Comprehensive Conservation Plan Bamforth National Wildlife Refuge Hutton Lake National Wildlife Refuge Mortenson Lake National Wildlife Refuge

              Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Bamforth National Wildlife Refuge
Hutton Lake National Wildlife Refuge
Mortenson Lake National Wildlife Refuge
September 2007
Prepared by:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Arapaho National Wildlife Refuge Complex
953 Jackson County Road #32
Walden, CO 80448
970/723 8202
and
Region 6, Mountain–Prairie Region
Division of Refuge Planning
134 Union Boulevard, Suite 300
Lakewood, CO 80228
303/236 8145
Approved by:
Steve Guertin Date
Regional Director, Region 6
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Lakewood, CO
and
Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Bamforth National Wildlife Refuge
Hutton Lake National Wildlife Refuge
Mortenson Lake National Wildlife Refuge
Submitted by:
Ann Timberman Date
Project Leader
Arapaho National Wildlife Refuge Complex
Walden, CO
Concurred with by:
Dean Rundle Date
Refuge Supervisor
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 6
Lakewood, CO
Richard A. Coleman, PhD Date
Assistant Regional Director, Region 6
National Wildlife Refuge Service
Lakewood, CO
Contents
Abbreviations .....................................................................................................................................................v
Summary ................................................................................................................................................................. vii
1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................................1
Purpose and Need for the Plan...........................................................................................................................1
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Wildlife Refuge System ..........................................3
National and Regional Mandates .......................................................................................................................4
Refuge Contributions to National and Regional Plans...................................................................................4
Ecosystem Descriptions and Threats................................................................................................................6
The Planning Process..........................................................................................................................................6
2 The Refuges ........................................................................................................................................................11
Establishment, Acquisition, and Management History................................................................................11
Special Values of the Refuges ...........................................................................................................................12
Purpose................................................................................................................................................................14
Vision ...................................................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................
...............................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
14
Goals 14
Planning Issues 17
3 Refuge Resources and Description 19
Physical Environment 19
Biological Resources 21
Cultural Resources 34
Special Management Areas 37
Visitor Services 40
Partnerships 41
Socioeconomic Environment 41
Refuge Operations 44
4 Management Direction ............................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................
...................................................................................
.................................................
45
Management Focus 45
Goals, Objectives, Strategies, and Rationale..................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................
...............................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................
...............................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................
46
Staffing and Funding 54
Step-down Management Plans 55
Monitoring and Evaluation 55
Glossary 57
Appendix A—Environmental Compliance 63
Appendix B—Key Legislation and Policies 65
Appendix C—List of Preparers 69
Appendix D—Public Involvement 71
Appendix E—Fire Management Program 77
Appendix F—List of Plant Species 81
Appendix G—List of Potentially Occurring Bird Species 85
Appendix H—List of Potentially Occurring Amphibian and Reptile Species 89
Appendix I—List of Potentially Occurring Mammal Species.............................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................
......................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................................................
91
Appendix J—Compatibility Determination for Wildlife Observation
and Wildlife Photography 93
Appendix K—Compatibility Determination for Environmental Education
and Interpretation 95
Appendix L—Compatibility Determination for Grazing 97
Appendix M—Section 7 Biological Evaluation 99
Bibliography 105
Figures and Tables
Figures
1. Vicinity map for the Laramie Plains refuges, Wyoming ............................................................................2
2. The Laramie Plains refuges are located in the Wyoming Basin, physiographic area 86 ......................5
3. Platte–Kansas Rivers ecosystem..................................................................................................................7
4. The planning process......................................................................................................................................8
5. Base map of Bamforth NWR, Wyoming ....................................................................................................13
6. Base map of Hutton Lake NWR, Wyoming ..............................................................................................
........................................................................................
......................................................................................................
................................................................................................
.........................................................................................
...........................................................................................
15
7. Base map of Mortenson Lake NWR, Wyoming 16
8. Habitats at Bamforth NWR, Wyoming 24
9. Habitats at Hutton Lake NWR, Wyoming 25
10. Habitats at Mortenson Lake NWR, Wyoming 26
11. Infrastructure at Bamforth NWR, Wyoming 29
12. Infrastructure and public use areas at Hutton Lake NWR, Wyoming .................................................
...............................................................................
.......................................
..........................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................
................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
..................................................
...........................................................................
38
13. Infrastructure at Mortenson Lake NWR, Wyoming 39
14. Laramie Plains refuges in relation to nearby centers of economic infl uence 41
15. Wyoming and study area population 42
16. Study area age composition 42
17. Study area employment distribution, 2006 43
18. The adaptive management process 56
Tables
1. Planning process summary for the Laramie Plains refuges, Wyoming 10
2. Water rights for the Laramie Plains refuges, Wyoming 22
3. Documented occurrences of vertebrate species of concern within the Laramie Plains refuges,
Wyoming .........................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................
............................................
35
4. Current and proposed staff for the Arapaho NWR Complex, including Arapaho NWR, Colorado,
and Bamforth NWR, Hutton Lake NWR, Mortenson Lake NWR, and Pathfi nder NWR,
Wyoming 55
5. Step-down management plans for the Laramie Plains refuges, Wyoming 56
Abbreviations
Administration Act National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966
ABC American Bird Conservancy
BBS breeding bird survey
BCR Bird Conservation Regions
CCC Civilian Conservation Corps
CCP comprehensive conservation plan
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
cfs cubic feet per second
CRP conservation reserve program
CWCS comprehensive wildlife conservation strategy
DNC dense nesting cover
DU Ducks Unlimited
EA environmental assessment
EO executive order
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FMP fire management plan
FONSI finding of no signifi cant impact
FTE full-time equivalent
GIS geographic information system
GPS global positioning system
GS general schedule (employment)
HAPET Habitat and Population Evaluation Team
HMP habitat management plan
IMPROVE interagency monitoring of protected visual environments
Improvement Act National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997
LWCF Land and Water Conservation Fund
LPP land protection plan
NABCI North American Bird Conservation Initiative
NAWCA North American Wetlands Conservation Act
NAWMP North American Waterfowl Management Plan
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NGO nongovernmental organization
NOI notice of intent
vi Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NWI national wetland inventory
NWR national wildlife refuge
NWRS National Wildlife Refuge System
PFW Partners for Fish and Wildlife
PL public law
PPJV Prairie Pothole Joint Venture
PPR prairie pothole region
Refuge System National Wildlife Refuge System
region 6 Mountain–Prairie Region of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
RONS Refuge Operating Needs System
SAMMS Service Asset Maintenance Management System
Service U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
SUP special use permit
SWG state wildlife grant
TMDL total maximum daily load
TNC The Nature Conservancy
UGHEP upland gamebird habitat enhancement program
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
WG wage grade (employment)
WHIP wildlife habitat incentive program
WPA waterfowl production area
WMD wetland management district
WUI wildland–urban interface
Summary
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has
developed this comprehensive conservation plan as
the foundation for management and use of the three
Laramie Plains refuges (Bamforth, Hutton Lake,
and Mortenson Lake) located in Albany County,
Wyoming. This plan, approved in 2007, will guide
management of the refuges for the next 15 years.
The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement
Act of 1997 (Improvement Act) requires the Service
to develop a comprehensive conservation plan by
2012 for each national wildlife refuge in the National
Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System).
This brief summary describes the refuges,
comprehensive conservation plan, and planning
process.
THE LARAMIE PLAINS REFUGES
Laramie, Wyoming, is positioned in a high plains
basin ecosystem known as the Laramie Basin.
The shallow depressions of the basin, within the
relatively flat topography of the region, support
wetland complexes that are unique to the area.
These wetland complexes provide resting, nesting,
and breeding areas for migratory birds in the
semiarid environment.
The Laramie Basin is home to three national wildlife
refuges known collectively as the “Laramie Plains
refuges.” Located within 15 miles of Laramie,
the three refuges are managed by Service staff
headquartered at the Arapaho National Wildlife
Refuge (NWR) near Walden, Colorado, which lies
approximately 65 miles southwest of Laramie.
In the early 1930s, J. Clark Salyer III was charged
with identifying areas to protect as national wildlife
refuges for migratory birds. He surveyed the
area around Laramie and selected two locations
as national wildlife refuges for migratory birds.
Bamforth NWR and Hutton Lake NWR were
established by executive orders in 1932, within one
day of each other.
Bamforth NWR comprises three separate parcels
with private or state lands between them. The
1,166-acre refuge contains Bamforth Lake, but most
of the lake falls outside the refuge boundary. No
public use is allowed on Bamforth NWR.
Hutton Lake NWR consists of 1,928 acres and
supports approximately 2,000 visits over the course
of a year, mostly from March through October.
Wildlife-viewing opportunities and refuge access are
limited from November through February due to
frozen ponds and cold, snowy weather.
Mortenson Lake NWR was established in 1993 to
protect the Wyoming toad’s last known population.
The Wyoming toad was listed as an endangered
species in 1984. Physical features of 1,968-acre
refuge include Mortenson Lake, Soda Lake, and
Gibbs Pond. Habitat types include open water,
wetlands, wet meadow, grassland, sagebrush, and
greasewood communities. No public use is currently
allowed on the refuge to prevent potential adverse
impact on the Wyoming toad.
Refuge habitats include wet meadows and grasslands.
USFWS
viii Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
THE PLANNING PROCESS
Through the environmental analysis process, the
Service has selected as the preferred alternative
(final comprehensive conservation plan) for the
Laramie Plains refuges alternative B from the draft
conservation plan and environmental assessment
published in August 2007.
In 2006, a planning team of refuge and other
Service staff gathered and began to analyze
resource information. The planning process included
designing a vision for the three refuges, along with
goals to reach the vision. After identifying key
issues related to achieving the vision, the team
developed management alternatives.
The team invited the public to participate in the
planning process and public scoping. A mailing list
of about 165 names was created and included private
citizens; local, regional, and state government
representatives and legislators; other federal
agencies; tribal governments; and nonprofi t
organizations.
Key issues (habitat, wildlife, water quality, public
outreach, public use, and refuge operations) were
identified during analysis of concerns raised by
refuge staff, along with analysis of public comments
collected during scoping. These issues were
addressed throughout the planning process and in
the final comprehensive conservation plan.
COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN
This plan includes detailed objectives and strategies
to carry out the vision and goals for the Laramie
Plains refuges.
The below vision describes what the refuges will
be and what the Service hopes to do, and is based
primarily on the mission of the National Wildlife
Refuge System and specific purposes of the refuges.
Vision
The wetland complexes and uplands of the Laramie
Plains refuges are important resource components
of this semiarid region that provide key habitat for
the Wyoming toad, migratory birds, and resident
wildlife.
The refuges will be evaluated to direct management
decisions to provide natural and enhanced habitat,
Bulrushes.
USFWS
Summary ix
thereby maximizing the unique potential of each
refuge. Wildlife-dependent recreation opportunities
will be evaluated for each refuge to determine
potential, appropriate public use opportunities.
Goals
The following goals will direct work toward
achieving the vision for the Laramie Plains refuges.
Research and Science Goal
Conduct natural resource management using
sound science and applied research to advance the
understanding of refuge resources and natural
resource function.
(Applies to all three Laramie Plains refuges.)
Partnerships Goal
Work with partners to determine the wildlife and
habitat resources on the refuges, to maximize
wildlife habitat protection, and to increase
understanding of wildlife needs, as well as
the benefits wildlife offer to individuals and
communities, on and off the refuges.
(Applies to all three Laramie Plains refuges.)
Cultural Resources Goal
Identify and evaluate the cultural resources on the
refuges and protect those that are determined to be
signifi cant.
(Applies to all three Laramie Plains refuges.)
Refuge Operations Goal
Secure and demonstrate the effective use of funding,
staffing, and partnerships for the benefit of all
resources in support of the refuges and the Refuge
System.
(Applies to all three Laramie Plains refuges.)
Natural Resources Goal
Conduct baseline surveys to identify refuge
resources and the role these resources serve in the
Laramie Basin ecosystem and the Refuge System.
(Applies only to Bamforth NWR.)
Wetlands Goal
Manage refuge impoundments and other wetlands
to create diverse habitat for wetland-dependent
wildlife.
(Applies only to Hutton Lake NWR and Mortenson
Lake NWR.)
Uplands Goal
Evaluate and manage shrub- and grass-dominated
uplands for benefits to migratory birds (willet,
horned lark), white-tailed prairie dogs, pronghorn,
and other wildlife.
(Applies only to Hutton Lake NWR and Mortenson
Lake NWR.)
Visitor Services Goal
Provide wildlife-dependent recreational
opportunities to a diverse audience when the
administration of these programs does not adversely
affect habitat management objectives.
(Applies only to Hutton Lake NWR.)
Wyoming Toad Goal
In conjunction with the Wyoming Toad Recovery
Team, manage refuge lands around Mortenson
Lake and other areas on the refuge as necessary
to protect, create, and manage habitat suitable for
Wyoming toad recovery from endangered status.
(Applies only to Mortenson Lake NWR.)
1 Introduction
Yellow-headed blackbird.
USFWS
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has
developed this comprehensive conservation plan
(CCP) to provide a foundation for the management
and use of the three national wildlife refuges located
in southeast Wyoming near the town of Laramie
(fi gure 1).
The CCP is intended to be a working guide for
management programs and actions over the next
15 years for the three refuges known collectively as
the “Laramie Plains refuges”: Bamforth National
Wildlife Refuge (NWR), Hutton Lake NWR, and
Mortenson Lake NWR.
The Service developed this CCP in compliance with
the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement
Act of 1997 (Improvement Act) and Part 602
(National Wildlife Refuge System Planning) of “The
Fish and Wildlife Service Manual.” The actions
described in this CCP also meet the requirements
of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA). Compliance with the NEPA is being
achieved through involvement of the public and
inclusion of an integrated environmental assessment
(EA) in the previous draft document (see
environmental compliance documents in appendix A).
The CCP specifies the necessary actions to achieve
the vision and purposes of refuges. Wildlife is the
first priority in refuge management; public use
(wildlife-dependent recreation) is allowed and
encouraged, as long as it is compatible with the
refuges’ purposes.
A planning team of representatives from various
Service programs, refuge staff, the Wyoming Toad
Recovery Team, and the Wyoming Game and Fish
Department prepared the CCP. In developing this
plan, the team used input from local citizens and
organizations.
The evaluation of management alternatives
for the refuges was documented in the “Draft
Comprehensive Conservation Plan and
Environmental Assessment—Bamforth National
Wildlife Refuge, Hutton Lake National Wildlife
Refuge, Mortenson Lake National Wildlife Refuge.”
In September 2007, the regional director of region
6 of the Service selected alternative B as the
preferred alternative for the CCP for the Laramie
Plains refuges.
The planning process and public involvement are
further described in “The Planning Process” section
of this chapter.
PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PLAN
The purpose of this CCP is to identify the role that
the refuges will play in support of the mission of the
National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System),
and to provide long-term guidance for management
of refuge programs and activities. The CCP is
needed
Q to communicate with the public and other
partners in efforts to carry out the mission
of the Refuge System;
Q to provide a clear statement of direction for
management of the refuges;
Q to provide neighbors, visitors, and
government officials with an understanding
of the Service’s management actions on and
around the refuges;
Q to ensure that the Service’s management
actions are consistent with the mandates of
the Improvement Act;
2 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
Figure 1. Vicinity map for the Laramie Plains refuges, Wyoming.
Chapter 1—Introduction 3
Q to ensure that management of the refuges
is consistent with federal, state, and county
plans;
Q to provide a basis for development of
budget requests for the refuges’ operation,
maintenance, and capital improvement
needs.
THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE AND
THE NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM
The Service is the principal federal agency
responsible for fish, wildlife, and plant conservation.
The Refuge System is one of the Service’s major
programs.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
working with others, is to conserve, protect, and
enhance fish and wildlife and their habitats for the
continuing benefit of the American people.
Over a century ago, America’s fish and wildlife
resources were declining at an alarming rate.
Concerned citizens, scientists, and hunting and
angling groups joined together to restore and
sustain America’s national wildlife heritage. This
was the genesis of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
Today, the Service enforces federal wildlife laws,
manages migratory bird populations, restores
nationally signifi cant fisheries, conserves and
restores vital wildlife habitat, protects and recovers
endangered species, and helps other governments
with conservation efforts. In addition, the Service
administers a federal aid program that distributes
hundreds of millions of dollars to states for fi sh
and wildlife restoration, boating access, hunter
education, and related programs across America.
National Wildlife Refuge System
In 1903, President Theodore Roosevelt designated
the 5.5-acre Pelican Island in Florida as the nation’s
first wildlife refuge for the protection of brown
pelicans and other native, nesting birds. This small
but significant designation was the beginning of the
Refuge System.
One hundred years later, the Refuge System has
become the largest network of lands in the world
specifically managed for wildlife, encompassing over
96 million acres within 546 refuges and over 3,000
small areas for waterfowl breeding and nesting.
Today, there is at least one refuge in every state
as well as Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin
Islands.
In 1997, the Improvement Act established a clear
mission for the Refuge System.
The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System
is to administer a national network of lands and
waters for the conservation, management, and
where appropriate, restoration of the fi sh, wildlife,
and plant resources and their habitats within the
United States for the benefit of present and future
generations of Americans.
The Improvement Act states that each national
wildlife refuge (that is, each unit of the Refuge
System) shall be managed
Q to fulfill the mission of the Refuge System;
Q to fulfill the individual purposes of each
refuge;
Q to consider the needs of fish and wildlife
fi rst;
Q to fulfill the requirement of developing a
CCP for each unit of the Refuge System and
fully involve the public in the preparation of
these plans;
Q to maintain the biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health of the
Refuge System;
Q to recognize that wildlife-dependent
recreation activities including hunting,
fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife
photography, and environmental education
and interpretation, are legitimate and
priority public uses;
Q to retain the authority of refuge managers
to determine compatible public uses.
In addition to the mission for the Refuge System,
the wildlife and habitat vision for each unit of the
Refuge System stresses the following principles:
Q Wildlife comes fi rst.
Q Ecosystems, biodiversity, and wilderness
are vital concepts in refuge and district
management.
Q Habitats must be healthy.
Q Growth of refuges and wetland management
districts must be strategic.
Q The Refuge System serves as a model
for habitat management with broad
participation from others.
Following passage of the Improvement Act, the
Service immediately began to carry out the direction
of the new legislation, including preparation of
CCPs for all national wildlife refuges and wetland
management districts. Consistent with the
Improvement Act, the Service prepares all CCPs in
4 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
conjunction with public involvement. Each refuge
and each district is required to complete its CCP
within the 15-year schedule (by 2012).
People and the Refuge System
The nation’s fish and wildlife heritage contributes
to the quality of American lives. Wildlife and wild
places provide special opportunities to recreate,
relax, and enjoy the natural world.
Whether through bird watching, fi shing, hunting,
photography, or other wildlife pursuits, wildlife
recreation contributes millions of dollars to local
economies. In 2002, approximately 35.5 million
people visited the Refuge System, mostly to observe
wildlife in their natural habitats. Visitors are most
often accommodated through nature trails, auto
tours, interpretive programs, and hunting and
fishing opportunities. Significant economic benefi ts
are being generated to the local communities
that surround refuges and wetland management
districts. Economists report that Refuge System
visitors contribute more than $792 million annually
to local economies.
NATIONAL AND REGIONAL MANDATES
Refuge System units are managed to achieve the
mission and goals of the Refuge System, along with
the designated purpose of the refuges and districts
(as described in establishing legislation, executive
orders, or other establishing documents). Key
concepts and guidance of the Refuge System are
in the Refuge System Administration Act of 1966
(Administration Act), Title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFRs), “The Fish and Wildlife Service
Manual,” and the Improvement Act.
The Improvement Act amends the Administration
Act by providing a unifying mission for the
Refuge System, a new process for determining
compatible public uses on refuges and districts,
and a requirement that each refuge and district
be managed under a CCP. The Improvement Act
states that wildlife conservation is the priority of
Refuge System lands and that the Secretary of
the Interior will ensure the biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health of refuge lands
are maintained. Each refuge and district must be
managed to fulfi ll the Refuge System’s mission and
the specifi c purposes for which it was established.
The Improvement Act requires the Service to
monitor the status and trends of fi sh, wildlife, and
plants in each refuge and district.
A detailed description of these and other laws and
executive orders that may affect the CCP or the
Service’s implementation of the CCP is in appendix
A. Service policies on planning and day-to-day
management of refuges and districts are in the
“Refuge System Manual” and “The Fish and
Wildlife Service Manual.”
REFUGE CONTRIBUTIONS TO NATIONAL
AND REGIONAL PLANS
The Laramie Plains refuges contribute to the
conservation efforts described here.
Fulfi lling the Promise
A 1999 report, “Fulfilling the Promise, The
National Wildlife Refuge System” (U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 1999), is the
culmination of a yearlong process by teams
of Service employees to evaluate the Refuge
System nationwide. This report was the focus of
the first national Refuge System conference in
1998 attended by refuge managers, other Service
employees, and representatives from leading
conservation organizations.
The report contains 42 recommendations packaged
with three vision statements dealing with wildlife
and habitat, people, and leadership. This CCP
deals with all three of these major topics. The
planning team looked to the recommendations in
the document for guidance during CCP planning.
Partners in Flight
The Partners in Flight program began in 1990
with the recognition of declining population levels
of many migratory bird species. The challenge,
according to the program, is managing human
population growth while maintaining functional
natural ecosystems. To meet this challenge,
Partners in Flight worked to establish priorities
for conservation efforts and identify land bird
species and habitat types. Partners in Flight
activity has resulted in 52 bird conservation plans
covering the continental United States.
The primary goal of Partners in Flight is to
provide for the long-term health of the bird life
of North America. The first priority is to prevent
the rarest species from going extinct, the second
is to prevent uncommon species from descending
into threatened status, and the third is to “keep
common birds common.”
There are 58 physiographic areas, defi ned by
similar physical geographic features, wholly or
partially contained within the contiguous United
States and several others wholly or partially in
Alaska. The Laramie Plains refuges fall within
physiographic area 86, the Wyoming Basin (see
fi gure 2).
Chapter 1—Introduction 5
The Wyoming Basin is primarily in Wyoming but
also extends into northern Colorado, southern
Montana, and very small parts of northeast Utah
and southeast Idaho. The area consists of broad
intermountain basins interrupted by isolated hills
and low mountains that merge to the south into a
dissected plateau. The Wyoming Basin is primarily
shrub–steppe habitat, dominated by sagebrush and
shadscale, interspersed with areas of short-grass
prairie. Higher elevations are in mountain shrub
vegetation, with coniferous forest atop the highest
areas. Priority bird populations and habitats of the
Wyoming Basin include the following:
Shrub–Steppe
Ferruginous hawk
Prairie falcon
Greater sage-grouse
Cassin’s kingbird
Sage thrasher
Brewer’s sparrow
Sage sparrow
Sagebrush Grasslands
Swainson’s hawk
Mountain plover
McCowan’s longspur
Montane Shrub
Lewis’s woodpecker
Virginia’s warbler
Wetlands
American white pelican
Wilson’s phalarope
Recovery Plans for Federally Listed
Threatened or Endangered Species
Where federally listed threatened or endangered
species occur at the Laramie Plains refuges,
management goals and strategies in their respective
recovery plans will be followed. The list of
threatened or endangered species that occur at the
refuges will change as species are listed or delisted,
or as listed species are discovered on refuge lands.
At the time of plan approval, the Wyoming Toad
Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
[USFWS] 1991) is in effect at Mortenson Lake
NWR, the only refuge covered by this CCP that
provides habitat for the endangered Wyoming
toad. Reports of Preble’s meadow jumping mouse
have been documented at Hutton Lake NWR. The
Service conducted a biological evaluation of the
actions in this CCP per section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act (see appendix M).
Figure 2. The Laramie Plains refuges are located in the Wyoming Basin, physiographic area 86.
6 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
State Comprehensive Wildlife
Conservation Strategy
Over the past several decades, documented declines
of wildlife populations have occurred nationwide.
Congress created the State Wildlife Grant (SWG)
program in 2001. This program provides states
and territories with federal dollars to support
conservation aimed at preventing wildlife from
becoming endangered and in need of protection
under the Endangered Species Act. The SWG
program represents an ambitious endeavor to take
a proactive role in keeping species from becoming
threatened or endangered in the future.
According to the SWG program, each state or
territory and the District of Columbia must
complete a comprehensive wildlife conservation
strategy (CWCS) by October 1, 2005, to receive
future funding.
The CWCS for the state of Wyoming was reviewed
and information therein was used during the
development of the CCP. Implementation of CCP
habitat goals and objectives will support the goals
and objectives of the CWCS.
ECOSYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND THREATS
The Laramie Plains refuges are located within the
Platte–Kansas Rivers ecosystem, which includes
almost all of Nebraska, southeast Wyoming,
northeast Colorado, and northern Kansas (fi gure 3).
The ecosystem is home to the Nebraska Sandhills,
the largest sand dune complex in the western
hemisphere. This area and many others provide vital
habitat for numerous threatened and endangered
wildlife and plant species.
The ecosystem spans from snow-capped, barren
mountain peaks in Colorado to lowland riparian
cottonwood forests along the Missouri River in
eastern Nebraska and Kansas. The mountainous
regions are predominately a mixture of coniferous
forests comprised of Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine,
lodgepole pine, Engelmann spruce, and subalpine
fir. Pinyon pine, juniper woodlands, and aspen
communities are also common throughout. At
high elevation, alpine meadows and lakes, willow
shrub lands, and barren, rocky areas are frequently
found. Forests generally transition into shrub
communities dominated by sagebrush with short
grasses and forbs in eastern Wyoming and western
Nebraska. Farther to the east, trees give way to
short-grass prairie dominated by buffalo grass, blue
grama, hairy grama, and western wheatgrass. The
short-grass prairie turns into mixed-grass prairie
in central Nebraska and Kansas, due primarily
to greater annual rainfall. Many federally listed
endangered and threatened species including the
bald eagle, piping plover, whooping crane, and
Eskimo curlew are found within this ecosystem.
Threats to the Platte–Kansas Rivers ecosystem
that require attention include overgrazing of land,
invasive plants in the area, population growth
and housing development, and groundwater and
surface-water depletion. To overcome these threats,
the priorities for the ecosystem will be to ensure
that natural, healthy ecological processes dominate
and that economic development complements
environmental protection.
Refuge Relationship
The Laramie Plains refuges lie within the Laramie
Basin. The Laramie Basin is at an elevation of
between 7,200 and 7,500 feet above sea level; it
is a semiarid, intermountain basin characterized
by a predominant vegetation of short grasses and
sagebrush.
THE PLANNING PROCESS
This CCP for the three Laramie Plains refuges is
intended to comply with the Improvement Act and
the NEPA as well as the implementing regulations
of the acts. The Service issued its Refuge System
planning policy in 2000, which established
requirements and guidance for refuge and district
plans—including CCPs and step-down management
plans—to ensure that planning efforts comply with
the Improvement Act. The planning policy identifi es
several steps of the CCP and EA process (also see
fi gure 4):
Q Form a planning team and conduct
preplanning.
Q Initiate public involvement and scoping.
Q Draft the vision statement and goals.
Q Develop and analyze alternatives, including
the proposed action.
Q Prepare the draft CCP and EA.
Q Prepare and adopt the fi nal CCP and EA
and issue a “fi nding of no signifi cant impact”
(FONSI) or determine if an environmental
impact statement is needed.
Q Implement the CCP; monitor and evaluate.
Q Review the CCP every 5 years and revise it
every 15 years.
The Service began the preplanning process in
January 2006. The planning team consisted of
Service personnel from various divisions including
refuges, planning, education and visitor services,
ecological services, and the Wyoming Game and Fish
Department. A list of planning team members and
Chapter 1—Introduction 7
Figure 3. Platte–Kansas Rivers ecosystem.
8 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
other major contributors to the development of this
CCP is in appendix C.
The Service developed three unique management
alternatives based on the issues, concerns, and
opportunities expressed during the scoping process.
The evaluation of the alternatives was documented
in “Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and
Environmental Assessment—Bamforth National
Wildlife Refuge, Hutton Lake National Wildlife
Refuge, Mortenson Lake National Wildlife Refuge,”
which was published in August 2007. After the
public comment period for the draft CCP and EA,
the Service finalized the CCP.
Coordination with the Public
The Service held two public scoping meetings in May
2006 (see table 1 for details) announced by the local
media. During the public meetings, a description
of the CCP and NEPA process was provided.
Participants were asked to provide suggestions on
the scope of issues to be considered in the planning
process, and comments were recorded and entered
in the planning record. Attendees were encouraged
to ask questions and offer comments; each attendee
was given a comment form to submit additional
thoughts or questions in writing.
Approximately 51 people attended the public
meetings. Attendees included local citizens and
members of the Laramie Audubon Society, the
Wyoming Outdoor Council, and the Biodiversity
Conservation Alliance.
Written comments were due July 17, 2006. A total of
70 written comments were received throughout the
scoping process. Input obtained from meetings and
correspondence including email was considered in
development of this draft CCP and EA.
A mailing list of more than 148 contacts includes
private citizens; local, regional, and state
government representatives and legislators; other
federal agencies; and interested organizations (see
appendix D).
In September 2006, the first planning update was
sent to everyone on the mailing list. Information
was provided on the history of the refuges and the
CCP process, along with an invitation to share ideas
regarding refuge management with the planning
team. Each planning update included a comment
form and postage-paid envelope to give the public an
opportunity to provide written comments.
4. DEVELOP AND ANALYZE
ALTERNATIVES
— Create a reasonable range
of alternatives including a
“no-action” alternative
5. PREPARE DRAFT PLAN
AND NEPA
DOCUMENT
— Public comment and
review
1. PREPLANNING:
PLAN THE PLAN
2. INITIATE PUBLIC
INVOLVEMENT AND
SCOPING
— Involve the public
3. DRAFT VISION
STATEMENT AND
GOALS AND DETERMINE
SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
6. PREPARE AND ADOPT
FINAL PLAN
— Respond to public comment
— Select preferred alternative
7. IMPLEMENT PLAN,
MONITOR, AND EVALUATE
— Public involvement when
applicable
8. REVIEW AND REVISE
PLAN
— Public involvement when
applicable
The
Comprehensive
Conservation
Planning Process
and
NEPA Compliance
Figure 4. The planning process.
Chapter 1—Introduction 9
State Coordination
On January 27, 2006, an invitation letter to
participate in the CCP process was sent by the
Service’s region 6 director to the director of the
Wyoming Game and Fish Department (WGF).
Two representatives from the WGF are part of the
CCP planning team. Local WGF wildlife biologists
and the refuge staff had established excellent and
ongoing working relations before starting the CCP
process.
The Wyoming Game and Fish Department is
charged with providing “an adequate and fl exible
system for the control, management, protection,
and regulation of all Wyoming wildlife.” The WGF
maintains 36 Wildlife Habitat Management Areas
and 96 Public Access Areas, encompassing 410,000
acres of managed lands for wildlife habitat and
public recreation opportunity. These lands contain
121 miles of stream easements and about 21,014
surface acres of lakes and reservoirs for public
access.
Tribal Coordination
On October 17, 2006, five Native American tribal
governments (Arapaho, Crow, Northern Cheyenne,
Oglala Sioux, and Shoshone) were contacted
through a letter signed by Service’s region 6
director. With information about the upcoming
CCP, the letter invited tribal recipients to serve
on the planning team. Although Native American
tribal governments did not express interest in
participating on the planning team, the tribal
governments remain on the CCP mailing list and
will continue to receive CCP correspondence.
Results of Scoping
Table 1 summarizes all scoping activities.
Comments collected from scoping meetings and
correspondence, including comment forms, were
used in the development of a final list of issues that
were addressed in the draft CCP and EA.
The Service determined which alternatives could
best address these issues. The planning process
ensures that issues with the greatest effect on the
refuges are resolved or given priority over the
life of the final CCP. Identified issues, along with a
discussion of effects on resources, are summarized in
chapter 2.
In addition, the Service considered suggested
changes to current refuge management presented
by the public and other groups.
Table 1. Planning process summary for the Laramie Plains refuges, Wyoming.
Date Event Outcome
January–March 2006 Preplanning. CCP overview; established planning team; identifi ed
purpose of the refuges, history, and establishing
authority; developed planning schedule and CCP mailing
list.
March 23, 2006 Kickoff meeting. Toured refuges; conducted internal scoping by developing
issues and qualities list for the refuges; identifi ed
biological and mapping needs; developed a vision
statement for the refuges.
May 8, 2006 News release for
public meeting sent
to Wyoming media
contacts.
Notifi ed public of opportunities for involvement in the
CCP process.
May 24, 2006 Public meeting in
Casper, WY.
Opportunity for the public to learn about the CCP and
offer suggestions on the scope of issues to be considered
in the planning process.
May 25, 2006 Public meeting in
Laramie, WY.
Opportunity for the public to learn about the CCP and
offer suggestions on the scope of issues to be considered
in the planning process.
June 16, 2006 NOI (to prepare the
CCP) published in the
“Federal Register.”
Notifi ed the public of the intention to prepare a CCP and
EA for the Laramie Plains refuges.
July 27, 2006 Goals and alternatives
workshop.
Goals developed; alternatives discussed.
September 2006 Planning update
distributed to CCP
mailing list.
Planning update (describing CCP process and providing
opportunity for public suggestions on the scope of issues
to be considered in the planning process).
September 26, 2006 Environmental
consequences
workshop and
identifi cation of the
Reviewed the anticipated environmental consequences;
identifi ed alternative B as the proposed action.
proposed action.
October 20, 2006 Objectives workshop. Reviewed the proposed objectives, strategies, and
rationale for implementation of the proposed action (draft
CCP).
June 2007 Internal review of the Received comments on the draft CCP and EA.
draft CCP and EA.
August 2007 Release of draft CCP
and EA for public
review.
Draft CCP and EA presented to the public; received
comments on the revised draft CCP and EA.
August 29, 2007 Public meeting in
Laramie, WY.
Increased public understanding of the draft CCP and EA;
received public comments on the draft CCP and EA.
September 2007 CCP approval. Selection of the preferred alternative (B) for the fi nal
CCP.
10 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
2 The Refuges
Two of the three Laramie Plain refuges, Bamforth
and Hutton Lake, were established by executive
orders in 1932 within one day of each other. The
third refuge, Mortenson Lake, was established in
1993 under the Endangered Species Act to protect
the endangered Wyoming toad.
Bamforth National Wildlife Refuge.
USFWS
Hutton Lake National Wildlife Refuge.
USFWS
Mortenson Lake National Wildlife Refuge.
USFWS
ESTABLISHMENT, ACQUISITION, AND
MANAGEMENT HISTORY
Located within 15 miles of Laramie, Wyoming, the
Laramie Plains refuges are managed by Service
staff headquartered at the Arapaho NWR near
Walden, Colorado, about 65 miles southwest of
Laramie.
Laramie is positioned in a high plains basin
ecosystem known as the Laramie Basin. The shallow
depressions of the basin, within the relatively
flat topography of the region, support wetland
complexes that are unique to the area. These
wetland complexes provide resting, nesting, and
breeding areas for migratory birds in the semiarid
environment.
In the early 1930s, J. Clark Salyer III was charged
with identifying areas to protect as national wildlife
refuges for migratory birds. He surveyed the
area around Laramie and selected two locations
as national wildlife refuges for migratory birds.
Bamforth NWR and Hutton Lake NWR were
established by executive orders in 1932 within one
day of each other.
Bamforth National Wildlife Refuge was established
on January 29, 1932, by Executive Order 9321
(figure 5). Consisting of 1,166 acres, the refuge
is located approximately 6 miles northwest of
Laramie. The refuge was established with 201 acres
withdrawn from the public domain in 1932, and 965
acres purchased with Migratory Bird Conservation
Act (Migratory Bird) funds in 1933.
Due to a number of factors, Bamforth NWR has
remained within the Refuge System but has not
been actively managed. The refuge comprises three
parts arranged roughly in an L-shaped pattern, with
the segments one-half mile apart. Lands adjacent
to and in between refuge parcels are owned by the
state of Wyoming and private parties. The refuge
is located in a closed basin hydrologic system that
contains Bamforth Lake, but most of the lake falls
outside the refuge boundary. The fragmented
parcels, closed basin hydrology, and minimal
water rights have contributed to the lack of active
management of this refuge.
Hutton Lake National Wildlife Refuge was
established on January 28, 1932, by Executive
Order 5782 (figure 6). Consisting of 1,928 acres, the
refuge is located approximately 10 miles southwest
of Laramie. In 1932, 153 acres were withdrawn
from the public domain for the establishment of
this refuge. Additional lands were purchased with
Migratory Bird funds in 1933 and 1939. In 1940, 147
acres were exchanged, which completed the current
1,928 acres comprising Hutton Lake NWR. Physical
features of the refuge include Hutton Lake, Rush
Lake, Creighton Lake, and Lake George. Mallards,
redheads, teal, pintails, great blue herons, black-crowned
night-herons, phalaropes, western grebes,
bitterns, and black terns use the refuge during fall
and spring migrations.
12 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
With some water rights at Hutton Lake NWR,
the Service manages Lake George and Creighton,
Hutton, Hoge, and Rush lakes for migratory
birds. Water management is opportunistic due to
limited water rights and a closed basin system.
Ponds are filled in the spring with natural runoff
and maintained as high as possible over the birds’
breeding and brood-rearing seasons (June–August).
Hutton Lake NWR supports approximately 2,000
visits over the course of a year, mostly from March
through October. Wildlife-viewing opportunities and
refuge access is limited from November through
February due to frozen ponds and cold, snowy
weather.
Mortenson Lake National Wildlife Refuge was
established in 1993 under the Endangered Species
Act to protect the endangered Wyoming toad (fi gure
7). The Service purchased an additional 151 acres for
the refuge in 2003. The 1,968-acre refuge is located
15 miles southwest of Laramie. Within the refuge’s
approved acquisition boundary, 598 acres remain in
private ownership. Protection for the Wyoming toad
would improve if the Service could purchase these
lands from willing sellers. Physical features of the
refuge include Mortenson, Soda, and Garber lakes
and Gibbs Pond. Last Chance, Osterman, and South
ditches cross the refuge. Habitat types include open
water, wetlands, wet meadow, grassland, sagebrush,
and greasewood communities.
Great blue heron.
USFWS
SPECIAL VALUES OF THE REFUGES
Early in the planning process, the planning team
and public identifi ed the outstanding qualities of
the Laramie Plains refuges, the characteristics and
features that make it special to people, valuable for
wildlife, and worthy of refuge status. Identifying
these values at the outset helps ensure they will be
preserved, protected, and enhanced throughout the
planning process. Refuge qualities can range from
providing a unique biological habitat for wildlife to
offering visitors a quiet place to observe a variety of
birds and enjoy nature. The following summarizes
the qualities that make the Laramie Plains refuges
unique and valued:
Q The wetland complexes of the refuges
provide important water resources that
support resting, nesting, and foraging
areas for migratory birds in the semiarid
environment of the Laramie Plains basin.
Q A diversity of wetland habitat within the
refuges provides a range of conditions (i.e.,
varying amounts of emergent and aquatic
vegetation, salinity, and open water) that
support a variety of wildlife species.
Q The nearby University of Wyoming and
Colorado State University are resources
for natural resource studies to add to the
body of scientifi c literature on semiarid
environments and the importance of national
wildlife refuges in the western United
States.
Q Two vegetative species of concern have
been identifi ed on Mortenson Lake NWR
and Hutton Lake NWR. Alkali wildrye is
a meadow grass occurring at its northern
limits on the refuges. Pale blue-eyed grass
is a wet-meadow plant in the iris family
endemic to southeastern Wyoming and
north-central Colorado.
Q The refuges contain native short-grass
prairie habitat, which is unique in the state
of Wyoming (species of special concern that
use short-grass prairie include mountain
plover, burrowing owl, sage-grouse, and
McCown’s longspur).
Q The refuges are located near an urban
population center (Laramie) and can be
used as outdoor classrooms to provide
environmental education opportunities for
the local community.
Q Visitors can fi nd wide-open spaces that
remain relatively undisturbed, and may
often feel as if they have the place to
themselves.
Chapter 2—The Refuges 13
Figure 5. Base map of Bamforth NWR, Wyoming.
14 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
Q The refuges are designated as Important
Bird Areas by the Wyoming Audubon
Society.
Q Mortenson Lake NWR harbors the
endangered Wyoming toad.
PURPOSE
Every refuge is established for a purpose. This
purpose is the foundation upon which to build
all refuge programs, from biology and public use
to maintenance and facilities. No action that the
Service or public takes may conflict with this
refuge purpose. The refuge purpose is found in the
legislative acts or administrative orders, which are
the authorities to either transfer or acquire a piece
of land for a refuge. Over time an individual refuge
may contain lands that have been acquired under a
variety of transfer and acquisition authorities, giving
it more than one purpose. The goals, objectives,
and strategies identified in the CCP are intended to
support the individual purpose for which the refuge
was established.
Bamforth NWR was established by Executive
Order 5783, January 29, 1932. The purpose of the
refuge is to provide “a refuge and breeding ground
for birds and wild animals.”
Hutton Lake NWR was established by Executive
Order 5782, January 28, 1932. The purpose of the
refuge is to provide “a refuge and breeding ground
for birds and wild animals.”
Mortenson Lake NWR was established in 1993 to
protect the Wyoming toad’s last known population.
The Wyoming toad was listed as an endangered
species in 1984. The population at Mortenson Lake
was found in 1987. The purpose of the refuge is
“to conserve fish or wildlife which are listed as
endangered species or threatened species.”
VISION
At the beginning of the planning process, the
Service developed a vision for the Laramie Plains
refuges. A vision describes what will be different in
the future as a result of the CCP and is the essence
of what the Service is trying to accomplish at the
refuges. The vision is a future-oriented statement
designed to be achieved through refuge management
by the end of the 15-year CCP planning horizon. The
vision for the Laramie Plains refuges is:
The wetland complexes and uplands of the Laramie
Plains refuges are important resource components
of this semiarid region that provide key habitat for
the Wyoming toad, migratory birds, and resident
wildlife.
These refuges will be evaluated to direct
management decisions to provide natural and
enhanced habitat, thereby maximizing the unique
potential of each refuge. Wildlife-dependent
recreation will be evaluated for each refuge to
determine potential, appropriate public use
opportunities.
GOALS
The Service also developed a set of goals for the
refuges based on the Improvement Act, the refuge
purposes, and information developed during project
planning. The goals direct work toward achieving
the vision and purpose of the refuge and outline
approaches for managing refuge resources. The
goals for the refuges are detailed below.
The Laramie Plains Refuges
The following goals apply to all three Laramie Plains
refuges.
Research and Science Goal: Conduct natural
resource management using sound science and
applied research to advance the understanding of
natural resource function.
Partnerships Goal: Work with partners to determine
the wildlife and habitat resources on the refuges,
to maximize wildlife habitat protection, and to
increase understanding of wildlife needs, as well
as the benefits wildlife offer to individuals and
communities, on and off the refuges.
Cultural Resources Goal: Identify and evaluate the
cultural resources on the refuges and protect those
that are determined to be signifi cant.
Refuge Operations Goal: Secure and demonstrate
the effective use of funding, staffi ng, and
partnerships for the benefit of all resources in
support of the refuges and the Refuge System.
Bamforth NWR
The following refuge-specific goal was identifi ed for
Bamforth NWR.
Natural Resources Goal: Conduct baseline surveys
to identify refuge resources and the role they serve
in the Laramie Basin ecosystem and the Refuge
System.
Hutton Lake NWR
The following refuge-specific goals were identifi ed
for Hutton Lake NWR.
Chapter 2—The Refuges 15
Figure 6. Base map of Hutton Lake NWR, Wyoming.
16 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
Pahlow Lane
Pahlow Lane
Figure 7. Base map of Mortenson Lake NWR, Wyoming.
Chapter 2—The Refuges 17
Wetlands Goal: Manage refuge impoundments
and other wetlands to create a diverse habitat for
wetland-dependent wildlife.
Uplands Goal: Gather baseline biological information
to guide evaluation and management of shrub- and
grass-dominated uplands for benefit to migratory
birds (willet, horned lark), white-tailed prairie dogs,
pronghorn, and other wildlife.
Visitor Services Goal: Provide wildlife-dependent
recreational opportunities to a diverse audience
when the administration of these programs does not
adversely affect habitat management objectives.
Mortenson Lake NWR
The following refuge-specific goals were identifi ed
for Mortenson Lake NWR.
Wyoming Toad Goal: In conjunction with the
Wyoming Toad Recovery Team, manage refuge
lands around Mortenson Lake and other areas on the
refuge as necessary to protect, create, and manage
habitat suitable for Wyoming toad recovery from
endangered status.
Wetlands Goal: Following considerations for
Wyoming toad needs, manage refuge impoundments
and other wetlands to create diverse habitat for
wetland-dependent wildlife.
Uplands Goal: Following consideration for Wyoming
toad needs, gather baseline biological information
to guide evaluation and management of shrub- and
grass-dominated uplands for the benefit of migratory
birds, white-tailed prairie dogs, pronghorn, and
other wildlife.
PLANNING ISSUES
Several key issues were identified following the
analysis of comments collected from refuge staff and
the public, as well as a review of the requirements of
the Improvement Act and the NEPA. Substantive
comments (those that could be addressed within
the authority and management capabilities of the
Service) were considered during the formulation
of the alternatives for future management. These
key issues for the Laramie Plains refuges are
summarized below.
The Laramie Plains Refuges
The following planning issues apply to all three
Laramie Plains refuges.
Refuge Uses
Refuge uses (grazing, recreation, transmission
lines) need to be evaluated to ensure existing and
proposed uses are compatible with the purpose
of the refuges and mission of the Refuge System.
Refuge uses have not been actively evaluated
over time due to minimal staff presence. Through
the development of this CCP, refuge uses and
management activities will be evaluated to ensure
the best, most informed decisions are made for
proper management of refuge lands.
Water Resources
Water and water availability are vital in semiarid
regions. The limited water rights for these refuges
can result in dry spring conditions and poor wildlife
habitat for trust species. Acquiring additional water
rights would enable the Service to consistently
provide high-quality spring migration and nesting
habitat for trust species. The Service needs to
research the availability and feasibility of obtaining
additional water rights for the refuges.
Invasive Species
Invasive species are a threat to quality habitat. If
not contained early, they can also drain resources.
Though the refuges do not have signifi cant invasive
species issues, vigilance is required. Tamarisk has
been identified and managed at Hutton Lake NWR,
but an increase in monitoring, management, and
control of it and other invasive species is needed.
Research and Science
The Service needs to obtain good baseline biological
information for the refuges. Monitoring programs
need to be implemented for species that use the
refuges. The University of Wyoming, located
within 15 miles of the refuges, could be a partner in
gathering quality research data on the refuges.
Land Protection
Areas of concern center on the small size of the
individual refuges and a lack of buffer zones. Each
refuge is less than 2,000 acres in size, and the
refuges’ proximity to Laramie and urban growth in
the area pose a potential threat. Refuge advocates
want to increase protections through conservation
easements or expansions through willing seller
acquisitions to ensure the refuges are large enough
to preserve wildlife qualities.
Partnerships
Cooperation with other agencies is needed to
address issues of common concern. Opportunities for
the public to assist in protection and management of
the refuges should be identified and provided.
Staffi ng
The refuges should be actively managed by Service
staff stationed in Wyoming. This issue was raised
18 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
frequently in public meetings. The managing staff
is headquartered at Arapaho NWR in Walden,
Colorado, an hour’s drive south of Laramie.
The remote location and the small number of
staff assigned to Arapaho NWR prevent active,
consistent oversight of the Laramie Plains refuges.
Coyote.
USFWS
Bamforth NWR
The following planning issues apply only to
Bamforth NWR.
Lack of Information
Bamforth NWR has not been actively managed
since its establishment in 1932. The refuge is not
properly posted, fenced, or signed to indicate its
status as a national wildlife refuge. The planning
team struggled with a lack of information about
the refuge’s wildlife and habitat resources. The
planning team discussed whether Bamforth NWR
should maintain its national wildlife refuge status.
The Service’s region 6 divestiture model was used
to evaluate the refuge. The evaluation indicated
the refuge should remain in the Refuge System,
mainly due to insufficient information. The Service
needs to obtain a good understanding of the
refuge’s resources before advocating divestiture
or promoting public use. With the possibility
of recommending divestiture of the refuge in
the future, it would not be prudent to fund the
development of the infrastructure needed to provide
public use opportunities at this time. This plan
strives to identify the resources and potential of
the refuge to determine its appropriate role in the
Refuge System.
Public Use
The refuge is currently closed to public use and is
not signed or fenced to mark the refuge boundaries.
Until baseline biological information has been
obtained to determine the role the refuge plays
in the Refuge System, and whether divestiture
of the refuge is warranted, it would not be
prudent to invest resources in the development of
infrastructure to safely support public use programs.
Mortenson Lake NWR
The following planning issue applies only to
Mortenson Lake NWR.
Endangered Species
Mortenson Lake NWR was established for the
endangered Wyoming toad. Although the refuge
staff participates on the Wyoming Toad Recovery
Team, not having a staff member specifi cally
assigned to the Laramie Plains refuges has hindered
management decisions and active, planned oversight
of these lands for the Wyoming toad.
3 Refuge Resources and Description
Located in northern Wyoming in a high plains
basin ecosystem known as the Laramie Basin, the
Laramie Plains refuges lie near the center of the
Mountain–Prairie Region. Bamforth NWR, Hutton
Lake NWR, and Mortenson Lake NWR support
wetland complexes that provide resting, nesting,
and breeding areas for migratory birds in a semiarid
environment. In addition, Mortenson Lake NWR
provides habitat for the endangered Wyoming toad.
This chapter describes the refuges’ setting, as
follows:
Q physical environment
Q biological resources
Q cultural resources
Q special management areas
Q visitor services
Q socioeconomic environment
Q operations
Greater sage-grouse.
Gary Kramer/USFWS
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
This section describes global warming; climate;
physiography, geography, and soils; land use; water
resources; hydrology; water rights; and air quality.
Global Warming
The U.S. Department of the Interior issued an
order in January 2001 requiring federal agencies
under its direction that have land management
responsibilities to consider potential climate change
effects as part of long-range planning endeavors.
The Department of Energy’s report, “Carbon
Sequestration Research and Development,”
concluded that ecosystem protection is important
to carbon sequestration and may reduce or prevent
loss of carbon currently stored in the terrestrial
biosphere. The report defines carbon sequestration
as “the capture and secure storage of carbon that
would otherwise be emitted to or remain in the
atmosphere.”
The increase of carbon dioxide (CO2) within the
earth’s atmosphere has been linked to the gradual
rise in surface temperature commonly referred to
as “global warming.” In relation to comprehensive
conservation planning for Refuge System units,
carbon sequestration constitutes the primary
climate-related effect to be considered in planning.
Vegetated land is an important factor in carbon
sequestration. Large, naturally occurring
communities of plants and animals that occupy major
habitats—grasslands, forests, wetlands, tundra,
and desert—are effective both in preventing carbon
emission and in acting as biological “scrubbers” of
atmospheric CO2.
One service activity in particular—prescribed
burning—releases CO2 directly to the atmosphere
from the biomass consumed during combustion
yet results in no net loss of carbon because new
vegetation quickly germinates and sprouts to
replace the burned-up biomass. This vegetation
sequesters an approximately equal amount of carbon
as was lost to the air (Dai et al. 2006). Several other
effects of climate change may need to be considered
in the future:
20 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
Q Habitat available in lakes and streams for
cold-water fi sh such as trout and salmon
could be reduced.
Q Forests may change, with some plant
species shifting their range northward or
dying out and other trees moving in to take
their place.
Q Ducks and other waterfowl could lose
breeding habitat because of stronger and
more frequent droughts.
Q Changes in the timing of migration and
nesting could put some birds out of
synchronization with the life cycles of their
prey.
Climate
The Laramie Basin is considered a cold desert with
annual precipitation averaging 11.53 inches (High
Plains Regional Climate Center 2006). The average
maximum temperature is 53.8°F, average minimum
temperature is 26.8°F, and extremes range from a
summer high of 95°F to a record low of −50°F. The
area is known for persistent windy conditions, and
the growing season is short, typically from late May
to early September (U.S. Department of Agriculture
[USDA] 1998).
Physiography, Geography, and Soils
The current physiography of the Laramie Basin
was influenced by a shallow warm water sea, a
crustal uplift affecting Colorado and southeast
Wyoming, the Laramide Orogeny Mountain building
episode, volcanic activity in the Yellowstone area,
and influences of the ice ages. Most of the stable
landforms in the area today were created within
the last hundred thousand years by glacial outwash
waters. Many of the soils therefore have alluvial
origins (USDA 1998). The high, flat nature of
much of Wyoming is conducive to strong winds,
and several features on the land suggest that wind
has played an important role in past geological
development as well. Data suggest that the Laramie
Basin—including Bamforth NWR—is a defl ation
hollow formed by wind action (Morrison 1991).
Bamforth NWR is at about 7,000 feet in elevation
with the benches reaching over 7,200 feet. Hutton
Lake NWR and Mortenson Lake NWR lie between
7,200 feet and 7,300 feet.
Land Use
The Laramie Basin lies within the aforementioned
Wyoming Basin (see figure 2), a large percentage
of which is in public ownership, with the Bureau of
Land Management (BLM) owning much of the lower
elevation shrub–steppe and grassland and the U.S.
Forest Service owning a great deal of the higher-elevation
wooded land. A checkerboard pattern of
land ownership is a subtle problem that affects the
consistency of land management over large areas.
The primary land use in the Wyoming Basin has
been for many years and continues to be grazing,
although conversion to agriculture is also an issue.
The effects of overgrazing and nonnative plant
invasion should be mitigated to improve conditions
for breeding birds. Maintenance of springs and
riparian habitat may be crucial, particularly to
sage-grouse. Fencing or changing grazing systems
may be effective in maintaining water fl ow. Oil and
gas extraction and hard rock mining are relatively
recent factors that may negatively affect the greater
landscape needs of the sage-grouse.
Rocky Mountain bee plant.
USFWS
Water Resources
This section describes the hydrology and water
rights of the Laramie Plains refuges.
Hydrology
The Laramie River is the primary water source
for Albany County. With its headwaters beginning
in the Rawah Mountains to the south in Colorado,
as well as the Laramie Mountains to the east and
Medicine Bow Mountains to the west, the river
winds a course from south to north through the
county, exits to the northeast, and ultimately
empties into the North Platte River near
Wheatland, Wyoming (USDA 1998).
Water Rights
Water rights for the Laramie Plains refuges are
listed in table 2.
Air Quality
Air quality receives protection under several
provisions of the Clean Air Act, including the
Chapter 3—Refuge Resources and Description 21
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and
the Prevention of Significant Deterioration program.
NAAQS include maximum allowable pollution
levels for particulate matter, ozone, sulfur dioxide,
nitrogen dioxide, lead, and carbon dioxide.
Based on Wyoming’s most current data, the state
has relatively clean air. In the area of the refuges
(Albany County), the levels of carbon monoxide,
nitrogen dioxide, ozone, sulfur dioxide, particulate
matter (diameter <2.5 micrometers), particulate
matter (diameter <10 micrometers), and lead did not
exceed federal standards at any monitoring site in
2006 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA]
2007a).
The air quality index (AQI) is an approximate
indicator of overall air quality, because it takes into
account all of the criteria air pollutants measured
within a geographic area. Air quality in Albany
County is considered to be generally good, with no
reported days of unhealthy air quality (EPA 2007b).
Prescribed burning is the refuge management
activity that has the greatest effect on air quality
(find more information in the description of the
fire management program in appendix E). The
management of smoke is incorporated into planning
prescribed burns and, to the extent possible,
in suppression of wildfires. Sensitive areas are
identified and precautions are taken to safeguard
visitors and local residents. Smoke dispersal is a
consideration in determining whether a prescribed
burn is within prescription. Generally, the fi ne-grass
fuels and small burn size (80–600 acres) generate low
volumes of smoke for short durations (4–5 hours).
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
This section describes vegetation, wildlife, and
their associated communities at the Laramie Plains
refuges. Appendices F–I list species that can be
found on the refuges for plants (appendix F), birds
(appendix G), amphibians and reptiles (appendix H),
and mammals (appendix I).
Major habitat types of the Laramie Plains refuges
include open water wetlands, uplands consisting
of brush and grasslands, alkali flats, and irrigated
meadows. The location and distribution of the major
habitat types for the refuges are shown in the
habitat maps for Bamforth NWR (figure 8), Hutton
Lake NWR (figure 9), and Mortenson Lake NWR
(fi gure 10).
Open-water Wetlands
The wetlands within the Laramie Plains
refuges vary from natural basins to constructed
impoundments and enhanced basins. The physical
look of the refuges wetlands ranges from complete
open water to rimmed with emergent vegetation to
dominated by emergents. Natural runoff somewhat
influences these areas, but most water added to
these wetlands comes from water rights from
irrigation ditches adjudicated through the state
of Wyoming. The ability to manage waters in the
different impoundments varies considerably.
In Albany County’s semiarid environment, the
natural and enhanced lakes and ponds on the
refuges, as well as the other impoundments, are
tightly regulated by the Wyoming State Engineer’s
Office. Prior to European settlement of Wyoming
in the nineteenth century, the Laramie Plains
lakes were playas, filling in high runoff years and
drying up completely during sustained droughts.
Although there are several streams in the county,
most of the lakes are independent of their infl uence
from flooding. Following settlement, a series of
irrigation ditches were constructed to provide fl ood
irrigation waters for hay and crop production. These
ditches probably aided in maintaining more reliable
water levels for some of the plains lakes, as return
irrigation flows were captured in them, and some
of the basins were developed to serve as storage
reservoirs for irrigation.
Bulrush wetlands.
USFWS
The lower-priority irrigation rights owned by the
Service for the refuges often result in little or no
irrigation water reaching refuge impoundments,
which potentially mimics natural historic conditions,
as the wetlands receive more water in good water
years and little to no water in drought years.
However, good snowpacks in the mountains can
result in higher water availability in the irrigation
system being available for the Laramie Plains
lakes, a condition that may not have obtained in
presettlement days. Wildlife is a considered a viable
water use category under Wyoming water law and is
covered under either the irrigation or miscellaneous
use categories.
22 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
Table 2. Water rights for the Laramie Plains refuges, Wyoming.
Amount of
Irrigated
Permit Territorial Priority Acreage
No. Proof No. Date Station Name Use (Acres)
5617 — 03/19/1947 Mortenson Soda Lake Draw Irrigation —
Lake NWR #1 Reservoir and stock
20132 — 07/03/1947 Mortenson Harmon ditch Irrigation 79.6
Lake NWR and stock
20459 — 07/13/1949 Mortenson Soda Lake ditch Irrigation, 27.88
Lake NWR domestic,
and stock
4454 07/29/1964 Mortenson Johnson No. 1 Stock —
Lake NWR Lake
4455 — 07/29/1964 Mortenson Johnson No. 2 Stock —
Lake NWR Lake
7259 — 04/14/1967 Mortenson Mortenson Lake Irrigation —
Lake NWR
U.W. 04/22/2002 Mortenson Field Well No. 1 Domestic —
144046 Lake NWR and stock
— 4626 12/31/1871 Hutton Red ditch Irrigation 118 total;
Lake NWR refuge
has 10
— 4635 12/31/1888 Hutton Richards ditch Irrigation 45 total;
Lake NWR refuge
has 42
1962 — 02/02/1892 Hutton Hutton Lake Irrigation —
RES Lake NWR Reservoir ditch
2304E 16648 06/03/1909 Hutton King ditch Irrigation 579;
Lake NWR enlargement refuge
and extension has
portion
5212E 22925 09/11/1939 Hutton First enlargement Irrigation 112
Lake NWR Hutton Lake and bird
refuge
U.W. — 04/27/1988 Hutton Well No. 1 Stock —
76609 Lake NWR
— 561 08/27/1887 Bamforth Park ditch (via Irrigation 600 total;
Lake NWR Johnson Refuge and refuge
ditch) domestic has 120
Table 2. cont. Water rights for the Laramie Plains refuges, Wyoming.
Location of CFS GPM Storage
Irrigated Rate of Rate of in Additional
Acreage Source Diversion Diversion Acre-feet Information
Storage water can be Soda — — 152.64 Storage season begins
used anywhere on Lake (fi rst fi ll October 1; adjudicated.
refuge and lands Draw only—no
attached to Permit refi ll)
20459
Section 3, 14N, 75W, Richard 1.1 — — Direct fl ow right;
6th P.M. Draw unadjudicated.
NE 1/4, Section 3, 14N, Soda 2.29 — — Direct fl ow supplemental to
75W, 6th P.M. Lake April 19, 1879 right from Laramie
Draw River through Pioneer Canal;
unadjudicated.
— — — — 1.37 Unadjudicated (small stock
reservoir).
— — 1.72 Unadjudicated (small stock
reservoir).
Storage water can be Meeboer — — 247.46 Storage season begins
used on lands Draw (fi rst fi ll October 1; unadjudicated.
anywhere on refuge only—no
refi ll)
— Ground — 10 — Not completed yet due to lack
water of funds.
NENW Section 17, Sand 1.69; — — Adjudicated pursuant to
14N, 74W, 6th P.M. Creek refuge December 27, 1912, Sand Creek
0.14 Decree. “Priority No. 1.”
Refuge owns a portion.
12A SESE, Section 18, Sand 0.64 total; — — Adjudicated pursuant to
10A NWNW, 20A Creek refuge December 27, 1912, Sand
SWNW, Section 20, has Creek Decree. “Priority
14N, 74W, 6th P.M. 0.60 No. 9.” Refuge owns a portion.
Not tied to specifi c Sand — — 2500 Adjudicated pursuant to
acreage Creek December 27, 1912, Sand Creek
Decree. Diversion can occur
when Sand Creek is above 58
cfs. “Priority No. 12.5.” Filed as
a direct fl ow irrigation right.
Portion of Laramie 8.27 total; — — Adjudicated pursuant to
Sections 17 and River refuge December 27, 1912, Laramie
20, 14N, 74W has a River Decree. Refuge owns a
portion portion.
Portion of Sections 17 Sand 1.6 — — Subsequent to December 27,
and 20, 14N, 74W, Creek 1912, Sand Creek Decree.
6th P.M.
— Ground
water
— 3 — —
30A NESE, Little 8.57 total; — — —
10A SESE, Laramie refuge has
Section 12, 80A River 1.71
W1/2SE,
Section 8, 16N,
75W, 6th P.M.
Chapter 3—Refuge Resources and Description 23
24 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
Figure 8. Habitats at Bamforth NWR, Wyoming.
Chapter 3—Refuge Resources and Description 25
Figure 9. Habitats at Hutton Lake NWR, Wyoming.
26 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
Figure 10. Habitats at Mortenson Lake NWR, Wyoming.
Chapter 3—Refuge Resources and Description 27
Wetlands of Bamforth NWR
Records indicate Bamforth NWR has received
little to no active wetlands management since its
establishment in 1932. Bamforth NWR is located
in a 4,000-acre natural depression known as the
Big Basin northwest of Laramie. The bottom of the
basin is dominated by alkali flats, small ponds, and
Bamforth Lake, which encompasses approximately
250 acres when full. Bamforth Lake is owned mostly
by the state of Wyoming with approximately 100
acres of the 550-acre lake located in the refuge
boundary. The lake comprises half of the refuge,
while the other half is upland habitat.
The Park ditch flows through the southwest portion
of the refuge, and the Alsop ditch No. 1 fl ows along
the northwest portion of the Big Basin. The refuge
owns very junior irrigation water rights out of
the Park ditch only, but water use in both ditches
potentially influences refuge wetlands through
irrigation return flows and subsurface water effects.
Two small dikes are located on refuge lands—one is a
stock watering pond, and the other is used for stock
and irrigation storage, with most of the storage area
located off refuge property. The ponds in the bottom
of the basin are natural, with no inlet or outlet
structures, resulting in little to no management
capabilities. The soils along the bottom of the basin,
including the ponds when dry, are strongly saline,
resulting in minimal emergent or submergent
vegetative growth. An island in Bamforth Lake, but
not on refuge property, is used by white pelicans,
double-crested cormorants, and California gulls for
nesting. The area is also used by American avocets
and killdeer, and occasionally by other migrating
shorebirds and waterfowl.
Remaining refuge habitats include greasewood-dominated
upland, alkali flats, and a limited amount
of grassland. Before 1950, Bamforth Lake was
an important area for many wildlife species due
to a fairly dependable water supply. With the full
development of the Wheatland Irrigation District,
however, Bamforth Lake lost its major water
supply due to junior refuge water rights (USFWS
1980). The loss of water for the refuge diminished
the ability of the refuge to support migratory bird
species from the mid-1950s to present day.
Wetlands of Hutton Lake NWR
Hutton Lake NWR consists of fi ve impoundments
and surrounding uplands immediately adjacent to
the floodplain of the Laramie River southwest of
Laramie. Originally, there were likely only three
separate basins—what is now Creighton Lake, Lake
George, and Hutton Lake. Dikes were constructed
to create Rush and Hoge lakes, and along the west
boundary of the refuge, in an apparent attempt to
keep water from reaching the floodplain to the west.
A diversion structure was also placed in Sand Creek
to move appropriated water from the creek to the
refuge, and ditches were dug to connect Rush and
Creighton lakes and Lake George for easier water
movement between them.
Creighton Lake (210 surface acres or 2,525 acre-feet)
and Hutton Lake (221 surface acres or 1,135
acre-feet) are large and fairly deep open water
areas with no water management capabilities
once water reaches them. They typically fl uctuate
between various water levels based on yearly water
availability and evaporation, rarely being completely
full or dry. The fluctuating water levels prevent the
establishment of emergent vegetation on these two
wetlands by either drying up or flooding out any
plants that might try to take hold.
Lake George, a smaller natural basin (16 surface
acres or 250 acre-feet), receives water more often
and more reliably than the larger pools. It maintains
a water level stable enough for the establishment of
a hardstem bulrush ring that completely encircles
the lake.
Rush and Hoge lakes are larger than Lake George,
but shallower and smaller than Hutton and
Creighton lakes. Rush Lake (95 surface acres or
250 acre-feet) is the first in the system to receive
water, so it generally benefits from available water
from Sand Creek. It is also the shallowest pool and
tends to dry up the quickest when water ceases to
be available for recharge. Over 50 percent of Rush
lake is emergent vegetation—hardstem bulrush
and cattail—with numerous smaller areas of open
water, and historic ditches through the lake to aid
water movement to Hoge Lake and Lake George.
Hoge Lake (75 surface acres or 200 acre-feet) has
open water through its middle with signifi cant
stands of hardstem bulrush along the dike between
it and Rush Lake and in the bay on its south side.
Submergent vegetation is found in all pools but not
in large amounts.
Creighton and Hutton lakes are important resting
areas for waterfowl in the spring and fall, as rafts of
redheads, scaup, canvasback, and coots numbering
in the thousands are not uncommon. Canada geese
use these lakes as molting areas in the summer.
George Lake and Hoge and Rush lakes provide
nesting habitat for coots, ruddy ducks, blackbirds,
marsh wrens, pied-billed grebes, and soras, as well
as feeding habitat for coots and dabbling ducks.
Rush Lake also provides nesting habitat for white-faced
ibis and black-crowned night-herons. Water
levels are generally low enough on Creighton and
Hutton lakes to allow nesting by American avocets
and killdeer, but the lakes can potentially fl ood in
high-water years.
During the summers of 2004 and 2005, California
gull and double-crested cormorant rookery were
established along the north shore of Hutton Lake.
This previously unobserved activity occurred below
28 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
the high waterline of the lake, and it is unknown
whether nesting would occur under high water
conditions.
From the time of its settlement to current day, the
lack of good water rights for Hutton Lake NWR
has been a constant theme. In the semiarid Laramie
Basin, water is a key resource in managing habitat
for the benefit of migratory bird species. Because
the Service does not own senior water rights,
refuge wetlands water levels are dependent on
natural processes and the willingness of adjoining
landowners holding watering rights in Sand Creek
to share their rights.
Records from the 1970s indicate low water
availability and difficulty in providing water to
refuge wetlands due to minimal water rights for the
refuge. This trend of low water is prevalent through
the 1970s until 1979 and 1980, which were reportedly
good water years. By 1981 water conditions were
again reported as poor.
Since the 1980s, water control structures at the
refuge have remained in place with no manipulation
of the boards or screw gates to actively manage
water levels (Pam Johnson, wildlife biologist,
Arapaho NWR; personal communication, January
2007). Water levels must be high in Rush and Hoge
lakes and Lake George before water can move to the
other wetlands. A water diversion structure on Sand
Creek is opened or closed as needed by the Wyoming
water commissioner. From Rush Lake water can
flow to Lake George or Hoge Lake, or both. Lake
George connects to the largest lake (Creighton
Lake), and Hoge Lake connects to Hutton Lake (see
figures 6 and 12).
American wigeon.
Donna Dewhurst/USFWS
Wetlands of Mortenson Lake NWR
Mortenson Lake NWR wetlands consist of four
lakes positioned in a west to east line sharing what
can be a common water source, an alkali playa, and
an irrigation-dependent impoundment known as
Harmon Reservoir. The current string of lakes was
likely three playas prior to settlement. Springs to
the south and west of the area, if natural, may have
sustained water in Mortenson Lake proper, but it is
unknown whether they are natural or induced from
human activities. Mortenson Lake is the western-most
lake followed by Garber Lake, Soda Lake,
and Gibbs Lake. Meeboer Lake, which lies between
Garber and Soda lakes, is owned by the Wyoming
Game and Fish Department.
Mortenson Lake receives water from springs to
the west and south, as well as irrigation return
flows from waters out of the Pioneer ditch. The lake
is mostly open water, with cattail and hardstem
bulrush patches around the edges and extensive
amounts of rushes and sedges along the north,
west, and south shores. Prior to refuge acquisition,
Mortenson Lake was used for irrigation of nearby
lands and was typically at least partially drawn
down in the summer.
Garber Lake is a small, mostly open water area
immediately east of Mortenson Lake. Waters from
Mortenson Lake are picked up in the Osterman ditch
and feed into Garber Lake. An outlet on the lake’s
northeast corner allows water to flow out of Garber
Lake and back into the Osterman ditch. Sedges
and rushes border Garber Lake along with some
hardstem bulrush.
Soda Lake, a long, narrow lake just east of the
Meeboer Lake State Wildlife Area, receives water
either from Meeboer Lake or from the South ditch,
which comes in from the northwest. Both of these
water sources can use and regularly do use water
that has come through Mortenson Lake. Soda Lake
is situated between steeper terrain on the north and
south, resulting in little emergent vegetation along
its shores, small areas of hardstem bulrush, and
some rushes and sedges.
Gibbs Lake is a small, shallow area that is prone to
drying out. When dry it is very alkaline. Water can
be moved to Gibbs Lake from the South ditch. There
is little vegetation along this pool except for rushes
and sedges at the extreme high waterline.
The playa is a small, low spot southeast of Gibbs
Lake, which is split by Highway 230. There is no
water source for this pond, and it is usually dry with
an alkaline surface.
Harmon Reservoir is south of Soda Lake and
consists of a fairly large dike crossing the natural
Chapter 3—Refuge Resources and Description 29
Figure 11. Infrastructure at Bamforth NWR, Wyoming.
30 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
drainage and a small outlet pipe that was historically
used to supply ditches that ran on either side of the
drainage for flood irrigation. Low priority limits the
ability to use a water right due to holders of higher-priority
rights using available water flows in all
but wet years. Consequently, this area sees water
so rarely that most of the vegetation in the bottom
and along shorelines is more typical of surrounding
uplands habitat than wetlands.
Submergent vegetation is present in Mortenson,
Garber, and Soda lakes but not in large quantities,
probably due to the saline conditions of the
substrate.
The endangered Wyoming toad is found along
the shores of Mortenson Lake and occasionally
around Garber Lake, along with boreal chorus
frogs. Significant numbers of redheads, lesser
scaup, canvasback, and bufflehead are seen during
migration (June–July and September) on Mortenson,
Garber, and Soda lakes. Various dabbling ducks,
coots, eared and pied-billed grebes, Canada geese,
and black and Forster’s terns are regularly observed
on these lakes in the summer. American avocets,
killdeer, and dabblers use Gibbs Lake.
Established for the endangered Wyoming toad,
and managed in conjunction with recommendations
from the Wyoming Toad Recovery Team, the area
around Mortenson Lake proper has received active
management (grazing, rest, prescribed fire) for the
benefit of the Wyoming toad.
In 1992, a cooperative agreement with an adjacent
landowner was established regarding the exchange
of water shares for grazing privileges. This
agreement remains in effect, with refuge staff
directing grazing on the refuge to benefi t the
Wyoming toad and receiving water for refuge
purposes. Water management activities are
performed by the grazing permittee and generally
consist of opening the south ditch headgate, which
allows water to flow into refuge wetlands from
approximately May 1 to September 11. As a result,
the refuge receives an average of 232 acre-feet of
water per year. The majority of the water is used to
fill wetlands on the eastern section of the refuge.
Water Management History of Mortenson Lake NWR
The prior landowner who purchased Mortenson
Lake and surrounding land in 1972–73 would
typically begin drawing down Mortenson Lake in
May for irrigation and continue to draw it down
until about July 1, when the area would be dried
out for haying. It was not uncommon for the lake to
refill by mid- to late August, when more irrigation
would occur to moisturize the ground before winter.
Water levels in the lake were held full throughout
the summer when possible. In 1991, the Nature
Conservancy (TNC) purchased Mortenson Lake and
surrounding land.
The Service purchased Mortenson Lake and
surrounding area from TNC in May of 1993, creating
what is now Mortenson Lake NWR. Sometime in the
early 1990s, a water control structure was installed
on the southern berm of the lake just off the dike,
which raised the lake level. From 1993 through
2002, the water level in Mortenson Lake was held
full from the spring through the fall. Boards were
removed from the structure to slightly lower the
water level each fall and reinstalled sometime in
late March or early April. The reasons for lowering
the lake level are twofold: (1) the high water levels
through the winter are believed to negatively impact
Wyoming toad hibernation, and (2) higher water
levels can erode the dike, especially when ice melts.
Due to drought conditions, lake levels in 2003 and
2004 were not as full as in the past. In 2005, water
levels were intentionally dropped starting in May
and continuing through June to mimic historic water
management. Overall, the lake water level was
dropped a little over 1 foot. In the fall of 2005, the
lake level did not return to full as it had historically
due to a dry year. In 2006, a managed drawdown was
accomplished, with lake levels returning to normal
by fall.
Upland Habitat: Brush and Grasslands
Uplands consisting of brush and grasslands is
the dominant habitat type in the Laramie Basin,
encompassing most of the lands not within an
existing floodplain and below the mountains. Where
access to water exists or has existed, some of these
upland areas are in hay production, and the infl uence
of past attempts at haying are still apparent from
the existing vegetation. The uplands on the three
Laramie Plains refuges are very similar, though
subtle differences exist among them. Most of the
soils in the uplands have alluvial origins, and many
are influenced locally by differing water regimes
that affect vegetation. In general, these lands appear
to be unbroken, and given the undulating or sloped
conditions of many sites, thoughts of seeding in the
past were likely dismissed.
Uplands of Bamforth NWR
Uplands range from the top of the bench forming the
Big Basin through an area intermittently irrigated
by the Park ditch to poorer soils abutting alkali
flats or alkaline ponds. The vegetation on the bench
is sparse grasses including western wheatgrass,
needleandthread, and bluegrass, as well as some
rabbitbrush and sagebrush. The area infl uenced by
irrigation is more grass dominated with less bare
ground; grasses are assumed to include western
Chapter 3—Refuge Resources and Description 31
and bluebunch wheatgrass and possibly introduced
forage-producing species. The area closer to the
alkaline sites can be quite barren, with 80–90
percent bare ground and only greasewood or black
sage for vegetative cover, although certain spots
include saltgrass in the mix.
Uplands of Hutton Lake NWR
Uplands range from the shorelines of Hutton
and Creighton lakes up to the highest benches,
approximately 100 feet above the lakes. Soil
characteristics result in some vegetative variability.
The relatively flat area between the lakes is
dominated by a large prairie dog town. This area
is sparsely vegetated, with few grasses, several
types of annual weeds and forbs, prickly pear, and
greasewood on the south. In general, the southern
uplands are more grass dominated and the north
holds a little more greasewood, but openings in
the brush and greasewood plants can be found
throughout the refuge. The greasewood plants
are especially thick and tall (4–5 feet) northeast of
Creighton Lake, east of Hutton Lake, and along
the spoil piles northeast of Hoge and Rush lakes.
An area in the southwest corner of the refuge has
been irrigated in the past and holds a thicker, more
grass dominated regime than the rest of the refuge
uplands. Vegetative species include western and
bluebunch wheatgrass, needle and thread, and
rabbitbrush.
Uplands of Mortenson Lake NWR
The south half of Mortenson Lake NWR consists of
a terrace of gravelly soils with a mound-intermound
pattern of microrelief. This terrace slopes down to
the lakes of the refuge to the north, where between
the pools and waterways feeding them, more
gravelly, well-drained upland soils exist. Vegetation
on the terraces is dominated by needleandthread,
western and bluebunch wheatgrass, larkspur, and
rabbitbrush. On the uplands not associated with
the terraces vegetation consists of mostly the same
species but also includes greasewood and more open
ground. The slopes contain most of the same species
but also includes sparsely spaced big sagebrush
plants.
Characteristic wildlife of the Laramie Plains uplands
habitat includes pronghorn, horned larks, and
meadow larks. White-tailed prairie dogs are common
on Mortenson Lake NWR and Hutton Lake NWR.
Grazing Management History at Bamforth NWR
Grazing has occurred on Bamforth for at least the
past 35 years, most recently in cooperation with
an adjoining landowner. Lack of fencing limits
the ability to adequately manage grazing, but it
is assumed that the current grazing regime is not
detrimental to the area, based on observations
of similar grazing regimes used on refuges in the
region. Future monitoring and evaluation will
ensure that grazing management is appropriate and
compatible.
Grazing Management History at Hutton Lake NWR
Grazing has occurred on Hutton Lake NWR for over
10 years. Records on grazing management for the
refuge prior to 1997 were lost in an offi ce fi re. From
1998 to 2008, grazing will have occurred 7 out of 10
years. Grazing has been conducted from mid-May
through mid-July for periods ranging from 10 to
18 days, with 200–418 cow/calf pairs using 98–296
AUMs. No grazing occurred in 2006 or 2007, and
another year of rest is planned for 2008. Future
monitoring and evaluation will occur to ensure that
grazing management is appropriate and compatible.
Future grazing will focus on fall grazing to remove
heavy, decadent vegetation from ponds and to
reduce wildlife disturbance during the nesting
period of April–July.
Grazing Management History at Mortenson Lake NWR
The landowner who purchased Mortenson Lake and
the surrounding land in 1972–73 would typically put
cattle on the middle pasture known as the Meeboer
pasture (south and east of Meeboer Lake) in March
or April, usually feeding the cattle until new growth
started. The cattle were not brought onto the
Mortenson Lake pasture until the tall larkspur,
which grows along the hillside south of the lake, had
stopped flowering and was no longer poisonous to
cattle.
After the first of July, 200–225 pair of cattle were
brought to the pasture and grazed for most of the
summer. At that time, a much larger area was
available for grazing, as the pasture included the
area immediately north of the refuge boundary
fence, just north of Mortenson Lake. This fairly well-irrigated
north portion of the historic pasture is still
in private ownership, producing good forage now
and in the past. Consequently, it has seen a lot of
use by the cattle, which has also resulted in greater
cattle use of the north shore of Mortenson Lake, as
they come in from the north to water and graze and
rest there.
The former landowner has stated that cattle use
of the north shore is noticeably diminished now
compared to in the past due in part to the boundary
fence and easier grazing to the south and east of
Mortenson Lake. Another reason is a change in
vegetation; the area is now mostly comprised of
rushes and Carex, making it less enticing to cattle.
32 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
During the period when TNC owned Mortenson
Lake and the surrounding land (1991–93), grazing
was discontinued. Reintroduced by the Service,
grazing at Mortenson Lake NWR under Service
management has changed over the years. For the
first two years (1993–94), cattle were allowed to
graze the whole pasture encompassing Mortenson
Lake. In 1994, an electric fence was constructed in
the field to protect the outlet portion of the lake,
which was thought to be prime Wyoming toad
habitat. The fence was also used to concentrate
the cattle in the more alkali/bulrush vegetation
surrounding the north side of the lake to thin the
vegetation for the toads. The electric fence was
maintained over the next six years, with cattle using
annually in the fall 28–90 AUMs around the shore of
Mortenson Lake and 180–340 AUMs in the rest of
the fi eld.
In 2000, the fence was modified to eliminate cattle
access to the dike because of erosion issues. Each
fall through 2003, cattle used 32–72 AUMs along the
lakeshore and 52–340 AUMs in the rest of the fi eld.
In the fall of 2003, the planned 2004 grazing regime
was changed on the advice of the Wyoming Toad
Recovery Team. Shoreline vegetation had become
too dense, and the open habitats documented as
needed by the Wyoming toad (Withers 1992) were no
longer available. The density of the vegetation had
also potentially decreased temperatures in historic
breeding areas, making them less suitable for the
toad. Although Withers (1992) had documented
breeding on the northeast and southeast shores of
Mortenson Lake, during 2001 and 2002 egg laying
had only occurred on the northwest shore in areas
with adjacent open vegetation, and in 2002 tadpoles
had been found only on grazed lands adjacent to the
northwest shore of Mortenson Lake.
In 2004, the following change to grazing was made
based on the recommendations of the previous
landowner whom the Service had contacted to
discuss historic land use practices. The electric fence
was installed and cattle were allowed to access the
shore of Mortenson Lake from July 13 through
September 1, using 102 AUMs. The cattle were
then moved to the main pasture from September 9
through October 26, using 108 AUMs.
The electric fence was not installed in 2005, and
cattle grazed in the fall from October through
November, using 255 AUMs. This grazing occurred
after a prescribed fire of 22 acres was conducted on
the north side of the lake in the spring, which was
an attempt to remove the heavy rush and Carex
vegetation along the north shore of the lake, as
cattle grazing was not having the desired effect of
reducing this vegetation.
In 2006, cattle were again allowed to graze the
entire pasture (no electric fence) in July, using 94
AUMs. The cattle were removed in late July and
then allowed back in the field in October, using
another 58 AUMs.
Alkali Flats
Alkali flats are predominately flat lands and
seasonally dried-up wetland basins with strongly
saline soils. These areas are associated with or
adjacent to playas or intermittent lakes. The
alkaline/saline soils appear to severely restrict plant
growth, as vegetation is very spotty throughout
much of this area. Vegetation includes salt grass,
alkali sacaton, and greasewood. Wildlife use of
the alkali flats is generally limited to migratory
shorebirds, mostly killdeer and American avocet
(likely in association with water nearby).
Alkali Flats of Bamforth NWR
Approximately one-third to one-half of Bamforth
NWR is alkali flats, depending on water levels.
Alkali Flats of Hutton Lake NWR
A small playa northeast of Creighton Lake on
Hutton Lake NWR may be described as alkali fl ats.
Alkali Flats of Mortenson Lake NWR
Mortenson Lake NWR has one alkaline playa, and
Gibbs Lake, when drawn down, becomes alkaline.
Irrigated Meadows
Irrigated meadows are found only in a small area
on the west portion of Hutton Lake NWR and in a
few scattered locations on Mortenson Lake NWR.
These areas are characterized by the presence of
hydric soils and plants, and no distinction has been
made as to whether they are naturally occurring
or a manufactured condition because the total
area of land involved is minimal. Characteristic
vegetation may include creeping meadow foxtail,
and other species introduced for hay production,
as well as Baltic rush, Nebraska sedge, cattail, and
hardstem bulrush. Wildlife use include sora, Wilson’s
phalarope, yellow-headed blackbird, red-winged
blackbird, white-faced ibis, waterfowl (dabblers),
and marsh wrens.
Irrigated Meadows of Hutton Lake NWR
The meadows on Hutton Lake NWR are within the
floodplain of Sand Creek and likely were historically
flooded seasonally during runoff. The diversion
structure on Sand Creek that brings water into the
refuge is in this area. When the structure is open or
if the neighbor is irrigating the adjacent ground, this
area is flooded—sometimes for extended periods—
depending on water availability.
33
Irrigated Meadows of Mortenson Lake NWR
Mortenson Lake NWR meadows include
subirrigated areas on the northwest and south
side of Mortenson Lake, as well as irrigated lands
between Mortenson and Meeboer lakes and between
Soda and Gibbs lakes. As previously mentioned, it is
conceivable but unknown as to whether these areas
were naturally wet meadows prior to European
settlement. If the springs that help feed Mortenson
Lake waters are a historic part of the landscape,
they could have helped keep Mortenson Lake full,
and overflowing, which would have irrigated some of
these lands. If these springs are the result of uphill
irrigation, well development, or other constructions,
the irrigated meadows are fairly recent to the
landscape.
Contaminant Assessment
Contaminant assessment for the Laramie Plains
refuges are based on the results of baseline studies
of environmental contaminants and land usage
described below.
Contaminant Assessment for Bamforth NWR
A baseline study investigating trace elements in
various media on the refuge was conducted from
1991 to 1993 (Dickerson and Ramirez 1993). Lead
was slightly elevated in Bamforth Lake water
samples (0.143–0.164 mg/l). Selenium was elevated in
vegetation (3.28–4.26 ug/g) and sediment (28.6 ug/g).
Selenium concentration in American avocet eggs
ranged from 3.10 to 5.30 ug/g. Arsenic was slightly
elevated in vegetation (24.5–49.2 ug/g) and aquatic
invertebrates (23.1–33.1 ug/g), and boron was
slightly elevated in vegetation (303 ug/g).
Cattle grazing and irrigated pasture lands are the
primary use of the upland areas on the refuge. The
possibility for spills to occur on or near the refuge is
remote.
Contaminant Assessment for Hutton Lake NWR
A baseline study of environmental contaminants,
primarily trace elements, was performed at
Hutton Lake NWR in 1988 and 1989 (Ramirez and
Armstrong 1992). Trace elements were not present
in concentrations adverse to fish and wildlife. Aerial
spraying for mosquito control is conducted on the
private land located over 1 to 2 miles to the north.
Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) is applied on lands
adjacent to the refuge for mosquito control. Grazing
is the main use of this land.
Baseline sampling areas identified for Hutton Lake
NWR include four of the five main lakes at the
refuge: Hutton Lake, Rush Lake, Creighton Lake,
and Lake George. Contaminants assessment process
information should be reviewed in 5 years. Managers
Chapter 3—Refuge Resources and Description
should monitor mosquito-spraying activities to
ensure that the refuge is not accidentally sprayed.
Contaminant Assessment for Mortenson Lake NWR
A baseline study of environmental contaminants,
primarily trace elements, was performed at
Mortenson Lake NWR in 1988 and 1989 (Ramirez
1992). Trace elements were not present in
concentrations adverse to fi sh and wildlife. Aerial
spraying for mosquito control is conducted on the
private lands in the basin and on lands adjacent to
the refuge. Bt is also applied on lands adjacent to
the refuge and used within the refuge for mosquito
control. Grazing is the main use of this land.
A Wyoming toad in Mortenson Lake.
USFWS
Contaminants assessment process information
should be reviewed in 5 years. Managers should
monitor mosquito-spraying activities to ensure that
the refuge is not accidentally sprayed.
A recent investigation (Dickerson, Hooper, Huang,
and Allen 2003) assessed pesticide aerial drift from
mosquito control activities on lands adjacent to the
refuge. Pesticide indicator strips and spray cards
were used to determine the extent of malathion
entering the refuge and potential reintroduction
sites. Aquatic invertebrate abundance was not
signifi cantly different (p <0.05) before and after
spraying at any sites except the reference site
and Meeboer Lake. No malathion residues were
detected in the aquatic invertebrates. Results
from this study indicated that, although some drift
of malathion was occurring, the toads were not
exposed to concentrations great enough to reduce
adult survival, affect predator avoidance behavior, or
reduce their food source.
Recent study results (Little, Calfee, and Dickerson
2002) show that ammonia nitrate is not currently
elevated to concentrations that would adversely
affect the Wyoming toad. Increases in nitrogen
input, such as what might occur with changes in
34 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
land use, could increase the risk for adverse affects
to the toad, particularly because ammonia nitrate
concentrations may act synergistically with other
environmental factors or may serve as a stressor
for increasing the toads’ susceptibility to disease.
Periodical sampling of water from the refuge will
ensure that nitrogen input does not increase to
concentrations exceeding the tolerance level of
Wyoming toads.
Threatened and Endangered Species
Mortenson Lake NWR was established in 1993 to
protect the Wyoming toad’s last known population.
The Wyoming toad was listed as an endangered
species in 1984; the population at Mortenson Lake
was discovered in 1987.
At the present time, no known threatened or
endangered species use Bamforth NWR or Hutton
Lake NWR. Hutton Lake NWR has been a site for
Wyoming toad releases in the past. Refuge staff will
continue to facilitate the use of Hutton Lake NWR
as a release site for the Wyoming toad, per Recovery
Team recommendation.
Species of Concern
Table 3 indicates documented occurrences of
vertebrate species of concern within the Laramie
Plains refuges based on Keinath, Heidel, and
Beauvais 2003; updated by service staff in 2008.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
The Service is responsible for managing
archaeological and historical sites found on refuge
lands.
Prehistory and Early Contact
Archaeological and architectural remains
representing over 12,000 years of human occupation
are potentially located on the Laramie Plains
refuges. Little is known about the archaeology of the
region because the land is mostly privately owned,
and very few formal cultural resource surveys
have been done in the area. Cultural resources in
the surrounding regions span the earliest Paleo-
Indian occupations to the Euro-American presence
beginning in the early eighteenth century. Nearby
sites are located in a variety of geographical settings
and exhibit a wide range of artifacts and features,
but definite trends in site types and changes through
time are apparent.
Larson and Letts (2003) propose that although
the record is thin, there was probably signifi cant
use of the area by indigenous peoples. Current
archaeological evidence indicates that the
earliest inhabitants, the Paleo-Indians, migrated
to the region near the close of the last Ice Age
approximately 12,000 years ago. These people had
a highly mobile lifestyle that depended on big-game
hunting, including mammoths and the now-extinct
huge bison. The hallmark of most Paleo-Indian sites
are the distinctive spear points that are generally
associated with animal kill and butchering sites, in
addition to small temporary camps.
There was a gradual but definite shift in the pattern
of human use of the region beginning about 9,000
years ago. The changes are due to a combination
of regional climatic fluctuations and an increasing
population, coupled with tremendous social change
and technological innovation. Although this stage,
referred to as the Archaic Period and lasting until
about 2,000 years ago, is better represented in the
archaeological record than the preceding Paleo-
Indian stage, the interpretation of the remains is
difficult. Evidence of a greater diversity of tools
and increased use of a variety of plants and animals
are found on many sites, and the occupation of rock
shelters or pit houses becomes more common.
Approximately 1,500 years ago, the use of the
bow and arrow marked the beginning of the Late
Prehistoric Period. The increase in the number
of known archaeological sites for this period may
indicate a growing population or the influx of peoples
from other regions, or it may just reflect our ability
to locate these more recent sites. By the early 1800s,
Euro-Americans were becoming more common in
the area and evidence of their trade with the Native
populations in horses, firearms, and ornamental
items is increasingly evident in the archaeological
record. Native American tribes including the Crow,
the Cheyenne, the Sioux, and the Arapaho lost their
lands with the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868, and
many were relocated to reservations outside the
state.
Remains of these early occupations include fi re
hearths, lithic scatters (stone tools and the by-products
from making them), quarry sites, and stone
circles that are probably tipi rings. Fewer than 20
of these sites have been formally recorded in the
Laramie Basin.
Historic Period
As is the case with much of the West, the early
exploration of the Laramie Basin owes much of
its beginnings to the fur-trapping trade. In 1820,
Jacques LaRamie, the namesake of a county, city,
river, mountain range, and basin, trapped along the
river that now bares his name. Although thousands
traveled through what is now Wyoming in the 1840s
and 1850s along the nearby Oregon, California, and
Mormon trails, most were heading farther west, and
few people settled in what would become Wyoming.
From 1862 to 1868 approximately 20,000 people a
Chapter 3—Refuge Resources and Description 35
Table 3. Documented occurrences of vertebrate species of concern within the Laramie Plains refuges, Wyoming.
Bamforth NWR
Species
American avocet
Most Recent Observation
1996
American bittern 1911
American white pelican
Black tern
2006
unknown
Black-crowned night-heron
Black-footed ferret
1996
1977
Burrowing owl
California gull
Caspian tern
Common loon
1982
2006
1996
1933
Dwarf shrew 1987
Forster’s tern unknown
Herring gull
Iowa darter
unknown
unknown
Merlin unknown
Mountain plover
Northern leopard frog
Snowy egret
Swift fox
1993
1999
1996
1988
White-faced ibis 1988
Hutton Lake NWR
Species
American avocet
Most Recent Observation
2007
American bittern 1994
American dipper
American white pelican
Bald eagle
Black tern
1997
2007
2004
2007
Black-crowned night-heron
Black-footed ferret
2007
1964
Black-rosy fi nch
Brewer’s sparrow
Burrowing owl
California gull
Chestnut-collared longspur
Common goldeneye
Common loon
1992
2005
1991
2007
2005
2006
1998
Ferruginous hawk
Forster’s tern
2005
2007
36 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
Hutton Lake NWR cont.
Species Most Recent Observation
Golden eagle 2007
Hammond’s fl ycatcher 1911
Long-billed curlew 2004
McCown’s longspur 2005
Merlin 2004
Mountain plover 2005
Preble’s meadow jumping mouse 2005
Sage thrasher 2007
Short-eared owl 1995
Snowy egret 2006
Swift fox 2002
Western jumping mouse 2005
Western scrub-jay 2002
White-faced ibis 2007
White-tailed prairie dog 2007
Wyoming toad 2000
Mortenson Lake NWR
Species Most Recent Observation
American avocet 2007
American white pelican 2007
Black-footed ferret 1964
Black tern 2007
Brewer’s sparrow 2005
California gull 2007
Chestnut-collared longspur 1982
Common loon 1990
Long-billed curlew 2004
McCown’s longspur 2005
Mountain plover 2005
Ringtail 1993
Sage sparrow 1982
Sage thrasher 2005
Sandhill crane 2005
Swift fox 1965
Tiger salamander 1989
White-faced ibis 2001
White-tailed prairie dog 2007
Wyoming toad 2007
37
year traveled along the Overland Trail, which ran
approximately 3 miles north of Hutton Lake NWR.
The stage stations established by the Overland
Stage Company became the first permanent Euro-
American structures in the area (Larson and Letts
2003).
The first homestead in the basin was built in 1864
by Phil Mandel along the Little Laramie River
approximately 7 miles west of Bamforth NWR. It
also served as a stage station for the Overland Trail.
Mandel sold replacement stock to travelers and later
cut and sold hay to soldiers at Fort Sanders, which
was established in 1866 just south of present day
Laramie and about 10 miles northeast of Hutton
Lake NWR. Until 1882, when the fort closed,
it served to help protect the early settlers and
travelers in the basin during the many confl icts with
the Native Americans.
The construction of the Union Pacifi c Railroad
through the area in the late 1860s is one of the most
influential events in the history of the region. The
railroad lies about six miles east of Bamforth NWR
and Hutton Lake NWR. The railroad facilitated
better movement of both people and goods and
led to the establishment of many towns along
Wyoming’s southern border. Laramie grew to be a
major supply center, and numerous stations sprang
up along the tracks. Access to the railroad was also a
great catalyst for the growth of the cattle and sheep
ranching industries.
Henry Bath built the Henry Bath Ranch and
barn (also known as the Old Stone Ranch or Vallie
Bath Ranch) in 1875 approximately 5 miles west
of Bamforth NWR. These structures are listed on
the National Register of Historic Places and are
significant to the history of ranching and early
Euro-American occupation in the Laramie Basin.
Flag Ranch, another important ranch located about
3 miles east of Hutton Lake NWR, was settled in
1871 and became one of the early sheep operations
in the region. Agriculture was also a major factor in
the settlement of the area. By the late nineteenth
Chapter 3—Refuge Resources and Description
century, irrigation ditches were built to bring water
to the fi elds. Several of these ditches still exist in
the area of Hutton Lake NWR and Mortenson Lake
NWR, and many are considered eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places.
Previous Cultural Resource Studies
With the exception of a small fence line survey
in 2004, cultural resource inventories—as part
of Section 106 compliance associated with the
National Historic Preservation Act—have not
been performed on the three refuges. However,
archaeologists from the University of Wyoming
surveyed 898 acres at Hutton Lake NWR
(approximately half of the refuge) between 1992 and
1995 (Kornfeld 1996a, 1996b). Prehistoric features
located included a quarry or lithic procurement
site at the southwestern edge of the refuge and a
hearth site with a fi re-cracked rock concentration
at the southern edge of Lake George. Historic
archaeological remains consist of scattered trash
dumps, troughs, fence lines, a possible corral, and
historic structural remains. Individual artifacts
include bottles and cans, some dating back to the
1870s and 1880s, with several others from the early
1900s.
Bird-watching opportunities exist at Hutton Lake NWR.
USFWS
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREAS
This section describes the special management areas
of the Laramie Plains refuges.
Wilderness
Due to the small size of the refuges and current and
past land use patterns, the refuges do not appear to
meet the criteria for wilderness. As outlined in the
Wilderness Act of 1994, a wilderness area
Q generally appears to have been affected
primarily by the forces of nature, with the
human imprint substantially unnoticeable;
Q offers outstanding opportunities for solitude
or a primitive and unconfined type of
recreation;
Q has at least 5,000 acres of land or is of
sufficient size as to make practicable its
preservation and use in an unimpaired
condition;
Q may contain ecological, geological, or other
features of scientific, educational, scenic, or
historical value.
Important Bird Area
The Laramie Plains refuges, particularly Hutton
Lake NWR, are included in the Laramie Plains
38 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
Figure 12. Infrastructure and public use areas at Hutton Lake NWR, Wyoming.
Chapter 3—Refuge Resources and Description 39
Figure 13. Infrastructure at Mortenson Lake NWR, Wyoming.
40 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Laramie Plains Refuges, WY
Lake Important Bird Area (IBA) recognized by
the Audubon Society in partnership with Birdlife
International. This designation was given to the
Laramie Plains refuges in 2003 (Alison Lyon
Holloran, conservation coordinator, Audubon
Wyoming; personal communication, 2006). The
refuges meet four of five criteria for establishment
of an IBA including
Q endangered/threatened species (Wyoming
toad, Preble’s meadow jumping mouse);
Q other high conservation priority species
(white-faced ibis, American white pelican);
Q rare, unique, or representative habitat
(high-prairie wetlands);
Q significant concentration of waterfowl, gulls,
and wading birds.
The only IBA criterion that is not currently met is
long-term research.
VISITOR SERVICES
Refuge infrastructure (roads, fences, water control
structures) and public use facilities (parking areas,
walking trails) are shown on the maps for Bamforth
NWR (figure 11), Hutton Lake NWR (figure 12), and
Mortenson Lake NWR (fi gure 13).
Visitor Services at Bamforth NWR
No public use is allowed on Bamforth NWR. The
refuge lands are separated into three parcels with
private or state lands between them and have seen
little active management in several decades. In
addition, the soil types and moisture content in the
area preclude adequate fence construction in some
portions of the refuge. Consequently, much of the
refuge boundary is unfenced and unsigned, creating
potential trespass problems if visitation were
allowed on the refuge.
One public road (Highway 12) traverses the
southwest corner of the southwest parcel of the
refuge, which offers distant views of area wetlands
and other habitats on the refuge.
Visitor Services at Hutton Lake NWR
Opportunities for four of the six priority public uses
identified in the Improvement Act are available at
Hutton Lake NWR.
Hunting
Many hunting opportunities exist in nearby areas,
and Hutton Lake NWR provides a place for
members of the nonhunting public to experience
safe, nonconsumptive wildlife-dependent recreation
during hunting seasons.
Due to the small size of the refuge and existing
hunting opportunities in the area, the refuge will
remain closed to hunting.
Fishing
Fishing is not permitted on Hutton Lake NWR.
Unreliable water supplies with diminishing water
quality over time in refuge impoundments precludes
establishment of a viable fi shery.
Wildlife Observation and Wildlife Photography
There are no formal opportunities for these
activities, but opportunistic means are available.
Although there is not a designated auto tour route
on the refuge, 2.75 miles of gravel road are currently
open to public travel (see figure 12). These roads
allow visitors to traverse all major habitat types
on the refuge, including uplands with prairie dog
towns, grasses and shrubs used by pronghorn and
sage thrashers, and refuge impoundments hosting
a variety of water dependent birds. Facilities
that would aid the public in conducting wildlife
observation and photography such as photo blinds,
observation blinds, and interpretive panels do not
exist at the refuge.
Interpretation and Environmental Education
As previously mentioned, interpretive panels, tour
routes, nature trails, or other interpretive facilities
do not exist at the refuge. Staff are only occasionally
on site, as there is not a visitor center on the refuge.
An undated general information pamphlet and a
1972 bird list are available and sent to interested
parties who contact the refuge staff located at
Arapaho NWR with a request. Occasional requests
for tours and talks from scout groups, schools, and
nonprofit organizations are addressed on a case-by­case
basis; the refuge biologist generally handles
these requests.
Visitor Services at Mortenson Lake NWR
Because Mortenson Lake NWR was acquired for
the express purpose of preserving the endangered
Northern pintail.
USFWS
Chapter 3—Refuge Resources and Description 41
Wyoming toad, public use is currently not permitted
on the refuge to prevent potential adverse impact
on the toad. The refuge does not have any visitor
services facilities such as interpretive panels, nature
trails, and kiosks. Requests for refuge tours, studies,
and other uses are addressed on a case-by-case
basis.
Figure 14. Laramie Plains refuges in relation to nearby centers of economic infl uence.
Sources: Nationatlas.gov and BBC Research & Consulting.
PARTNERSHIPS
Refuge staff work with the following partners
to perform natural resource management at the
Laramie Plains refuges:
Q Wyoming Toad Recovery Team to achieve
population recovery goals for the Wyoming
toad.
Q Albany County Weed and Pest to assist
with management of invasive species on the
refuges.
Q Wyoming A