Alamosa - Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge Complex Colorado Comprehensive Conservation Plan

              U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Alamosa - Monte Vista
National Wildlife Refuge Complex
Colorado
Comprehensive
Conservation
Plan
CCPs provide long-term guidance for management decisions and set
forth goals, objectives, and strategies needed to accomplish refuge
purposes and identify the Service’s best estimate of future needs.
These plans detail program planning levels that are sometimes
substantially above current budget allocations and, as such, are
primarily for Service strategic planning and program prioritization
purposes. The plans do not constitute a commitment for staffing
increases, operational and maintenance increases, or funding for
future land acquisition.
Alamosa - Monte Vista
National Wildlife Refuge Complex
Comprehensive Conservation Plan
September 2003
Prepared by
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Alamosa - Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge Complex
9383 El Rancho Lane
Alamosa, Colorado 81101
and
Division of Refuge Planning
Region 6, Mountain-Prairie Region
P.O. Box 25486, DFC
Denver, Colorado 80225
Regional Director, Region 6, USFWS
Alamosa - Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge Complex
Comprehensive Conservation Plan Approval
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Region 6
Acknowledgments:
The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service would like to acknowledge the efforts of
the following individuals toward the completion of this Comprehensive
Conservation Plan. The diversity, talents, and knowledge contributed by
these individuals dramatically improved the vision and completeness of this
document.
Steve Berlinger
Pam Eaton
Susan Echelberger
Sheri Fetherman
Leigh Fredrickson
Jim Gammonley
John Gerstle
David Hamilton
Loree Harvey
Wayne King
Gene Knoder
Murray Laubhan
Rachel Laubhan
Dave Sharp
Virginia McConnel Simmons
Michael Spratt
Robert Tribble
Melvie Uhland
Cheryl Williss
Ted Zukoski
Summary
The Monte Vista and Alamosa National Wildlife Refuges (NWR) are located
in the San Luis Valley (SLV), a high mountain basin located in south-central
Colorado. Both Refuges were established under the Migratory Bird
Conservation Act “. . . for use as inviolate sanctuaries, or for any other
management purpose, for migratory birds.” (16 U.S.C. 715D)
The Monte Vista NWR (14,800 acres) lies on the west side of the San Luis
Valley, about 8 miles south of the town of Monte Vista on State Highway 15.
Monte Vista NWR was approved for acquisition on June 10, 1952, by the
Migratory Bird Conservation Committee. Establishing and acquisition
authorities include: Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 1929, Public Land
Order 2204 dated September 1960.
About 15 miles to the east is the Alamosa NWR, (11,169 acres) which is 3
miles east of the town of Alamosa off State Highway 160. Alamosa NWR
was approved for acquisition on June 27, 1962, by the Migratory Bird
Conservation Committee. Establishing and acquisition authorities include:
Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 1929, Public Land Order 3899 dated
December 1965.
The SLV consists of a flat and broad depression between mountain ranges
converging to the north and is the first of a series of basins along the Rio
Grande. The mountain ranges to the east reach altitudes over 14,000 feet
and those to the west range between 13,000 and 14,000 feet. The length of
the Valley from north to south is about 80 miles, and its greatest width is
about 50 miles. The climate of the San Luis Valley is marked by cold winters
and moderate summers light precipitation and much sunshine. This arid
Valley receives an average of 7 inches of precipitation a year, most of which
is in the form of rain in mid-summer. The growing season around the
Alamosa NWR averages about 90 days. July and August are usually the
only frost-free months. Winds are light except for the spring and early
summer months when speeds of 40 miles per hour can commonly occur with
higher gusts.
Vision
Lands of the Alamosa and Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge
Complex and those owned by our partners will be managed in a
way that contributes to the migratory bird resource in the San
Luis Valley to the greatest extent possible to benefit people of the
Valley and the United States. Management will emphasize
protection, enhancement, restoration and, where appropriate,
creation of a variety of wetland and riparian habitats in this
water rich, yet arid mountain valley. Local residents and visitors
will view Refuge lands with a sense of pride and value their
relationships and accomplishments with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service.
The purpose for managing habitats on the Alamosa and Monte Vista
National Wildlife Refuges (Refuge Complex) is to provide healthy plant
communities in a variety of successional and structural stages which best
support migratory birds.
Alamosa and Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuges were established under
the authority of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act “. . . for use as
inviolate sanctuaries, or for any other management purpose, for migratory
birds.” Based on these establishment purposes, the Service has developed
habitat and public use goals. The continuing achievement of these goals will
fulfill the Refuges’ purposes.
The goals of the CCP are:
Goal 1: Provide short-emergent vegetation in conjunction with various
hydrologic conditions for migrating and breeding water birds,
raptors, and passerines on the Refuge Complex.
Goal 2: Provide short-emergent vegetation in a range of structures
necessary to meet the requisites of nesting waterfowl, water
birds, raptors, passerines, and the habitat needs for small
mammal populations on the Refuge Complex.
Goal 3: Maintain areas of saltgrass in suitable condition for
migrating and breeding water birds and passerines on the Refuge
Complex.
Goal 4: Provide tall-emergent vegetation with other suitable
habitat conditions for breeding water birds and marsh passerines
on the Refuge Complex.
Goal 5: On Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge, provide
agricultural grains in adequate amounts for migrating sandhill
cranes and waterfowl.
Goal 6: Provide submergent wetland vegetation for foraging
migrant and breeding water birds, molting waterfowl, foraging
raptors, aerial foraging birds, and nesting grebes and diving
ducks.
Goal 7: Provide shallow (< 1 foot) seasonal water in conjunction
with other habitat conditions for migrating and breeding water
birds and aerial foraging birds.
Goal 8: Enhance the Rio Grande corridor and its tributaries on Refuge
lands to provide habitat for river, riparian-dependent, and other
wetland species.
Goal 9: Provide native shrub (primarily greasewood and rabbitbrush on
the Monte Vista NWR and four-wing saltbrush on Alamosa
NWR) communities on the Refuge Complex for the benefit of
nesting, migrating and wintering migratory birds and other
wildlife species dependent upon them.
Goal 10: Provide native short-grass communities on the Complex but
primarily on Alamosa NWR for the benefit of nesting, migrating,
and wintering migratory birds and other wildlife species
dependent upon this habitat.
Goal 11: Actively participate in protecting the San Luis Valley Ecosystem
(Upper Rio Grande Ecosystem) and achieving the goals contained
in the North American Waterfowl Management Plan and the
North American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI) through
coordination with local, regional, and national partners.
Goal 12: Control noxious weeds on Refuge Complex roads, levees, and
ditch banks to improve the quality of adjacent habitat and to slow
or cease the spread of these species to neighboring private lands.
Goal 13: Foster understanding, appreciation, and stewardship of the
National Wildlife Refuge System, migratory birds and wetlands
within the San Luis Valley Ecosystem (Upper Rio Grande
Ecosystem).
Table of Contents
I. Introduction/Background
Introduction .................................................................................................. 1
Environmental Setting................................................................................ 1
History of Refuge Establishment, Acquisition, and Management ...... 7
History of SLV and the Refuge Complex ................................................ 7
II. Purpose of and Need for Plan
Purpose of and Need for Plan .................................................................... 11
NWRS Mission, Goals, and Guiding Principles ....................................... 11
National Wildlife Refuge System Policies ............................................... 12
Refuge Purpose ............................................................................................ 12
Refuge Vision Statement ............................................................................ 12
Legal and Policy Guidance.......................................................................... 13
Existing Partnerships ................................................................................. 15
Description of Planning Process ................................................................ 16
Planning Issues ............................................................................................. 17
Wildlife .................................................................................................... 17
Naturalness ............................................................................................ 17
Water ....................................................................................................... 18
Public Use .............................................................................................. 18
Weeds ...................................................................................................... 19
Elk ........................................................................................................... 20
Plans Affecting San Luis Valley and Management of Refuges ............ 21
III. Summary Refuge and Resources
Descriptions
Geographic/Ecosystem Setting ................................................................. 23
Refuge Resources, Cultural Resources, and Public Uses
Soils and Vegetation ............................................................................. 24
Water ....................................................................................................... 26
Plant Communities (Habitat Types) .................................................. 30
Wildlife .................................................................................................... 40
Threatened and Endangered Species ................................................ 41
Waterfowl ............................................................................................... 46
Shorebirds .............................................................................................. 50
Marshbirds ............................................................................................. 50
Colonial Water Birds ............................................................................ 50
Water Birds ............................................................................................ 50
Raptors ................................................................................................... 51
Songbirds................................................................................................ 52
Corvids .................................................................................................... 52
Resident Fish and Wildlife .................................................................. 53
Amphibians and Reptiles ..................................................................... 53
Cultural Resources ...................................................................................... 54
Recreational Uses ........................................................................................ 56
Social and Economic Aspects
Population and Unemployment .......................................................... 57
Tourism ................................................................................................... 57
i
ii
IV. Management Direction
Refuge Management Direction: Goals, Objectives, and Strategies .... 58
Habitat Goals and Objectives ............................................................. 59
Public Use Goal and Objectives .......................................................... 71
Refuge Management Policies and Guidelines .......................................... 73
Water Management .............................................................................. 73
Rest ......................................................................................................... 76
Prescribed Grazing ............................................................................... 77
Prescribed Burning .............................................................................. 77
Farming .................................................................................................. 78
Public Use .............................................................................................. 79
Cultural Resources ............................................................................... 84
Elk Management ................................................................................... 85
V. Implementing and Monitoring
Funding and Personnel Need to Implement the Plan ........................... 86
Step-down Management Plans .................................................................. 88
Partnership Opportunities .......................................................................... 92
Habitat Protection Vision ........................................................................... 93
Habitat Protection Vision (15 years and beyond) ................................... 97
Monitoring and Evaluation ......................................................................... 99
Plan Amendment and Revision.................................................................. 101
Environmental Action Statement ............................ 102
Finding of No Significant Impact............................ 103
Appendices
A. Glossary ......................................................................................................... 104
B. Bibliography .................................................................................................. 108
C. RONS Projects ............................................................................................. 110
D. MMS Projects ............................................................................................... 111
E. Compatibility Determinations ................................................................... 112
F. Species Lists ................................................................................................. 117
G. Section 7 ......................................................................................................... 122
H. Compatibility Lawsuit Actions .................................................................. 123
I. Synopsis of Goal Setting Meeting ............................................................. 124
J. List of Preparers .......................................................................................... 142
K. Public Involvement/Consultation and Coordination .............................. 143
L. Mailing List ................................................................................................... 146
Maps
1. Vicinity Map .................................................................................................. 2
2. Monte Vista NWR Base Map ..................................................................... 3
3. Alamosa NWR Base Map ........................................................................... 4
4. Mountain Prairie Region Ecosystem Map ............................................... 5
5. San Luis Valley Map .................................................................................... 6
6. Monte Vista NWR Habitat Types ............................................................. 31
7. Alamosa NWR Habitat Types ................................................................... 32
8. Monte Vista NWR Hunting Map ............................................................... 80
9. Alamosa NWR Hunting Map ..................................................................... 81
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 1
I. Introduction/Background
Introduction
The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (Service) is the principal Federal agency
responsible for conserving, protecting, and enhancing fish and wildlife and
their habitats. The Service manages the 95-million-acre National Wildlife
Refuge System which encompasses nearly 540 national wildlife refuges,
thousands of small wetlands, and other special management areas. National
wildlife refuges are established for specific purposes and provide habitats for
more than 5,000 species of birds, mammals, fish, and insects.
Environmental Setting
The Monte Vista and Alamosa National Wildlife Refuges are located in the
San Luis Valley (SLV), a high mountain basin located in south-central
Colorado (Map 1 - Vicinity Map). The Monte Vista NWR (14,800 acres) lies
on the west side of the San Luis Valley, about 8 miles south of the town of
Monte Vista on State Highway 15 (Map 2 - Monte Vista NWR Base Map).
About 15 miles to the east is the Alamosa NWR, (11,169 acres) which is 3
miles east of the town of Alamosa off of State Highway 160 (Map 3 - Alamosa
NWR Base Map). These refuges are located within the Upper Rio Grande
Ecosystem of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (Map 4 - Ecosystem Map).
The SLV consists of a flat and broad depression between mountain ranges
converging to the north and is the first of a series of basins along the Rio
Grande. The mountain ranges to the east reach altitudes over 14,000 feet and
those to the west range between 13,000 and 14,000 feet. The length of the
Valley from north to south is about 80 miles, and its greatest width is about
50 miles. The climate of the San Luis Valley is marked by cold winters and
moderate summers, light precipitation, and much sunshine. This arid valley
receives an average of 7 inches of precipitation a year, most of which is in
the form of rain in mid-summer. The growing season around the Alamosa
NWR averages about 90 days. July and August are usually the only frost-free
months. Winds are light except for the spring and early summer months
when speeds of 40 miles per hour can commonly occur with higher gusts.
The San Luis Valley is part of the much larger Rio Grande Rift Zone which
extends from southern New Mexico northward through the San Luis and
Upper Arkansas Valleys to its northern termination near Leadville,
Colorado (Map 5 - San Luis Valley). The SLV is bordered on the east by the
linear Sangre de Cristo Mountains, which resulted from extensive block
faulting during the Laramide Orogeny. The western side of the SLV is
flanked by the San Juan Mountains, the result of extensive tertiary
volcanism. In sharp contrast with the steeply faulted eastern side of the
Valley floor, the Oligocene volcanic rocks of the San Juans gently dip
eastward into the Valley floor where they are interbedded with Valley-fill
deposits (USDI, BLM 1989).
The SLV has two major aquifers, the shallow unconfined and the deep
confined. These aquifers consist mainly of unconsolidated clay, silt, sand, and
gravel. The unconfined aquifer is separated from the confined aquifer by
clay layers and lava flows. Wells drilled into the confined aquifer frequently
produce free flowing artesian wells. Unconfined groundwater occurs
throughout the Valley floor. The confined aquifer underlies most of the
Valley, extending from north of Mosca south to Romeo and from Monte
Vista to east of Alamosa. Both of the refuges overlay the confined aquifer.
The aquifers provide water that is adjudicated for wildlife and irrigation
uses on the Refuges. For example, the Mumm artesian well provides about
one quarter of the water used on Alamosa NWR.
2 Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 3
4 Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 5
6 Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 7
History of Refuges Establishment, Acquisition, and
Management
Alamosa and Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuges were established under
the authority of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act “. . . for use as
inviolate sanctuaries, or for any other management purpose, for migratory
birds.” Additionally, Public Land Order 2204, dated September 19, 1960,
withdrew 800 acres of public land administered by the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) for inclusion in Monte Vista NWR. Public Land Order
3899, dated December 1965, withdrew 86 acres of public land (BLM) for
inclusion in Alamosa NWR. Both orders withdrew these lands from all
forms of appropriation under public land laws, including mineral laws (Title
30, U.S.C. Chapter 2). However, mineral leasing laws pertaining to drilling
are applicable if known geological resources, such as oil and gas, exist.
History of the SLV and the Refuge Complex
For over a century, the SLV has been irrigated to produce hay, small grains
(wheat and barley), and vegetables (potatoes, peas, lettuce). About 30
percent of the SLV is currently irrigated with water from the Rio Grande
river and well water for agricultural purposes. The construction of over
2,000 miles of ditches and pumping of groundwater needed to support
agricultural irrigation has likely diminished the quality and quantity of many
naturally occurring wetland areas. We assume wetlands originally
associated with creek and river systems in the Valley have been diminished
by irrigation diversions by agricultural and wildlife managers. However,
irrigation practices have also resulted in the creation of thousands of acres
of wet meadows. These shallowly-flooded native plant meadows are usually
annually hayed and grazed but still provide foraging habitat to migratory
birds.
What we know about the landscape of the Refuge Complex prior to
European settlement is primarily from descriptions provided by the first
refuge manager (P. Bryant, pers comm.), settlers from the early 1900s (E.
Olson, pers comm.), the original Refuge Master Plan (USFWS 1962), and
the map produced by the 1874, 1875, and 1877 Wheeler expedition and the
Rio Grande County Soil Survey. From these sources of information we
believe that the area we now call Monte Vista NWR was largely devoid of
palustrine emergent wetlands (wetlands permanently or semipermanently
flooded) (wetland definitions by Cowardin et al. 1979). When these wetlands
did occur they were in the floodplains of Spring Creek, Rock Creek and
possibly Cat Creek. The natural flows in these creeks have been drastically
reduced in the last 50 to 150 years, and in the case of Spring Creek, almost
dried completely due to the construction of irrigation canals and extensive
groundwater withdrawal. Therefore, the availability of naturally occuring
palustrine emergent wetlands on the Monte Vista NWR has been reduced.
Another type of wetland may have existed on the refuge prior to its
establishment. Wetlands with saturated soils, perennial wetland vegetation
and intermittent or temporary flooding may have occurred but they were
probably dependent upon groundwater levels which were higher than
current levels. These and other kinds of wetlands may have occurred. The
dominant plant community is believed to have been desert salt shrubland
primarily consisting of rabbitbrush, greasewood, saltgrass, and alkali
sacaton (Rocchi et al. 2000). A need is recognized to continue to gather
information on the extent, type, and location of historic wetlands on and
near the Monte Vista NWR.
8 Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003
After 1882 and before the Monte Vista Refuge was established (1952), much
of this shrubland habitat was converted to wet meadows for grazing and
production of hay and croplands via irrigation by private landowners. After
the Refuge was established, the improvement of water management
facilities began in order to emphasize wildlife habitat production on these
irrigated lands. Low level levees have been built throughout the 14,800
acres to maintain irrigation of shallow water wetland vegetation, to
compensate for the loss of wetland habitat throughout the SLV and to fulfill
Refuge purposes. The majority of these wetlands rely upon the delivery of
surface water through a series of canals, ditches, and borrow areas. Water is
the primary instrument to produce and maintain wildlife habitat on the
Refuges and, without it, wetland-dependent wildlife would be greatly
reduced in the SLV.
The Rio Grande is the largest and most significant river in the San Luis
Valley, starting in the San Juan Mountains above Creede, Colorado and
flowing southeast through the towns of South Fork, Del Norte (where it
officially enters the SLV), Monte Vista, and Alamosa and then south to the
New Mexico State line. This major river is critical not only for the people
and resources of the San Luis Valley but for these same entities as it flows
south through the States of New Mexico and Texas and then along the
border with Mexico. Similar to other river systems in arid environments
that support extensive irrigation, the Rio Grande now has an extensive
network of storage dams and diversions for irrigation and other purposes
along its entire length. In the SLV storage dams are located in the
headwaters and upper reaches and extensive direct diversions
(approximately 4,000 to 4,500 cubic feet per second sustained at peak of
irrigation season) that occur between South Fork and the Alamosa NWR.
These and other uses and modifications in the Rio Grande have resulted in,
but are not limited to: fewer over-bank flooding events, depressed flows
during the spring and early summer (runoff period), and more prolonged
flows throughout the remainder of the year due to water returning to the
river from irrigated lands (Gerstle 2001). These factors, in combination with
alterations in groundwater and aquifers, have impacted the type, quantity,
quality, and persistence of wetland habitats in the SLV.
The Alamosa NWR lies in the Rio Grande floodplain and is part of what was
referred to as the “Alamosa Marshes,” one of the largest wetland complexes
in the SLV documented in the 1878 Wheeler expedition maps (U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers 1878). Soon after, in the late 1800s, the area now known
as the Refuge was managed as cattle ranches and several irrigation ditches
were established to irrigate meadows for the production of livestock forage.
After this land was converted to a national wildlife refuge in 1962, similar
irrigation practices were continued. These combined irrigation practices
have probably resulted in water being kept longer in some wetlands than
historically. Other changes in Refuge habitat are the result of modifications
of the Rio Grande hydrology; for example, it is speculated that flooding on
the Alamosa NWR occurred more frequently and over most of the Refuge.
Relatively few wetland impoundments were artificially created because
oxbow and other wetland depressions still existed although water was no
longer naturally supplied by the Rio Grande. Few improvements were made
in the original water management infrastructure used by cattle ranchers,
and water is still moved through this system to irrigate wetland vegetation
throughout the Refuge. This plan assumes that the most dramatic changes
in the Alamosa NWR have been the alteration of hydrology in the Rio
Grande and the 1983 construction of the Bureau of Reclamation’s Closed
Basin Conveyance Channel which bisects the Refuge.
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 9
This plan reflects the current stage in the evolution of management
direction, perception and goals of Monte Vista and Alamosa National
Wildlife Refuges. The goals of these two Refuges have changed over time in
response to changes in ecological and agricultural conditions, human
activities, and our knowledge of biology, geology, hydrology, and sociology.
If history is a guide, any specific goals assigned to these Refuges have a life
span defined by their applicability to current conditions, and knowledge and
state of the wildlife management profession. Monte Vista NWR was
originally established under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act in response to
local interest in protecting wintering duck habitat along Spring Creek and
drawing ducks causing depredation on privately-owned grain fields onto a
federally owned refuge (USFWS 1962). After almost 10 years of
management as a national wildlife refuge and the resulting conversion of
ranching, farming, and dairy operations to dramatically less intensive,
annual utilization of vegetation, tremendous numbers of waterfowl started
using the Refuge for nesting. This coincided with growing continental
concern over plummeting duck populations. Management adapted waterfowl
production as a goal to meet demands of that period in time. Refuge
managers also realized that of the 230,000 acres of wetlands in the San Luis
Valley (USFWS 1992) only a small percentage could be managed to support
dense stands of vegetation not harvested annually. This wetland type and
condition has been shown to be very productive for ground-nesting water
birds and was considered an important enough habitat type to reproduce on
public or private lands when possible.
During this period of succession and manipulation of Refuge habitats,
nesting conditions for several colonial water bird and other nongame water
birds became favorable and important to bird conservation in Colorado.
Management goals were broadened to protect and encourage these habitats.
From the time of establishment to the late 1970s, groundwater levels
declined, which terminated flows in Spring Creek and other valley springs.
Thus increasing managers focus’ and reliance on surface water management
to maintain wetland habitat. In more contemporary times, our partners and
the Service have encouraged our conservation efforts to focus on the broad
array of migratory birds and, in particular, their habitats. Also, we have
embraced the fact that conservation of migratory birds must take place
landscape-wide, not just on refuges. And it must be conducted in the context
of human use, occupation, and impacts to those same lands. As a
consequence, the goals of Monte Vista and Alamosa National Wildlife
Refuges described in this document reflect our best attempt to describe
habitat and public use goals appropriate for this period of time knowing full
well they will change with environmental conditions, social demands, and
growing knowledge.
10 Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003
In 1992, Monte Vista NWR was included in a lawsuit filed by National
Audubon Society et al. versus Babbitt alleging the U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service had violated the National Wildlife Refuge Administration Act, the
Refuge Recreation Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the
Administrative Procedures Act by allowing incompatible uses in the
National Wildlife Refuge System. Monte Vista NWR was included because
of its use of livestock grazing in habitat management. The U.S. Fish &
Wildlife Service settled the lawsuit with the plaintiffs out-of-court in
October 1993. The agreement as it specifically related to Monte Vista NWR
required the Service to take six specific actions (see Appendix H).
This lawsuit and the resulting settlement have had a substantial influence
on day-to-day operations of both Refuges. As part of the settlement, it was
agreed that a 5-year research study would be conducted which would
evaluate habitat management tools including grazing. Dr. Leigh
Fredrickson, a wetland ecologist from the University of Missouri’s Galleried
Memorial Laboratory, was selected to conduct the project and research
began on both Refuges in 1996. Additionally, it was agreed that in the short-term
there would be no cattle grazing on the Complex unless it was part of
the research. The outcome of the research project is fundamentally
important to all future habitat management of the Refuges. Monitoring of
habitat management actions is now more than just a common sense good
idea but mandated especially if grazing is used as a habitat management
tool.
In order to conserve migratory birds and their habitats in the San Luis
Valley, refuge planning and operations are intertwined with a large number
of partners that share many conservation goals. These partnerships have
proven extremely productive yet equally time consuming to maintain. Two
challenges now faced are how to coordinate this plan with the array of other
planning efforts underway and, secondly, how to provide staff time to
participate and, in some cases, lead these efforts.
Both national wildlife refuges in the San Luis Valley serve as imperfect
models of how areas set-aside for wildlife management complement
migratory bird habitat in a setting dominated by agriculture. Much needs to
be learned. Our knowledge of historical and prehistorical environmental
conditions is scant and largely dependent upon anecdotal and qualitative
information. In this desert environment, the variety and abundance of life is
influenced by the presence of water more than any other factor. This factor
has likely been altered more than any other in the San Luis Valley and
confounds many efforts to speculate about site specific environmental
conditions.
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 11
II. Purpose of and Need for Plan
The purpose of developing the Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) is
to provide the refuge manager and public with a 15-year management plan
for the conservation of fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their related
habitats, while providing opportunities for compatible wildlife-dependent
recreational uses. The CCP, when fully implemented, should achieve Refuge
purposes; help fulfill the Refuge System mission; maintain and, where
appropriate, restore the ecological integrity of each Refuge and the Refuge
System: help achieve the goals of the National Wilderness Preservation
System; and meet other mandates.
NWRS Mission, Goals, and Guiding Principles
The mission of the System is “to administer a national network of lands
and waters for the conservation, management, and where appropriate,
restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats
within the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of
Americans” (National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997).
Goals of the National Wildlife Refuge System are:
a. To fulfill our statutory duty to achieve refuge purpose(s) and
further the System mission.
b. Conserve, restore where appropriate, and enhance all species of fish,
wildlife, and plants that are endangered or threatened with
becoming endangered.
c. Perpetuate migratory bird, interjurisdictional fish, and marine
mammal populations.
d. Conserve a diversity of fish, wildlife, and plants.
e. Conserve and restore, where appropriate, representative ecosystems
of the United States, including the ecological processes
characteristic of those ecosystems.
f. To foster understanding and instill appreciation of fish, wildlife,
and plants, and their conservation, by providing the public with
safe, high-quality, and compatible wildlife-dependent public use.
Such use includes hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and
photography, and environmental education and interpretation.
There are four guiding principles for management and general public use of
the Refuge System established by Executive Order 12996 (3/25/96):
■ Public Use. The Refuge System provides important opportunities
for compatible wildlife-dependent recreational activities involving
hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, and
environmental education and interpretation.
■ Habitat. Fish and wildlife will not prosper without high quality
habitat, and without fish and wildlife, traditional uses of refuges
cannot be sustained. The Refuge System will continue to conserve
and enhance the quality and diversity of fish and wildlife habitat
within refuges.
■ Partnerships. America’s sportsmen and women were the first
partners who insisted on protecting valuable wildlife habitat within
wildlife refuges. Conservation partnerships with other Federal
agencies, State agencies, Tribes, organizations, industry, and the
general public can make significant contributions to the growth and
management of the Refuge System.
■ Public Involvement. The public should be given a full and open
opportunity to participate in decisions regarding acquisition and
management of our national wildlife refuges.
This goose, designed by J.N.
“Ding” Darling, has become the
symbol of the National Wildlife
Refuge System.
12 Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003
National Wildlife Refuge System Policies
To manage each refuge to fulfill the mission of the System, as well as the
specific purposes for which that refuge was established.
Compatible wildlife-dependent recreation is a legitimate and appropriate
general public use directly related to the mission of the system and the
purposes of many refuges.
Compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses are the priority general
public uses of the System and shall receive priority consideration in refuge
planning and management.
When a wildlife-dependent recreational use is compatible within a refuge,
that activity should be facilitated, subject to such restrictions or regulations
as may be necessary, reasonable and appropriate.
Refuges Purposes
Alamosa and Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuges were established under
the authority of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act “. . . for use as
inviolate sanctuaries, or for any other management purpose, for migratory
birds.” Based on their establishment purposes, the Refuges have adopted a
number of habitat and public use goals. The continuing achievement of these
goals will fulfill the Refuges’ purposes.
In addition to purposes provided by the Migratory Bird Conservation Act,
the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report for the Bureau of
Reclamation Closed Basin Project describes the role Alamosa NWR plays in
mitigating wetlands lost through construction and operation of the project.
The Bureau of Reclamation has purchased 800 acre-feet of water and
appurtenant land, and provides a variable amount of water out of the Closed
Basin Conveyance Channel to include in the operation of Alamosa NWR as
partial wetland mitigation for the Closed Basin Project.
Refuge Vision Statement
Lands of the Alamosa and Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge
Complex and those owned by our partners will be managed in a
way that contributes to the migratory bird resource in the San Luis
Valley to the greatest extent possible to benefit people of the Valley
and the United States. Management will emphasize protection,
enhancement, restoration, and where appropriate, creation of a
variety of wetland and riparian habitats in this water rich, yet arid
mountain valley. Local residents and visitors will view Refuge
lands with a sense of pride and value their relationships and
accomplishments with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 13
Legal and Policy Guidance
Management actions on national wildlife refuges are circumscribed by many
mandates (laws, Executive Orders, etc.) the latest of which is the Volunteer
and Community Partnership Enhancement Act of 1998. The regulations that
affect Refuge management the most are listed below.
Volunteer and Community Partnership Enhancement Act (1998): The
purposes of this Act are to encourage the use of volunteers to assist in the
management of refuges within the Refuge System; to facilitate partnerships
between the Refuge System and nonfederal entities to promote public
awareness of the resources of the Refuge System and public participation in
the conservation of the resources and; to encourage donations and other
contributions.
National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997: Sets the
mission and administrative policy for all refuges in the National Wildlife
Refuge System; mandates comprehensive conservation planning for all units
of the National Wildlife Refuge System.
Executive Order 13007 Indian Sacred Sites (1996): Directs Federal land
management agencies to: accommodate access to and ceremonial uses of
Indian sacred sites by Indian religious practitioners, avoid adversely
affecting the physical integrity of such sacred sites, and where appropriate,
maintain the confidentiality of sacred sites.
Executive Order 12996 Management and General Public Use of the
National Wildlife Refuge System (1996): Defines the mission, purpose,
and priority public uses of the National Wildlife Refuge System. It also
presents four principles to guide management of the system.
Americans With Disabilities Act (1992): Prohibits discrimination in public
accommodations and services.
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (1990):
Requires Federal agencies and museums to inventory, determine ownership
of, and repatriate cultural items under their control or possession.
Federal Noxious Weed Act (1990): Requires the use of integrated
management systems to control or contain undesirable plant species; and an
interdisciplinary approach with the cooperation of other Federal and State
agencies.
Archaeological Resources Protection Act (1979) as amended: Protects
materials of archaeological interest from unauthorized removal or
destruction and requires Federal managers to develop plans and schedules
to locate archaeological resources.
American Indian Religious Freedom Act (1978): Directs agencies to
consult with native traditional religious leaders to determine appropriate
policy changes necessary to protect and preserve Native American religious
cultural rights and practices.
Executive Order 11988 (1977): Requires Federal agencies to provide
leadership and take action to reduce the risk of flood loss and minimize the
impact of floods on human safety, and preserve the natural and beneficial
values served by the floodplains.
Clean Water Act (1977): Requires consultation with the Corps of
Engineers (404 permits) for major wetland modifications.
Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act (1974): Directs the
preservation of historic and archaeological data in Federal construction
projects.
14 Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003
Rehabilitation Act (1973): Requires programmatic accessibility in addition
to physical accessibility for all facilities and programs funded by the Federal
government to ensure that anybody can participate in any program.
Endangered Species Act (1973): Requires all Federal agencies to carry out
programs for the conservation of endangered and threatened species.
National Environmental Policy Act (1969): Requires the disclosure of the
environmental impacts of any major Federal action significantly affecting
the quality of the human environment.
Architectural Barriers Act (1968): Requires federally owned, leased, or
funded buildings and facilities to be accessible to persons with disabilities.
National Historic Preservation Act (1966) as amended: Establishes as
policy that the Federal Government is to provide leadership in the
preservation of the nation’s prehistoric and historic resources.
National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act (1966): Defines the
National Wildlife Refuge System and authorizes the Secretary to permit
any use of a refuge provided such use is compatible with the major purposes
for which the refuge was established.
Refuge Recreation Act (1962): Allows the use of refuges for recreation
when such uses are compatible with the refuge’s primary purposes and
when sufficient funds are available to manage the uses.
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (1958): Allows the Fish and Wildlife
Service to enter into agreements with private landowners for wildlife
management purposes.
Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Act (1934): Authorized
the opening of part of a refuge to waterfowl hunting.
Migratory Bird Conservation Act (1929): Establishes procedures for
acquisition by purchase, rental, or gifts of areas approved by the Migratory
Bird Conservation Commission.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (1918): Designates the protection of migratory
birds as a Federal responsibility. This Act enables the setting of seasons,
and other regulations including the closing of areas, Federal or nonfederal,
to the hunting of migratory birds.
Antiquities Act (1906): Authorizes the scientific investigation of antiquities
on Federal land and provides penalties for unauthorized removal of objects
taken or collected without a permit.
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 15
Existing Partnerships
The San Luis Valley of Colorado is well known for its wetland resources.
The National Wetland Inventory data indicates approximately 230,000 acres
of wetland habitat currently exists. Although most of these wetlands are
supported by irrigation practices, they still provide valuable wildlife habitat.
Currently, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service is an active partner in the
Colorado Wetlands Program. It is a large statewide partnership with the
goal of protecting, restoring, and enhancing wetland habitat. This initiative
is a voluntary approach to wetland conservation. It is aimed at conserving
all biologically significant wetlands of Colorado and associated wildlife
including birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. The initiative was
started in 1996 with the reorganization of the Colorado Division of Wildlife
and the development of the Intermountain West Joint Venture of the North
American Waterfowl Management Plan. In the San Luis Valley, this
initiative has built on existing programs by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service,
the Colorado Division of Wildlife, the Bureau of Land Management, and The
Nature Conservancy. Although much remains to be done to improve
wetland management on these “conservation units,” most wetland habitat in
the Valley is privately-owned.
Implementation of the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program (PFW) in the
San Luis Valley began April 1, 1990. Since its inception in the SLV, the PFW
Program has been instrumental in restoring and enhancing numerous acres
of wetland and wet meadow habitat, cottonwood/willow riparian habitat, as
well as associated upland habitat. Portions of the SLV support an excellent
habitat for breeding waterfowl and water birds. However, the vegetation
and water conditions conducive to waterfowl and water bird breeding
habitat (dense vegetation cover) are assumed under represented Valley.
Therefore, the PFW Program has focused its attention almost exclusively
on restoring and enhancing wetland/wet meadow and riparian systems to
increase the habitat quality for waterfowl, water birds, passerines, and
other resident wildlife species.
To date, over 220 Wildlife Extension Agreements (WEA) with landowners
have incorporated over 12,000 total acres into the San Luis Valley’s PFW
Program. Of these, approximately 8,500 acres are wetland/wet meadow,
3,160 acres of associated uplands, and over 400 acres of cottonwood/willow
riparian habitat. Landowners enter into WEAs for a minimum of 10 years,
although some have signed agreements for 20 years.
The cost/benefit return of the PFW Program in the SLV has been, and
continues to be, exceptional because the PFW staff constructs the majority
of the projects themselves and the flat topography of the SLV is ideal. The
majority of restoration and enhancement activities are accomplished for
$200 to $300/wetland acre with some projects being even more cost efficient.
The PFW Program is achieving its goal of increasing production of
waterfowl and water birds in the SLV. Additionally, numerous other wildlife
species have benefitted from these restoration and enhancement activities.
Project areas receive a lot of use by breeding and wintering raptors and
prairie nesting songbirds such as western meadowlarks and vesper
sparrows. Small mammals, amphibians and reptiles, as well as a suite of
invertebrates, have also benefitted substantially.
16 Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003
Description of Planning Process
Comprehensive conservation planning efforts for Alamosa/Monte Vista
NWR began in November 1997 with a meeting of regional management and
planning staff and field station employees at Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR. At
that meeting, a core planning team was designated with the major
responsibilities of gathering information and writing the Plan. A review
team was set up to provide guidance and direction to the core planning
team. A working group was also organized to provide interchange of
information between Service personnel, outside agencies, and interested
stakeholders of the Refuge.
On March 24 and 26, 1998, open house scoping sessions were held at the
Alamosa/Monte Vista Refuge office. The open house provided participants
an opportunity to learn about the Refuge’s purposes, mission and goals, and
issues currently facing management. People attending were provided the
chance to speak with Service representatives and to share their comments.
During the planning process, the review and working groups have had
access to information on objectives and alternatives being considered.
Written comments have been exchanged and verbal conversations have
been held. The Draft CCP/EA was the first opportunity that these groups
and the public had to review the entire planning effort and the Plan. A 30-
day comment period was provided from March 28, 2003 through April 28,
2003.
This CCP will guide management on the Refuge for the next 15 years. Plans
are ultimately signed by the Regional Director, Region 6, thus providing
Regional direction to the station project leader. A copy of the Plan will be
provided to all those interested.
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 17
Planning Issues
As part of the comprehensive planning process, in March and April of 1998,
the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service gathered public opinions regarding the
Alamosa and Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuges and how they are
managed. This was done by meeting with interested groups and public
agencies and by distributing an Issues Workbook to the people attending the
Monte Vista Crane Festival or just stopping by at the Refuge headquarters.
In addition, open houses were held at the Monte Vista and Alamosa Refuges
to gather input and answer questions.
Although this was not a scientific survey, it still provides insight to the
Refuge staff as to aspects of the Refuges and their management that
concern people or give them enjoyment and satisfaction. These insights
were used to prepare a Comprehensive Conservation Plan that is
responsive to the public’s concerns while carrying out Complex mandates
and Service goals.
The following summarizes the responses to the Issues Workbook questions.
When considering these responses, it is important to remember that they
did not result from a scientifically designed workbook. Therefore, they only
represent the opinions of those people who attended the Crane Festival or
otherwise had some special interest in the management of the Complex.
Wildlife
The Alamosa and Monte Vista Refuges were established to provide wildlife
habitat. The public fully supports this mission. Comments focused especially
on threatened and endangered species, waterfowl and other water bird
management, and resident species.
Ranches within the Alamosa and Monte Vista area, that included grazing on
a complex of wetland and riparian vegetative resources, have been recently
subdivided into housing and other developments thus reducing wildlife
habitat in the vicinity of the Complex. This development is also occurring all
along the Rio Grande from South Fork to Alamosa NWR. This type of
development is especially severe between South Fork and Del Norte,
Colorado where numerous, relatively large residential subdivisions have
been established along the Rio Grande. Large ranches have been subdivided
into smaller ranchettes as part of the demographic trend in western states
of people moving from urban areas to more rural settings. Developers seek
out these properties for their scenic value, proximity to communities with
full services, and accessibility to vast acreage of public lands. Many ranchers
are deciding to sell their property to developers as income from traditional
ranching operations fall far below that from sale for residential
development. In many cases, all or portions of existing ranches are being
subdivided in order to pay inheritance tax liabilities.
Naturalness
Refuges, as islands of naturalness in areas dominated by human activities
and structures, are very important to visitors. Management techniques,
including structures, should be as unobtrusive as possible. Naturalness is
typified by a variety of vegetation communities, open water areas, lush
growth, and presence of wildlife. The Complex should consist of diverse
native vegetation with special emphasis on protecting wetlands, including
riparian areas. The presence of weeds diminishes the aspect of naturalness.
While naturalness and natives are appreciated, the methods used to
eliminate invasive exotics are not.
18 Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003
Water
Water management to accomplish wildlife and public use objectives was an
expressed concern to a number of respondents. As any place in the west,
water is a major concern in the San Luis Valley. The average annual
precipitation is 7 inches. The Service acquired groundwater rights and
rights to use water from the Rio Grande when lands were purchased for
both Refuges. It also subsequently established rights under State law to use
groundwater. Wells supply about 8,200 acre-feet per year to Monte Vista
NWR and 1,541 acre-feet to Alamosa NWR. An average of about 8,500 acre-feet
of water per year is diverted from the Rio Grande River to Monte Vista
NWR, and an average of about 13,750 acre-feet is diverted to Alamosa
NWR. The use of Rio Grande River water is governed by a 1939 compact
between the States of Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas.
The adequacy of Service water rights to provide for wildlife is especially
important to the residents of the San Luis Valley. Some residents expressed
concern about whether the Refuges have adequate water and water rights
to achieve wildlife habitat objectives.
There is concern that the Complex has increased the consumptive use of
water. The Service continues to use water for irrigation, but the crop is now
wetland vegetation rather than hay, and it is not regularly harvested.
Alamosa NWR also receives water from the Closed Basin Project as
mitigation for the Project’s impacts to wetlands; this water provides
additional water management flexibility which was not available to the
landowners who originally appropriated the Complex’s water rights.
Public Use
Recreational use of the Refuges is considered highly desirable, but the types
and amounts of public use provided on the Complex must be compatible with
the wildlife and its habitat and the purposes for which the refuges were
established. Support was expressed for all the wildlife-dependent priority
public uses provided for on the Complex, i.e., hunting and fishing, wildlife
observation and photography, and environmental education and
interpretation. However, a need was expressed to scrutinize hunting and the
Crane Festival with regard to their compatibility with wildlife. Interest was
also expressed in some non-wildlife-dependent activities, such as walking
and biking.
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 19
Weeds
Invasive plant problems have increased annually since the 1960s. They are
problematic for several reasons, and are particularly troublesome for
Refuge neighbors who are required by State and local laws to control weeds
on their lands. County weed districts are not authorized to enforce noxious
weed laws on Refuge lands, further complicating the Refuge’s relationship
with some of its neighbors since they see the Refuge as a source of weeds
for which they have no recourse.
A unique characteristic of refuge management is the practice of allowing the
wetland plants grown during the summer to remain through the winter to
provide nesting habitat for migratory birds. Frequently, this means Refuge
meadows are left standing during the summer without being annually
grazed or mowed. Over the decades these practices have resulted in large,
robust stands of desired native plants. But, over the last 30 years, all too
often, noxious weeds that benefit from the same management practices
increasingly accompany these desired plants. This can, and does, decrease
the quality of wildlife habitat on some Refuge units.
Biological control of undesirable plants has been used as a management tool
since 1989 when 100 stem-mining weevils were initially released on Monte
Vista and Alamosa Refuges to help control Canada thistles. Additional
releases of gall flies and stem-mining weevils for Canada thistle control have
been made, 18 in all since 1989. None of these introductions have resulted in
establishing a population capable of affecting the life cycle of the weeds. No
USDA approved biological controls are currently available for tall whitetop.
Some respondents expressed concern about the use of intrusive weed
control methods and their appropriateness on wildlife refuges. These
methods may disturb and potentially harm some wildlife, thus compromising
wildlife objectives. Current management uses herbicide application and
mowing, emphasizing control in areas along Refuge boundaries and water
courses exiting the Refuges. In addition, preventive measures include
shaping of spoil banks, seeding disturbed sites, and spraying disturbed sites
to favor establishment of desirable plant communities.
Currently, experimentation with livestock, herbicides, tillage, and water
manipulation is being conducted to determine the effect on seed production,
stem density, and root mass of tall whitetop. Results from these
investigations will enable management to better control noxious weeds
without compromising the purposes for which the Refuges were established.
20 Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003
Elk
Since the late 1980s, increasing numbers of elk have used Monte Vista
NWR. A small resident population became established on the east side of
the Refuge while a larger group (up to 900 animals) has started using the
western one-third of the Refuge starting with the fall hunting season on
public lands adjacent to the west. Elk on the Refuge present good public
viewing opportunities but also present several problems. The Colorado
Division of Wildlife is extremely concerned about rapidly growing elk
populations throughout the State. This is also the case in Game Management
Unit 80 of which Monte Vista NWR is part. Since no recreational hunting of
elk occurs on the Refuge, it has become a haven for elk during the hunting
season protecting a variable segment of the population from harvest.
Growing numbers of elk on the Refuge have resulted in increased conflicts
with landowners neighboring the Refuge and increased incidence of elk/
vehicle collisions on State Highway 15 and several county roads crossing the
Refuge. The Colorado Division of Wildlife is financially liable to damage to
privately-owned fence and forage crops caused by elk. In addition, trails and
bedding areas impact vegetation that could be used, or is being used, by
ground-nesting birds. This is more of a concern on the eastern side of Monte
Vista NWR where a resident population has become established in the most
valuable dense nesting cover on the Refuge. Although little habitat damage
has occurred by this small group, it will undoubtedly become significant as
the herd grows. For these reasons, the Refuge attempts to control resident
and transient elk.
Some respondents expressed a desire to allow public elk hunting on Refuge
lands, especially in light of the Division of Wildlife’s difficulty in meeting elk
harvest objectives. Other respondents expressed safety concerns including
the proximity of private landowners, density of public roadways, and the
presence of Refuge staff, contractors and cooperators on the land combined
with the range and power of elk hunting rifles.
On the Alamosa NWR, elk numbers during peak use have reached
approximately 100 to 120 animals in the last few years with about 20 to 30
animals during the summer. Currently, these animals are not causing
depredation problems on adjacent private lands nor habitat damage on the
Refuge. However, there is potential for rapid expansion of elk numbers on
the Alamosa NWR, which is occurring in other areas in the San Luis Valley.
The number of elk to the north (near the Great Sand Dunes National Park)
and south (La Sauces area) of the Alamosa Refuge are increasing and some
of these animals, especially from La Sauces and Fort Garland, may begin to
move onto the Refuge. Consequently, the Refuge staff is communicating and
cooperating with the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) relative to
population monitoring and decisions regarding potential elk population
control or dispersal methods.
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 21
Plans Affecting San Luis Valley and Management of Refuges
The Refuge Improvement Act of 1997 calls for our plans to be consistent
with State plans “to the extent practicable.” Therefore, the following plans
were consulted in an effort to be consistent with other agencies plans in the
SLV.
North American Colonial Water Bird Conservation Plan - This Plan was
developed to aid in fulfilling a specific mission: “to create a cohesive, multi-national,
partnership for conserving and managing colonial-nesting water
birds and their habitats throughout North America.”
Intermountain West Joint Venture Implementation Plan - Final December
1995. The goal of the Intermountain West Joint Venture is “to strive for the
long-term conservation of wetland habitats and their associated wildlife
values.” It does so by supporting the restoration and maintenance of
migratory bird populations; fostering the protection, restoration, and
enhancement of wetlands, and associated uplands; and by promoting
understanding of waterfowl and wetland habitat issues, functions, and
values. This Plan is a component of the North American Waterfowl
Management Plan and was developed by an implementation plan committee.
Intermountain West Regional Shorebird Plan - Revised February 8, 2001.
This Plan was developed to conserve shorebirds and shorebird habitat in
Region 6. This Plan was developed as part of the U.S. Shorebird
Conservation Plan.
Upper/Middle Rio Grande Ecosystem Plan (USFWS, Regions 2 and 6) -
1996. The Monte Vista/Alamosa NWR Complex lies within the Upper Rio
Grande Valley. The Refuge staff are active partners in the ecosystem team
and are the only representatives from Region 6. The Upper/Middle Rio
Grande Ecosystem encompasses Federal, State, local and tribal entities.
However, the purpose of this Plan is to only direct the efforts of the USFWS
in an ecosystem approach for achieving its mission of fish and wildlife
conservation. With input from the other programs, the main goal is “to
protect, restore, and maintain viable levels of biotic diversity within the
Upper/Middle Rio Grande Ecosystem.”
Southern Prairie/Mountain Ecosystem Team (USFWS, Region 6) - October
27, 1999. This team does not have an official plan but has developed five
priority issues for their ecosystem approach to habitat and wildlife
conservation.
Whooping Crane Recovery Plan - 1994. Prepared by the Whooping Crane
Recovery Team. The goal of the Plan is to provide decision-makers with
direction on how to remove the whooping crane (Grus americana) from the
endangered species category to the threatened category.
Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Recovery Plan - This Plan to recover the
endangered race of the southwestern willow flycatcher is currently being
written by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. The draft recovery plan was
released for public review in June 2001 and approved in December 2002.
Management Plan of the Pacific and Central Flyways for the Rocky
Mountain Population (RMP) of Greater Sandhill Cranes - July 1998.
Prepared by the Subcommittee on the Rocky Mountain Population of
Greater Sandhill Crane, Pacific Flyway Study Committee and Central
Flyway Technical committee. The goal of this Plan is to provide an outline
for managing “the RMP for numbers and distribution that will provide
maximum direct benefits to the public and for the intrinsic values of the
birds themselves.”
22 Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003
USFWS, Region 6: Nongame Migratory Birds Conservation Plan - Revision
March 3, 1994. This Plan is designed to aid conservation of nongame bird
species in Region 6 of the USFWS. It supports the goals of the nongame
migratory bird program which are to “protect and maintain all native
nongame species at viable population levels, and protect their habitats.”
Colorado Statewide Waterfowl Management Plan, 1989-2003. Written in
1989 by the Colorado Division of Wildlife. This Plan outlines the
management and conservation needs and efforts for waterfowl in the State.
The San Luis Valley Community Wetlands Strategy - Final September 2000.
Prepared by the San Luis Valley Wetlands Focus Area Committee in
cooperation with the Colorado Natural Heritage Program. This strategy is
an “organizational tool to identify opportunities to make wetland protection
programs work better; it is a process for bringing people together to help
identify specific wetlands problems and realistic, equitable, solutions that
achieve future wetlands protection goals.”
San Luis Valley Water Bird Plan - Final September 8, 1995. The goal of this
Plan is “to provide and protect a habitat base of sufficient quality and
quantity to maintain healthy viable populations of water birds in the San
Luis Valley.” This Plan was produced by a joint effort of the Colorado
Division of Wildlife, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, and U.S. Bureau of Land
Management.
Status Assessment and Conservation Plan for the Black Tern in North
America - 1999. This document addresses the biology, management and
statues of the Black Tern, which is currently listed as threatened or
endangered in six states and is a species of management concern within the
Intermountain West. The Plan was produced by the USFWS.
Rock Creek Heritage Project - Project Overview, July 2000. This project is
a “landowner initiative” focused on protecting approximately 15,000 acres of
agricultural lands in the Rock Creek watershed and lands that surround and
buffer the Monte Vista NWR.
Monte Vista NWR Interim Elk Population Management Plan - March 21,
1997. This Plan outlines an “approach to dealing with a growing conflict with
elk in the vicinity of Monte Vista NWR.” It is a joint effort between the
USFWS, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Bureau of Land Management, and
U.S. Forest Service.
Los Caminos Antiguos (LCA) Partnership Agreement - February 24, 2000.
The Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex has joined in partnership with
numerous other agencies, municipal governments and tourism and
community development organizations for “collaborative leadership,
sustainable funding, and support of the Los Caminos Antiguos Scenic and
Historic Byway.”
Great San Luis Valley Trails and Recreation Master Plan - 1998. This Plan
provides tools for “preservation, protection and stewardship of our open
space, wildlife habitat, parks, and trails, plus timely plans for creating
recreation opportunities.” It is a coalition of local, regional, State, and
Federal government agencies, local businesses and private citizens.
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 23
III. Summary Refuge and Resources
Descriptions
Geographic/ Ecosystem Setting
The Monte Vista and Alamosa National Wildlife Refuges are located in the
San Luis Valley (SLV), a high mountain basin located in south-central
Colorado. The SLV consists of a broad depression between mountain ranges
converging to the north and is the first of a series of basins along the Rio
Grande. The mountain ranges to the east reach altitudes over 14,000 feet
and those to the west range between 13,000 and 14,000 feet. The length of
the Valley from north to south is about 80 miles, and its greatest width is
about 50 miles.
The San Luis Valley is part of the much larger Rio Grande Rift Zone which
extends from southern New Mexico northward through the San Luis and
Upper Arkansas Valleys to its northern termination near Leadville,
Colorado. The SLV is bordered on the east by the linear Sangre de Cristo
Mountains, which resulted from extensive block faulting during the
Laramide Orogeny. The western side of the SLV is flanked by the San Juan
Mountains, the result of extensive tertiary volcanism. In sharp contrast
with the steeply faulted eastern side of the Valley floor, the Oligocene
volcanic rocks of the San Juans gently dip eastward into the Valley floor
where they are interbedded with Valley-fill deposits (USDI, BLM 1989).
The SLV contains two types of aquifers, the shallow unconfined and the
deep confined, which supports artesian well flows. These aquifers consist
mainly of unconsolidated clay, silt, sand, and gravel. The unconfined aquifer
is separated from the confined aquifer by clay layers and lava flows.
Unconfined groundwater occurs nearly everywhere in the Valley while
confined groundwater occurs under nearly one-half of the Valley (Emery et
al. 1973).
24 Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003
Refuge Resources, Cultural Resources, and Public Uses
Soils and Vegetation
Monte Vista NWR
Three major soil/vegetation association groups comprise the Monte Vista
NWR (USDA, SCS 1980). The extreme western edge of the Refuge consists
of the Luhon-Garita-Travelers Association (Foothills Plant Community)
which is very gently sloping to moderately steep, with well drained to
somewhat excessively drained, medium textured to moderately coarse
textured, deep to shallow, cobble and stony soils. The soils were formed in
mixed alluvium and in the residuum weathered from basalt. The vegetation
is primarily winterfat, low rabbitbrush, blue grama, Indian ricegrass, ring
muhly, and snakeweed.
The Hooper-Arena-San Luis Association (Salt Desert Shrub Plant Community)
is intermingled throughout most of the Monte Vista NWR. This association
is at the lower end of alluvial fans and on old floodplains on the valley floor.
The topography is nearly level, and moderately fine textured to coarse
textured soils are well too poorly drained. Soils are alkali soils and are 20 to
60 inches deep over sand and gravel. The soils formed in mixed alluvium.
The vegetation on nonirrigated soils is primarily greasewood, rabbitbrush,
alkali sacaton, and saltgrass.
The Torrifluvents-Torssido-Alamosa Association (Wet Meadow/Marsh/
Cropland Plant Communities) is the last association and is also intermingled
throughout most of the Refuge. The landscape is nearly level floodplains and
nearly level or very gently sloping alluvial fans and terraces. The soils
formed in mixed alluvium. Soils are excessively to poorly drained and are
moderately-coarse to moderately-fine textured ranging in depth from 10 to
60 inches deep over sand and gravel, on floodplains, alluvial fans, and
terraces. The vegetation is primarily sedges, rushes, tufted hairgrass,
slender wheatgrass, and alkali sacaton in wet meadows and cattail and
bulrush in marshes. Small grains and alfalfa are recognized irrigated
cropland uses for this soil association.
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 25
Alamosa NWR
Three major soil/vegetation associations also make up Alamosa NWR. More
detailed descriptions of these and the many minor soil associations present
on the Refuge can be found in Colorado Field Office Technical Guide, Range
Site Descriptions (USDA, SCS 1975) The eastern part of the Refuge
contains a narrow strip (approximately 900 acres) of Costilla-Space City
Association. These soils are level to gently sloping, very permeable and
coarse textured. They support a desert plant community dominated by small
rabbitbrush, blue grama, Indian ricegrass, and limited amounts of
greasewood and alkali sacaton.
Soils in the northern 2,200 acres of the Refuge are in the Hapney-Hooper-
Corlett Association. These soils are level except for a few dunes. They too
are very permeable but have no pattern of surface drainage so surface
water either soaks into the ground, evaporates or transpires. These soils
support a native plant community primarily consisting of greasewood,
rabbitbrush, western wheatgrass, alkali sacaton, inland saltgrass, blue
grama, and creeping wildrye.
The largest group of soils on the Refuge is the Alamosa-Vastine-Alluvial
land Association. These soils comprise about 7,900 acres of the Rio Grande
floodplain. They are deep, level or undulating and range from fine to coarse
texture. These soils tend to be very saline due to the high water table;
however, most of this area is subject to frequent spring flooding that tends
to flush salt from the soil. Next to the river, these soils support a band of
cottonwood trees and willows with an understory of grasses. Farther from
the river and outside of the tree band these soils support wetland plants
characteristic of the area, including thick stands of sedges, rushes and water
tolerant grasses. Still within this association are areas less frequently
flooded that support greasewood, rabbitbrush, alkali sacaton, and inland
saltgrass. Slender spider flowers are commonly found throughout this
association.
26 Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003
Water
Average annual precipitation in the San Luis Valley is 7 inches. Sixty
percent of this falls between July and August, mostly from erratic
thundershowers of short duration. Wide seasonal and yearly variations in
precipitation are common. Mean annual temperature is 42 degrees
Fahrenheit. The average frost-free period is 100 days, from late-May or
early June through early September. Summer daytime temperatures are
frequently in the 80s, but rarely exceed 90 degrees Fahrenheit; nights are
cool. Temperatures of minus 20 degrees to minus 30 degrees Fahrenheit can
be expected each year and are common most winters. Temperatures lower
than minus 40 degrees Fahrenheit are frequently recorded. High velocity
winds are common, especially in the spring. Relative humidity is usually low,
but evaporation rates average lower than those of many other dry regions
because of the cool climate. Snow cover may be light and is sometimes
lacking through much of the winter (USDI, BLM 1989).
Excluding precipitation, Alamosa and Monte Vista NWRs are affected by
water from four major sources. In addition, some habitat is influenced by
irrigation water applied to non-Refuge lands that flows onto Refuge lands.
Snow Melt (on the SLV floor)
In some years, surface water is directly obtained from melting snowpack. In
general, however, this on-site generated water results in the saturation of
the wetland soils, which allows these areas to be filled faster in the spring
with water diversions. Usually, not enough direct snow melt is available to
fill wetlands to capacity.
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 27
Rio Grande Water
Water in the Rio Grande headwaters is generated from snowfall in the San
Juan and Sangre de Cristo Mountains. Peak river flows usually occur in
June with a peak 40 year average of about 5,348 cubic feet per second (cfs)
measured at Del Norte, Colorado. During some years flows in the Rio
Grande are influenced by July and August Rains.
Use of Rio Grande water is governed by a 1939 compact between the States
of Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas. This compact also contains water
provisions for Mexico. The compact ensures an equitable amount of river
water to all parties and is the basis for assessing the effects of today’s river
water use.
The Monte Vista Refuge receives irrigation water from the Rio Grande
primarily through the Empire and Monte Vista canals and water draining
off neighboring private lands. Refuge diversions from the Rio Grande
average about 8,500 acre-feet. The primary use of this irrigation water is to
maintain wetland vegetation throughout the Monte Vista Refuge as well as
to irrigate cropland. Water delivery is facilitated by a complicated
infrastructure consisting of over 30 major dikes, more than 100 smaller
dikes, over 400 water control structures, and 61 miles of ditches.
Alamosa Refuge is rarely flooded by the Rio Grande due to the extensive
use of water along the 48 irrigation ditch diversions upstream of the Refuge.
The Rio Grande usually leaves its banks annually during the first or second
week of June, flooding only a small area of riparian vegetation for a short
period of time. Since the Alamosa Refuge was established, major floods
(those greater than the annual activity described above) occurred in 1965,
1970, 1979, 1986, 1987, and 1995. If the Rio Grande is typical of other stream
systems that are used for irrigation of arid lands, it floods less frequently
due to upstream diversions but flows are prolonged after the period of
summer run while irrigation water flows back to the River.
Alamosa Refuge receives irrigation water from the Rio Grande primarily
from the Costilla Ditch, the San Luis Ditch, the Chicago Ditch, and the New
Ditch. The Chicago and New Ditch diversions are entirely owned by the
Refuge. The New Ditch Dam is the last dam on the Rio Grande in Colorado.
The past 27-year average annual Refuge diversion of Rio Grande water is
13,750 acre-feet. The primary use of this water is to irrigate wetland
vegetation throughout Refuge bottomlands. Water delivery is facilitated by
2 major dikes, 20 smaller dikes, more than 200 water control structures, and
5 major canals.
In the mid-1980s, a major thrust toward recharging groundwater in the SLV
was initiated. At present, from November 1 to January 1, six major
irrigation companies can divert and hold Rio Grande water in their canals to
assist in recharging groundwater. These winter diversions can only be made
when River water is not needed to meet Rio Grande Compact obligations.
The Monte Vista and Empire Canals are two of the six irrigation canals in
the recharge program. In 1994, with cooperation of private landowners, the
Refuges, and SLV Water Conservancy District, an old gravel pit located
adjacent to Monte Vista Refuge’s west boundary was equipped as a
groundwater recharge pit. The overall groundwater recharge effort was a
big step in supporting the economic, social, and ecological stability of the
SLV.
28 Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003
Pumped and Artesian Well Water
Monte Vista Refuge has about 220 small (2 to 6 inch diameter casing)
artesian wells. Most of these wells no longer flow; but those that do flow
provide excellent small (less than one acre) wetland areas. It also contains
three large (16 inch diameter casing) artesian wells. These wells,
adjudicated for an average flow of about 1,800 gallons per minute (g.p.m.)
each, provide water to support wetlands throughout the Refuge. In addition,
the Refuge contains 21 large pumped wells with an average adjudicated
flow of about 1,700 g.p.m. each which also support the Refuge’s wetlands
and croplands. Most of these pumped wells were artesian when first drilled;
however, by the mid-1960s, most artesian flow ceased and pumps were
installed on the wells to provide water for the Refuge’s wetlands.
Almost all of Monte Vista Refuge’s artesian wells cease flow during the
summer months when maximum pumped well-use is required for irrigation
both on and off the Refuge. The massive increase in pumping of
groundwater in the 1960s resulted in the loss of Spring Creek, a large free-flowing
spring on the Refuge. This spring once flowed at an average of 4 cfs
and varied from 1 up to 18 cfs (Siebenthal 1910; USFWS 1962). It is
estimated that the decline in flow of all artesian springs in the SLV has
amounted to about 22,000 acre-feet per year (Emery et al. 1973).
The Alamosa NWR has 53 artesian wells within its boundaries. Most of
these wells flow about 10 to 30 g.p.m. and create very small (less than one
acre) wetlands. The Refuge also contains the largest artesian well in the
SLV, the Mumm Well. This well is adjudicated for a flow of 2,860 g.p.m. with
total use not to exceed 1,541 acre-feet per year. The well is about 2,000 feet
deep and the water temperature is about 85 degrees Fahrenheit. The
Mumm Well provides water to support wetlands throughout the southern
two-thirds of the Refuge.
In the late-1960s and early-1970s, the Colorado Division of Water Resources
began actively enforcing Colorado Division III Water Court well water
decrees. This enforcement required landowners with only irrigation season
legal decrees to restrict well flows during the nonirrigation (winter) season,
which helped maintain the overall integrity of SLV aquifers.
In 1972, a moratorium for the construction of any wells, other than exempt
domestic-type wells, was placed on the entire SLV for all of the confined
(deep) aquifer and the areas of the unconfined (shallow) aquifer south of the
hydrological divide which lays just north of the Rio Grande. In 1981, due to
decreased groundwater levels, the area north of the hydrologic divide in the
unconfined aquifer had a well construction moratorium placed on it as well.
Therefore, since 1981, no well construction permits for new water
appropriations, other than exempt domestic-types, have been issued
throughout the entire SLV.
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 29
Bureau of Reclamation Closed Basin Water Project
Alamosa NWR receives some mitigation water from a U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation water salvage program in the closed basin, an area north of the
Rio Grande that has no water outlet. In the mid-1980s, the Closed Basin
Division of the Bureau began construction on the San Luis Valley Project,
authorized by Congress in 1972. The project is designed to salvage
groundwater that was believed to be lost to the atmosphere and/or
consumed by vegetation that did not offer a monetary benefit (greasewood)
and deliver it south to the Rio Grande. More than 150 shallow pumped wells
were drilled to remove water from the unconfined aquifer. Salvaged water is
moved into a canal that eventually runs through Alamosa NWR and empties
into the Rio Grande. This water is used to assist Colorado in meeting its
water delivery obligations to downstream users (New Mexico, Texas, and
Mexico). As part of the requirement to mitigate for wetlands lost through
the operation of the project, the Alamosa NWR receives an annual
allotment that varies depending upon level of Closed Basin Project
operations. This water is used to facilitate wetland management on all but
1,500 acres of the Refuge.
Groundwater
Refuge groundwater levels range from about 6 inches to 6 feet below the
surface. The high groundwater table affects overall vegetation in this high
mountain desert and is partially related to the amount and timing of
irrigation water applied to Refuge lands as well as lands throughout the
SLV. Two major SLV groundwater drainage ditches, the Bowen and Parma
Drains, flow through Monte Vista Refuge and also supply water to the
Refuge. The Parma Drain terminates in Rock Creek as it flows through
Monte Vista Refuge. The drains were dug in the early-1900s to facilitate
cropland farming by lowering high groundwater levels.
Groundwater levels in the San Luis Valley have likely changed over history
as a result of surface and groundwater rights development. Very little data
exists that describes this change, especially those that are site specific. A
goal of Valley water regulators and managers is to provide water users a
yield that can be sustained from both the confined and unconfined aquifer.
The Rio Grande Water Conservation District monitors groundwater levels
in the unconfined aquifer. Currently, long-term concern over dropping water
tables exists in a few areas in the Valley where groundwater is not used in
conjunction with surface water. This practice minimizes the amount of
unconfined aquifer recharge. By the year 1900, over 1,000 wells had been
drilled into the confined or artesian aquifer. By 1970 that number increased
to more than 7,000. At the time of establishment, all wells on Monte Vista
Refuge were free flowing due to artesian pressure, and Spring Creek was
flowing from springs issuing from the west side of the Refuge. Spring Creek
stopped flowing in the 1960s and the number of free flowing wells has
dropped since then. In the early 1970s, the State Engineer, in a successful
effort to stabilize artesian pressure, placed a moratorium on new wells into
the confined aquifer. (Steve Vandiver, pers comm)
30 Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003
Plant Communities (Habitat Types)
The various vegetation associations found on the Complex were described
and divided into 11 plant communities during the original habitat goal and
objectives setting meetings in 1996. This team included a group of biologists
and ecologists from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological
Service, Colorado Division of Wildlife, representatives from nongovernment
organizations, and Dr. Leigh Fredrickson.
Plant Communities Described During 1996 Goal Setting Meeting:
Upland shrub Tall-emergent
Cattail Bulrush
Short-emergent Baltic rush
Spikerush/carex Saltgrass
Shallow seasonal water (no vegetation) Semipermanent wetland
Riparian Riverine
Dense cover (planted by Refuge staff) Agriculture
Annuals (kochia, chenopodiums, spikerush, foxtail, barley)
Since 1996, these plant or habitat types have been used in setting goals and
objectives, in the development of a habitat map for the Alamosa NWR, and
in the day-to-day work done on the Complex. Through time, some
modifications have been made in the list of habitat types. (See Map 6 -
Monte Vista NWR Habitat Types and Map 7 - Alamosa NWR Habitat
Types.)
Plant Communities (Habitat Types) Currently Used (2001)
Upland shrub Tall-emergent
Short-emergent Saltgrass
Shallow seasonal wetland Shortgrass
Riparian Semipermanent wetland
Agriculture Riverine
A habitat map was developed in 2000 for the Monte Vista NWR. Based on
the field experience of Dr. Fredrickson’s staff and Refuge staff since 1996,
nine habitat types were used for this project. The nine are similar to the
original list, except that semipermanent and shallow seasonal wetlands were
mapped as open water and the “annual plant” category was not used.
The U.S. National Vegetation Classification (USNVC) system has recently
been adopted for use on all national wildlife refuges in an effort to
standardize vegetation monitoring and mapping. Most of the habitat
mapping efforts on the Complex were done before the adoption of this
methodology but most of it can and will be cross-walked into the USNVC
system.
On Monte Vista NWR, most of the wetland basins are man-made with a
design common to many managed wetland areas. At one or two sides is a
“borrow area” where dirt was removed or borrowed to form the dike or
levee. The resulting borrow area is the lowest portion of the wetland basin.
From the borrow area, the elevation gradually increases until it becomes
upland. The result is a zone of elevation changes which, depending on
natural events and management actions, provides an array of water depths
and vegetation conditions. Through the season or at any one time, an
impoundment often contains several habitat types. Natural wetland basins
on the Alamosa NWR are similar to impoundments in that a gradient of
elevations occur, and thus several habitat types may be available based on
water conditions.
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 31
32 Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003
Alamosa/Monte Vista NWR Complex Comprehensive Conservation Plan - September 2003 33
The following is a description of the habitat types currently
in use:
Shallow Seasonal Wetlands
On the Refuge Complex, this habitat type usually consists of temporary,
shallow water over the alkali or mudflat portions of a wetland or
greasewood uplands that are seasonally flooded. These wetlands are defined
by seasonal, shallow (