Turnbull National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan

              Comprehensive Conservation Plans 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.
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background
1.1 Introduction .........................................................................................................................1-1
1.2 Purpose and Need................................................................................................................1-1
1.3 Summary of the CCP...........................................................................................................1-2
1.4 Content and Scope of the CCP............................................................................................1-5
1.5 Brief Description and History of the Refuge and Study Area.............................................1-5
1.6 Implementation and Relationship to Previous and Future Refuge Plans ............................1-9
1.7 Federal Mandates and Refuge Purposes..............................................................................1-10
1.8 Relationship to Regional Conservation Goals.....................................................................1-15
1.9 Refuge Vision......................................................................................................................1-17
1.10 Refuge Goals .......................................................................................................................1-18
1.11 Public Involvement in the Development of the CCP ..........................................................1-18
1.12 Issues ..................................................................................................................................1-19
Chapter 2: Management Direction
2.1 Overview .............................................................................................................................2-1
2.2 Goals, Objectives and Strategies .........................................................................................2-11
Chapter 3: Refuge and Resources Description
3.1 Physical Environment..........................................................................................................3-1
3.2 Refuge and Study Area Habitats .........................................................................................3-13
3.3 Land Stewardship Overview ...............................................................................................3-27
3.4 Elk Management..................................................................................................................3-30
3.5 Refuge Infrastructure and Administrative Facilities ...........................................................3-32
3.6 Public Use Facilities, Activities and Programs ...................................................................3-33
3.7 Regional Recreation Perspective.........................................................................................3-44
3.8 Research ..............................................................................................................................3-47
3.9 Special Status Lands............................................................................................................3-48
3.10 Cultural Resources ..............................................................................................................3-50
3.11 Refuge Budget and Revenue Sharing .................................................................................3-53
3.12 Local Social and Economic Setting.....................................................................................3-54
Appendices
Appendix A: Land Protection Plan
Appendix B: Habitat Management Plan Summary
Appendix C: Fire Management Plan Summary
Appendix D: Species Lists
Appendix E: Compatibility Determinations
Appendix F: Implementation
Appendix G: Statement of Compliance
Appendix H: Wilderness Review
Appendix I: References
Appendix J: Glossary
Appendix K: Public Involvement
ii
Appendices continued . . .
Appendix L: Public Comments on the Draft CCP/EA
Appendix M: List of Preparers
List of Maps
Map 1. Refuge Vicinity .................................................................................................................1-3
Map 2. Key Refuge and Study Area Features ..............................................................................1-7
Map 3. Main Elements of the Comprehensive Conservation Plan................................................2-5
Map 4. Surface Watersheds and Drainage Features with Influence on Refuge ...........................3-5
Map 5. Historic and Current Wetlands within Refuge Vicinity ...................................................3-7
Map 6. Groundwater Zone and Features with Influence on Refuge Wetlands..............................3-11
Map 7. Aspen/Riparian Habitat Quality within Refuge Vicinity ..................................................3-19
Map 8. Current and Historic Steppe Habitat within Refuge Vicinity............................................3-21
Map 9. Ponderosa Pine Forest Habitat within Refuge Vicinity.....................................................3-23
Map 10. Existing Recreational Facilities within the Public Use Area ...........................................3-37
Map 11. Land Protection Priorities ................................................................................................. A-7
Map 12 Maps 12A through 12G Land Ownership Parcels in the Stewardship Area .....................A-9
Map 13 Maps 13A through 13D USFWS Tracts inside the Stewardship Area..............................A-17
List of Figures
Figure 1. Hierarchy of Guidance within the National Wildlife Refuge System.............................1-13
Figure 2. Location of Channeled Scablands Formations in Eastern Washington State ................3-1
Figure 3. Graphical Depiction of Water Flows between Underground
Aquifers, Recharge, and Discharge Areas .....................................................................3-4
Figure 4. Relationship of Groundwater Flows to Wetlands ..........................................................3-9
Figure 5. Comparison of Channeled Scablands Wetlands Density, Size and
Type with Prairie Potholes Region ................................................................................3-15
List of Tables
Table 1-1. Turnbull NWR Land Status, 2003.............................................................................1-9
Table 1-2. Step-down Management Plan Status .........................................................................1-11
Table 2-1. Summary Table of CCP Actions ...............................................................................2-7
Table 3-1. Regional Subwatersheds Affecting Refuge Wetlands ...............................................3-3
Table 3-2. Special Status Species that Likely Occur within the Stewardship Area....................3-26
Table 3-3. Existing Trails............................................................................................................3-36
Table 3-4. Most Common Visitor Activities at Turnbull NWR .................................................3-39
Table 3-5. Estimates of Visitation Reported in RMIS, Years 2000-2002, By Activity..............3-41
Table 3-6. Projected Future Increase in Participation for Selected Outdoor
Recreation Activities .................................................................................................3-47
Table 3-7. Population and Associated Social Statistics, Spokane County and Washington.......3-56
Table 3-8. Summary of Population and Housing by County Subarea ........................................3-56
Table 3-9. Recent Population Growth in Selected Cities near Turnbull NWR (1990-1999)......3-56
Table 3-10. Estimated Population (2015) and Population Change (1999-2015)
in Selected Locations.................................................................................................3-56
Table 3-11. Employment and Business Data ................................................................................3-57
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
and
Background
Great Blue Heron. Photograph by Nancy J. Curry
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 1 - Introduction 1-1
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Turnbull National Wildlife Refuge is located on
the eastern edge of the Columbia Basin in the
Channeled Scablands region of Spokane County
in eastern Washington (Map 1). The City of
Spokane, a major metropolitan area of nearly
200,000 people, is located 20 miles northeast of
the Refuge. The Refuge is located next to the
town of Cheney.
In amending the National Wildlife Refuge
System Administration Act of 1966 (Refuge
Administration Act) with the National Wildlife
Refuge System Improvement Act (NWRSIA)
(16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee) in 1997, Congress
mandated that Comprehensive Conservation
Plans be developed for each of the more than
500 refuges in the National Wildlife Refuge
System.
The CCP will be used as a tool by the Refuge
staff and other partners in Refuge management.
It will guide management decisions over the
next fifteen years and identify strategies for
achieving Refuge goals and objectives.
1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED
The purpose of the CCP is to provide a coherent,
integrated set of management actions to help
attain the Refuge vision, goals, and objectives.
It identifies the Refuge=s role in support of the
mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System,
provides information on the Service=s
management actions, and provides a basis for
Refuge budget requests.
The CCP is needed for a variety of reasons.
Most urgently, Refuge purposes could be
threatened without action to protect sources of
Refuge water. Groundwater is especially critical
to migratory waterbirds breeding in Refuge
wetlands. Both shallow and deep aquifers
underlying the Refuge are, however, being
increasingly tapped for residential and urban
development. In addition, widespread land
conversion to agricultural and residential uses in
the surrounding area has threatened the
connectivity of the Refuge to other native
habitats, undermining biological integrity.
The Channeled Scablands, of which the Refuge
is a piece, is an area of regional and national
conservation importance. Crossing several
counties in eastern and central Washington
State, the Scablands contain densities of wetland
basins rivaling the Prairie Pothole region, and at
intact sites, waterfowl production exceeds that of
the Potholes region. Yet most of the larger
wetland basins have been drained and very little
of the original Channeled Scablands area is
under any kind of public ownership or protected
in any other fashion.
Numerous plans attest to the biological
significance of the area: it is identified as an
important site in the Partners in Flight Columbia
Plateau Plan (Altman and Holmes 2000), the
Nature Conservancy=s Columbia Plateau
Ecoregion Plan (Soper 1999), the Draft
Intermountain West Waterbird Conservation
Plan (Ivey and Herziger 2003), and the Draft
Recovery Plan for Water Howellia (Shelley and
Gamon 1996).
In addition, the Refuge is currently designated as
an Important Bird Area by the Audubon Society.
The Channeled Scablands also host the majority
of the last remnants of the Palouse steppe
vegetation community which is recognized both
nationally and at the state level as a critically
endangered ecosystem.
The CCP is also needed to address the problem
of aspen browsing by an increasing elk
population. Aspen clones are not successfully
regenerating in many places on the Refuge, in
part because of heavy browsing by elk.
Finally, the CCP is also needed to evaluate and
manage Refuge visitor uses and needs in light of
regional recreation trends and demands and in
compliance with the Refuge System
Administration Act. The NWRSIA requires
refuges to facilitate compatible wildlife-dependent
recreation for six Refuge System
priority public uses, namely hunting, fishing,
Turnbull NWR CCP
1-2 Chapter 1 - Introduction
wildlife observation and photography,
environmental education and interpretation.
1.3 SUMMARY OF THE CCP
The CCP includes many elements, which are
detailed in Chapter 2. The key elements of the
CCP are summarized here:
(1) The Service will strive, with partners, to
protect water resources that support Refuge
wetlands and wildlife, and to protect and restore
additional wetlands, rare Palouse steppe habitat,
aspen / riparian habitats, and pine forests within
the Channeled Scablands. To do this, the
Service will implement a Land Protection Plan
(found in Appendix A). Key elements of this
plan include the following:
• Establishing a Stewardship Area
surrounding the Refuge which would
encompass 44,324 acres. This area includes
the 4,723 acres within the current Approved
Refuge Boundary not acquired in fee. The
Stewardship Area would function as an
informally designated conservation zone
surrounding the Refuge. Within the
Stewardship Area, the Service would
actively work with partners and neighbors
for voluntary, cooperative activities that
protect habitat and water resources. Key
tools include but are not limited to:
conservation easements, enrollment in the
Wetlands Reserve Program, and technical
assistance programs. Key partners include
but are not limited to: Intermountain West
Joint Venture, Spokane County, State of
Washington, Inland Northwest Land Trust,
Ducks Unlimited and The Nature
Conservancy.
• In addition, the Service would seek to
protect, as part of the National Wildlife
Refuge System, up to 12,000 acres of
priority lands from willing sellers within
the Stewardship Area, through fee,
easement or agreement. Priority lands
are described in Appendix A.
• Land conservation is proposed to address
the key threats to Refuge purposes and
integrity, in particular threats to surface
water and groundwater resources, and the
lack of connectivity with surrounding
habitats. In addition, land conservation
would provide opportunities for protection
and restoration of Palouse steppe, wetland,
aspen/riparian, and ponderosa pine forest
habitats and would provide additional
opportunities for wildlife-dependent
recreation. These habitats also support
several threatened species.
(2) To address habitat damage caused by elk
browse, and to provide a recreational
opportunity, the Service would approve an
annual elk hunting program at the Refuge. The
number of permits, length of the seasons, and
number of seasons offered would vary
depending upon the amount of aspen damage
observed each year. The Service would also
offer a youth waterfowl hunt each year on the
weekend designated by the State for this season
each year.
(3) The Service would increase the
Environmental Education program, both on and
off-Refuge, increase viewpoint and interpretive
opportunities on the Refuge, add a small
interpretive exhibit area (co-located with new
office space), provide more trail miles, and link
the Public Use Area to the cross-State Columbia
Plateau Trail with a bike trail. If the Refuge
were to acquire contiguous additional lands, up
to 10 additional trail miles could be added as
well as several thousand more acres for elk or
waterfowl hunting.
These actions best achieve the Refuge purpose,
vision, and goals, and contribute to the Refuge
System mission. These actions address the
significant issues, are consistent with principles
of sound fish and wildlife management, and
fulfill necessary mandates under NWRSIA and
other applicable laws.
§¨¦090
Whitman
Spokane River
UV395
Spokane
Lincoln
Whitman
City Of Spokane
Fairchild
Cheney
Airway Heights
Medical Lake
Millwood
Fairfield
Rockford
Latah
Waverly
Spangle
UV23
UV2
UV195
UV231
UV291
UV27
UV904
UV206
UV902
UV290
UV271
UV278
UV231
UV2
0 2.5 5 Miles
1:400,000
±
Map produced by: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 16507 SW Roy Rogers Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140 (503) 590-6596
Spokane
Tribal Reservation
1-3
TURNBULL NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN, 2006
Refuge Fee Title Ownership
Stewardship Area
County Boundaries
Lakes or rivers
Railways
Dept of Defense
County owned
State owned
Tribal Land
Bureau of Land Management
Map 1. Refuge Vicinity
Turnbull NWR CCP
1-4 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 1 - Introduction 1-5
1.4 CONTENT AND SCOPE
OF THE CCP
This CCP provides management guidance for
maintenance, restoration, and use of Refuge
resources during the next 15 years. Specifically,
the CCP for Turnbull Refuge:
• Sets a long term vision, goals, and
objectives for the Refuge;
• Implements a Land Protection Plan,
including an informally designated
Stewardship Area surrounding the Refuge,
and describe objectives and conceptual
management strategies for areas that may be
acquired through fee, easement, or lease;
• Establishes public use management goals,
objectives, and strategies and evaluate
existing and proposed activities for
compatibility with the purposes of the
Refuge;
• Integrates the Habitat Management Plan
goals and objectives that were outlined in
1999; and
• Outlines projects, staff, and facilities
necessary to support the goals and
objectives.
The CCP provides a framework for future
Refuge management. The Plan was developed at
a broader scale. It is not a detailed site plan and
does not have precise locations for facilities or
detailed descriptions of programs.
In order to study the areas within and adjacent to
the Refuge that were most critical in terms of
hydrologic influence and habitat connectivity,
the planning team designated a Study Area
encompassing 60,000 acres. The planning team
specifically analyzed aspects of hydrology,
habitat quality, recreation, and land use within
the entire Study Area. The Study Area is shown
on Map 2. Most of the Study Area was
ultimately incorporated into the Stewardship
Area described in Section 1.3.
Other sections of text refer to the ARefuge
vicinity.@ This is an area that was not
specifically outlined, but generally extends
outside the Refuge for approximately 5 to 7
miles in each direction.
The CCP guides Refuge management activities
only. In some cases, the CCP makes
recommendations that the manager and staff
work with private landowners or other
management agencies for greater conservation
benefit on private lands. In no cases would any
project be undertaken on private land without
the consent of the landowner.
Habitat and fire management actions to be taken
upon currently owned Refuge lands will
continue to be guided by the Habitat
Management Plan (USDI 1999) and Fire
Management Plan (USDI 2001).
1.5 BRIEF DESCRIPTION AND
HISTORY OF THE
REFUGE AND STUDY
AREA
The Refuge and Study Area are located within a
globally unique geological area known as the
Channeled Scablands, created by massive
scouring from Ice Age floods 15,000 years ago
(Map 2). An extensive complex of deep
permanent sloughs, semi-permanent potholes
and seasonal wetlands formed in the depressions
left in the scoured landscape, while soils only
centimeters thick on upland sites, support
primarily ponderosa pine intermixed with
grasslands (steppe) and exposed basalt cliffs.
Aspen is scattered throughout the area. The
juxtaposition of all these contrasting habitats in
such close proximity is unique to the Channeled
Scablands and creates conditions of exceptional
wildlife and plant diversity.
Prior to settlement, ducks, geese, and other
waterbirds nested in the area in large numbers.
Many waterfowl also used the productive
marshes and lakes during the spring and fall
migrations.
Turnbull NWR CCP
1-6 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Because of its unique resources, this area was
also important to local indigenous cultures. The
Northern Plateau peoples frequented this
vicinity in spring to dig the roots of camas,
bitterroot, wild onion and numerous species of
lomatium, and to gather waterfowl eggs.
Pioneers arrived in the late 1800s and rapidly
began altering the landscape. Many of the
marshes were drained to expand crop areas for
hay. By the late 1920s few wetlands remained;
instead a network of drainage ditches became
the more common feature of the landscape. In
addition, as in most developing communities,
timber was harvested, native plant communities
were grazed by livestock, exotic plants were
introduced, and fire, a natural part of the
ecosystem, was suppressed. The wildlife values
of the area would have been seriously
compromised if it had not been for the failure of
the drained lakebeds to produce crops.
The Refuge was established by President
Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1937, through
Executive Order 7681, as a refuge and breeding
ground for migratory birds and other wildlife.
Local activists, sportsmen, and naturalists were
instrumental in obtaining the area=s designation
as a National Wildlife Refuge. The Refuge was
named after early settler Cyrus Turnbull, who
built a cabin on the north end of Turnbull
Slough and lived there with his wife and
children from 1880 to 1886.
1.5.1 HABITAT MANAGEMENT
Since Refuge establishment, the primary focus
of habitat management was waterfowl, and in
recent years it was directed more specifically at
production of redheads. Early management
focused on restoring Refuge wetlands that had
been drained, and producing grain crops for
migratory waterfowl. In later years,
management moved from restoration to
enhancement, the goal always being to improve
habitat conditions to increase or maintain
waterfowl populations. Enhancement involved
creating additional semi-permanent wetland
habitat for breeding diving ducks, especially
redheads, and the creation of numerous nesting
islands for upland nesting ducks.
Habitat manipulation for redheads involved
deepening seasonal and temporary marshes and
increasing the interspersion of open water to
emergent vegetation with heavy equipment. In
the early decades the Refuge also allowed
economic uses including timber harvest, grazing,
and trapping. Trapping and timber harvest were
suspended in 1975 and grazing was discontinued
in 1993. The Refuge continues to use prescribed
burning, has begun small scale non-commercial
thinning, and reinstated commercial thinning to
reduce fuel accumulations and promote forest
health.
With completion of the Habitat Management
Plan (HMP) in 1999, the Refuge adopted a
mission statement based on the Refuge=s
purposes and the outstanding wildlife and
habitat needs of the area. Under management
goals and objectives adopted under the HMP,
Refuge habitats are managed to sustain the
diversity of the flora and fauna native to the
Channeled Scablands.
1.5.2 PUBLIC USES
For many years, the Refuge has maintained a
2,200-acre area open to the public (Public Use
Area). Approximately 30,000 visits are made
each year to the Refuge. Wildlife observation is
the major activity, and an Auto Tour Route leads
visitors to the key observation points. Visitors
also hike, take nature photographs, ride bicycles,
jog, or cross-country ski. Hunting and fishing
have never occurred at the Refuge. Outside the
Public Use Area, the Refuge has historically
been closed to general visitor use. At times,
opportunities are offered within this area for
special interpretive tours or community service
projects.
The Refuge has had some form of environmental
education (EE) for most of its existence. Early
in its development, EE was very informal and
only a handful of local schools and civic groups
visited the Refuge annually. These early groups
LEGEND
* Approved Refuge Boundary refers
to the area within which the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service may acquire land or
water rights from willing sellers and/or
manage through various agreements.
±
0 1.5 3 Miles
k
UV904 ÃÅÆ
UV902
§¨¦90
Map 2. Key Refuge and Study Area Features
1:128,000
Chapman Lake
Badger Lake
Turnbull Slough
Long Lake
Philleo Lake
Kepple Lake
Stubblefield
Lake
Refuge Fee Title Ownership
Former Approved Refuge Boundary*
Study Area
Public Use Area
Research Natural Areas
Deepwater Lakes
Wetland basins
k Refuge office
ÅÆÃ Turnbull Lab for Ecological Studies
Auto Tour Route
Columbia Plateau Trail
City of Cheney
Railways
State highways
TURNBULL
NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
COMPREHENSIVE
CONSERVATION PLAN
2006
Source: Digital Elevation model : U.S. Geological Survey. Refuge features: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Map produced by: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 16507 SW Roy Rogers Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140 (503) 590-6596
1-7
Turnbull NWR CCP
1-8 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 1 - Introduction 1-9
were provided a talk or nature walk by the
Refuge staff member who was free on the day of
their visit.
As the local population grew, the Refuge
recognized the need for a more formal approach.
A self-conducted program was initiated, with
the development of an EE classroom and teacher
workshops offered in spring and fall. This
program, with some enhancement was in
operation until 1995 with nearly 2,500 students
visiting the Refuge annually.
In 1996, a Refuge Friends group formed and
more than $80,000 in grants was raised via
fundraising activities. The funds were used to
hire a contractor to coordinate activities and
develop a curriculum. The EE program reached
nearly 15,000 students over the next two years.
In the years since, the Refuge has tried to
continue to meet this demand by offering a year-round,
multi-faceted program facilitated
primarily by Americorps members, Student
Conservation Association (SCA) volunteers,
student interns, and community volunteers.
Because of the lack of a stable funding base, and
the time commitment involved in training new
EE staff yearly, the challenge is to maintain a
consistent, high quality program from one year
to the next.
1.5.3 LAND STATUS
Like most refuges, Turnbull Refuge was
acquired incrementally over time after its
original establishment. The process of adding to
the Refuge System is ongoing and will likely
continue in a similar incremental pattern. For
every refuge, the Approved Refuge Boundary
identifies the area within which the Service may
acquire lands or interest in land from willing
sellers. The Approved Refuge Boundary may
contain roads, right-of-ways, or other portions of
property that a refuge would not be interested in
acquiring. An Approved Refuge Boundary can
be modified by an executive order, legislation,
congressional legislation, or administrative
procedures of the Service.
Currently, the Turnbull Approved Refuge
Boundary totals 20,640 acres. Table 1-1 shows
the current acres and percent of this area in fee
title ownership, lease, and agreement.
Table 1-1. Turnbull NWR Land Status
Land Status Current
Acres*
Percent of
Approved
Refuge
Boundary
Fee title ownership 15,859 77%
Lease (no hunting)
or agreements
2,076 10%
Subtotal managed
under NWRS
17,935 87%
Inholdings within
Approved Refuge
Boundary
2,705 13%
Total Acreage
within Approved
Refuge Boundary
20,640 100%
* Rounded to nearest acre. Source: RPMIS, May 2006 and
Service GIS layers.
Of the 15,859 acres under Refuge ownership,
approximately 66 percent were purchased with
Migratory Bird Conservation Commission funds
(Duck Stamp monies).
1.6 IMPLEMENTATION AND
RELATIONSHIP TO
PREVIOUS AND FUTURE
REFUGE PLANS
1.6.1 IMPLEMENTATION
Implementation of the objectives and strategies
in the CCP will be dependent upon the Refuge
receiving adequate funds. Funding will not be
immediately available to implement the CCP in
full. Project implementation will be guided
partly through priorities as outlined in Appendix
F - Implementation. If funding for any
particular project is not received through
appropriations, or obtained through partnerships
or private sources, the Service will normally
default to the corresponding no action strategy
for any particular item.
Turnbull NWR CCP
1-10 Chapter 1 - Introduction
1.6.2 PREVIOUS PLANS AND DECISIONS
The CCP has evolved from previous planning
efforts and/or decisions, including:
• Determination that grazing is incompatible
with Refuge purposes (1990). This
determination resulted in a decision to phase
out grazing over five years. However, a
subsequent court case brought by Defenders
of Wildlife and Audubon resulted in a ruling
ending incompatible uses immediately.
• Operational review completed by the
Service in 1990.
• Management Plan by Don White, Parts 1
and 2, 1986.
• Environmental Assessment (1973) covering
Operation, Maintenance, and Development.
• Master Plan, 1966.
While the life-span of the CCP is 15 years,
periodic reviews will occur. The CCP may be
amended as necessary at any time under the
principles of adaptive management.
1.6.3 STEP-DOWN PLANS
Under Service planning policy, the CCP is
meant to serve as broad guidance to all Refuge
management programs. Specifics needed for
implementation are generally developed in
Astep-down management plans@ for individual
program areas. All step-down plans require
appropriate NEPA compliance. Project-specific
plans, with appropriate NEPA compliance, may
be prepared outside of these step-down plans.
Two important step-down plansBthe Habitat
Management Plan (HMP) and the Fire
Management Plan (FMP)Bwere completed,
together with NEPA compliance, in advance of
the CCP (see USDI 1999, and USDI 2001).
Those plans are integrated in the CCP with the
following important caveats:
• The CCP shall act as the umbrella planning
document for the Refuge. The CCP=s final
overall goals for the Refuge supersede those
listed in the HMP and FMP.
• The HMP=s habitat objectives, strategies and
guidelines prevail over any habitat
objectives or guidelines listed in the FMP, in
case of conflict.
• The FMP should be regarded primarily as an
operational plan. AGoals@ Aobjectives@ and
Astrategies@ listed in that plan pertain
primarily to fire management actions and
should not be taken out of that context.
The status of other step-down plans is listed in
Table 1-2.
1.7 FEDERAL MANDATES
AND REFUGE PURPOSES
Refuges are guided by various federal laws,
executive orders, Service policies, and
international treaties. Fundamental to refuge
management are the mission and goals of the
National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS or
Refuge System) and the designated purpose of a
refuge unit as described in establishing
legislation, executive orders, or other documents
establishing, authorizing, or expanding a refuge.
Key Refuge System concepts and guidance are
covered in the National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966, the Refuge
Recreation Act of 1962, Title 50 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, the Fish and Wildlife
Service Manual, and, most recently, the National
Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of
1997.
1.7.1 NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT ACT
Of all the laws governing activities on National
Wildlife Refuges, the Refuge Administration
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 1 - Introduction 1-11
Table 1-2. Step Down Management Plans Status
Completed Plans (Date Completed) Plans Needed Subsequent to CCP
Habitat Management Plan (1999) Public Use Management Plan
Fire Management Plan (2001) Hunt Plan
2002 Emergency Action Plan for Lower Pine Lake Reviewed annually. Law Enforcement Plan
Continuation of Operations Plan (2002) Integrated Pest Management Plan
Safety Plan (2000) Cultural Resources Management Plan
Sign Plan (1993) Needs to be updated. Biological Research Plan
Wildlife Inventory Plan (1990) Needs to be updated. Annual Water Management Plan
Act undoubtedly exerts the greatest influence.
The National Refuge System Administration Act
of 1966 was amended by the National Wildlife
Refuge Improvement Act (NWRSIA) in 1997 by
including a unifying mission and goals for all
National Wildlife Refuges as a System, a new
process for determining compatible refuge uses,
and a requirement that each refuge be managed
under a CCP, developed in an open public
process.
The Refuge Administration Act states that the
Secretary shall provide for the conservation of
fish, wildlife and plants, and their habitats
within the System as well as ensure that the
biological integrity, diversity, and environmental
health of the System is maintained.
Under Refuge Administration Act, each Refuge
must be managed to fulfill the Refuge System
mission as well as the specific purposes for
which it was established. The Act requires the
Service to monitor the status and trends of fish,
wildlife, and plants in each Refuge.
Additionally, the NWSIA identifies six priority
wildlife-dependent recreational uses. These uses
are hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and
photography, environmental education and
interpretation. As priority public uses of the
Refuge system, these uses are to receive
enhanced consideration over other uses in
planning and management.
When preparing a CCP, Refuge managers must
reevaluate compatibility of all general public,
recreational, and economic uses (even those
occurring to further habitat management goals)
proposed or occurring on a Refuge, including
priority public uses. No Refuge use may be
allowed or continued unless it is determined to
be compatible. A compatible use is a use that, in
the sound professional judgment of the Refuge
manager, will not materially interfere with or
detract from the fulfillment of the mission of the
Refuge System or the purposes of the Refuge.
Updated compatibility determinations for
existing and proposed uses for Turnbull Refuge
are in Appendix E.
Section 5 of the Refuge Administration Act also
states AIn administering the System, the
Secretary shall . . .(F) assist in the maintenance
of adequate water quantity and water quality to
fulfill the mission of the System and the
purposes of each refuge; (G) acquire, under
State law, water rights that are needed for refuge
purposes...@
The Refuge Administration Act also requires
that, in addition to formally established
guidance, the CCP must be developed with the
participation of the public. Issues and concerns
articulated by the public play a key role in
guiding alternatives considered during the
development of the CCP, and together with the
formal guidance, can play a role in design of the
final CCP.
Turnbull NWR CCP
1-12 Chapter 1 - Introduction
1.7.2 OTHER LAWS, POLICIES, AND ORDERS
Many other federal authorities, including laws,
treaties, executive orders, interstate compacts
and memoranda of agreement govern Service
and Refuge System lands. A list and brief
description of each can be found at
http://laws.fws.gov.
Over the last couple of years, the Service has
developed or revised numerous policies and
Director=s Orders to reflect the mandates and
intent of the Refuge Administration Act. Some
of these key policies include the Biological
Diversity, Health, and Environmental Health
Policy; the Compatibility Policy; the Refuge
Planning Policy; the Director=s Order on
Responsibility of Federal Agencies to Protect
Migratory Birds in Accordance with Executive
Order 13186; and the Director=s Order regarding
Coordination and Cooperative Work with State
Fish and Wildlife Agency Representatives on
Management of the National Wildlife Refuge
System. Text of these policies and orders as
well as others in draft or under development can
be found at: http://refuges.fws.gov/policy-makers/
nwrpolicies.html.
In developing a CCP, Refuges must consider
these broader laws and policies as well as
Refuge System and ecosystem goals and visions.
The CCP must be consistent with these and also
with the Refuge purpose. Figure 1 illustrates the
hierarchy of planning guidance in the Fish and
Wildlife Service.
1.7.3 NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM
MISSION AND GOALS
The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge
System is:
ATo 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
Administration Act)
The goals of the National Wildlife Refuge
System are: (601 FW1, finalized July 26, 2006)
• Conserve a diversity of fish, wildlife, and
plants and their habitats, including species
that are endangered or threatened with
becoming endangered.
• Develop and maintain a network of habitats
for migratory birds, anadromous and
interjurisdictional fish, and marine mammal
populations that is strategically distributed
and carefully managed to meet important
life history needs of these species across
their ranges.
• Conserve those ecosystems, plant
communities, wetlands of national or
international significance, and landscapes
and seascapes that are unique, rare,
declining, or underrepresented in existing
protection efforts.
• Provide and enhance opportunities to
participate in compatible wildlife-dependent
recreation (hunting, fishing, wildlife
observation and photography, and
environmental education and interpretation).
• Foster understanding and instill appreciation
of the diversity and interconnectedness of
fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats.
1.7.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE REFUGE
PURPOSE
The purpose for which a refuge was established
or acquired is of key importance in refuge
planning. Purposes must form the foundation
for management decisions. By law, refuges are
to be managed to achieve their purposes. When
a conflict exists between the Refuge System
mission and the purpose of an individual refuge,
the refuge purpose may supersede the Refuge
System mission (Improvement Act, Section 5(a)
(3)(D)).
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 1 - Introduction 1-13
Figure 1. Hierarchy of Guidance within the National Wildlife Refuge System
Applicable Federal laws* and executive orders

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mission

Refuge Purposes

National Wildlife Refuge System Mission*/Goals/Policies

Ecosystem Vision/Goals/Objectives

Refuge Vision

Refuge Goals

Refuge Objectives

Refuge Strategies

Developed or
revised as part of
the CCP process
Projects Developed as part
of the CCP or with
Step-down
Management Plans
* established by law
The Service defines the purposes of national
wildlife Refuges when a Refuge is established or
when new land is added to an existing Refuge.
Service realty files document purposes used to
acquire lands or to receive transferred lands. At
times, purpose statements define specific uses
allowable on the Refuge. Purpose statements
often identify the wildlife species or groups of
species that receive management emphasis on
any particular Refuge.
1.7.5 PURPOSES FOR TURNBULL NATIONAL
WILDLIFE REFUGE
As explained previously, the following purposes
form the foundation for management decisions
at Turnbull Refuge, including the development
of goals, objectives, and strategies.
A...as a refuge and breeding ground for migratory
birds and other wildlife...@ (Executive Order
7681, dated July 30, 1937)
Turnbull NWR CCP
1-14 Chapter 1 - Introduction
A...for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any
other management purpose, for migratory birds.@
(16 U.S.C. 715d Migratory Bird Conservation
Act)
A...suitable for (1) incidental fish and wildlife-oriented
recreational development, (2) the
protection of natural resources, (3) the
conservation of endangered species or
threatened species...@ (16 U.S.C. 460k-1) and
A...the Secretary...may accept and use...real...
property. Such acceptance may be
accomplished under the terms and conditions of
restrictive covenants imposed by donors...@ (16
U.S.C. 460k-2 and Refuge Recreation Act 16
U.S.C. 460k-460k-4, as amended).
A...for the development, advancement,
management, conservation, and protection of
fish and wildlife resources...@ (16 U.S.C.
742f(a)(4)) A...for the benefit of the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service, in performing
its activities and services. Such acceptance may
be subject to the terms of any restrictive or
affirmative covenant, or condition of
servitude...@ (16 U.S.C. 742f(b)(1) Fish and
Wildlife Act of 1956).
1.7.6 MEANING OF TERMS IN PURPOSE
Migratory Birds. Migratory birds are those
defined as such by the following treaties. The
birds are listed at 50 CFR ' 10.13.
• The treaty between the United States and
Great Britain for the protection of migratory
birds concluded August 16, 1916 (39 Stat.
1702).
• The treaty between the United States and the
United Mexican States for the protection of
migratory birds and game mammals
concluded February 7, 1936 (50 Stat. 1311).
• The Convention between the Government of
the United States and the Government of
Japan for the Protection of Migratory Birds
and Birds in Danger of Extinction, and their
Environment concluded March 4, 1972.
• The Convention between the United States
and Union of Soviet Socialist Republics for
the Conservation of Migratory Birds and
their Environment concluded November 19,
1976 (16 USC 715j).
Inviolate Sanctuary. The original intent of the
term Ainviolate sanctuary@ is found in the
Migratory Bird Conservation Act (first passed in
1918 as the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and
amended in 1934 and 1938). This Act originally
required that all refuges be inviolate sanctuaries
and deemed refuges= primary purposes were as
breeding grounds and habitat for migratory
birds. Migratory bird hunting was prohibited on
migratory waterfowl areas by the Act, but most
other human uses were not addressed. The 1938
amendment to the Act gave refuge managers
authority to decide if, when, and how bird
hunting would be allowed. After World War II,
public demand for opening refuges to recreation
increased. The 1949 Duck Stamp Act allowed
waterfowl hunting on refuges, but restricted the
percentage of each refuge open to hunting.
Current policy states that portions of a refuge are
considered Ainviolate sanctuaries@ if they were
(a) acquired with the approval of the Migratory
Bird Conservation Commission (MBCC) for the
purpose of an inviolate sanctuary; (b) acquired
with MBCC approval or Land and Water
Conservation Funds to protect a threatened or
endangered species; or (c) established by an
instrument or document which states the intent
to manage the area as an Ainviolate sanctuary for
migratory birds@ or to fulfill the purpose of the
Migratory Bird Conservation Act. Policy further
allows migratory game bird hunting on no more
than 40 percent of the area considered inviolate
sanctuary if compatible with a refuge’s purposes
and mission. Inviolate sanctuary classification
imposes no limits on hunting non-migratory
birds, fur bearers, or other game species.
On Turnbull NWR, 13,650 acres were purchased
with MBCC funds and fall within the Ainviolate
sanctuary@ provision. Since its inception, the
Refuge has been closed to hunting of all kinds.
Key advocates for the establishment of the
Refuge in the 1930s included the Spokane
Sportsman=s Association, who believed that the
area should include a sanctuary where hunting
would not be permitted.
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 1 - Introduction 1-15
Incidental Fish and Wildlife-Oriented
Recreational Development. The Refuge
Recreation Act does not specifically define these
terms (although the term Asecondary@ is also
used with Aincidental@ in several places), but it
does emphasize the following points:
A...any present or future recreational use will be
compatible with, and will not prevent
accomplishment of, the primary purposes for
which the said conservation areas were acquired
or established...@
A...such public recreation use shall be permitted
only to the extent that is practicable and not
inconsistent with other previously authorized
Federal operations or with the primary
objectives for which each particular area is
established...@
Development, Advancement, Management,
Conservation, and Protection. These terms
were not defined in the Fish and Wildlife Act (as
amended). However, the Refuge Administration
Act does define some of these terms as follows:
AConserving@ Aconservation@ Amanage@
Amanaging@ and Amanagement@ mean to sustain,
and where appropriate, restore and enhance
healthy populations of fish, wildlife, and plants
utilizing, in accordance with applicable Federal
and State laws, methods and procedures
associated with modern scientific resource
programs. Such methods and procedures
include, consistent with provisions of the Act,
protection, research, census, law enforcement,
habitat management, propagation, live trapping
and transplantation, and regulated taking.
1.8 RELATIONSHIP TO
REGIONAL
CONSERVATION GOALS
The Refuge System, when and where possible,
also tries to assist in meeting conservation goals
established by other divisions of the Service, and
by other legitimate and credible organizations.
Some of these organizations are other federal
agencies or interagency groups. Others are state
agencies or coalitions of government and
nongovernment partners, such as Partners in
Flight. Listed below are brief statements of
ecosystem goals and objectives that apply within
the Refuge vicinity.
1.8.1 INTERMOUNTAIN WEST JOINT
VENTURE
The 1998 Intermountain West Joint Venture
Channeled Scablands Focus Area
Implementation Plan (1998) includes two goals
relevant to the Refuge CCP: increasing the
quantity and quality of Channeled Scabland
wetland, upland, and riparian habitats for
breeding, migrating, and wintering waterfowl, as
well as other species of management concern;
and restoring degraded wetland and upland
habitat for waterfowl and other species.
Two federal North American Wetland
Conservation Act (NAWCA) grants were
awarded recently in the amount of nearly two
million dollars for protection and restoration of
wetland and riparian habitats in Spokane,
Lincoln, and Adams Counties. These first two
grants fund Phases 1 and 2 of a five phase
project plan for the Intermountain West Joint
Venture Channeled Scablands Focus Area
(CSFA), to which the Refuge is a partner.
Fourteen public and private organizations
provided matching and in-kind funds in the
amount of $3.2 million (Phase II) and $6.2
million (Phase I). Numerous private landowners
are also partners in the project. The goals of
Phase I and Phase II of the project are to acquire,
restore and enhance over 15,000 acres of
wetland, riparian, and adjacent upland habitat
within the area covered by the CSFA
Implementation Plan.
The Refuge is a partner in an ongoing
effort by 14 organizations to protect and
restore wetlands and riparian areas
within the Channeled Scablands. Two
million dollars in federal grants were
recently awarded to this project.
Partners have put up nearly ten million
dollars in matching and in-kind funds.
Turnbull NWR CCP
1-16 Chapter 1 - Introduction
1.8.2 PARTNERS IN FLIGHT, COLUMBIA
PLATEAU PLAN
The primary goal of the Conservation Strategy
for Landbirds in the Columbia Plateau of
Eastern Oregon and Washington (Altman and
Holmes 2000) is to ensure long-term
maintenance of healthy populations of native
landbirds in shrub-steppe and riparian habitats.
The Partners in Flight Conservation Strategy
includes an objective to “Initiate actions to
increase the size and connectivity of existing
riparian and steppe patches through restoration
and acquisition efforts.”
1.8.3 BIRDS OF CONSERVATION
CONCERN 2002
Based on the efforts and assessment scores of
three major bird conservation efforts (Partners In
Flight, the U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan,
and the North American Waterbird Conservation
Plan), this report identifies, by Service region
and by Bird Conservation Region (BCR), the
bird species most in need of conservation
attention (the list does not include threatened or
endangered species or hunted species). Turnbull
Refuge straddles BCRs 9 and 10. BCR 9
contains 29 species listed in this report and BCR
10 contains 28 species (USFWS 2002).
1.8.4 GAP ANALYSIS PROGRAM REPORT,
WASHINGTON STATE
The 1997 report Role of Washington State’s
National Wildlife Refuges in Conserving the
State’s Biodiversity (Cassidy et al. 1997b)
recommended acquisition priorities for specific
zones in the State of Washington. For the east
side forest zones and the steppe zones of
Washington, the Gap Analysis Program (GAP)
authors recommended acquiring areas with the
following characteristics: “Oak and ponderosa
pine forest, especially where these types are
combined with wetlands, and not isolated from
upper forest and lower steppe zones, and where
maintenance of a natural fire regime is feasible.”
Within the steppe zones, the GAP authors
recommended acquiring: “Upland steppe on
deep soil; the palouse zone adjacent to Turnbull
Refuge has the highest priority, but deep soil
sites in any steppe zone are a high acquisition
priority. Wetlands in steppe, especially where
wetland protection can be combined with
protection of adjacent uplands.”
1.8.5 WATER HOWELLIA DRAFT
RECOVERY PLAN
The goal of the recovery plan is “to provide an
adequate level of conservation for the species
and its habitat so that there will be self-sustaining
populations distributed throughout its
extant range” (Shelley and Gamon, 1996).
According to the draft plan, recovery efforts
should “focus on development and
implementation of habitat management plans for
occurrences on public lands; promotion of
voluntary protection on private lands;
conducting biological and habitat management
research; monitoring and surveys of known
occurrences and potential habitat; dissemination
of educational information; promotion of state-level
legal protection; and evaluation of the
appropriateness and feasibility of reintroducing
water howellia into portions of its historic
range.”
1.8.6 THE NATURE CONSERVANCY
CONSERVATION STRATEGY,
COLUMBIA PLATEAU ECOREGION
The Nature Conservancy (TNC) conducted a
strategic analysis of the Columbia Plateau
Ecoregion to identify sites that could
conceivably maintain all viable native species
and communities within the Ecoregion (Soper
1999). They concluded that protection of
approximately 139 sites would achieve their
goals. They further prioritized this list,
identifying 27 sites to work on over the next five
years. Several of the priority sites are within the
Palouse steppe area, as well as within the
Channeled Scablands ecosystem.
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 1 - Introduction 1-17
1.8.7 THE SERVICE’S COLUMBIA RIVER
BASIN ECOREGION
The Service’s Columbia River Basin Ecoregion
Goal #1 reads as follows: “Prevent species
decline, expedite recovery of candidate,
threatened, and endangered species, and
preclude future species listings by conserving
and restoring a diversity of native fish, wildlife,
and plant species and their habitats in the
Columbia River Basin”.
1.8.8 INTERIOR COLUMBIA BASIN
ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT PLAN
This project was an ambitious effort covering
the majority of the Inland Northwest (an area the
size of France) and is a good source of broad
scale ecosystem analysis for the region. The
scientific assessment which underlies the plan
identified numerous threats to the ecological
integrity of the basin (Quigley et al. 1996).
Within the vicinity of Turnbull Refuge, report
authors listed the primary opportunities to
address the risks to ecological integrity as:
“maintenance or restoration of riparian
conditions; restoration of productive aquatic
areas; and conservation of fish strongholds and
unique aquatic areas.”
1.8.9 SPOKANE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN
Spokane County completed an update of its
Comprehensive Plan in 2002 (Spokane County
2002). The Plan calls for minimization of
habitat fragmentation. Furthermore, the
County’s Critical Areas Ordinance requires the
protection of a variety of priority habitats,
including wildlife corridors and landscape
linkages. A University of Washington
Department of Urban Design and Planning class
analyzed the County’s biodiversity and habitat
to assess which lands, if protected, would
conserve all the biodiversity of the County under
the most efficient design possible. The students
ultimately recommended a map of reserves;
wildlife corridors and landscape linkages that
would meet this objective (see
http://depts.washington.edu/rsal/GAP/
spokane_brochure/index.html; also Stevenson
1998; University of Washington 1998). Much
of the area surrounding Turnbull Refuge is
encompassed in the area the students
recommended be maintained as a reserve and
wildlife corridor. The County has incorporated
the recommendation by designating many of
these areas as “open space” in its plan and
zoning others under a low density “Rural
Conservation” category.
1.9 REFUGE VISION
Turnbull National Wildlife Refuge will be key
to preserving the unique Channeled Scablands
habitat of Eastern Washington, with its broad
diversity of plants and animals. The area will
serve as an important link in migrations for at
least 139 species of birds, but its best function
will be as a production area for at least 100 bird
species. Habitat diversity will provide a stable,
productive and flexible resource to ensure that
the native faunal diversity of the Refuge is
maintained. The Refuge will restore and
maintain ecosystem processes that provide for a
natural diversity of flora and fauna native to the
wetland, aspen/riparian, steppe, and ponderosa
pine communities of Eastern Washington.
Maintenance of biodiversity will be further
supported by the conservation of threatened and
endangered species. Partnerships with
neighbors, non-profit organizations, and other
government agencies will ensure the
maintenance of biologically effective landscape
linkages and corridors between the Refuge and
other intact areas of vegetation zones
representative of this ecoregion. Efforts will be
made to conserve and restore additional
Channeled Scabland habitats and wetlands.
Wetland habitats will have a legally secure water
supply based on annual precipitation and runoff.
The quality of water entering the Refuge will be
monitored and maintained at a standard suitable
for ensuring ecological integrity. Water
management facilities make for more efficient
use of water, bypassing high flows, maintaining
desired food and cover plants, and providing
optimum diversity.
Turnbull NWR CCP
1-18 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Grassland steppe habitats will be healthy and
diverse, sustaining a variety of both migratory
and resident birds as well as other indigenous
plants and wildlife. Healthy forested uplands
managed by the reintroduction of fire will
provide a natural distribution and diversity of
structural and successional stages to benefit
forest dependent wildlife.
Research and environmental education
opportunities will be provided. Visitor and
education facilities will assist with interpreting
the values of wildlands and wildlife to the
public. Visitors will experience the quiet
solitude that only nature can provide.
Opportunities for outstanding aesthetics, wildlife
observation, and other compatible uses will be
provided.
Volunteers will support Refuge public use
programs, Refuge monitoring and research, and
habitat restoration. Partnerships with Friends of
Turnbull Refuge, the Spokane chapter of the
Audubon Society, the Inland Northwest Land
Trust, the Inland Northwest Wildlife Council
and other non-profit organizations, neighbors,
and other federal, state and county agencies will
enhance opportunities to realize Refuge goals
and objectives.
1.10 REFUGE GOALS
Goal 1: Contribute to protection of local
watersheds to maintain adequate water quality
and quantity for native Refuge wetland species.
Goal 2: Provide habitat conditions essential to
the conservation of birds and other wildlife
within a variety of wetland complexes.
Goal 3: Restore Refuge aspen and ponderosa
forest to a natural distribution of stand structural
and successional stages to benefit forest-dependent
wildlife.
Goal 4: Protect and restore the natural
distribution and diversity of grassland and shrub
steppe habitats to benefit wildlife.
Goal 5: Support the conservation of threatened
and endangered species in their natural
ecosystems.
Goal 6: Support the maintenance of
biologically effective landscape linkages and
corridors between the Refuge and other intact
areas of vegetation zones representative of this
ecoregion.
Goal 7: Foster appreciation of and support for
the Refuge and the Channeled Scablands
ecosystem through quality environmental
education, interpretation, wildlife-dependent
recreation, and outreach compatible with the
Refuge purposes and mission.
Goal 8: Encourage and support research that
substantially contributes to our understanding of
the Channeled Scablands ecosystem.
1.11 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
IN THE DEVELOPMENT
OF THE CCP
Public involvement was sought throughout the
development of the CCP, starting in the summer
of 1999. Public involvement strategies
emphasized face-to-face meetings with key
agencies, tribes with ancient links to the area,
elected officials, and Refuge neighbors. The
Refuge also held open houses, conducted a
planning workshop, sent newsletters, conducted
surveys, and gave presentations at community
organizations to inform the public, invite
discussion and solicit feedback.
A mailing list of approximately 900 persons and
organizations is maintained at the Refuge and
was used to distribute planning updates, public
meeting announcements, and to notify the public
of the release of the Draft CCP/EA. Appendix
K contains a brief summary of the events,
meetings, and outreach tools that were used in
CCP public involvement efforts.
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 1 - Introduction 1-19
1.12 ISSUES
Under the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), federal agencies may identify
numerous issues after scoping is completed.
However, only major issues drive the
formulation of alternatives. Based on the
scoping efforts undertaken, the following major
issues were identified for the Turnbull Refuge
CCP.
Issue 1. Elk Management and Hunting
Archeological evidence suggests that elk may
have once been fairly widespread in eastern
Washington and were hunted by native
Americans residing in the area. However, elk
appear to have been eliminated by the time of
Euro-American settlement. Elk reintroductions
in the early 1900s resulted in expanding herds
throughout much of the forested portions of
eastern Washington. From these reintroductions
and subsequent transplants, elk populations
increased dramatically in the mid-twentieth
century. Elk were first observed on the Refuge
in the late 1950s. Although increasing numbers
were observed on the Refuge and in most of
southern Spokane County since their first
appearance, dramatic increases did not occur
until the early 1980s. The herd that inhabits the
Refuge and local vicinity (Hangman Creek
subherd) was estimated at 115 to 219 animals in
1997 (95 percent confidence interval, population
estimate from Meyers 1998). In November
2004, 354 elk were counted in the herd, with
100 off-Refuge and the rest on the Refuge.
Research underway by the State and Eastern
Washington University indicates that the Refuge
is disproportionately important to the local elk
population as a security zone. As a result, there
has been heavy browsing of young aspen and
other deciduous shrubs and trees on the Refuge.
In addition, several neighbors have complained
of elk damage to their hay, other agricultural
crops, fences, and ornamental shrubs since the
early 1990s and feel that the Refuge should take
a more active role in limiting elk numbers.
Since 1992, two claims have been paid by the
State for elk damage to agricultural crops.
Complaints have declined since 1999 as a result
of several local landowners leasing their lands
for hunting.
On Refuge hunting of big game and/or
waterfowl has been proposed at various times in
the past (1959, 1966, and 1987) but never was
widely supported by the community and has
never been permitted on the Refuge for any
species.
Surveys conducted in 1999 when the CCP was
initiated indicated 82 percent of the public
surveyed (485 respondents) believed that the
Refuge should remain closed to hunting. Half of
the 88 respondents who felt that the Refuge
should be opened to hunting also felt that all
types of hunting should be allowed. Eighteen
respondents felt that only big game hunting
should be allowed (EDAW 1999). Respondents
to other surveys distributed at the public scoping
meetings in the spring of 2000 indicated that 29
percent of the participants identified the
prohibition of hunting as an important Refuge
issue. However, nearly 13 percent felt that the
most important issue was allowing hunting as a
management tool.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
and others advocated hunting or other
management tools to bring the elk population
numbers down to a level considered “socially
acceptable” (i.e. a level which does not trigger
many depredation complaints).
Issue Summary: What kinds of elk management
tools, if any, should the Refuge utilize to address
habitat damage and depredation problems?
Issue 2. Recreational Development and
Opportunities, Allowable Uses, and Visitor
Access
For many years, the Refuge has maintained a
2,200-acre area open to public driving, wildlife
viewing, photography, hiking, and
environmental education. The remainder of the
Refuge is closed to public use. Interpretive
opportunities are fairly limited and trail lengths
are short.
Turnbull NWR CCP
1-20 Chapter 1 - Introduction
An opportunity to inquire into what the public
values at Turnbull Refuge occurred during
public scoping at the outset of the CCP. As part
of this process, the Service distributed a short
survey to its mailing list and to attendees of the
public scoping meetings in February and March,
2000. Eighty-six participants completed the
survey. The majority of the respondents to the
survey indicated that wildlife is what makes
Turnbull special to them. Nature, interpretation
and environmental education were also
important reasons for visiting the Refuge.
Ninety-three percent of the individuals surveyed
agreed that Refuge facilities were adequate. A
segment of the public is interested in seeing a
higher level of interpretive and trail facilities for
public enjoyment and use.
The environmental education program (EE) has
been underway for more than thirty years. The
EE program provides students from the Spokane
area an opportunity for field-based science
learning and supports teachers in meeting state
educational requirements. However, the
program has no permanent funding, and many
requests go unmet because of limited staff and
facilities. To date, the EE program has been
supported by volunteers, an active partnership
program, and fluctuating Refuge funds
supplemented by grants. Many members of the
public have expressed interest in expanding the
EE program.
In May of 2000, the Washington State Parks and
Recreation Commission (WSPRC) opened the
130-mile long Columbia Plateau Trail on an
abandoned railroad right-of-way in Eastern
Washington. The trail lies adjacent to some of
the Refuge’s most productive waterfowl lakes,
Long Lake and Ballinger Lake. When fully
developed, the trail will run from Pasco to Fish
Lake and traverse five miles of the Refuge,
through the heart of the Refuge’s closed area.
Projections of use for this section of trail are
30,000 people annually. State Parks and some
users have asked the Refuge to create side trails
off of the Columbia Plateau trail so that they can
loop through the area. Concerns remain,
however, about potential disturbance to
waterfowl, disturbance to big-game populations
in this area, and potential for trespass from the
Columbia Plateau Trail into the closed area of
the Refuge.
Public participation in nature activities,
including wildlife observation and photography
and visiting interpretive centers, is projected to
grow by approximately 30 percent from 2002-
2017 in the state of Washington (IAC, 2002a).
An assessment completed by IAC (IAC 1995)
identified trails and environmental education as
the two highest outdoor recreation needs in the
State.
Hunting is one of the six wildlife-dependent
public uses identified in the Refuge
Improvement Act of 1997. Hunting
participation in the State is expected to decrease
over the next fifteen years (IAC, 2002a). All
wildlife-dependent public uses must be accorded
enhanced consideration during CCP
development.
Issue Summary: What kind of public
recreational opportunities should the Refuge
seek to provide over the next 15 years, and how
should the Refuge manage these uses to
maintain compatibility with its purposes?
Issue 3. Protection of Habitats, Water
Quality and Quantity Off-Refuge
Refuge wildlife and their habitats are connected
to and depend upon the surrounding landscape.
The Refuge Improvement Act of 1997 requires
maintenance of the Refuge System’s biological
integrity, diversity and environmental health.
The Act also directs the Secretary to maintain
adequate water quality and quantity to fulfill the
purposes of each Refuge and acquire, under
State law, water rights needed for Refuge
purposes.
In consideration of these mandates, the planning
team considered whether Turnbull Refuge
encompasses sufficient habitat to maintain the
wildlife it was established to protect. The team
also considered whether water supplies that feed
Refuge wetlands are adequate for the future, and
whether they are free of pollutants.
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 1 - Introduction 1-21
For most of the Refuge’s existence, surrounding
land use has mostly complemented the Refuge
by maintaining open space, providing a larger
habitat base, and serving as critical linkages to
other undisturbed habitats. The situation around
the Refuge is, however, changing. Spokane
County’s population has increased by 30 percent
over the past 20 years. Accelerated home
construction, business developments, and the
transportation infrastructure to service this
growing population have begun to isolate the
Refuge from surrounding habitats. This
development increases the potential for threats
to wildlife and their habitats, such as
contamination of air and water, altered or
depleted supplies of surface and ground water,
loss of connectivity to other suitable or
complimentary habitats, and the invasion of
exotic plant and animal species that erode the
integrity of the Refuge.
It is likely that the biological integrity, diversity
and environmental health of the Refuge will be
at risk over the long term if the Refuge is
managed as an isolated island of habitat without
attention to maintaining water supplies and
connectivity to adjacent habitats.
Several scientific assessments in the area
(Cassidy et al. 1997a, Wisdom 2000, Soper
1999) indicate that much of Eastern
Washington’s wildlife and habitats remain
unprotected.
Mechanisms for land protection could include:
cooperative agreements, conservation
easements, fee title acquisition, leases,
donations, transfers, and exchanges. Only
willing participants would be considered for any
of these approaches.
Issue Summary: How can the Refuge best ensure
protection of water supplies and healthy wildlife
habitats within the Refuge vicinity, to provide
long term benefits for its species and habitats?
CHAPTER 2
Management Direction
Elk cow and calf. Photograph by Nancy J. Curry
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-1
2.1 OVERVIEW
2.1.1 CONSIDERATIONS IN THE
DESIGN OF THE CCP
In thinking through appropriate actions for this
long term conservation plan, the Service
reviewed and considered a variety of resource,
social, economic, and political aspects important
for managing the Refuge. These background
conditions are described more fully in Chapter 3.
As is appropriate for a National Wildlife
Refuge, resource considerations were
fundamental in designing the CCP. Aquatic
species at Turnbull depend on water, so careful
consideration was allotted to hydrology,
especially the delineations of watersheds
providing surface water to the Refuge. After
planning began and several members of the
public mentioned water quality as an issue, the
Service commissioned a water quality study to
provide information on current stream water
quality parameters. In addition, the team
consulted groundwater specialists, to estimate
groundwater movements, and the team identified
a groundwater Aarea of influence@ - i.e. an area
within which groundwater withdrawals,
recharges, and/or contamination would be most
likely to affect Refuge wetlands.
The planning team utilized aerial photo
interpretation to map and rate the quality of all
terrestrial habitats within the Study Area. The
team utilized National Wetlands Inventory data
to locate all Study Area wetlands and identified
each wetland as drained or undrained. The team
considered the potential for wetland restoration
especially with regard to wetlands crossing
multiple property ownerships. The team
considered habitat connectivity and areas
inhabited by threatened and endangered species.
The team also consulted with Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife to get the latest
information on elk herd sizes and locations
frequented by elk within the area. The team
reviewed scientific reports and studies to better
understand ecosystem trends and the latest
scientific recommendations for species and
habitats.
The team reviewed State reports on outdoor
recreation trends and catalogued nearby
recreation opportunities. The team used
surveys, meeting questionnaires, and comments
to try to determine the kinds of experiences
desired by Refuge visitors.
The Service met with local, State, and federal
agency staffs and elected officials to ascertain
priorities and problems as perceived by others.
Refuge staff met with neighbors, Refuge users,
non-profit groups, and community organizations
to ensure that their comments and ideas were
considered during CCP development.
In addition, the planning team held a workshop
attended by approximately three dozen local
citizens to review seven preliminary alternatives.
Based on the input received at that workshop
and further internal review, the Service refined
the CCP alternatives to the four presented in the
Draft CCP/EA, released in June 2005.
Additional changes were made after public
review of the document. The goals, objectives,
and strategies below comprise the actions to be
adopted in this final CCP.
2.1.2 GENERAL GUIDELINES
General guidelines for implementation of the
CCP follow:
$ Implementation Subject to Funding
Availability
CCP actions will be implemented over a period
of 15 years as funding becomes available.
Project priorities are designated in Appendix F,
Implementation.
$ On-Refuge Habitat and Fire
Management
Turnbull NWR CCP
2-2 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
Habitat management actions will continue to be
guided by the direction set forth in the Refuge
Habitat Management Plan (USDI 1999). This
plan was analyzed and publicly reviewed under
an Environmental Assessment released in 1999.
Fire management was similarly analyzed and a
Fire Management Plan was finalized in 2001.
$ Inholdings
The Fish and Wildlife Service will continue to
seek ways for acquiring interest in private lands
within the existing Approved Refuge Boundary,
from willing landowners. This interest could be
secured through management, easements,
exchange or purchase of the approximately
4,723 acres of inholdings (this includes lease
and agreement lands) within the boundary.
Outside the Approved Refuge Boundary, small
acquisitions from willing sellers may be
completed consistent with national policy.
$ Leases
The Refuge will continue to maintain mutually
agreed upon leases on 2,018 acres of lands
within the Approved Refuge Boundary. Under
these leases, two adjacent landowners agree to
prevent hunting from occurring on their
property. Another area is managed under a year
to year agreement for the same purpose. The
leased properties are fenced and carry Refuge
signs. These leases were set up to protect
waterfowl and to minimize public safety
concerns adjacent to the Refuge=s Public Use
Area. The leases do not incur a cost to the U.S.
government.
$ Easements
The Service manages two conservation
easements: Wildrose in northern Spokane
County and R.D. Smith in Whitman County.
Both areas contain riparian habitat that is
managed to exclude livestock.
$ Maintenance of Existing Research
Natural Areas (RNA)
Two existing Service designated Research
Natural Areas (RNAs) on the Refuge will be
maintained and restored for the values for which
they were established in 1966. In practice, this
means that they will be managed similarly to
other Refuge habitats as described in the Refuge
Habitat Management Plan. Research activities
may occur within the RNAs, but will not be
confined to these areas.
Active management within both RNAs will
continue with the objective of returning both
RNAs to a more natural stand condition. After
an initial thinning, Pine Creek RNA will be
maintained with regular underburning. Turnbull
Pines will be managed as a control area until the
completion of all other uplands habitat
management units, and then it may be restored
in the same manner as other forested areas of the
Refuge.
$ Tribal Coordination
Increased regular communication with
Native American Tribes who have an
interest in the Refuge will occur. The
Spokane Tribe, Coeur d=Alene Tribe,
Kalispel Tribe, and the Confederated Tribes
of the Colville Reservation are four local
Tribal groups the Service will work with
regarding issues of shared interest.
Currently, the Service allows Tribal
members to gather roots and tubers in
appropriate locations on the Refuge and
seeks their assistance in interpreting
traditional Native American lifeways as part
of the Refuge=s environmental education
program.
Turnbull NWR CCP - October 2006
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-3
$ State Coordination
Similarly, the Service will continue to
maintain regular discussions with the
Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife. Key topics of discussion will be
coordination on elk management strategies
and law enforcement.
$ Volunteer Opportunities and
Partnerships
Volunteer opportunities and partnerships will
continue to be important. These are recognized
as key components of the successful
management of public lands and vital to
implementation of Refuge programs, plans, and
projects.
$ Refuge Revenue Sharing Payment
Annual payments to Spokane County will
continue according to the established formula
and subject to payments authorized by Congress.
If lands are acquired and added to the Refuge,
the Service=s annual payment will increase
accordingly.
$ Firewood Cutting by Permit
The firewood cutting permit system will remain
the same as at present. The number of permits
issued, cords allowed, and locations will vary
from year to year based on slash produced by
forest management practices.
$ Maintenance and Updating of
Existing Facilities
Periodic maintenance and updating of Refuge
buildings and facilities will be necessary for
safety and accessibility and to support staff and
management needs.
$ Protection and Management of Cultural
Resources
The Service will continue to uphold federal laws
protecting cultural resources, including the
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA),
Archeological Resources Protection Act, and
Native American Graves Protection and
Repatriation Act. These laws also require
consultation with Native American tribes, the
State Historic Preservation Office, and other
preservation partners. The NHPA requires all
projects that use federal funding, permitting, or
licensing to be reviewed by a cultural resource
professional to determine if there is the potential
to affect cultural resources. If needed, an
inventory must be conducted and appropriate
actions to mitigate effects must be identified,
prior to implementation of the project. A site
specific determination is needed for all of the
HMP, FMP and CCP projects including:
- new or expanded Refuge management and
public use facilities and activities
- elk management actions
- federal easements, cooperative agreements,
and other stewardship projects off the Refuge.
$ Management of Minor Recreational
Uses
Minor recreational activities are occasionally
pursued on the Refuge. Other recreational
activities not specifically addressed in this
document may be allowed on Refuge lands if the
Refuge Manager finds they do not conflict with
wildlife or habitat objectives.
Turnbull NWR CCP
2-4 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
LEGEND
§¨¦90
Mullinix Rd.
Cheney / Plaza Rd.
Salnave Rd.
Cheney Spangle
Graham Rd.
Jennings Rd.
Curtis Rd.
Wells Rd
Depot Springs
Rupp Rd.
Philleo Lake Rd.
Cheney / Plaza Rd.
Pine Grove Rd.
Short Rd.
UV904
UV902
Map 3. Main Elements of the Comprehensive Conservation Plan, 2006
0 1 2 Miles
1:77,000
±
City of Cheney
Columbia Plateau Trail
Burlington Northern Railway
Union Pacific Railway
Badger Lake
Map produced by: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 16507 SW Roy Rogers Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140 (503) 590-6596
Visitor Contact Point
with Interpretive Exhibits
at Headquarters
Environmental Education Facility
with Two Classrooms
2-5
TURNBULL
NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
COMPREHENSIVE
CONSERVATION PLAN
2006
*** Stewardship Area: An informally designated
conservation zone surrounding the Refuge. Within
this area, the Service will actively work with partners
and neighbors for voluntary, cooperative activities that
protect habitat and water resources. Key tools include
but are not limited to: conservation easements, use of
conservation grants and/or enrollment in various habitat
reserve programs, well casing, and technical assistance
programs.
In addition, Service acquisition of up to 12,000 acres
from willing sellers could occur on priority lands
within the Stewardship Area.
Stewardship Area ***
Land Conservation Features
Existing Features
New Public Use Features
Youth waterfowl hunt area
New designated 2.7 mile bike trail
![ New viewpoints
!\ New photoblinds
New hiking trails
Elk hunting area
Expanded Public Use Area
Interpretive trails
Anderson Rd.
! Existing viewpoints
Existing hiking trails
Columbia Plateau Trail
Auto tour route
Railways
Refuge Fee Title Ownership
2-6 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-7
Table 2-1. Summary Table of CCP Actions
THEMES CCP Action
ON- REFUGE HABITAT MANAGEMENT
Management of Refuge
Pine Forests, Wetlands,
Aspen, and Steppe
Habitats
Continue implementation of Habitat Management Plan (1999) and Fire Management Plan (2001).
See Appendix B for HMP summary and objectives; see Appendix C for Fire Management Summary.
ELK MANAGEMENT
State Coordination Continue discussions with State to share information on elk, including herd population estimates,
reports of off-Refuge damage, viable methods for reducing elk numbers, etc. Conduct annual elk
population survey together with State.
Elk Hunting Allowed, after preparation of a Hunting Plan and publication of Federal Register notice. Length of
season, number of permits issued and/or seasons offered will vary based upon the level of aspen damage
observed on the Refuge each year. Hunt will be managed as a high quality, limited entry opportunity, in
cooperation with State.
Use of Other Tools to
Reduce Elk Numbers
Other tools to reduce elk population numbers or damage will be considered together with State.
Potential tools to consider include: Relocation, biobullets (implant of reproduction suppression
chemicals), facilitation of State technical assistance, and other methods.
WATERFOWL AND GAME BIRD HUNTING
Waterfowl Hunting Youth hunt one weekend each year, in conjunction with educational program. Additional areas could be
designated if Refuge acquires additional lands.
Other species Maintain possibility of permitted turkey hunt depending on turkey population trends. Encourage
research to investigate turkey ecology on Refuge.
OFF- REFUGE LAND CONSERVATION FOCUS AND TOOLS
Land Conservation Goals - To ensure greater protection of the Refuge=s water quality and quantity by protection of surface and
ground watersheds.
- To ensure greater protection and conservation of the critically endangered Palouse steppe habitat
- To enhance and restore the outstanding wetland resources of the Channeled Scablands
- To provide greater connectivity to other ponderosa pine habitats and to ensure greater protection for
aspen habitats.
LAND CONSERVATION TOOLS
Stewardship Area/
Partnerships
The Stewardship Area is an informally designated conservation zone surrounding the Refuge. Within
this area, the Service will actively work with partners and neighbors for voluntary, cooperative activities
that protect habitat and water resources. Key tools include but are not limited to conservation
easements, enrollment in the Wetlands Reserve Program, well casing, and technical assistance
programs. Key partners include but are not limited to: Intermountain West Joint Venture, Ducks
Unlimited, Spokane County Parks and Recreation Dept, Spokane County Conservation District,
Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, Bureau of Land Management, Natural Resources Conservation
Service, Avista Corporation, U.S. Farm Services Agency, Inland Northwest Wildlife Council, Inland
Northwest Land Trust, Friends of Turnbull National Wildlife Refuge, Spokane Audubon Society, and
The Nature Conservancy.
Stewardship Area Size 44,324 acres
Turnbull NWR CCP
2-8 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
THEMES CCP Action
Protection Under the
National Wildlife Refuge
System
Protection of up to 12,000 acres by fee, easement, or agreement from willing sellers on priority lands
within the Stewardship Area.
PUBLIC USE AREA
Size and Location 3190 acres (hunting would occur annually on an additional 5,000 plus acres outside the Public Use
Area)
Accessibility Times and
Areas
Open year-round. Off trail use not permissible.
WILDLIFE OBSERVATION /WILDLIFE PHOTOGRAPHY
Location of Viewpoints
and Pulloffs
Public use area; Columbia Plateau Trail; Cheney-Plaza Road; Cheney-Spangle Road; Mullinix Road
Designated Viewpoints 25 viewpoints (19 existing plus 6 new sites). Most/all viewpoints will include interpretive sign.
New sites developed in the following areas.
Within existing Public Use Area:
Cheever Lake
From Cheney-Plaza Road:
Upper Turnbull Slough (elevated platform)
McDowell Lake (elevated platform)
Other locations:
Helms Marsh from Mullinix Road
Stubblefield Lake (elevated platform),
Pull off on Cheney-Spangle Road where there is view of Stubblefield Lake and steppe.
Photo Opportunity
Blinds
Pine Lake (not accessible to persons with disabilities), Kepple Peninsula (accessible), East side of
Blackhorse (accessible), Long Lake, but only in conjunction with Long Lake bypass (accessible).
Visitor Welcome Areas Interpretive panels overlooking Winslow Pool (4 panels)
Staffed visitor contact point with small interpretive exhibit area included in new or added on office
space.
ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION PROGRAM ON REFUGE
Degree of Facilitation All visiting classes and groups facilitated by Refuge staff, teachers, volunteers, or other partners.
Teacher Support Two to four teacher workshops annually
Number of Students
Served Annually
8,000-10,000
Coordinator Status Year round Environmental Education Specialist
Target Audience
Emphasis
All ages, (students and non-students) diverse backgrounds and affiliations, inner city kids, at risk kids
and seniors. From schools and other groups up to 150 miles away.
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-9
Field EE Sites Four hardened sites with one in rest at all times. Each site used 4 days per week or less. Piers
established into wetlands to facilitate aquatic studies and diminish shoreline impact. Add fifth site if
needed.
THEMES CCP Action
ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION PROGRAM OFF REFUGE
Materials EE supplies, videos and displays loaned out as needed.
Number of Individuals
served
3,000 - 4,500 (120-180 classes or groups/year)
Percent Facilitated 25
Links to Other EE
Programs
member of State-wide consortium
Depth of Programs year round program, Eastern Washington ecosystems emphasis
Target Audience
Emphasis
All ages, diverse backgrounds and affiliations, inner city kids, at risk kids and seniors
ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION FACILITY
EE Facility Add second classroom to existing facility. Role of center is to serve as a regional environmental
education center.
Number of Persons
Accommodated in the
EE Classroom Facility
Add on to existing classroom at Headquarters. Facility will have 2 adjoining classrooms
accommodating 50 people each; can be combined to create multipurpose presentation room seating 100.
TRAILS
Trail Mileage and
Location
15.25 miles. Additional trail miles may be added in the future if opportunities arise through acquisition
of properties contiguous to Public Use Area. Stubblefield trail will terminate in elevated viewing
platform. No off trail use.
Surface Type and
Accessibility
Most dirt surfaces. One wheelchair accessible boardwalk. Bark on EE site short trails. Two trails
(Kepple Peninsula Trail and Pine Lake Loop Trail) with accessible surfaces, 48" widths, appropriate
grades for accessibility, and accessible trailheads. These trails will traverse each major habitat type.
Boardwalk Replace to meet standards of updated accessibility guidelines
Trail Lengths Stubblefield trail added with length of 3.7 miles. In future, should additional trails be added on newly
acquired properties, trails could be longer.
Loop Trails Loop trail of up to 9.6 miles (Pine lakes/Headquarters/Stubblefield loop/bike loop).
Bike Trails A designated 2.7 mile bike trail connecting Public Use Area to one point on the State Columbia Plateau
Trail. Bike Trail would follow the old Cheney Plaza Highway roadbed inside the Refuge (adjacent to
Cheney Plaza Road.) Consider packed gravel to cut the dust.
Turnbull NWR CCP
2-10 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
THEMES CCP Action
COLUMBIA PLATEAU TRAIL
Interpretive Signs and
Facilities
Existing signs and facilities, plus a sign-in book at Refuge entry points and more benches.
Support State Parks initiative to develop public facilities in the vicinity of the Refuge for the
Columbia Plateau Trail.
Monitoring Systematic monitoring of recreational use, including: visitor numbers, trespass occurrences, and wildlife
disturbance utilizing pre-established scientific protocol.
Experimental manipulations with EWU class plus study of real-time actual use and disturbance
correlations over 1-2 nesting seasons.
Monitoring of visitation frequency
Minimize Disturbance to
Long Lake and Other
Sensitive Areas
Consider planting hawthorn to prevent trespass and minimize disturbance near Long Lake
Consider possibility of developing a bypass trail to reduce disturbance along sensitive parts of the CPT.
Consider education, concentrating use, or seasonal closures as other tools
INTERPRETATION
Interpretive Trails (Generally short trails designed especially for the educational benefit of casual or new visitors; trails
have multiple interpretive signs or markers supported with brochure)
Boardwalk (7 signs)
Pine Lake Loop Trail (4 signs)
Kepple Peninsula Trail (markers with interpretive brochure)
Interpretive Services
(naturalist)
Day, evening, and weekend programs.
Number of Wheelchair
Accessible Points/Trails
Boardwalk Trail, Kepple Peninsula Trail, Pine Lake Loop Trail, and Turnbull Slough.
Most interpretive signs would follow ADA guidelines.
Space for Non-Profit
Gift Store
Provide space in Visitor Center for Friends of Turnbull NWR store
CULTURAL RESOURCE EDUCATION AND INTERPRETATION
Education Materials artifact replica kit, additional hands-on activities and curriculum
Interpretive Materials pamphlets, signs, exhibits
Number of Individuals
served and Target
Audience
Proportional to on and off Refuge EE programs.
Target audience would be Refuge visitors as well as local students.
CULTURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION
Data Management Develop GIS layer with appropriate locks for sensitive information
Partnerships Develop partnership with Tribes for cultural resources inventory, evaluation, and monitoring
Work with educational institutions, historical societies, and other preservation partners for inventory,
evaluation, and monitoring.
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 2 ��� Management Direction 2-11
2.2 GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES
Goals and objectives are the unifying elements of successful refuge management. They identify and
focus management priorities, resolve issues, and link to refuge purposes, Service policy, and the Refuge
System Mission.
A CCP describes management actions that help bring a refuge closer to its vision. A vision broadly
reflects the refuge purposes, the Refuge System mission and goals, other statutory requirements, and
larger-scale plans as appropriate. Goals then define general targets in support of the vision, followed by
objectives that direct effort into incremental and measurable steps toward achieving those goals. Finally,
strategies identify specific tools to accomplish objectives (USDI 2002).
The goals for the Turnbull Refuge for the next 15 years under the CCP are presented below. Each goal is
followed by the objectives that pertain to that goal.
Below each objective statement are the strategies that could be employed in order to accomplish the
objectives.
Some objectives pertain to multiple goals and have simply been placed in the most reasonable spot.
Similarly, some strategies pertain to multiple objectives.
Only new objectives and strategies that were developed during the CCP planning process are listed here.
Objectives developed for the Refuge Habitat Management Plan are listed here, but not explained, partly
because the NEPA document analyzing those objectives was completed in 1999 and partly because these
objectives are part of the current Refuge management direction regardless of which CCP alternative is
chosen. The complete text of the HMP objectives, strategies, and guild management guidelines can be
found in Appendix B. The FMP objectives and strategies were not restated here or in Appendix B as that
plan is primarily an operational plan dealing with wildfire suppression, fire prevention, and prescribed
fire. The goals, objectives and strategies listed in that plan should be treated within that context only.
The FMP objectives prevail over all other Refuge objectives for fire suppression, firefighter safety, and
life and property protection in case of wildfire. When not dealing with fire suppression situations, HMP
or CCP objectives supersede FMP objectives when there is any conflict in habitat type objectives.
Turnbull NWR CCP
2-12 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
Goal 1: Contribute to protection of local
watersheds to maintain adequate
water quality and quantity for native
R f tl d i
Objectives 1A through 1D were developed as part of the HMP. They can be found in greater detail in
Appendix B.
OBJECTIVE 1A. WATER RIGHTS REVIEW
OBJECTIVE 1B. WETLANDS WATER LEVEL MONITORING
OBJECTIVE 1C. WATER YIELD OF REFUGE WATERSHEDS
OBJECTIVE 1D. WATERSHED QUALITY COORDINATION
OBJECTIVE 1E. WATER AND LAND CONSERVATION: In partnership with private
landowners, other federal agencies, local and state governments, and private organizations, the Service
will work to protect the water resources supporting Refuge wetlands and wildlife, and will protect,
conserve, and restore wetland, steppe, and forest habitats in the Refuge vicinity.
Strategies
• Designate informal Stewardship Area of approximately 44,324 acres surrounding Refuge-owned
lands. The intent of the Stewardship Area is to encourage voluntary and cooperative
protection and restoration of high and medium quality habitats, and to protect water quality
and quantity within the surface and ground watersheds affecting the Refuge. Work with
neighboring landowners and partners utilizing tools such as conservation easements,
enrollment in the Wetlands Reserve Program, well capping, and technical assistance to
achieve Stewardship aims.
• Implement Land Protection Plan (Appendix A) and establish new Approved Refuge Boundary
to the extent of the Stewardship Area.
• Within new Approved Refuge Boundary, the Service shall seek to protect, as part of the
National Wildlife Refuge System, up to 12,000 additional acres, as described in the Land
Protection Plan, from willing sellers, through fee, easement, or agreement.
• Hire staff person to conduct intensive outreach to achieve habitat conservation objectives by
voluntary and cooperative means within Stewardship area. Partner with Ecological Services
as needed.
Rationale for objective and strategies:
The Refuge’s wildlife species are connected to and depend upon the larger landscape. The Turnbull
NWR comprises one of the only protected areas within the Channeled Scablands. Most of the original
habitats of the Scablands have been highly altered, as detailed in Chapter 3. Yet the potential of the
Scablands to support biodiversity is quite high; as one example, wetland basin density rivals that of the
Prairie Pothole region and at intact sites, waterfowl production exceeds that of the Potholes (see Chapter 3
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-13
of this document, Sections 3.2 and 3.1, and the Refuge Habitat Management Plan [USDI 1999] for more
detail). The intermingling of four different habitat types in such close proximity creates conditions of
unique habitat diversity.
Some attendees at the public alternatives workshop in June, 2002 were interested in developing the
voluntary stewardship idea. A Stewardship Area helps to raise public awareness of the unique
conservation value of these lands and the roles that can be played by both public and private sector
entities in conservation. This awareness in turn could potentially lead to decisions by multiple private
landowners, the State, and other conservation partners (i.e. The Nature Conservancy, Inland Northwest
Land Trust, and others) to recognize this area as a priority area for the protection and enhancement of
habitats; conservation and management of water, and restoration of drained wetlands. Thus, conservation
benefits could potentially be realized in a very efficient manner. The Stewardship Area includes most of
the lands included in the Study Area used in the EA. It encompasses lands in varying conditions. The
distribution and quality of wetland, aspen / riparian, ponderosa pine, and Palouse steppe habitats within
this area is mapped and discussed in Chapter 3, and analyzed further in Chapter 4 of the Draft CCP/EA
(USFWS 2005).
Protection under the Refuge System of up to 12,000 acres of land within the new Approved Refuge
Boundary will assist in sustaining the values of the highest quality lands within the Study Area, including
the lands most important for surface and ground water quality and quantity protection; the lands with
superior pine, aspen and/or steppe habitats; and the lands most feasible for restoration of wetlands.
Protection and restoration, using the variety of tools proposed in partnership with neighbors and interested
conservation partners, will greatly contribute to the long term maintenance of environmental health and
biodiversity in this area of Washington. See Land Protection Plan in Appendix A for further details.
OBJECTIVE 1F. IMPROVE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY: Work to ensure
current or improved levels of the quality and quantity of water entering the Refuge from the four major
drainages (Company, Kaegle, Phillips, and Philleo) so as to manage existing Refuge wetlands at objective
levels identified in the Habitat Management Plan.
Strategies
• Complete water quality study in progress. Conduct similar study at five year intervals to
determine if water quality entering Refuge is improving.
• Partner with landowners, County, Natural Resources Conservation Service and Department of
Ecology outside Refuge ownership boundaries, but with particular focus within Stewardship
Area, to implement measures that could conserve water quality and quantity. Such measures may
include: distribution of information about best management practices, enrollment in the Wetlands
Reserve Program, and other conservation practices; provision of technical assistance or matching
funds for conservation and restoration work, etc.
• Within new Approved Refuge Boundary, acquire lands from willing sellers as funds become
available.
• Encourage land trusts such as The Nature Conservancy, Trust for Public Lands, and Inland
Northwest Land Trust to work actively within the Channeled Scablands and especially within the
Stewardship Area to conserve lands.
Turnbull NWR CCP
2-14 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
• Together with partners, monitor groundwater resources through the placement of monitoring
wells and use of the piezometer well identified in the HMP.
• Together with partners, reduce density and intensity of future well development to prevent over
utilization of groundwater resources.
• Consider a study on groundwater resources, to investigate the hypothesis that there has been a
drop in well levels from historic to current times.
Rationale for objective and strategies:
Maintaining adequate water quantity flowing into the Refuge is essential for wetlands to function as
primary breeding and foraging habitats for all species that may potentially use these habitats. Because of
the regional nature of the drainage system, Turnbull NWR is dependent on inflow of water to supply and
manage its wetlands.
The proximity and growth of Spokane, Cheney, and other communities in the Spokane metropolitan area
has the potential to affect the quality of both groundwater and surface run-off waters. Septic systems
continue to be the primary method of domestic waste disposal in the area. Increased septic system
loading increases the potential for non-point source pollution of groundwater that ultimately feeds Refuge
wetlands.
Water quality has been a concern for the Refuge for some time. During the last 11 years, two studies of
water quality around and on the Refuge were completed. The 2002 study found the highest nutrient
concentrations in the subwatersheds with the greatest area in dairy and/or dryland farming (see Chapter 3,
Section 3.1). Left unresolved, water quality problems will degrade Refuge wetland habitats and other
habitats downstream.
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-15
Goal 2:
Provide habitat conditions essential
to the conservation of migratory birds
and other wildlife within a variety of
wetland complexes.
Objectives 2A through 2F were developed as part of the HMP. They can be found in greater detail in
Appendix B.
OBJECTIVE 2A. OPEN WATER ACREAGE
OBJECTIVE 2B. EMERGENT PLANT STRATA PERCENT
OBJECTIVE 2C. WATER DEPTHS IN EMERGENT PLANT ZONE
OBJECTIVE 2D. RESTORATION OF NATURAL HYDROLOGY
OBJECTIVE 2E. RESTORATION OF NATURAL BASINS TOPOGRAPHY
OBJECTIVE 2F. REED CANARYGRASS CONTROL
OBJECTIVE 2G. RESTORE WETLANDS: Strive to maintain existing and restore
additional wetland habitat to benefit key wetland indicator species.
• Within the Stewardship Area, protect or restore up to 7,110 acres of wetlands through voluntary
partnerships and stewardship activities.
• Within new Approved Refuge Boundary, protect, as part of the National Wildlife Refuge System,
up to 2,156 acres of wetland habitat from willing sellers only.
Strategies
• Throughout Stewardship Area, work with landowners to encourage wetlands restoration
activities. Provide education on the values of wetlands through outreach programs; provide
technical assistance as feasible; and provide information to landowners on technical and
financial assistance programs available through federal, state, or local agencies and private
organizations.
• With partners, prepare interpretive brochure describing wetlands restoration desired outcomes
and techniques. Use brochure for field trips, outreach activities, etc.
• Within new Approved Refuge Boundary, acquire lands from willing sellers as funds become
available.
Rationale for objective and strategies:
Approximately 7,110 wetland acres are found within the Study Area outside of the Refuge ownership, of
which 5, 006 acres are drained. The potential of the Channeled Scablands vicinity to support wetland
habitats and species is very high. Analysis shows that the Channeled Scablands rival or exceed the Prairie
Pothole Region for wetland depth, size, and abundance in almost every wetland type category (see further
discussion, Chapter 3). Additionally, the Channeled Scablands have a greater proportion of the total area
in wetlands. In areas such as the Refuge where the wetland complex is still intact, duck breeding pair
densities of several species is actually greater than in the Prairie Pothole region, which is globally known
for its waterfowl production. Positive conservation action is needed, however, to realize these habitat
Turnbull NWR CCP
2-16 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
benefits. As the situation currently stands, most of these wetland acres have been drained and now
provide only ephemeral habitat for wetland dependent species.
Key wetland indicator species are listed in the Refuge Habitat Management Plan (USDI 1999).
See Land Protection Plan in Appendix A for further details.
OBJECTIVE 2H. IDENTIFY AND PROTECT VERNAL POOLS: Identify locations
of high quality and intact rare vernal pool habitat within Stewardship Area and strive to further protect
these areas.
Strategies
• In cooperation with landowners, inventory grassland areas within the Stewardship Area to
ascertain vernal pool presence.
• Throughout Stewardship Area, work with landowners to encourage vernal pool protection.
Provide information on the values of vernal pools through outreach programs; provide technical
assistance as feasible; and provide information to landowners on technical and financial
assistance programs available through federal, state, or local agencies and private organizations.
• Within new Approved Refuge Boundary, acquire lands from willing sellers as funds become
available.
Rationale for objective and strategies:
Vernal pools, typically located in the biscuit and swale steppe habitat of the Channeled Scablands region,
warrant special consideration. These vernal pools occur in shallow depressions with a perched water
table. Standing water is usually present for less than two months in most years. Because of the relatively
short lived nature of these wetlands they are host to a unique plant and animal community.
Because of their small size and ephemeral nature, most vernal pools are not readily detectable with
remote sensing imagery and have been largely overlooked by the National Wetlands Inventory. Because
of this, their actual locations in the Study Area are generally unknown.
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-17
Goal 3:
Restore Refuge aspen and ponderosa
pine forests to a natural distribution of
stand structural and successional
stages to benefit forest dependent
wildlife.
Objectives 3A through 3D were developed as part of the HMP. They can be found in greater detail in
Appendix B.
OBJECTIVE 3A. RESTORATION OF PONDEROSA PINE
OBJECTIVE 3B. SNAG RECRUITMENT
OBJECTIVE 3C. ASPEN/RIPARIAN RESTORATION WITHIN CLIMAX PINE
STANDS
OBJECTIVE 3D. COARSE WOODY DEBRIS
OBJECTIVE 3E. REDUCE ELK DAMAGE: In cooperation with the State, undertake
actions to reduce elk damage to Refuge habitats. In particular, ensure that damage to Refuge aspen
groves does not exceed levels above which aspen stands cannot be regenerated or sustained.
Strategies
• Continue work to identify a sound indicator for measuring the damage to aspen habitats.
Investigate use of percent of current annual growth (CAG) browsed or percent of twigs browsed.
Utilize Albrecht (2003) study.
• Continue discussions with Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife to share elk
information, including herd population estimates, reports of on-refuge and off-refuge damage,
and viable methods for reducing elk numbers.
• Consider a variety of tools to reduce elk population numbers or damage, including relocation,
implant of reproduction inhibiting chemicals, working with private landowners, and other
methods as feasible. (Hunting will be employed as a tool - see Objective 7M).
• Monitor aspen habitats annually using established indicator.
• Monitor and track seasonal shifts in elk populations and distribution on Refuge.
• Encourage Washington State University continuation of Master’s level theses dealing with elk/
aspen interactions.
Turnbull NWR CCP
2-18 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
Rationale for objective and strategies:
Research underway by the State and Eastern Washington University indicates that the Refuge is important
to the local elk population as a security zone. As a result, there has been heavy browsing of young aspen
and other deciduous shrubs and trees on the Refuge. In addition, several neighbors have complained of
elk damage to their hay, other agricultural crops, fences, and ornamental shrubs since the early 1990s and
feel that the Refuge should take a more active role in limiting elk numbers. Since 1992, two claims have
been paid by the State for elk damage to agricultural crops. Complaints have declined since 1999 after
several local landowners began leasing their lands for hunting.
Aspen stands typically regenerate themselves after disturbance by producing new shoots, also called
suckers. A high level of elk browse on an aspen stand can ultimately impede the stand’s capacity to
regenerate and grow into a mature stand. Current literature was reviewed to investigate the issue of how
much elk use on aspen is sustainable or in other words, does not impede a stand’s regeneration and
capacity to grow into a mature stand. A set of management recommendations for regenerating aspen
stands, published by Bates et al. (2002) indicates that 4000-5000 well-spaced suckers per acre at age two
is adequate for regenerating the stand, though a higher number of suckers per acre is desirable for
unexpected losses from disease or injury. Other authors, including Debyle (1985) and Campbell et al.
(2001) have recommended retaining at least 500 stems per acre at year 6 or when the aspen close is
approximately 2.5 meters tall.
The Refuge maintains twelve study plots in aspen habitat. Albrecht (2003) investigated aspen
regeneration under variable elk use on the Refuge and discovered that aspen in areas where elk
concentrate are much more intensively browsed. Specifically, he discovered that in areas categorized as
“low-use” by elk, less than 20% of the stems under 2.5 meters tall received moderate to high intensity
browsing. This appeared to be an acceptable level in that these stands were showing recruitment of an
adequate number of stems per acre.
Management that reduces elk densities in an area during the winter by either removal or redistribution can
decrease browsing intensity enough to allow aspen escapement and height growth beyond the reach of
elk. Hunting can be an effective elk population management strategy. Because of the high proportion of
leased private land and current no hunting areas such as the Refuge and several private tracts, limited elk
hunting opportunities exist in the Refuge vicinity.
See also Objective 7M; Initiate a High-Quality Elk Hunting Program.
OBJECTIVE 3F. PROTECT ASPEN HABITAT: Strive to protect and restore additional
aspen and deciduous shrub habitat to benefit key aspen indicator species.
• Within the Stewardship Area, protect and restore up to 380 acres of aspen through voluntary
partnerships and stewardship activities.
• Within new Approved Refuge Boundary, protect, as part of the National Wildlife Refuge System,
up to 115 acres of aspen habitat from willing sellers only.
Strategies
• Throughout Stewardship Area, work with landowners to encourage stewardship and restoration
of aspen groves and deciduous shrub riparian habitats. Provide education on the wildlife values
of aspen habitat through outreach programs, provide technical assistance as feasible, and provide
information to landowners on technical and financial assistance programs available through
federal, state, or local agencies and private organizations. Integrate outreach and assistance
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-19
programs with the Wildland Urban Interface program (WUI) and funds as per the National Fire
Plan.
• With partners, prepare interpretive brochure describing aspen restoration desired outcomes and
techniques. Use brochure for field trips, outreach activities, etc.
• Within new Approved Refuge Boundary, acquire lands from willing sellers as funds become
available.
Rationale for objective and strategies:
Although aspen occurs in small amounts relative to other habitats within the Study Area, it is important to
a large portion of the local wildlife, particularly neotropical migratory songbirds. Almost 75% of the
aspen stands within the Study Area are considered high quality (deduced from aerial photo interpretation).
Cover type mapping completed by the Refuge in 1992 indicated that the area occupied by aspen and
deciduous shrub riparian habitats had been reduced by approximately 65 percent from previously. Causes
for this decline included competition by encroaching ponderosa pine, clearing for pasture improvement,
and finally by livestock and elk browsing which suppresses aspen and shrub regeneration. Simplification
of habitat structure in aspen (loss or suppression of understory shrubs, grasses, forbs, and regenerating
trees, as well as loss of snags) reduces the suitability of this habitat for shrub and tree cavity nesters and
cavity using wildlife species. Human development nearby also encourages competitive or predatory
wildlife such as starlings, house sparrows, raccoons, and cats.
Key aspen indicator species are listed in the Refuge Habitat Management Plan (USDI 1999).
See Land Protection Plan in Appendix A for further details.
OBJECTIVE 3G. PROTECT PONDEROSA PINE HABITAT: Protect and restore
additional ponderosa pine forest habitat to benefit key pine indicator species.
• Within the Stewardship Area, protect and restore up to 20,090 acres of ponderosa pine habitat
through voluntary partnerships and stewardship activities.
• Within new Approved Refuge Boundary, protect, as part of the National Wildlife Refuge System,
up to 6,092 acres of ponderosa pine habitat, from willing sellers only.
Strategies
• Within Stewardship Area, work with landowners to encourage conservation and restoration
activities for ponderosa pine forests. Provide information on the values of pine forests through
outreach programs; provide technical assistance for restoration as feasible; and provide
information to landowners on technical and financial assistance programs available through
federal, state, or local agencies and private organizations. Integrate outreach and assistance
programs with the Wildland Urban Interface program (WUI) and funds as per the National Fire
Plan.
• With partners, prepare interpretive brochure describing pine forest restoration desired outcomes
and techniques. Use brochure for field trips, outreach activities, etc.
• Within new Approved Refuge Boundary, acquire lands from willing sellers as funds become
available.
Turnbull NWR CCP
2-20 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
Rationale for objective and strategies:
The Study Area contains approximately 20,090 acres of ponderosa pine forest. Nearly all large diameter
open stands of ponderosa pine forest have been harvested from large regions of Oregon, Washington, and
Idaho. Ponderosa pine provides valuable wildlife habitat in its large-diameter late-seral stage. Timber
harvest has severely affected these habitat types because of the high value of the trees and the fact that,
located at lower elevations, these habitats have been more accessible than higher elevation types. Fire
exclusion has also played a role in the loss of this habitat, resulting in a gradual shift in stand composition
from shade-intolerant tree species such as ponderosa pine to shade-tolerant species such as Douglas-fir
and grand fir. See further discussion in Chapter 3, Section 3.2.
The late-seral ponderosa pine cover type has declined throughout its range in the Columbia Basin but
portions of the Basin show declines that are particularly severe. In the Northern Glaciated Mountains
Ecological Reporting Unit (ERU) which measures 17.6 million acres and includes part of the northeast
section of the Study Area, late-seral, single layer ponderosa pine has declined from historic levels by over
99 percent. In the Columbia Plateau ERU (24.3 million acres), where the rest of the Study Area is
located, late-seral, single layer ponderosa pine has declined from historic levels by over 93 percent (Hann
et al., 1997).
Conservation and restoration of large diameter pine forests is necessary in order to protect and restore
habitats for the unique suite of species reliant on such forests.
Key ponderosa pine indicator species are listed in the Refuge Habitat Management Plan (USDI 1999).
See Land Protection Plan in Appendix A for further details.
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-21
Goal 4:
Protect and restore the natural
distribution and diversity of grassland
and shrub steppe habitats to benefit
wildlife.
Objectives 4A through 4D were developed as part of the HMP. They can be found in greater detail in
Appendix B.
OBJECTIVE 4A. LITTER COVER PERCENT
OBJECTIVE 4B. ENCROACHING PINES REMOVAL
OBJECTIVE 4C. EXOTIC PLANT SPECIES CONTROL
OBJECTIVE 4D. IDENTIFICATION OF INTACT GRASSLAND AND STEPPE
OBJECTIVE 4E. PROTECT PALOUSE STEPPE HABITAT: Strive to protect and
restore additional Palouse steppe habitat to benefit key steppe indicator species.
• Within the Stewardship Area, protect and restore up to 11,955 of Palouse steppe habitat through
voluntary partnerships and stewardship activities.
• Within new Approved Refuge Boundary, protect, as part of the National Wildlife Refuge System,
up to 3,637 acres of Palouse steppe habitat from willing sellers only.
Strategies
• Within Stewardship Area, work with landowners to encourage Palouse steppe protection and
restoration activities. Provide information on the values of steppe through outreach programs;
provide technical assistance as feasible; and provide information to landowners on technical and
financial assistance programs available through federal, state, or local agencies and private
organizations.
• Within new Approved Refuge Boundary, acquire lands from willing sellers as funds become
available.
Rationale for objective and strategies:
Nearly 90 percent of the original Palouse Prairie steppe habitat has been converted to dryland farming
(Cassidy et al. 1997a). The extent of this loss places this ecosystem on the list of critically endangered
ecosystems in the United States (Noss et al. 1995) and the Washington GAP Analysis authors rated
Palouse steppe as the highest conservation priority in the State.
Key steppe indicator species are listed in the Refuge Habitat Management Plan (USDI 1999).
Turnbull NWR CCP
2-22 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
Goal 5: Support the conservation of
threatened and endangered species
in their natural ecosystems.
Objectives 5A through 5E were developed as part of the HMP. They can be found in greater detail in
Appendix B.
OBJECTIVE 5A. HOWELLIA RESEARCH AND MONITORING
OBJECTIVE 5B. HOWELLIA PRECAUTION
OBJECTIVE 5C. REDUCTION OF REED CANARYGRASS COMPETITION
OBJECTIVE 5D. HOWELLIA EDUCATION
OBJECTIVE 5E. HOWELLIA HABITAT PROTECTION
OBJECTIVE 5F. CONSERVE WATER HOWELLIA HABITAT: Protect up to 885
acres of potential water howellia habitat within the Stewardship Area and/or up to 511 acres within new
Approved Refuge Boundary to support recovery efforts identified in the Draft Water Howellia Recovery
Plan (Shelly and Gamon 1996).
Strategies
• Within Stewardship Area, work with landowners to encourage conservation of water howellia.
Provide information on identification of the plant in outreach programs; provide technical
assistance as feasible; and provide information to landowners on technical and financial
assistance programs available through Natural Resources Conservation Service, private partners,
or the Service’s Private Lands Program.
• Within new Approved Refuge Boundary, acquire lands from willing sellers as funds become
available.
Rationale for objective and strategies:
Small, semi-permanent wetlands on the Refuge, and within the near vicinity, support one of the largest
known metapopulations of water Howellia within its range (Shelly and Gamon 1996). Although very
little of its potential habitat has been surveyed in the Refuge vicinity, there are numerous wetlands within
that have the same habitat attributes as the known occurrences on the Refuge. Expanding the number of
protected sub-populations will further conserve this meta-population.
OBJECTIVE 5G. PROTECT SPALDING’S SILENE HABITAT: Endeavor to protect
up to 6,502 acres of potential Spalding’s Silene habitat within the Stewardship Area and/or up to 1,971
acres within the new Approved Refuge Boundary in support of recovery for this species.
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-23
Strategies
• Implement all recovery actions that are appropriate and can be undertaken at Turnbull NWR.
• Actively promote conservation of Palouse steppe habitat through outreach and education
programs.
• Protect potential Spalding’s silene habitat through acquisition from willing sellers as funds
become available.
Rationale for objective and strategies:
Spalding’s silene, also known as Spalding’s catchfly, was recently listed as a threatened species under the
Endangered Species Act. The species has been documented on the Refuge and 28 populations have been
identified in eastern Washington (Spokane, Lincoln, Whitman, and Asotin Counties). This species is
primarily restricted to Palouse steppe habitat. Actions undertaken by the Refuge to promote conservation
of Palouse steppe habitat could also aid in the long term recovery of this species.
Turnbull NWR CCP
2-24 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
Goal 6:
Support the maintenance of
biologically effective landscape
linkages and corridors between the
refuge and other intact areas of
vegetation zones representative of
this ecoregion.
Objectives 6A through 6B were developed as part of the HMP. They can be found in greater detail in
Appendix B.
OBJECTIVE 6A. PARTICIPATION IN COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL PLANNING
OBJECTIVE 6B. MAINTENANCE OF NATIVE LAND COVER
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-25
Goal 7:
Foster appreciation and support of
the Refuge and the Channeled
Scablands ecosystem through quality
environmental education,
interpretation, wildlife-dependent
recreation, and outreach compatible
with the Refuge purposes and mission.
OBJECTIVE 7A. PROVIDE A QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION
PROGRAM ON-REFUGE: Provide a quality, on-site environmental education program for 8,000
to 10,000 students and citizens annually. This program shall emphasize the wildlife and habitat of the
Channeled Scablands as well as the role and importance of national wildlife refuges. The on-Refuge
environmental education program shall:
• focus on community groups and schools within 150 miles;
• tier to (or achieve) Washington state educational objectives;
• incorporate specific learning objectives and utilizes audience-appropriate curricula;
• feature class facilitation balanced between Refuge staff, teachers, volunteers, and partners; and
• be coordinated by a permanent full time Environmental Education Specialist.
Strategies
• Every two years, review EE curricula with focus group of educators at primary, secondary, and
university levels. Update curricula and materials as necessary to ensure specific, age-appropriate
learning objectives are articulated and that proper emphasis is placed on Refuge
System, current ecosystem science of Channeled Scablands, current management issues, and
adherence to current State environmental education standards.
• Implement user and administrative stipulations specified in the Environmental Education and
Interpretation Compatibility Determination (Appendix E).
• Design all instructional materials to encourage development of an environmental ethic and
commitment to land stewardship in addition to conveying scientific knowledge.
• Consider membership in a statewide environmental education consortium, with the Refuge
program emphasis on Channeled Scablands and Eastern Washington ecosystems.
• Establish permanent, full time Environmental Education Specialist position.
• Establish a permanent seasonal Environmental Educational Specialist position.
• Establish temporary park rangers for EE program.
Turnbull NWR CCP
2-26 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
• Hold 2 to 4 teacher workshops per year to train educators and facilitators.
Rationale for objective and strategies:
The Refuge’s EE program has been active for over 30 years. Based on feedback obtained during CCP
scoping, the Service recognizes that of all the programs and services provided by the Refuge, the EE
program is probably the most highly valued by the public. Many people support an expanded EE
program. We feel it is imperative to ensure that this program receive the staff and funding emphasis that
will ensure quality environmental educational opportunities for a diversity of students and community
groups for the next 15 years.
OBJECTIVE 7B. EXPAND ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION FACILITIES:
Within seven years, expand the existing EE facility to allow use by two groups at a time. Provide two
adjoining classrooms, accommodating 50 people each, which can be combined to create a multipurpose
room for 100.
Strategies
• Implement user and administrative stipulations specified in the Environmental Education and
Interpretation Compatibility Determination (Appendix E).
• Explore funding opportunities such as a capital campaign, etc.
• Maintain a vault toilet at each EE site, and maintain parking areas to accommodate buses.
• Establish a permanent shelter at each EE site.
• Maintain four field EE sites, with one in rest /rotation at all time.
• Add a fifth field EE site if necessary.
• Ensure all EE facilities and field sites are accessible to individuals with disabilities.
Rationale for objective and strategies:
Existing environmental education facilities have worked well in the past, but they limit the potential of
the program. There is a need to be able to schedule two classes at a time. Expanded classroom facilities
will provide an opportunity for presentations and educational activities for larger audiences. The public is
very supportive of the environmental education program and would like to see more activity in this area.
OBJECTIVE 7C. PROVIDE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION PROGRAM OFF-REFUGE:
Provide an off-Refuge environmental education program to community groups and schools
that fosters understanding, appreciation and support for Refuges, and the habitat and wildlife of the
Channeled Scablands ecosystem. The off-Refuge environmental education program shall:
• be coordinated by a staff Environmental Education Specialist;
• complement on-Refuge environmental education opportunities;
• reach audiences not reached by on-Refuge programs;
• focus on groups and schools within an hour’s drive;
• reach 3,000 to 4,500 individuals (120-180 classes) annually, at least 20 percent of these from non-traditional
audiences;
Turnbull NWR CCP
Chapter 2 �� Management Direction 2-27
• include at least 25 percent facilitated educational opportunities;
• incorporate Washington state educational objectives; and
• incorporate specific learning objectives and utilize audience-appropriate curricula.
Strategies
• Maintain lending library of EE materials (videos, skins, curriculum guidelines, etc.).
• Recruit retired teachers and other volunteers for off refuge facilitated opportunities.
• Coordinate this program closely with the on-refuge EE program. In general, implementing the
on-refuge program will benefit the off-Refuge program as well.
• Post curricula and other learning materials on the Refuge web site.
• Actively advertise off-refuge environmental education program to teachers, schools, and groups.
Rationale for objective and strategies:
Off-Refuge educational programs can greatly expand the level of awareness and knowledge of the Refuge
and the Channeled Scablands ecosystem. The Refuge can accommodate only 125 students per day on
site, but many more students per day could potentially learn about the wildlife and aquatic ecology of the
Channeled Scablands through off-site programs, especially those provided through a lending library.
Even with these programs, however, the Refuge will aim to have at least 25 percent of the off-refuge
programs facilitated, as staff has found that facilitated programs are generally more effective at achieving
the learning objectives.
OBJECTIVE 7D. DEVELOP CULTURAL RESOURCES INTERPRETIVE AND
EDUCATION PROGRAM: In partnership with the Spokane, Coeur d'Alene, Colville, and
Kalispel Tribes, historical societies, and other preservation partners, develop a program for the education
and interpretation of cultural resources of the Refuge that:
• instills an ethic for the conservation of our cultural heritage;
• promotes an appreciation for the Native American culture and perspective on cultural resources;
• translates the results of cultural research into media that can be understood and appreciated by a
variety of people; and
• relates the connection between cultural resources and natural resources and the role of humans in
the environment.
Strategies
• Consult with the