I / I
I / I I /
I I / I
I V" I
I / I INTERMEDIATE I I ././
: ; I T
I I I I I
I I I
I I ! I
I I I I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I J LOW I j
~~-~ .... ,.,...·' ~ -~ ....----:-:. ~--········· /, .....
/
...... ~ 1----::-: ~-. . . . . . . . . v··· ...... ·
/ ...... -... ·······
/ , ~ ""'" ........ --.. ··
/ .... "'.,. -····· .. ·· Hysham
4 ...... ~--~ :-;:-. ::-:-...... ----Fort Keo / 1::-: :-.-:"'· :-:-: •.... ..
/ ...... . ............ Kinsey k:;;;. / ...... ~-~····· -·-·-Buffalo
/' ~ ~ . ~-~·· • July
r,.... J:l August
1 z I
gh
Rapids
I
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
% Loss
Figure 17. Percentage loss of navigable width in July and August in four sections of the
mid-Yellowstone under the low, intermediate, and high levels of development.
excess of 15 percent would occur at all locations under all projections in July
and August. The smallest percentage of loss of navigable width would occur in
July at the Hysham site. No attempt was made to weigh impacts between
sections.
Since passage is presently critical at the 90th-percentile natural low
flows for August and September, lower flows would virtually eliminate river
travel past critical areas. Waterskiing, obviously associated with boating,
is considered only in sections 4 and 5. Lower water levels would increase
the present danger situation.
ACCESS
Increased water withdrawal could improve access to recreational sites
during what would normally be periods of high runoff. In 1975 several Montana
Department of Fish and Game recreational areas were flooded as late as mid-
July; bridges were washed out, and some roads were impassable into mid-
August (figure 18). There were no such access problems in 1976.
'' \ --..
,~ ' .1/
. ,_ . .,.. .
::..-;'.
: -. . ··----
---
....
.. .. _; ..
.. . .. . .
~~---------....:_ ___ .c__o _ _:___ ---~"'--•-' __ .___• .,:": --~-· . ....:----
Figure 18. Limited Yellowstone River access near Worden, Montana,
in 1975.
68
PROJECTED IMPACTS
The methods by which the following impact projections were formulated are
explained on pages 11 to 12 .
Table .g on page .44 illustrated that more recreational use was observed in
some sections than in others, both in numbers of recreationists and in numbers
of recreational activities. Even so, a single recreational experience in one
section was assumed equal in importance to an experience in any other section.
Even though demand for and withdrawal of Yellowstone River water could affect
more person-days of recreation in areas of high use than in areas of low use,
the quality of the single experience, regardless of the section in which it
occurred, should be considered foremost in evaluating the following tables.
In the future, recreational use patterns in the study area may change greatly
through the addition of new access and recreational sites.
Tables 19 through 23 list the projected impacts for each activity for
each section.
TABLE 19. Impact assessment for section 1.
Impact Modification Numbers
Sectional Low Intermediate High
Rating Level of Level of Level of
'
Preference Development Development Deve 1 opment
Swimming 2 X -1 = -2 -1 = -2 -1 = -2
Picnicking -3 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Rest and Relaxation 3 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Boating 2 X -1 = -2 -1 = -2 -1 = -2
Floating 3 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Horseback Riding 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Bicycling 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Motor Biking 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Driving for Pleasure 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Playing Outdoor Games 2 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Rockhounding 1 X -1 = -1 -1 = -1 -1 = -1
Sightseeing 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Walking for Pleasure 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Waterskiing 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Birdwatching 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Fishing 3 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 +1 = 0
Access 3 X +1 = +3 +1 = +3 +1 = +3
TOTALS -2 -2 -2
69
TABLE 20. Impact assessment for section 2.
Impact Modification Numbers
Sectional Low Intermediate High
Rating Level of Level of Level of
Preference Development Deve 1 opmen t Development
Swimming 3 X -1 = -3 -1 = -3 -1 = -3
Picnicking 2 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Rest and Relaxation 3 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Boating 2 X -1 = -2 -1 = -2 -1 = -2
Floating 3 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Horseback Riding 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Bicycling 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Motor Biking 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Driving for Pleasure 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Playing Outdoor Games 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Rockhounding 1 X -1 = -1 -1 = -1 -1 = -1
Sightseeing 2 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Walking for Pleasure 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Waterskiing 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Birdwatching 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Fishing 3 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Access 3 X +1 = +3 +1 = +3 +1 = +3
TOTALS -3 -3 -3
TABLE 21. Impact assessment for section 3.
Impact Modification Numbers
Sectional Low Intermediate High
Rating Level of Level of Level of
Preference Development Deve 1 opment Development
Swimming 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Picnicking 2 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Rest and Relaxation 3 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Boating 2 X -1 = -2 -1 = -2 -1 = -2
Floating 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Horseback Riding 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Bicycling 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Motor Biking 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Driving for Pleasure 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Playing Outdoor Games 2 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Rockhounding 1 X -1 = -1 -1 = -1 -1 = -1
Sightseeing 2 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Walking for Pleasure 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Waterskiing 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Birdwatching 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Fishing 3 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Access 3 X +1 = +3 +1 = +3 +1 = +3
TOTALS 0 0 0
70
TABLE 22. Impact assessment for section 4.
' Impact Modification Numbers
Sectional Low Intermediate High
Rating Level of Level of Level of
Preference Development Development Development
Swimming 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Picnicking 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Rest and Relaxation 3 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Boating 3 X -1 = -3 -1 = -3 -1 = -3 Floating 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Horseback Riding 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Bicycling 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0 Motor Biking 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Driving for Pleasure 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Playing Outdoor Games 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0 Rockhounding 1 X -1 = -1 -1 = -1 -1 = -1 Sightseeing 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Walking for Pleasure 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0 Waterskiing 1 X -1 = -1 -1 = -1 -1 = -1 Birdwatching 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0 Fishing 3 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0 Access 3 X +1 = +3 +1 = +3 +1 = +3
TOTALS -2 -2 -2
TABLE 23. Impact assessment for section 5.
Impact Modification Numbers
Sectional Low Intermediate High
Rating Level of Level of Level of
Preference Development Development Development
Swiimning 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Picnicking 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Rest and Relaxation 3 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Boating 2 X 0 = 0 -1 = -2 -1 = -2
Floating 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Horseback Riding 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Bicycling 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Motor Biking 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Driving for Pleasure 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Playing Outdoor Games 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Rockhounding 3 X -1 = -3 -1 = -3 -1 = -3
Sightseeing 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Walking for Pleasure 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Waterskiing 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 = 0
Birdwatching 1 X 0 = 0 0 = 0 ' 0 = 0
Fishing 3 X -1 = -3 -1 = -3 -1 = -3
Access 3 X +1 = +3 +1 = +3 +1 = +3
TOTALS -3 -5 -5
71
Section 5 would be most adversely affected (-5) under the high and inter-
mediate projections. Section 2 would be adversely affected also, to the same
extent as section 5 under the low level of development (-3). Sections 1 and 4
would be adversely affected (-2) due to motorized boating loss and associated
activities. No impact is foreseen for section 3.
Tables 19 through 23 reflect only two summer study periods, one in 1975
and one in 1976. Hunting was not considered in the tables. Use of a boat
for hunting access was considered, but the likelihood of a small increased
water demand during hunting season pointed toward no significant impact.
Increased irrigation could increase resident waterfowl and pheasant numbers,
adding to the recreation potential.
Using the models developed to predict numbers of people on the Yellowstone
River as a function of river section, discharge, weather, day of week, tempera-
ture, turbidity, and the month of the season, the following relationships
were found.
In 1976, discharge and the square of the discharge (to allow for non-
linearity) were not strongly correlated with recreational use, accounting for
less than 10 percent of the variability in observed use (at p = 0.1). The best
prediction models for 1976 data correlated recreational use with weekend vs.
weekdays, section (location), and turbidity levels, in that order. The best
prediction for 1975 data also utilized weekend vs. weekdays and section
(location), but discharge ranked third. Turbidity levels were not incorporated
in 1975. Turbidity generally decreases-towards autumn. Because the paddle-
fish season occurs during the spring periods of high turbidities, the bulk
of the paddlefishing season was not within the summer study periods.
72
\
Recreationists enjoy numerous outdoor pastimes on the Yellowstone River.
The cold-water environment of the upper reaches provides trout fishing
throughout spring, summer, and fall. The lower reaches offer warm-water
fishing--sauger, channel catfish, and, for a short interval, paddlefish.
Boating, water skiing, and swimming are popular in these downstream sections
of the river and rockhunters favor the areas ~1here moss agates can be found.
On shore, picnicking, camping, and sightseeing are popular activities.
This study included two years' investigation of recreational use on the
Yellowstone River, by questionnaire and by observed use both on the ground
and by aerial survey. Only mainstem use was directly investigated, but a
summary of recreational use on the major tributaries, as reported elsewhere,
is included. A pilot questionnaire was circulated,and a final questionnaire
based on this pilot survey was circulated the following two summers. Ques-
tionnaire respondents were asked to relate their activities and length of
stay to such variables as available access, facilities, the presence of insects
and the cost of recreational travel. The river reaches surveyed proved to have
widely varying patterns of recreational use. The principal categories con-
sidered ~1ere shoreline and water-based activities. Further separation was by
type of outdoor pastime engaged in, season of year, number in party, and so on.
Most respondents were day users and were not on vacation. Three-fourths
were f1ontana residents. Fishing was reported as the favorite activity in all
study sections, with rest and relaxation second. Ninety percent of those
interviewed said the present recreation sites were at least adequate, although
adverse conditions such as increased 1 ittet· and water quality deterioration
were cited. Crowding was mentioned as a negative factor.
The study concludes that changes in the Yellowstone River due to
altered streamflow would be reflected in recreational uses that depend on a
stab 1 e riverine environment. Hunters, fishermen, and boaters would a 11 be
affected by a lessening in river stage and resultant environmental changes.
If streamflows were lessened by the amounts projected in this study, some
reaches would become impassable to the motorboats usually used on the Yellow-
stone. Lowered flows would also decrease the scouring action which uncovers
new agates for rockhunters.
Water-based recreation would be most affected by withdrawals, particu-
larly activities such as swimming, boating, and water skiing which are depen-
dent on a sufficient water level. The quality of fishing in the lower
Yellowstone would deteriorate as well. Changes in water levels and
subsequent altering of river morphology probably would not have a significant
effect on shoreline recreation such as picnicking, walking, and sightseeing.
Potential recreation sites will be needed if population projections and
increased industrial and commercial activities materialize. ·Several possible
areas are available on or near the mainstem of the Yellowstone. Evaluation
73
of these sites was based on existing access, boat launching potential, dis-
tance to other recreation areas, and proximity to population centers.
Patterns of recreational use could be expected to change with establishment
of additional access areas.
As withdrawals increase in response to greater demand, the Yellow-
stone's recreation potential could be permanently affected. Users would
then have to adjust their choice of area or activity. Alternative sites
for some types of recreation offer one solution.
74
75
PROJECTIONS OF FUTURE USE
FIGURES
A-1. The Nine Planning Subbasins of the Yellowstone Basin ...... 79
TABLES
A-1. Increased Water Requirements for Coal Development
in the Yellowstone Basin in 2000. . . ...... 79
A-2. The Increase in Water Depletion for Energy
by the Year 2000 by Subbasin. . . . . . . . . ...... 80
A-3. Feasibly Irrigable Acreage by County and Subbasin
by 2000, fligh Level of Development ..... . 81
A-4. The Increase in Water Depletion for Irrigated Agriculture
by 2000 by Subbasin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
A-5. The Increase in Water Depletion for Municipal Use by 2000 82
A-6. The Increase in Water Depletion for Consumptive Use
by 2000 by Subbasin . . . . . . . ..... 0 83
77
In order to adequately and uniformly assess the potential effects of water
withdrawals on the many aspects of the present study, projections of specific
levels of future withdrawals were necessary. The methodology by which these
projections were done is explained in Report No. 1 in this series, in which
also the three projected levels of development, low, intermediate, and high, are
explained in. more detail. Summarized below, these three future levels of
development were formulated for energy, irrigation, and municipal water use
for each of the nine subbasins identified in figure A-1.
ENERGY WATER USE
In 1g75, over 22 million tons of coal (19 million metric tons) were mined
in the state, up from 14 million (13 million metric) in 1974, 11 million (10
million metric) in 1973, and 1 million (.9 million metric) in 1969. By 1980,
even if no new contracts are entered, Montana's annual coal production will
exceed 40 million tons (36 million metric tons). Coal reserves, estimated at
over 50 billion economically strippable tons (45 billion metric tons) (Montana
Energy Advisory Council 1976), pose no serious constraint to the levels of
development projected, which range from 186.7 (170.3 metric) to 462.8 (419.9
metric) million tons stripped in the basin annually by the year 2000.
Table A-1 shows the amount of coal mined, total conversion production,
and associated consumption for six coal development activities expected to take
place in the basin by the year 2000. Table A-2 shows water consumption by sub-
basin for those six activities. Only the Bighorn, Mid-Yellowstone, Tongue, Powder,
and Lower Yellowstone subbasins would experience coal mining or associated
development in these projections.
IRRIGATION WATER USE
Lands in the basin which are now either fully or partially irrigated total
about 263,000 ha (650,000 acres) and consume annually about 1,850 hm3 (1,5 mmaf)
of water. Irrigated agriculture in the Yellowstone Basin has been increasing
since 1971 (Montana DNRC 1975). Much of this expansion can be attributed to
the introduction of sprinkler irrigation systems.
After evaluating Yellowstone Basin land suitability for irrigation, con-
sidering soils, economic viability, and water availability (only the Yellowstone
River and its four main tributaries, Clarks Fork, Bighorn, Tongue, and Powder,
were considered as water sources), this study concluded that 95,900 ha (237,000
acres) in the basin are financially feasible for irrigation. These acres are
identified by county and subbasin in table A-3; table A-4 presents projections
of water depletion.
Three levels of development were projected. The lowest includes one-third,
the intermediate, two-thirds, and the highest, all of the feasibly irrigable
acreage.
7B
1 Upper Yellowstone
2 Clarks Fork Yellowstone
3 Billings Area
4 Bighorn I r 5 Mid -Yellowstone
6 Tongue
7 Kinsey Area
8 Powder
9 Lower Yellowstone
~ ., ... ~~(L5,.flL
.,.[,T;.&"O I GOLC(• \ ' . '
Figure A-1. The nine planning subbasins of the Yellowstone basin.
TABLE A-1. Increased water requirements for coal development in the Yellowstone
~asin in 2000.
level of
Oevelopr.~ent
low
lntenr.edicJte
High
low
lnterr.ediate
High
low
lnte~T-ediate
Hlqh
Electric
Generation
8.0
24.0
32.0
2000 mw
6000 I:!W
8000 mw
30,000
90,000
120,000
Coo!.l Develop~ent Activity
Gasifi-
cation
7 .o
1.6
22.8
COAL Hlrl£0 (mt/y}
0.0
0.0
)6.0
0.0
0.0
J.S
COo'~V(RSJO~ PRODUCTION
250 l7JIJCfd
250 ltr.lefd
750 r:ncfd
0 b/d
0 b/d
200,000 b/d
0 t/d
0 t/d
2300 t/d
WATER COIISUMPTION (df/y)
9,000
9,000
Zl ,000
0
0
58,000
D
0
13,000
CONVERSIONS: I mt/y (shOrt) .... 907 rrrnt/y (metric)
I af/y • .1)0123 hm3/y
171 . I
293.2
368.5
•
31,910
80,210
strip
Nininq
9,350
16,250
22,980
aflo water consui!'IPtion Is shown for export under the low level of develo~nt because. for that
dcvelop:;:ent level, it h assumed that all eJ(nort is by rail, rather than by slurry pipeline.
79
Tot a I
186.7
324.8
462.8
48,350
147,160
321,190
TABLE A-2. The increase in water depletion for energy by the year 2000
by subbasin.
INCREASE Ill DEPLETION laf/v)
Uec. Gasifi-Syn-Ferti-Strip
Subbasin Generation cation crude lizer Export Mining Total
LOW LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT
Bighorn 0 0 0 0 0 B60 860
Mid-Yellowstone 22,500 9,000 0 0 0 3,680 35.180
Tongue 7,500 0 0 0 0 3,950 11,450
Powder 0 0 0 0 0 860 860
Lower Yellowstone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 30,000 g,ooo 9,350 48,350
INTERMEDIATE LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT
Bighorn 0 0 0 0 4,420 1 ,470 5,890
Mid-Yellowstone 45,000 9,000 0 0 15,380 6 '110 75,490
Tongue 30,000 0 0 0 9,900 7,000 46,900
Powder 15,000 0 0 0 2,210 1 ,670 18,880
Lower Yellowstone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 90,000 9,000 31 ,gl 0 16,250 147 '160
HIGH LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT
Bighorn 15,000 0 0 0 11 '1 00 2,050 28 '150
Mid-Yellowstone 45,000 18,000 29,000 0 38,700 8,710 139,410
Tongue 45,000 9,000 29,000 0 24,860 10,170 118,030
Powder 15,000 0 0 0 5,550 2,050 22.600
Lower Yellowstone 0 0 0 13,000 0 0 13,000
Total 120,000 27,000 58,000 13,000 80,210 22,980 321 ,1!!0
CONVERSIONS: 1 af/y = .00123 hm 3/y
NOTE: The four subbasins not shown (Upper Yellowstone, Billings Area, Clarks Fork
Yellowstone, Kinsey Area) are not expected to experience water depletion associated
with coal development.
80
TABLE A-3. Feasibly irrigable acreage by county and subbasin by 2000, high level
of development.
County
Park
Sweet Gras
St iII water
Carbon
Yellow·
stone
Big Horn
Treasure
Rosebud
Powder
River
Custer
Prairie
Dawson
Richland
Wibaux
BASirl
TOTALS
Upper Clarks Billings Big Hid Tongue ll:insey Powder Lower
ellowstone fork Area Horn Yellowstone River Mea River Yellowstone
21.664 1o.zn.1
6,208
38.076
2.160
2,160
19,412
13.037
9.591
11,408
4,230
19.412 13.037 25.229
2.185
9 .727
10,035
21 ,947
46.353
3 ,092 26 ,438
1.644 1,914 8.231
18.355
10,421
633
4.736 75.205 37.670
CONVERSIONS: 1 acre'" .405 ha
NOTE: The nut:lber of lrrlgable acres for the 1~ and intenncdiate develooment levels are one-third
and two-thirds, respectively, of the nu:bers given here. This table should not be considered an exhaustive
listing of all feasibly trrtqable acrea9e in the. Yellowstone Bdsin: it includes only the acreaqe identified
County
Tot a 1s
21 ,664
10,2011
6,20!1
2.160
19,412
15.222
9,591
21.135
46.853
43,795
II. 789
18.355
10,421
633
237.472
as feasibly trrigable according to the geoqraphtc and economic constraints ekplained elsewhere in thts report.
MUNICIPAL WATER USE
The basin's projected population increase and associated municipal water
use depletion for each level of development are shown in table A-5. Even the
13 hm3/y (10,620 af/y) depletion increase by 2000 shown for the highest develop-
ment level is not significant compared to the projected depletion increases for
irrigation or coal development. Nor is any problem anticipated in the availability
of water to satisfy this increase in municipal use.
WATER AVAILABILITY FOR CONSU~IPTIVE USE
The average annual yield of the Yellowsto~e River Basin at Sidney, r1ontana,
at the 1g7o level of development, is 10,850 hm (B.8 million af). As shown
in table A-6, the additional annu.al depletions required for the high projected
level of development total about 999 hm3 (Bl2,000 acre-feet). Comparison of
these two numbers might lead to the conclusion that there is ample water for
such development, and more. That conclusion would be erroneous, however,
because of the extreme variation of Yellowstone Basin streamflows from year
to year, from month to month, and from place to place. At certain places and
at certain times the water supply will be adequate in the foreseeable future.
But in some of the tributaries and during low-flow times of many years, water
availability problems, even under the low level of development, will be very real
and sometimes very serious.
Bl
TABLE A-4. The increase in water depletion for irrigated agriculture by 2000
by subbasin.
Subbasin
Upper Yellowstone
Clarks Fork
Bi 11 i ngs Area
Bighorn
Mid-Yellowstone
Tongue
Kinsey Area
Powder
Lower Yellowstone
TOTAL
BASIN TOTAL
BASIN TOTAL
CONVERSIONS:
Acreage
Increase
HIGH LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT
3B,080
2,160
19 ,410
13,040
25,230
21,950
4,740
75,200
37,670
237,480
Increase in
Depletion (af/y)
76,160.
4,320
38,820
26,080
50,460
43,900
9,480
150,400
75,340
474,960
INTERMEDIATE LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT
1 158.320 316,640
LOW LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT
79,160 158,320
acre = .405 ha
af/y = .00123 hm3/y
NOTE: The numbers of irrigated acres·at the low and intermediate
levels of development are not shown by subbasin; however, those numbers
are one-third and two-thirds, respectively of the acres shown for each
subbasin at the high level of development.'
TABLE A-5. The increase in water depletion for municipal use by 2000.
Level of Development
·Low
Intemediate
High
Population
Increase
56,858
62,940
94 '150
CONVERSIONS: 1 af/y = .00123 hm3/y
82
Increase in
Depletion (af/y)
5,880
6,960
10,620
TABLE A-6. The increase in water depletion for consumptive use by 2000
by subbasin.
Increase in Depletion (af/y)
Subbasin Irrigation Energy Municipal Total
LOW LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT
Upper Yellowstone 25,380 -o 0 25,380
Clarks Fork 1 ,440 0 0 1 ,440
Billings Area 12.940 0 3,4BO 16,420
Bighorn 8,700 860 negligible '). 560
flid-Yellowstone 16 ,820 35.180 1 ,680 53,680
Tongue 14,640 11 ,450 negligible 26,090
Kinsey Area 3,160 0 0 3.160
Powder 50,140 860 360 51 ,360
Lower Yellowstone 25.1 20 0 360 25,480
TOTAL 158,340 48,350 5,880 212.570
INTERMEDIATE LEVEL OF DEVELOPIIENT
Upper Yellowstone 50,780 0 0 50.780
Clarks Fork 2,880 0 0 2.880
Bi 11 i ngs Area 25,880 0 3,540 29,420
Bighorn 17,380 5,890 300 23,570
Mid-Yellowstone 33,640 75,490 1 ,360 110,990
Tongue 29,260 46,900 300 76,460
Kinsey Area 6,320 0 0 6.320
Powder 100,280 18,380 600 119,760
Lower Yellowstone 50 ,200 0 360 50,560
TOTAL 316,620 147,160 6,960 470,740
HIGH LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT
Upper Yellowstone 76.160 0 0 76.160
Clarks Fork 4,320 0 0 4,320
Billings Area 38,820 0 3,900 42,720
Bighorn 26.080 28. 150 480 54,710
Mid-Yellowstone 50,460 139,410 3,840 193,710
Tongue 43,900 118,030 780 162,710
Kinsey Area 9,480 0 0 9,480
Powder 150,400 22,600 1 • 140 174,140
Lower Yellowstone 75,340 13,000 480 88,82C
TOTAL 474,960 321,1QO 10,620 806,770
CONVERSIONS: 1 af/y = .00123 hm3/y
133
RESULTS OF SPRING 1975 PILOT QUESTIONNAIRE
Sample Questionnaire ....
Pilot Questionnaire Results
Cross Tabulations . . . . .
ll5
!l6
9I
1()2
PILOT STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE
THE following questionnaire has been designed
to evaluate the present recreational use of the
Yellowstone River and its tributaries. The Old West
Regional Commission is funding a study concerning the
effect coal and energy related water diversions from
the Yellowstone River will have upon the present and
future recreational opportunities.
AN accurate reply to the following questions would
provide needed information on present recreational use
patterns and would aid in fulfilling yo~r future recrea-
tional needs. The information you prov~de is strictly
confidential and will be used for no other reason than
stated above. You may obtain the results of this summer's
survey by writing the Montana Department of Fish and Game,
Recreation and Parks Division, Miles City, Montana, as
early as November, 1975.
Sincerely,
/?l_<Af-/~~~
Max L. Erickson
Recreational Specialist
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. ENJOY MONTANA.
86
1/ HAVE YOU NOTICED much deterioration in water quality or increase in
litter since you started using the Yellowstone area for recreation?
.Decrease in water quality?
Increase in litter?
Yes No
Yes--No--
Does it affect your enjoyment of the river?. Yes No
2/ LENGTH OF PRESENT STAY:
(check one)
Day use only __ _
One night __ _
Two nights
Three nights __ _
4-:, nights __ _
6-8 nights 9-10 nights __ _
more than 10 n1ghts __ _
3/ PLEASE RECORD the access and/or waterway you are presently enjoying.
Date: ___________________ ___
4/ ARE YOU PRESENTLY on your vacation? Yes No
Was recreation on the Yellowstone River ana?Or its tributaries the
primary purpose of your trip? Yes No
If no, what is the main reason for your tr1p? ________________________ ___
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+
+ 5/ HOW OFTEN do you visit this particular
NOTE: Spring: March 20-June 20
Summer: June 21-Sept. 22
Fall: Sept. 23-Dec. 20
Winter: Dec. 21-March 19
site each year? +
first time ever + +
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
more
2-3
4-6
6-8
than 8
once a spring +
times a spring +
times a spring +
times a spring +
times a spring + ------+
HOW MANY times do you visit this particular site during the +
+ + summer?
+ f; a 11 ?------------+
+ winter? +
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++i
6/ YEARLY, HOW MANY days do you spend enjoying recreational activities
at other sites on the Yellowstone River and/or its tributaries?
1 6-9
2-3 10-15----
3-4 16-20
4-5 More ~t~hi~n-20 a year ------
7/· Please mark (X) the activities you have engaged in or plan to engage
in while in the immediate area, as well as the number of hours spent
doing each.
Picnicking
Swimming
Rest and relaxation, as such
Boating -motorized
Boating -non-motorized river floating
Horseback riding
Bicycling
(continued)
87
No. of Hours
Motor biking
Driving for pleasure
Playing outdoor games
Rock hounding
Sightseeing
Walking for pleasure
Water skiing
Bird watching
Fishing
No. of Hours
(a) For which species in particular?~~~-----------------------(b) Which species, if any, did you catch? ______________________ __
(c) How many of each species?
What is your FAVORITE activity o~r--a-c~t~i~v~i~t~i~e~s~o~f~tLh'i~s~s~i~t~e~?~-------
8/ HOW DOES this particular site fulfill your recreational demands?
Completely ______ _ Not Adequately ______ _
Adequately ______ _ Poorly ______________ _
If "not adequately" or "poorly", why?
9/ WHERE WOULD you go to participate in the same activities if this site were not available? __________________________________________ ___
DO YOU like that site as well as this one? Yes ____ _ No ____ _
10/ DO YOU think this site presently is: (check one)
Too crowded Not used enough________ Just right ______ __
IF YOU think this area is too crowded, would you most prefer MORE
sites available? Yes No -----IF "yes", within how many miles upstream or downstream would you
like to see at least one more site? ________________________________ _
SHOULD THIS site be more fully developed (more facilities, roads,
etc.)? Yes No~~~
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$ 11/ HAS THE INCREASING cost of gasoline decreased the distance you will $ ~ travel to enjoy a recreational area? Yes No · ~
$ IF "yes", typical previous years' recreational trip covered approxi-$
$ mately miles, while this year's trip covered only $
$ miles round tn.p. $
$ pER PERSON, how much will your trip cost per day? (Include only $
$ groceries, automobile gasoline and camping fees, if any). $
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
88
12/ Please check the items of equipment you have with you.
boat canoe ____ _
water skiis
fishiny gear~~
car tent pickup_____ motor bike ____ _
pickup camper_____ bicycle ____ _
camping trailer_____ hiking gear ____ _
motor home sleeping bag ____ _
Other (list) ________________________ :::~~----------------------
###8####################8########################################8#########
# # # 13/ FOH THIS QUESTION ONLY, you will be answering for your group. #
# Ple;~se place an "X'' to represent each person in your group, other #
8 than yoursc 1 f. and an "0" to represent yoursc 1 f. #
# AGE: 1-12 SEX: Male Female #
H 13-18-----·· #
# 19-30 #
# 31-50 #
# 50+---#
# #
# ARE YOU and your qroup resi.dents of Montana? Yes No #
# IF YES, which town and county? #-
# IF NO, which town, county and state? #
Ji#############################i##########li#######################i#######
14/ INDICATE WHICII broad income
4,999 and under
5,000-7,999 ____ __
8,000-11,999 ____ __
category your household fits into:
12,000-15,999 ____ __
16,000-over ____ __
15/ WHAT IS your occupation?
I f you are rna r r i ed , wha t--,i-::s,--:-y::-:o::-:u~r=--=s-=p-=o:-:-u::-:s=-e:-r' s=--=o-=c-:c:-:-u:-:p:ca=-t,..,.i·-::o-=n-=?.------------
16/ ARE INSECTS a problem to you in this area? Yes No
If "yes", have they reduced the time you spend enjoying '"'y-=-o_u __ r_
favorite activities? Yes No --
Would you return to this area if the insect problem remains the
same? 'res No
Would you return to this area if the insect population was reduced
by at least one-fourth?· Yes No ____ __
89
============================================================================
= l 7 I -·
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
-·
=
= ARE YOU AWARE of the location of public (Bureau of Land Management)
= l~nds near (50 miles upstream and 50 miles downstream) this area?
Yes No =
---=
Are you
area is
Yes
aware of the location of public lands near your home if this_
not near your home (50 mile~ in any direction)? = No __ _ =
= Arc you aware that literature is available at any Bureau of Land
Mauaqement Office providing information and location of these areas,:
free of charge? Yes No ---=
Wi.thin the past year, have you used any of these areas adjacent to =
the Yellowstone River for recreational purposes? Yes No --=
If "yes", for what main activity? = ============================================================================
18/ lvHAT OTHER kinds of recreation would you like to see at this
particular site?
COMMENTS CONCERNING ANYTHING ASSOCIATED WITH THIS QUESTIONNAIRE:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH
90
PILOT QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS
Questionnaires completed during the May 1975 pilot study were mostly
(84.1 percent) from recreationists at Intake Fishing Access Site 17 miles
northeast of Glendive on the Yellowstone River, where paddlefishing is the
major recreational attraction in late spring. Catching of 50-to 65-pound
fish is not uncommon.
The summations of 88 questionnaires are listed here. Questions to
which the response was less than 10 percent (9 people) will not be discussed.
1. Have you noticed much detePioration in wateP quality oP increase in ZitteP
since you staPted using the Yellowstone foP PecPeation?
DecPease in wateP quality?
Number of valid responses Yes No
80 15% 85%
Through personal communication, it was determined that the
interviewees defined water quality as the color of the water.
Clear, blue water would be good water quality, as opposed to the
murky, brown water of the Yellowstone at the survey sites.
IncPease in ZitteP?
Number of valid responses Yes No
82 29% 71%
Does it affect yoUP enjoyment of the Piver?
Number of valid responses Yes No
82 35% 65%
In a survey done in southern Saskatchewan (Parkes 1975), over
two-thirds of 560 recreationists indicated that they were willing
to pay between 49 and 61 cents each per use-day, over and above the
additional expenses to which recreationists are subject, for improved
water quality.
91
2. Length of present stay (check one)
Number of valid responses Length of stay
Percentage of
respondents
83 Day use only
Dne night
Two nights
Three nights
4-5 nights
6-8 nights
g-10 nights
Over ten nights
53
11
11
13
0
2
0
4
3. Please record the access and/or waterway you are presently enjoying.
Number of valid responses
88
The five access sites from which questionnaires were
received are listed below, followed by the percentage of
respondents at each.
Intake Fishing Access Site 84
East Rosebud Fishing Access Site 11
Twelve Mile Dam (Tongue River) 1
Mouth of the Tongue River 2
Pumpkin Creek Bridge (near
Twelve Mile Dam) · 1
4. Are you presently on your vacation?
Number of valid responses Yes
85 17%
Was recreation on the Yellowstone River and/or tributaries the
prima.I'y puPpose of your trip?
Number of valid responses Yes
No
84%
No
75 69% . 31%
92
If no, what is the reason for your trip?
Number of valid responses
Percentage of
22 Respondents
Visiting relatives and/or
friends 27
Sightseeing 9
Enjoyment and/or rest and
relaxation 9
Business or work-related
activities 14
5. How often do you visit this particular site each year?
NOTE: Spring:
SWl1lller:
FaZZ:
Winter:
Spring
Summer
Fall
Wi ntera
March 20 -June 20
June 2Z -September 22
September 23 -December 20
December 20 -March Z9
Number of Valid Number of
Responses Visits
84 First time
One time
2-3 times
4-6 times
6-8 times
Over 8 times
45 One time
2-3 times
4-6 times
7 or 8 times
Over 8 times
17 Over 8 times
7
Percentage of
Respondents
18
16
20
10
5
32
22
20
7
2
49
41
aThe receipt of only seven valid responses indicates 1 ight winter
recreational use.
93
6. Yearly, hohl many days do you spend enjoying recreational activities on
the YeLLowstone River and/or its tributaries?
Number of valid responses
73
Days Spent
1-9 days
10-15 days
16-20 days
Over 20 days
Percentage of
Respondents
49
16
6
29
7. Please mark (x) the activities you have engaged in or plan to engage in,
in the immediate area, as weLL as the numbeP of hours spent doing each.
For this question, a nonresponse was considered a definite "no"
rather than a missing answer.
Number of valid responses
88 Picnickinga
Swimming
Rest and relaxationb
Boating--motorized
Rockhoundingc
Sightseeingil
Walking for pleasure
Fishinge
Percentage of
Respondents
52
16
49
16
17
17
16
75
NOTE: Insignificant response was
received for questionnaire recreation
categories boating--motorized, horse-
back riding, bicycling, motorbiking,
driving for pleasure, and playing
outdoor games. For categories water
skiing and birdwatching, the data were
not valid.
aThe most commonly reported picnic
duration was two hours.
bRest and relaxation entails no
definite outdoor recreational activity
such as fishing or picknicking. It can
be closely related with sightseeing,
but generally is defined as enjoying an
area with no specific purpose in mind.
94
CA 2-3 hour rock hunt was indicated
by 46 percent of the rockhounds.
dA 2-3 hour sightseeing trip was
indicated by 80 percent of those who
responded positively. From personal
communication, people who were visiting
the area for the first time were most
likely to consider themselves sight-
seers.
eof the fishermen, 22 percent said
they spent 2-5 hours fishing.
Fishermen were asked to complete the following three questions:
a) For what species in particular?
Number of valid responses
63
Species sought
Paddlefish
bJ Which species, if any, did you catch?
Number of valid
25
c) How many of each
Number of valid
20
responses
species?
responses
Species sought
Paddlefish
Nur.1ber caught
2
What is your FAVORITE activity or activities of this site?
Number of valid responses Favorite activity
65 Fishing
Percentage of
Respondents
84
Percentage of
Respondents
60
Percentage of
Respondents
85
Percentage of
Respondents
85
8. How does this pal"ticular site fulfill your recreational demands?
Number of valid responses
83
95
Completely
Adequately
Inadequately
Percentage of
Respondents
23
68
10
·If "not adequately" oro "pooroly", why?
Number of valid responses
10 Too crowded
Percentage of
Respondents
50
From personal observation, Intake F.ishing Access received the
highest annual use on the Memorial Day weekend in 1975 and 1976.
9. Wheroe would you go to participate in the same activities if this site
were not available?
Alternative Site
Twelve Mile Dam
East Rosebud
Don't Know
Yellowtail
Ft. Peck
Stay Home
Spotted Eagle
Yellowstone River
Powder River
Fred Robinson
North Dakota
South Side Intake
South Dakota
Fairview
Gartside
Other
TOTAL
Number of Responses
1
1
1
2
11
5
3
6
2
10
3
2
1
1
1
4
54
Do you like that site as well as this one?
Number of valid responses Yes
45 67%
Percentage of
54 Responses
2
2
2
4
20
9
6
11
4
19
6
4
2
2
2
8
No
33%
From personal communication, people indicated that in many
cases a second choice of site was enjoyed as much as, or even more
than, the present area, but time, money, and distance.precluded
their visiting it. --
96
10. Do you think this site presently is too crowded, not used enough, or
just right?
Number of valid responses
84 Too crowded
Not used enough
Just right
Percentage of
Respondents
61
2
37
If you think this area is too crowded, would you prefer more sites
available?
Number of valid responses Yes No
63 83% 17%
If "yes", within how many miles upstream or downstream would you Uke to
see at least one more site?
Number of valid responses
40 Within 1 mile
1-2 miles
3-5 miles
6-10 miles
11-20 miles
20-50 miles
Over 50 miles
Percentage of
Respondents
18
15
15
18
10
23
3
ShouLd this site be more fully developed (more facilities, roads, eta.)?
Number of valid responses Yes No
78 67% 33%
11. Has the increasing cost of gasoline decreased the distance you will travel
to enjoy a recreational area?
Number of valid responses Yes No
83 40% 60%
97
If yea, typical previous years' recreational trip covered approximately
__ miles, while this year 'a trip covered only miles round trip.
Percentage of Respondents
Number of
Valid Trips over Trips less than
Responses 450 miles 50 miles
Previous years' .23 48 17
trip
This years' trip 22 23 46
Per person, how much will your trip cost per day? (Include only
groceries, automobile gasoline and camping fees, if any).
Number of valid responses
55
Trip cost
Under $5
$6-10
$21-25
$26-35
Over $35
Percentage of
Respondents
22
20
13
2
13
12. Please aheck items of equipment you have with you.
===================
Number of valid responses
88
98
Equipment Items
Beata
Water skis
Fishing gear
Car
Pickup
Pickup camper
Camping trailer
Motor home
Tent
Motor bike
Bicycle
Hiking gear
Sleeping bag
Percentage of
Respondents
15
2
78
42
44
27
13
6
8
6
2
6
34
aThere were no canoes.
13. FOR THIS QUESTION-ONLY, you will be answering for your group. Please
place an "X" to represent eaah person in group, other than yourself,
and an "O" to represent yourself.
Number of valid responses
88
Age and sex of people in each of 88
groups:
Sex
Age Hale Female Total
1-12 47 23 70
13-18 33 14 47
19-30 61 25 86
30-50 41 23 64
50+ 24 13 37
TOTAL 206 98 304
NOTE: The reason that the most
frequently reported age category
was 19-30 years could be related
generally to the physical strength
needed for paddlefishing.
Are you and your group residents of Montana?
Number of valid responses Yes No
56 78% 22%
If YES, which town and county? (The towns were not consider>ed for the
pilot study).
Number of valid responses
56
If NO, which town, county and state?
Number of valid responses
15
99
County
Dawson
Rosebud
Richland
Yellowstone
Sheridan
Custer
State
North Dakota
Wyoming
Washington
Canada
Percentage of
Respondents
38
13
11
9
7
7
Percentage of
Respondents
53
33
7
7
14. Indicate which bPoad income categoPy your household fits into:
Number of valid, responses
78
Income
$5,000 and under
$5,000-8,000
$8,000-12,000
$12,000-16,000
Over $16,000
Percentage of
Respondents
5
9
32
27
26
15. Ilhat is your occupation? If you aPe mat"Pied, what 'Z-S yOUP spouse's
ocaupation?
Occupational
Category
Professional
Student
Housewife
Self employed white
collar
Self employed blue
collar
Employed white collar
Employed blue collar
Agriculture
Retired
ass valid observations
b45 valid observations
Interviewee's
Occupationa
(%)
9
6
5
2
2
11
49
11
5
Spouse's
Occupationb
(%)
15
4
54
7
0
7
9
4
0
Thus, the most common occupation (49 percent) among those
interviewed was blue-collar work in which the interviewee had no
ownership of his employer's company or holdings. The most common
occupation for the spouse was housewife (54 percent).
16. APe insects a pPobZem to you in this aPea?
Number of valid responses Yes No
80 31% 69%
If "yes", have they Peduced the time you spend enjoying your' favoPite
activities?
Number of valid responses Yes No
30 37% 63%
100
Would you return to this area if the insect problem remains the same?
Number of valid responses Yes No
88 72% 28%
WouUi you return to this area if the insect population was reduced by
at least one-fourth?
Number of valid responses Yes No
88 60% 40%
17. Are you aware of the location of public (Eiu:r'eau of Land Management)
lands near (~0 miles upstream and 50 miles downstream) this area?
Number of valid responses Yes No
78 35% 65%
A~e you aware of the location of public lands near your home if this
area is not near your home (50 miles in any direction)?
Number of valid responses Yes No
70 61% 39%
Are you aware that literature is available at any Bureau of Land
Management office providing information and location of these areas,
fr>ee of charge?
Number of valid responses Yes No
76 64% 36%
Within the past year, have you used any of these areas adjacent to the
Yellowstone River> for r>ecr>eational purposes?
Number of valid responses Yes No
75 52% 48%
If "yes", for> what main activity?
Percentage of
Number of valid responses Activity Respondents
32 Fishing 69
Rockhounding 6
Rest and Relaxation 6
101
18. What other kinds of recreation wouUi you ~ike to see at this particu~r
site?
Number of valid responses
11
Activity
Play equipment
for children
Percentage of
Respondents
36
CROSS TI\BULATIONS
Th~ second aspect of the pilot study entails use of cross tabulations
(CT) to establish certain pertinent relationships. Only those tabulations
thought to be most important and valid are included here. Because of the
small sample size, only the most obvious relationships within each cross
tabulation are mentioned.
Pilot Study
Questionnaire
Cross Tabulations
CT -1
CT-2
CT-3
CT-4
CT-5
Valid
Responses
74
75
76
21
75
102
Responses
Fifty-eight percent indicated that
recreation on the Yellowstone River
was the primary purpose of their
trip but were not on their vacation.
Sixty-five percent indicated that
no decrease in water quality had
been noted and that the enjoyment
one derives from the site had not
been affected.
Sixty percent indicated that no
increase in litter had been noticed
and that the enjoyment potential
of the site had not been affected.
Forty-three percent of Montana
residents traveled 50 miles or less
(round trip) on a typical recrea-
_tional outing.
Forty-nine percent indicated that
insects were not a problem in the
area and that the site adequately
met all recreational needs.
Pilot Study
Questionnaire Valid
Cross Tabulations Responses Responses
CT-6 62 Sixty-six percent indicated that the
site was too crowded but met
the desired recreational needs
adequately.
CT-7 73 Forty-five.percent of Montanans
indicated that the increasing cost
of gasoline had reduced the distance
they would drive on a typical
recreational outing; 55 percent
replied that it had not. Nonresi-
dents indicated 24 percent and 76
percent, respectively. Recreational
use in terms of activities and places
of visitation could change at some
point in the future, depending gen-
erally on the nation's economy.
CT-8 74 Fifty-eight percent of all income
categories .thought the increasing
cost of gasoline had not decreased
the distance of travel for recrea-
tional outings.
CT-g 76 Forty-two_percent indicated a desire
for more site development and reported
that the increasing cost of gasoline
had no effect upon the distance trav-
eled for a recreational outing.
CT-10 78 Thirty-four percent of households
surveyed indicated an income of
$8,000 to $12,000. In this income
bracket, 71 percent were Montana
households and 29 percent were not.
CT -11 23 Fifty-two percent reported that ~-:·.-
fishing was the most preferred
activity and the main activity
engaged in upon public land.
CT-12 60 Sixty-tWo percent indicated that
insects were not a problem presently
but could prevent a return trip if
numbers increased.
IOJ
1975-76
SUMMER QUESTIONNAIRE
AND RESULTS
Sample 1976 Questionnaire ..... .
Total Summer Questionnai're Response,
1975 and 1976 ........ .
105
106
108
SUMMER QUESTIONNAIRE
The following queationoirc has been developed to avoluote tho pre9ent rccrcotional uoc of ~he
Yellowstone River nnd its tributarico. The Old West Regions! Com'Tiission ic fundinr; n stu1ly concerning
t.hc effect of coal and enCriJ;.Y related water diversiom1 froc the Yellow:Jtonc River upon the ['r~:~cnt and
future recrcotjonol opportunJtien.
A.o accurate reply to the following qtJeationo will provide needed informuLion on present 1·ccrentionul
u~c pattcrnn anri will aid in fulfilling your future recreational need~. The informution you providt:!
is Dtrictly confidential ru.td will be used for no other rcuson than stated above. You coy obtain the
rcoulto of this oummcr 1 s survey by writin~ the Montana Departcent of Fish and GUI:lc, Recreation and
l'arks Divininn, Miles City, Montara, ao early ns Noveober, 1976. ~...< _/ ./. /1
Thank You Very Much For Your Time, ·ENJOY l!ONTAilA Sincerely, /'(CL-r pe. ~
Max L. ~rickAon, Recreational Specialist
= ------
1 Are you presently on your vacation? )Yes, ( )Uo.
2 Was recrention on t.he Yellowntone River ond/or i"ts tributarie!J the pdrnur.v purpose of your trip?
( )Yea, ( )No.
lf notl what Js tne c.aln real:JOn for your trip? ( )Visit rclotives-I"ricnds, ( )Sightoceing,
( Enjoyment, Rest, Relo.xation, ( )Busineoo or Work, ( )Other reasons.
3 How often do .vou visit thio pr.:.rticular site each sum;ner (June 21 -Sept 22) ?
( )Never before, ( }1 time, ( )2-3 time!J, ( )4-6 times, ( )7-8 time~, ( )more thnn 8 t.imes
How many ticaes do you violt this particular site during the
Sprlns (ltarch 20 -June 20) 7 -( )1-2 ticcs, ( )3-6 times, ( )7-8, .( )more th.:tn 8 times
t'nll (Sept 25 -Dee 20) ? -- -( )1-2 tioeo, ( )3-6 times, ( )7-8, ( )more than 8 times
Winter (Dec 21 -Morcb 19) 7-- (
)1-2 t.ices, ( )3-6 tioes 1 ( )7-8, ( )more thnn 8 times
4 8ince you :"t..ortcrl u~ inp; tho:! Yello-.vn:;one for recr-ention 1 has ~·ne c.:::,ount of litter
)Increased )Stayad the oumc )Decren5cd ?
~ What iG lhe len&th or your present Otoy?
( )~ nightn, ( )4-5 nights, (
( ) Day usc onl;r, ( ) 1 night,
)6-8 nights, ( )9-10 nights,
)2 nights
}core thon 10 nights.
6 For each activity you hove cngap;ed in or plan to engage in while in this immediate area, indicate
the number or~~ w spent in that wo.y.
( )Picnicking ( )Horooba.ck Hic.linu )Bicycling (
( )Swimming ( )Water Skiing ( )P&!otor Biking (
( )Rest,Relo~otion ( )Sightseeing ( )Walking,Hiking (
( )Bird Watching. ( )Rock Hunting ( )Pleasure Driving (
li'hich of these Ja your favorite activity
7 1 r you r ishcd in this area, for vrhich spccteo?
Which specico did you catch, and how many? )
8 Rotc each of t.ho !allowing at thla location.
Exceptional Good Fair
Picnic Facilities ( ) ( ) ( )
Rest. rooms ( ) ( ) ( )
Campiru; siteo ( ) ( ) ( )
Ch!ldrcns act1vitieo, oquip. ( ) ( ) ( )
Weed mowing -- - --( ) ( ) ( )
Acceoa Roads --- -
( ) ( ) ( )
9 Where would you go tor tho same activities if thin oite was not available? (
Specify:
10 Do you like that site no well as this one? ( )Yes, ( )No.
)Playinp: liomes
)Motor Booting
)River Floating
)Fishing
Poor
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
)
)Don 1 t know,
11 What to your state of residence? ____________________ __
County or town ---------------------------
12 Check the brood income category your
( )Under 5000, ( )5000-7999, (
combined household
)8000-11999,
fits into:
)12000-15999,
0 V E R P L E A S E
106
)16000 and over.
1~ !Jo .'/OU tJ;iJ•k t..l:i~:; :1\t.e l•re:lt~nt1y i~: ( )Too r..t•o·,;rlt!rl 1 )Ju:::.t rl1~ht 1 ) Not une<l rmour~h •·
111 Stwul<J t.td~: ~;ltc be .~1ore fully developer'! (rnorc l'aeilitl~G, rCIId0 1 etr..)? )No.
1~ Do you 'JJIInt mure rccr·ention :1itc~ a1onv. ~he 'iello;o.~tr.>nc Ulver? )Ye!>,
) YcD,
)No.
If you an::·,e.red YES, within how rr.any miles from thi:. 3ite?
)0-5~1les, )5-15milen, )15-30rniler., )Over ;o mileo.
16 Has the increasing cont of 11_ooollne decreo~ed the C:iotru:cc you travel to a rccreotionul o.r~o?
H•.!0 1 ( )llo.
Check the n:iles covered in a typical previous yec:rs 1 recrcatior; trip.
( )0 -50 niles, ( )50 -250 r.:i lee, ( )2~0 -U50 milcn, )over 450 .ciles.
Check t.h~ miles covct·ed in a typical recrt-ntion tr·ip this ,Year.
( )0 -50 :n i lc;;, ( )50 -250 miles, ( P~o -1•50 r.J.ileo, )ovor 1150 mil eo.
l7 Check ,vour OC<.'UI,Jntion ( )Self ernplo,...·cd Wh\ tc collar
)Self employed Blue collar
)Employed White collar
)Emplo.ycd Aluc collar
)Uner:.ployed
( )Professional, Technical
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
)Student
)Houscwi fe
)Agriculture,
)Retired
~Vhut ia your spouac'o occupation?, _________________ _
Ranching
18 Check your sex,
Check your age,
)Fcr::~nle,
)l-J.2 yrs,
)!.!ale.
( ) 13-18 yrs, )19-30 yro, )31-5-0 yra, )over 50 yrs.
19 Enter the ~or other persona in each cotep;ory from your
Femalco - ( }1-12 yrs, ( )13-18 yrs, ( )19-30 yrs, (
Males - - ( )1-12 yro, ( )13-18 yrs, ( )19-30 yrs, (
20 Are inoccts a preble~:~ to ~;ou in this area.? )Yes, (
Have they recluced the t.\me yo1l spenrl enjoy\n~,; your f.:J.voritP.
Would you return to tt.is oren if tt-.e insect probleo recaina
group.
)31-50 yrs,
)31-50 yrs,
)No.
activll..lt:s? (
the sru:::e? (
(
(
)over 70 ycors.
)over 50 ycors.
)Yes, )No.
)Yes, )no.
21 Are you awure of the location of public (Bureau of Lund Management) lands along the river near
(50 milco upstream or downstrenc) this area? ( )Yes, ( )No.
Are you t,·,..ore of the location of public lands near .vour ho!:!.e it this area iD not near your hooe
(50 ciles in any direction)? ( )Yes, ( )No.
Do you know th~t literature io available at any Bureau of Land Mana~ement Office providing
informat-ion and the locution of these llrcaD, free of charge? ( )Yes, )No.
22 Within the past year, which of the followin~ activities have you participated in on these
public lands adjacent to the Yellowstone River?
( ) None, ( )Fishimz;, ( )Booting, )Picnicking,
( ) CarnpinK, ( )Hunt in~, ( )Other,apecify
23 Yoorly, how many doyo do you spend ot other sites on the Yellowotone River and ito tributaries?
)16-20, ( )over 20. ( )none, )1 day, :2-·3 daYs, ( )to-7 days, )6-9, )10-15,
107
TOTAL SUMMER QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE, 1975 and 1976
In 1975, 212 questionnaires were completed in the entire study area; in
1976, 257 questionnaires were completed. The questionnaire form was modified
between the two sampling seasons. Some questions were dropped, others were
added, and, accordingly, the numbering of the questions differed on the two
forms. For that reason, the numbering of the questions in the following dis-
cussion does not correspond to the question numbers on the sample 1976
questionnaire (pages lOG and 107).
Each response represents a group of recreationists .. Fewer than 10 percent
of the responses were deemed not valid for questions one through six. All
totals may not equal 100 percent due to rounding.
The results for each individual study section are given in the main report
on pages 13 to 34. Cross tabulations for the entire study area are given on
pages 34 to 37.
1. Are you presently on your vacation?
Number of valid resEonses Yes No
1975 210 24% 76%
1976 250 36% 64%
2. Was recreation on the Yellowstone River and/or its tributaries the primary
purpose of your trip?
1975
1976
Number of valid resEonses
198
184
Yes
54%
57%
No
46%
54%
If not, what is the main reason for your trip?
Enjoyment, rest, and relaxationb
Visiting relatives and/or friends
Sightseeingb
Business or work
Percentage of valid responsesa
. 1975 1976
43
12
12
12
42
42
al29 valid responses in 1975, 167 in 1976.
bThose who answered either "sightseeing" or "enjoyment, rest
and relaxation" apparently did not consider those activities to
be recreation.
108
3. How often do you visit this particular site each summer ( J.me 21-Sept. 22)?
Number of visits
Never before
2-3 times
4-6 times
8 times or more
Percentage of valid responsesa
1975 1976
23
11
30
27
19
11
26
a 199 valid responses in 1975, 200 in 1976.
How many timea do you visit this particular site during the 1) spring (March
20-.lme 20), 2) fall (Sept. 23-Dec. 20), .3) winter (Dec. 21-March 19)?
Number of visits Percentage of valid responsesa
1975 1976
1-2 times
3-6 times
More than 8 times
1-2 times
3-6 times
7-8 times
---More than 8 times
1-2 times
3-6 times
More than 8 times
FalJb
Wi nterC
38
28
27
20
31
12
27
49
15
26
a 122 valid responses in 1975, 200 in 1976. ~ 100 valid responses in 1975, 70 in 1976.
53 valid responses in 1975, 70 in 1976.
3
15
25
57
14
25
66
30
A note may be made that the fewest valid responses for 1975 and
1976 occurred during the winter portion, and the most occurred
within the summer portion. One may surmise that these data re-
flect seasonal use patterns, summer having the greatest use and
winter the least.
109
4. Have you noticed a change in wateP quality since you started to use the
Yellowstone Rivep area for recreation?
Water quality had increased
About the same
Water quality had decreased
Percentage of valid responsesa
23
65
12
a 155 valid responses .In 1975 only.
From personal communication, water quality, to the inter-
viewees, was defined as the color of the water. Blue, clear
water would be of good quality, as opposed to murky, brown
water.
5. Since you started using the Yellowstone River area for recreation, has
the amount of litter increased, stayed the same, or decreased?
Increased
Stayed the same
Decreased
·a Percentage of valid responses
1975 1976
36
37
27
29
48
22
a 142 valid responses in 1975, 170 in 1976.
6. Has your enjoyment of the river increased, decreased, or stayed the same?
Increased
Decreased
Stayed the same
Percentage of valid responsesa
51
44
a 154 valid responses in 1975 only.
7. What is the length of your present stay?
Day use
One night
Over 10 nights
Percentage of valid responsesa
1975 1976
f.2
10
12
47
12
13
a 189 valid responses in 1975, 236 in 1976.
From personal communication, nonresidents and vacationers consti-
tuted the majority of those staying over ten nights and responded
not necessarily with their present location in mind but rather with
respect to the total duration of their trip.
110
8. For eaah aativity you have engaged in or pU2n to engage in while in this
immediate area, indiaate the number of hours per. day spent in that way.
9.
See table C-1 on page 112 for response.
Whiah of these is your favorite·activity?
If you
Activities
Picnicking
Swinrning
Rest and Relaxation
Water Skting
Sightseeing
Rockhounding
Bicycling
Motor Biking
Walking and Hiking
Motor Boating
Floating
Fishing
Percentages of valid responsesa
1975 1976
1
a
15
1
4
4
0
1
3
2
4
57
3
8
10
1
0
9
1
2
3
1
5
58
a 159 valtd responses in 1975, 156 in 1976.
The responses given to question 8 indicate that fishing and rest
and relaxation were the recreational activities most engaged in
and most preferred during the survey periods.
fished in this area, for which spec-!.es?
Species Percentages of valid responsesa
1975 1976
Sauger, wa l l eye 47 16
Paddlefish 8 6
Catfish 24 20
Sturgeon 1 3
Ling 2 3
Sue ker, carp 5 1
Trout 30 51
Bass 3 0
Bullhead 0 1
a 181 valid responses tn 1975, 120 in 1976.
111
TABLE C-l. Percentage of people spending between 1 and B hours per day in recreational pursuits in the Yellowstone River
Dasin, 1975-76
Hours per day
Not Hwnbcr non-
1 2 3 4 5 6 8 Valida rcsponsesb
Activity
1975 1976 1975 1976 1975 1976 1975 1976 1975 1976 1975 1976 1975 1976 1975 1976 1975 1976
Picnicking 42 57 40 23 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 0 167 187
Swimming 42 69 26 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 193 221
Rest & relaxation 24 45 20 14 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 137 153
Bird watching 33 50 33 25 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 17 0 206 245
Horseback. riding 25 100 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 208 255
Nater skiing 25 100 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 25 0 0 0 208 254
Sig!1tseeing 40 48 40 19 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 192 205
Rockhounding so 46 19 22 0 14 0 12 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 186 207
Bicycling 38 50 25 50 13 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 204 253
Hotor biking 14 91 14 0 14 0 0 0 43 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 205 246
~i'a lking, hiking 31 59 0 25 0 0 19 0 13 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 196 213
Pleasure driving 58 53 17 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 223
Playing outdoor
games 40 44 10 25 20 0 10 19 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 0 202 241
Motor boating 47 60 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 12 0 0 0 195 252
Fishing 16 37 15 0 0 12 21 15 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 111 126
Rcspo;sc less than 10 percent is shown only ao zero (0),
aNot-valid responses were those which defied common sense--e.g., 24 hours of water skiing per day.
bNonrcsponses arc categories which were not answered. The author assumes that the vast ~ajority of these nonresponses
did not engage in the respective recreational activity.
Which species did you catch, and how many?
Species Percentages of valid responsesa
Sauger, waJleye
Paddleffsh
Catfish
Sturgeon
Ling
Sucker, carp
T.rout
Bass
Bullhead
Goldeye
Whitefish
1975 1976
29
6
27
5
3
5
!3
2
2
8
2
16
4
22
1
1
7
45
0
1
1
1
~ 31 valid responses in 1975, 76 in 1g76.
The study period did not cover the peak paddlefishing period.
The actual number of fish caught by the 17 percent in 1975
and the 42 percent in 1976 of successful fishermen varied.
Without regard to species, 81 percent (31 valid responses)
and 71 percent (76 valid responses) caught from one to six
fish.
10. Rate each of the following at this location.
Number of
Valid
Responses
Percentage of Valid Responsesa
Exceptional Good Fair Poor
1975
Picnic Facilities 150 11 40 24
Rest Rooms 138 8 25 21
Camping Sites 145 10 36 32
Children's Activities,
Equipment 111 3 14 16
Weed Mowing 130 5 21 21
Access Roads 165 12 33 33
1976
Picnic Facilities 165 9 49 28
Rest Rooms 148 3 39 24
Camping Sites 156 7 53 29
Children's Activities,
Equipment ug 3 14 27
Weed Mowing 141 3 28 28
Access Roads 167 9 41 32
a The "poor" category includes responses concerning privately
owned lands where certain activities and/or conditions were
not present.
113
25
46
22
67
55
19
15
34
12
56
42
17
11. Wher>e IJOUld you go for the same activities if this site was not available?
The data collected in 1975 were not valid. In 1976, 54
percent replied that they did not know where they would go.
12. Do you like that site as well as this one?
1975
1976
Number of valid responses
145
92
13. What is your state of residence?
1975
1976
Number of valid responses
205
195
Yes
68%
80%
Montanans
82%
77%
No
32%
20%
Councy or.~t=own==·=,=====·=' ==============================================
Town of resid~nce Percentage of valid responsesa
Billings
Forsyth
Miles City
Columbus
All others
a 165 valid responses in 1975, 151 in 1976.
1975 1976
49
12
13
42
10
18
12
19
14. Check the broad income category your combined household fits into.
Percentage of valid responsesa
Income
Under $5,000
$5,000-$8,000
$8,000-$12,000
$12,000-$16,000
Over $16,000
a 203 valid responses in 1975, 180 in 1976.
114
1975 1976
14
13
26
28
20
12
15
22
26
26
15. Do you think this site presently is too crowded, just right, or not used
enough?
Percentages of valid responses
Site criteria
Too crowded
Just right
Not used enough
1975 1976
13
72
15
10
81
9
a In 1975, 203 valid responses, in 1976, 183.
16. Should this site be more fully developed (more facilities, roads, etc.J?
1975
1976
Number of valid responses
197
175
Yes
63r,
51%
No
38%
49~~
1?. Do you want more recreation sites along the Yellowstone River?
Number of valid responses Yes No
1976 only 175 81% 19%
If you answered YES, within how many miles from this site?
i-liles distant Percentage of valid responsesa
Less than 5
5-15
15-30
Over 30
a 173 valid responses in 1975, 136 in 1976.
1975 1976
29
32
23
16
11
35
31
24
18. Has the increasing cost of gasoline decreased the distance you travel to a
recreational area?
1975
1976
Number of valid responses
203
182
Yes
58%
40%
46%
60 r,
Check the miles covered in a typical previous year's recreation trip.
Number of miles Percentage of valid responsesa
Under 50
50-250
250-450
Over 450
a 190 valid responses in 1975, 164 in 1976.
115
1975 1976
14
26
16
44
4
31
19
47
19.
20.
Check the miles covered in a typical recreation trip this year.
Check the
Check the
Number of miles
Under 50
50-250
250-450
Over 450
Percentage of valid responsesa
1975 1976
21
32
16
31
13
32
14
41
·a 195 valid responses in 1975, 166 in 1976.
The percentage of trips over 450 miles decreased significantly
in 1975 and 1976 while shorter recreational trips increased.
type of vehicle you arrived in.
Vehicle Percentage of valid responses a
Car 50
Pickup 23
Pickup with camper 13
Other models 15
a 1975 only, 204 valid responses.
items of equipment you have with you.
Equipment Percentage of va 1 id responses a
Boats 17
Tents 11
Fishing gear 57
Sleeping bags 23
Firearms 14
a 212 valid responses, 1975 only.
Check your occupation. What is your spouse's occupation?
Occupation Intervieweea
1975 1976
Self-employed White Collar 6 4
Self-employed Blue Collar 7 6
Employed White Collar 10 9
Employed Blue Collar 35 25
Professional 11 5
Student 8 10
Housewife 8 6
Agriculture 4 3
Retired 12 19
a 192 valid responses in 1975, 187 in 1976.
b 122 valid responses in 1975, 116 in 1976.
116
Spouse of b Interviewee
1975 1976
6 3
3 3
15 12
19 23
0 8
0 1
50 41
2 0
7 9
21.
For both years, "employed blue collar" was the most common
form of employment of the interviewee, and "housewife" was
the most common occupation of spouses. This corresponds with
the larger number of males than females interviewed in 1975
and 1976.
Check yozao sex.
1975
1976
Check yozao age.
Age
Under 18
19-30
31-50
Over 50
Number of va 1 i d
204
186
responses Male
68%
76%
Percentage of
1975
11
28
37
24
a 197 valid responses tn 1975, 136 in 1976.
Fema 1 e
32%
24%
valid responsesa
1976
11
23
38
29
22. Enter the number of other persons in each category from yozao group.
Age
Group
1-12
13-18
19-30
30-50
Over 50
Males
Number of
~:!~~nsesa
29
24
23
19
16
Females
Number of
Valid
% Responsesb
26 14
22 12
21 32
17 36
14 16
NOTE: The numbers of valid responses in this table are the
numbers of respondents who answered that their group
contained people in the indicated age-sex category--
they do not indi~ate the number of recreationists in
%
13
lf
29
33
15
that category. Likewtse, the percentage figures show the
percentage of respondents claiming to have males or fe-
males of the gtven age category in their group. The
results from question 22 were not valid for showing the
total number of recreationists in each age-sex category.
a In 1975 only, 111 valid responses
b In 1975 only,.110 valid responses.
117
23. Ar-e insects a pr-obLem to you in this ar-ea?
Results not valid.
Have they r-educed the time you spend enjoying your-favor-ite activities?
Number of valid responses Yes No
1975 191 42% 58%
1976 223 39% 61%
WouLd you r-eturn to this ar-ea if the insect probLem remains the same?
Number of valid responses Yes No
1975 188 85% 15%
1976 224 65% 35%
WouLd you r-etur-n to this ar-ea if the insect pr-obLem was r-educed?
Number of valid responses Yes No
1975 only 184 92% 9%
24. Ar-e you awar-e of the Location of public (Bur-eau of Land Management) Lands
aLong the r-iver-near> (50 miLes upstr-eam or> downstr-eam) this ar-ea?
Number of valid responses Yes No
1975 192 41% 59%
1976 212 46% 54%
Ar-e you awar-e of the Location of pubLic Lands near your-home if this ar-ea
is not near-your> home (50 miLes in any dir-ection)?
Number of valid responses Yes No
1975 -I 155 57 % 43 %
1976 216 46% 54 %
Do you know that Liter-ature is avaiLabLe at any Bureau of Land Management
Office pr-oviding information and the Location of those ar-eas, free of
ch=ge?
1975
1976
Number of valid responses
191
245
118
Yes
64 %
49%
No
36 %
51 %
25. Within the past year, which of the following activities have you partici-
pated in on these public lands adjacent to the Yellowstone River?
Activity
None
Fishing
Boating
Picnicking
Camping
Hunting
Other
Percentage of valid responsesa
1975 1976
16
56
25
34
29
28
10
28
65
40
46
52
30
30
a 212 valid responses in 1975, 257 in 1976.
26. Yearly, how many days do you spend at other sites on the Yellowstone River
and its tributaries?
Number of days
spent at other
sites
None
1
2-3
4-5
6-9
10-15
16-20
Over 20
Percentage of valid responsesa
1975 1976
20
9
15
10
11
16
4
16
35
2
11
11
9
10
4
18
a 199 valid responses in 1975, 125 in 1976.
ug
OBSERVED USE FORM
121
....
N
N
_ /'I Q: ~~ !8$ ~
c $ p:t: ~ ~ q.Q; .Q;c:i
DATE. _______ _
SEC. _______ _
§
"' .:,;;Q, ~~ §§ R VEHIClES H;>O LINE
.
1975
MAIL SURVEY BOATING
QUEST! ONNA IRE
123
1975 ~1AIL SURVEY BOATING QUESTIONNAIRE
Dear Boater:
Your name has been selected by the Montana Department of Fish and Game
to evaluate boating use in southcentral and southeastern Montana. A prompt
and accurate reply to the questions concerning your favorite boating site,
favorite activities, number of days spent boating in 1975 would help great-
ly toward evaluation of new facility proposals.
Thank you very much.
My favorite boating site was (check one):
Fort Peck Reservoir
Yellowtail Reservoir -------
Tongue River Reservoir -------
Yellowstone River:_
No. Dakota_Ljne-Mouth
Powder River -------
Mouth Powder-Mouth Tongue
Mouth Tongue-Mouth Bighorn __ _
Mouth Bighorn-Mouth Clarksfork __
Mouth Clarks Fork-Big Timber
Favorite Activities
Big Horn River
Tongue River
Powder River
Missouri River _____ __
Clarks Fork River ----
Stil:l.l'@ter River ____ _ .-
Other
Number of total days spent boating ---------------------------------
124
Andrews, W.H., M.B. Masteller, D.E. Massey, R.J. Burdge, and G.E. Madsen.
1976. Measuring the impact of changing streamflow on recreation
activity. In: Methodologies for the determination of stream resource
flow requirements: an assessment. United States Fish and Wildlife
Service, Office of Biological Services, Western Water Allocation. Utah
State University, Logan, Utah.
Bishop, A. 1972. An alternative evaluation matrix. Instream Flow
Methodology Workshop, Olympia, Washington.
Bivins, T. E. 1976. Game Warden. Montana Department of Fish and Game.
Personal communication.
Burdge, R.J. and D.R. Field.
of outdoor recreation.
1972. Methodological perspectives for the study
Journal of Leisure Research 4:63-72.
Elser, A.A. 1976. Fish and Wildlife Biologist Supervisor. Montana Depart-
ment of Fish and Game, Miles City. Personal communication.
Haddix, M.F. 1g75. Fisheries Biologist. Montana Department of Fish and
Game. Unpublished data and personal communication.
Hi nz, T. 197 6.
Miles City.
Wildlife Biologist. Montana Department of Fish and Game,
Personal communication.
Montana Department of Fish and Game. 1975-1976. Unpublished mail survey.
Parkes, J.G.M. 1974. User response to water
in the Qu'appele Valley. Saskatchewan.
ment. University of Victoria, Victoria,
quality and water-based recreation
In: Priorities in water manage-
British Columbia. 8:99-112.
Pacific Northwest River Basin Commission. The Anatomy Of A River. 1974.
Rehwinkel. B.J. 1975. The fishery for paddlefish at Intake, Montana during
1973 and 1974. Master of Science Thesis, Montana State University,
Bozeman, Montana. --
Rehwinkel, B.J., M. Gorges, and J. Well. 1976. Powder River Aquatic Ecology
Project annual report. Montana Department of Fish and Game, Helena.
35 pp.
Stevenson, H.R. 1975.
tail Dam, Montana.
Bozeman, Montana.
The trout fishery of the Bighorn River below Yellow-
Master of Science Thesis, Montana State University,
67 pp.
125