Antelope Basin Management Area, Beaverhead-Dearlodge National Forest, Montana -- Photo Essay by Mike Hudak

Antelope Basin Management Area
Madison Ranger District
Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest, MT

August 23–26, 2002

Photo essay by Mike Hudak, author of
Western Turf Wars: The Politics of Public Lands Ranching

At 3.32 million acres, the Beaverhead-Deerlodge is the largest national forest in Montana. Its value, though, stems not just from its size, but from its importance as wildlife habitat. Its rangelands support large herds of elk and other wildlife species. Streams that originate on the Forest feed into a number of nationally recognized trout fisheries, the Rock Creek, Big Hole, Beaverhead, Ruby and Madison Rivers. As the headwaters of these rivers, the Forest plays an important role contributing to water quality and quantity for both sport fishing and habitat for bull trout, westslope cutthroat trout and fluvial arctic grayling.

The Forest Service’s Antelope Basin Management Area (ABMA), which I visited, is located in Southwestern Montana, west of Yellowstone National Park and to the east and north of the Red Rock National Wildlife Refuge.

Madison River, Three Dollar Bridge. Photo by Mike Hudak.

Streams originating in the ABMA flow into the Madison River, world-renowned for the fly fishing experience it offers.

Sheep and cattle have grazed here since at least the beginning of the 20th century. Perhaps earlier.

At the time of my visit in August 2002 ABMA consisted of eleven grazing allotments comprising 36,969 acres. Seventy-five percent of the management area was grazed annually by approximately 2,200 head of livestock.

Our tour begins on the 4,570-acre Antelope Basin Allotment, grazed by 300 cow-calf pairs annually from June 21st until October 15th.

Hiking Cows, Continental Divide Trail, Antelope Basin Allotment, Antelope Basin Management Area, Montana. Photo by Mike Hudak.

Like human hikers these recreation minded bovines enjoy a stroll on the Continental Divide Trail which runs through the allotment. Encounters with cows, though, sometimes have unfortunate consequences for people as described in this article from Colorado.

Sacrifice area surrounding cattle trough, Antelope Basin Allotment, Antelope Basin Management Area, Montana. Photo by Mike Hudak.

Of course, when those thirsty bovines are out on the trail, or otherwise away from a creek they need a ready source of water. The Forest Service has obliged them by installing twenty water troughs on the allotment like this one—an average of four troughs per square mile. Cattle attracted to the tanks trample and consume the surrounding vegetation which wildlife depend on (see pp. 211–220) for cover and forage. Although the most severe devastation occurs within a few dozen yards of the trough, increased cattle impacts to vegetation have been documented in New Mexico up to a mile away. Photo at UTM coordinates 0460005/4951712.

Drowned squirrel in water trough, Antelope Basin Management Area, Montana. Photo by Mike Hudak.

Animals other than cows often attempt to drink water in these tanks. This thirsty squirrel discovered too late that the water level had fallen so low that it could not reach the wire screen escape ladder. Photo at UTM coordinates 0460005/4951712.

	Antelope Creek, which flows through the grazing allotment, is described by the Forest Service as “Functioning At Risk” meaning that it is highly susceptible to further degradation from a relatively high flow event. To afford some protection from further cattle impacts, the Forest Service has restricted grazing on part of the creek, seen above the fence, to early in the season. Although still severely degraded from long-term cattle grazing, this creek portion shows some short-term recovery. Photo at UTM coordinates 0458001/ 4952107.

	View from the opposite side of the fence. This creek portion shows the Forest Service’s futile attempt to exclude cattle. The temporary electric fence was breached (right side) allowing cattle access to the creek and its surrounding vegetation. Note the greater width of the creek relative to that beyond the fence in the top photo—this from cattle trampling the banks and consuming the streamside vegetation.

Hillside erosion caused by cattle walking to Antelope Creek, Antelope Basin Management Area, Montana. Photo by Mike Hudak.

Cattle accessing Antelope Creek from this adjacent hill have eroded a path that will pollute the creek with sediment during rain storms. Deposition of cattle dung and urine into the stream further negatively impact aquatic life. Nearness of sagebrush to the creek suggests a lowering of the water table as a consequence of the creek’s hydrological degradation. Note the electric fence intended to keep cattle out of the creek. Photo at UTM coordinates 0458001/4952107.

Cropped and trampled vegetation, Antelope Creek, Antelope Basin Management Area, Montana. Photo by Mike Hudak.

In close-up the reasons for Antelope Creek’s “At Risk” designation become even more apparent. Close cropping and trampling of the vegetation increase the creek’s vulnerability to erosion during flood events. A high width-to-depth ratio and lack of vegetative cover promote higher water temperatures in summer—potentially to levels lethal to native fish. Photo at UTM coordinates 0458001/4952107.

Cattle-browsed willow along Antelope Creek, Antelope Basin Management Area, Montana. Photo by Mike Hudak.

Without the cows, Antelope Creek’s vegetative cover would not be limited to sedges and rushes, but would include willows as this browsed victim on the upper left demonstrates. Mature willows would not only stabilize stream banks, but would further improve fish habitat by reducing the water’s thermal variability. Photo at UTM coordinates 0458001/4952107.

Sage brush encroaching along Antelope Creek, Antelope Basin Management Area, Montana. Photo by Mike Hudak.

Compare the density of sagebrush on the hillside with that in the foreground. To provide more forage for cattle the Forest Service has burned or herbicided the hillside to open the area for regrowth by grass. Decrease in sagebrush habitat, though, can negatively impact wildlife species that depend on it for cover and forage. South view from UTM coordinates 0458089/4952317.

Horse Creek, Elk Lake Allotment, Antelope Basin Management Area. Photo by Mike Hudak.

We now move to the Elk Lake Allotment of the Management Area and, within it, to Horse Creek. So greatly entrenched is the creek that during high water events it may not be capable of accessing its floodplain. Consequently, more stream energy will be contained in the channel, increasing erosion potential. How did the creek arrive at this condition? The answer is staring you in the face. Long-term removal of vegetation by cattle destabilized the banks. Flowing water did the rest. South view at UTM coordinates 0449449/4946160.

Cows at Horse Creek, Elk Lake Allotment, Antelope Basin Management Area. Photo by Mike Hudak.

Cows still visit Horse Creek even at the bottom of its trench. Here they continue to trample and erode the banks in their relentless consumption of streamside vegetation. Southeast view at UTM coordinates 0449407/4946261.

Erosion; Horse Creek, Elk Lake Allotment, Antelope Basin Management Area. Photo by Mike Hudak.

Farther downstream Horse Creek has been polluted by cow dung. Nearby an eroded bank increases the likelihood of increased stream sediment. Both conditions harm fish habitat. Independent researcher D. L. Rosgen rates streams this degraded (stream type “F4”) as having a “poor” potential for recovery. North view at UTM coordinates 0449407/4946261.

In 1952, 2,301 acres of the Antelope Basin Management Area were set aside as the Cliff Lake Bench Research Natural Area, leaving "a sizeable and comparable portion of the bench which can and should be subjected to controlled grazing and other experimental studies not allowable on the Natural Area itself."1 The report further states that due to the lack of permanent water in the area grazing by livestock (primarily sheep) had been light and sporadic since record keeping began in 1935.


A fence barely visible in the lower third of the left photo marks the boundary of the natural area beyond. Notice the difference in the density of sagebrush inside and out. The right photo is from the natural area looking back to where the left hand photo was taken. Density of sagebrush cover within appears in the range of 25%–30%, while outside it is nearly nonexistent. There’s an unconfirmed report that the lack of sagebrush outside the natural area results from herbicide application by the Forest Service to increase cattle forage. What is certain, though, is that since establishment of the natural area, one water storage tank and five water troughs have been constructed nearby to supply the needs of cattle on the Cliff Lake Bench Allotment. Left photo: northeast view at UTM coordinates 0452899/4955530. Right photo: west view at UTM coordinates 0453230/4955635.

Flora; Cliff Lake Bench Research Natural Area. Photo by Mike Hudak.

The 1952 USDA document cited above notes that the grassland of the Natural Area is distinguished by an unusually rich flora with over twenty grass or grasslike species, about fifty forb species and six shrub species.2 Were cattle absent from the Antelope Basin Management Area we could expect conditions like these to prevail throughout the region. East view at UTM coordinates 0453532/4955615.

Footnotes

1 USDA Forest Service, Recommendations and Forester’s Order for Establishing the Cliff Lake Natural Area (Missoula, MT: Northern Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, 14 May 1952), 4.

2 Ibid., 9.

Epilogue

The Forest Service began public discussion over revising livestock grazing management on the Antelope Basin Management Area in October 2000. It issued an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the region in February 2002. Then, in November 2003, District Ranger Mark Petroni decided to implement “Alternative B” of the agency’s EA.

Environmentalists have criticized this alternative for leaving nearly unchanged the amount of forage removed annually by livestock. This plan further calls for construction of an additional twenty-six water troughs along with 5.75 miles of pipelines. As we’ve seen on the Antelope Basin Allotment, these troughs attracts many cattle to the surrounding region which they then strip bare of vegetation. Consequently, such “sacrifice areas” become unusable by wildlife. Collectively such areas often fragment wildlife habitat to the extent that a much larger region becomes unsuitable as well.

An administrative appeal of the management plan by Gallatin Wildlife Association, Western Watersheds Project and other groups was denied.

More recently, in late June 2004, the Native Ecosystems Council, The Alliance for the Wild Rockies and The Ecology Center filed suit in Federal District Court to force the Forest Service to halt implementation of the proposed management plan.

A press release issued by the groups pointed out that

the Forest Service has eliminated nearly 75% of the sagebrush habitat in the area through controlled burning and application of herbicides
ten southwestern Montana wildlife species, including sage grouse, depend on sagebrush habitat for their viability. No sage grouse have not been seen in the area since 1988.
the Forest Service’s own studies have found that continued intense cattle grazing could harm the area’s wildlife, arctic grayling and wild trout.

Please see the entire joint press release for full details of the groups’ opposition to the management plan.

Acknowledgement

My thanks to Glenn Hockett of Gallatin Wildlife Association for being my guide through the Antelope Basin Management Area as well as for providing additional information about the region.

These are your public lands. How well do you think those responsible for managing livestock grazing on the Antelope Basin Management Area are doing at protecting this region for wildlife? Express your thoughts to these officials at

Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest
Madison Ranger District
5 Forest Service Road
Ennis, MT 59729

Phone: (406) 682-4253

Letters to newspapers are also an effective way to express your views to resource managers:

Bozeman Daily Chronicle
2820 W. College
Bozeman, MT 59715

Online letters: Bozeman Daily Chronicle
Email your letter: citydesk@dailychronicle.com