Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
|
|
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan I
Table of Contents
Reader’s Guide ____________________________________________________________ 1
Section A. Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
I. Background ____________________________________________________________ 3
Introduction____________________________________________________________ 3
Purpose and Need for Plan _______________________________________________ 3
Fish and Wildlife Service ________________________________________________ 4
Mission _____________________________________________________________ 4
Description__________________________________________________________ 4
National Wildlife Refuge System__________________________________________ 4
Mission _____________________________________________________________ 4
Description__________________________________________________________ 4
Legal Policy Context _________________________________________________ 5
Relationship to State Wildlife Agency___________________________________ 5
Ecosystem Context _____________________________________________________ 6
Overview ___________________________________________________________ 6
Threats and Problems ________________________________________________ 6
Conservation Priorities and Initiatives _________________________________ 11
II. Refuge Description ____________________________________________________ 14
Introduction___________________________________________________________ 14
Purpose ______________________________________________________________ 16
Refuge Environment and Other Related Information _______________________ 16
Education and Visitor Services __________________________________________ 23
Refuge Administration _________________________________________________ 24
Research Natural Areas ________________________________________________ 26
Archaeological and Historic Resources____________________________________ 26
Land Protection and Conservation _______________________________________ 27
Refuge Related Problems _______________________________________________ 29
Conservation Priorities _________________________________________________ 31
III. Plan Development ____________________________________________________ 33
Overview _____________________________________________________________ 33
Issues and Concerns____________________________________________________ 33
Fish and Wildlife Populations _________________________________________ 33
Habitats ___________________________________________________________ 33
Education and Visitor Services________________________________________ 34
Refuge Administration_______________________________________________ 34
Land Protection and Conservation ____________________________________ 34
IV. Management Direction _________________________________________________ 35
Introduction___________________________________________________________ 35
Vision ________________________________________________________________ 35
Goals, Objectives, and Strategies_________________________________________ 35
Fish and Wildlife Populations _________________________________________ 35
Habitat Management ________________________________________________ 41
Education and Visitor Services________________________________________ 45
Refuge Administration_______________________________________________ 51
Bayou Cocodrie
National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive
Conservation Plan
II Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
Land Protection and Conservation _______________________________________ 54
V. Plan Implementation____________________________________________________ 57
Background ___________________________________________________________ 57
Proposed Projects _____________________________________________________ 57
Fish and Wildlife Populations _________________________________________ 57
Habitats ___________________________________________________________ 58
Education and Visitor Services________________________________________ 60
Refuge Administration_______________________________________________ 62
Land Protection and Conservation ____________________________________ 64
Step-Down Management Plans __________________________________________ 67
Plan Performance ______________________________________________________ 67
Partnership Opportunities ______________________________________________ 68
Monitoring and Evaluation ______________________________________________ 68
Section B. Environmental Assessment
I. Background ___________________________________________________________ 71
Introduction___________________________________________________________ 71
Purpose and Need for the Action_________________________________________ 71
Decisions to be Made ___________________________________________________ 71
Planning Study Area ___________________________________________________ 73
Comprehensive Conservation Planning Process and Issue Identification ______ 73
Managing Fish, Wildlife, and Habitats _________________________________ 73
Controlling Problem Species__________________________________________ 75
Managing Facilities and Staff _________________________________________ 75
Increasing Hunting, Wildlife Viewing, and Environmental Education
Opportunies ________________________________________________________ 75
II. Alternatives___________________________________________________________ 76
Formulation of Alternatives _____________________________________________ 76
Description of the Alternatives __________________________________________ 76
Alternative A (No Action) ____________________________________________ 78
Alternative B (Proposed Action) ______________________________________ 78
Alternative C _______________________________________________________ 80
Comparison of Alternatives _____________________________________________ 81
Management Common to All Alternatives_________________________________ 82
Compatible Secondary Uses __________________________________________ 82
Other Management__________________________________________________ 85
III. Affected Environment ________________________________________________ 107
IV. Environmental Consequences __________________________________________ 109
Overview ____________________________________________________________ 109
Effects Common to All Alternatives _____________________________________ 109
Effects from Implementing Alternative A________________________________ 114
Effects from Implementing Alternative B ________________________________ 116
Effects from Implementing Alternative C ________________________________ 122
V. Consultation and Coordination __________________________________________ 125
Public Involvement Process ____________________________________________ 125
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan III
Section C. Appendices
I. Glossary _____________________________________________________________ 127
II. References _________________________________________________________ 136
III. Relevant Legal Mandates ___________________________________________ 139
IV. Biota ______________________________________________________________ 147
V. Decisions and Approvals ______________________________________________ 156
VI. Management Methods and Procedures _________________________________ 168
Appendices
IV Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
1. Conservation Focus Management Areas __________________________________ 7
2. Lower Mississippi Valley Ecosystem _____________________________________ 8
3. Forest Cover Changes in the Lower Mississippi Valley _____________________ 9
4. Breeding Ranges and Proposed Critical Habitat for the Louisiana
Black Bear _____________________________________________________________ 10
5. Priority Bird Species Associated with Refuge Bottomland
Hardwood Forest ________________________________________________________ 13
6. Approved Acquisition Target Areas _____________________________________ 15
7. Existing Habitat Management __________________________________________ 20
8. Habitat Communities of Ridge and Swale Topography_____________________ 22
9. Refuge Land Use Features _____________________________________________ 25
10. Alternative B: (Service’s Proposed Action) Short-Term Projection ________ 38
11. Alternative B: (Service’s Proposed Action) Long-Term Projection _________ 39
12. Current and Proposed Visitor Facilities _________________________________ 47
13. Current and Proposed Organizational Structure__________________________ 53
14. Project/Staff Cost Summary for 2000-2015 _______________________________ 65
15. Step-Down Plans _____________________________________________________ 67
16. Refuge Location ______________________________________________________ 72
17. Planning Study Area __________________________________________________ 74
18. Existing Conditions___________________________________________________ 77
19. Alternative A: (No Action) Long-Term Projection _______________________ 79
20. Alternative C: Short-Term Projection __________________________________ 83
21. Alternative C: Long-Term Projection ___________________________________ 84
22. Comparison of Alternatives.____________________________________________ 87
23. Estimated Refuge Administration Costs _______________________________ 106
24. Planning Team Member Expertise ____________________________________ 126
25. Refuge Biota ________________________________________________________ 147
26. Private Lands Conservation Program Information _____________________ 170
27. Protection Priorities for the Proposed Expansion and Recommended Methods
for Acquisition _________________________________________________________ 179
28. Land Acquisition Priorities __________________________________________ 180
Figures
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan V
Guiding Principals of the
National Wildlife Refuge System
We are land stewards, guided by Aldo Leopold’s teachings that land is a community of life and
that love and respect for the land is an extension of ethics. We seek to reflect that land ethic in
our stewardship and to instill it in others.
Wild lands and the perpetuation of diverse and abundant wildlife are essential to the quality
of the American life.
We are public servants. We owe our employers, the American people, hard work, integrity,
fairness, and a voice in the protection of their trust resources.
Management, training from preservation to active manipulation of habitats and populations,
is necessary to achieve the missions of the National Wildlife Refuge System and the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service.
Wildlife-dependent uses involving hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography,
and environmental education and interpretation, when compatible, are legitimate and appro-priate
uses of the National Wildlife Refuge System.
Partnerships with those who want to help us meet our mission are welcome and indeed
essential.
Employees are our most valuable resource. They are respected and deserve an empowering,
mentoring, and caring work environment.
We respect the rights, beliefs, and opinions of our neighbors.
VI Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1
Reader’s Guide
The National Wildlife Refuge System has the mission of integrating
public land management; fish, wildlife and plant conservation; and wildlife-dependent
recreation and education efforts to support diverse public
interests. This Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan, upon final approval,
and Environmental Assessment for Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife
Refuge will assist in guiding management over the next 15 years. The
Fish and Wildlife Service’s planning process for all national wildlife refuges
involves the development of broad comprehensive conservation plans,
followed by the development of detailed step-down management plans.
Using public input, the Fish and Wildlife Service developed three
alternative approaches to manage Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife
Refuge. Each alternative described in the environmental assessment
was formulated to project future conditions. The possible effects of
implementing each alternative are also described. Alternative B is
tentatively selected as the Service’s Proposed Plan (Action).
Section A. Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan for Bayou Cocodrie
National Wildlife Refuge
A key purpose of this section is to detail the proposed conservation
actions for the refuge over a 15-year time frame. Chapter I provides
an overview of the Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Wildlife
Refuge System, and the Lower Mississippi Valley. Chapter II describes
the refuge environment and the resource problems and challenges facing
Service managers. Chapter III describes public involvement as part of
plan development and the underlying problems and concerns raised by
the public and Service managers. Chapter IV describes the desired future
management direction reflected through goals, objectives, and strategies.
Chapter IV also reflects the proposed management outlined in Alternative
B, and describes desired management activities and appropriate and
compatible recreational and permitted uses of the refuge. Chapter V lists
projects that the Service will strive to accomplish to meet the goals set
for the refuge.
Section B. Environmental Assessment for Bayou Cocodrie National
Wildlife Refuge
The environmental assessment was prepared to comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act. Chapter I introduces the reader to the plan,
planning study area, issues and problems associated with the refuge, other
activities that are relevant to plan development, and planning process
and issue identification. Chapter II describes three alternatives formulated
by the Service to accomplish the refuge purposes and goals. Chapter III
describes the refuge environment. Chapter IV addresses the predicted
effects from implementing each alternative. Chapter V describes public
and private entities consulted while conducting the planning effort.
Section C. Appendices
This section identifies terms, references, laws and authorities, and methods
utilized to develop plans; lists biota; partnering information useful to land
owners and managers; and decisions and approvals for implementing the
plan. After public comments are received regarding this draft, the Service
will publish responses to those comments in the final plan.
March 2001
Bayou Cocodrie
National Wildlife Refuge
P.O. Box 1772
Ferriday, LA 71334
318-336-7119
http://www.fws.gov
http://bayoucocodrie.fws.gov/
index.html
Bayou Cocodrie National
Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive
Conservation Plan
Bayou Cocodrie
National Wildlife
Refuge will be
transformed into
one of the finest
examples of
bottomland
hardwood forest
complexes, striving
to protect the
habitats of fish and
wildlife, and create
new opportunities
for visitors to enjoy
its unique
biological
resources.
VISION
Cypress swale
USFWS
2 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
Located in the Lower Mississippi Valley and established in 1990, Bayou
Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge is composed of fragmented forest patches,
parts of which retain a diverse assemblage of mature and old age bottomland
hardwood forests. This document proposes management actions to improve
conditions for wildlife, associated habitats, and recreation opportunities
on the refuge. The vision statement for the refuge reflects the desired
future conditions within the context of the National Wildlife Refuge System
mission, refuge purposes, and other relevant mandates.
Bayou Cocodrie National
Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive
Conservation Plan
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 3
SECTION A
I. Background
Introduction
Contained in this Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan for Bayou
Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge are the proposed management actions
and direction for the refuge over the next 15 years. When fully
implemented this plan will strive to achieve the refuge vision. Overriding
considerations reflected in the plan are that fish and wildlife conservation
requires first priority in refuge management, and that wildlife-dependent
recreation is allowed and encouraged as long as it is compatible with, or
does not detract from, the mission or the refuge purposes.
A planning team developed a range of alternatives that best met the goals
and objectives of the refuge and could be implemented within the 15-year
period. After reviewing comments and management needs the alternatives
were evaluated. The proposed alternative is described in Chapter IV,
Management Direction. Other alternatives are addressed in Section B,
Environmental Assessment.
Purpose and Need for Plan
The purpose of the plan is to identify the role the
refuge will play in support of the mission of the National
Wildlife Refuge System and to provide guidance in refuge
management activities.
The plan is needed to:
n Provide a clear statement of direction for the future
management of the refuge;
n Provide refuge neighbors, visitors, and government
officials with an understanding of Service management
actions on and around the refuge;
n Ensure that Service management actions, including
land protection and recreation/education programs, are
consistent with the mandates of the National Wildlife
Refuge System;
n Ensure that the management of the refuge is consistent
with federal, state, and county plans; and
n Provide a basis for the development of budget requests for
operations, maintenance, and capital improvement needs.
Perhaps the greatest need of the Service is communication
with the public and the public’s participation in efforts
to carry out the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge
System. Many agencies, organizations, institutions, and
businesses have developed relationships with the Service to
advance the mission of national wildlife refuges. This draft
comprehensive conservation plan supports the Partners-in-
Flight Initiative; the Lower Mississippi Valley Migratory
Bird Wetland Conservation Initiative; the North American
Waterfowl Management Plan; the Western Hemisphere
Shorebird Reserve Network; the American Woodcock
Management Plan; and the National Wetlands Priority
Conservation Plan. For further information regarding
migratory birds, see website http://birds.fws.gov/.
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Old growth cypress swale
USFWS
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter I
4 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
Fish and Wildlife Service
Mission
As part of its mission, the Service manages more than 530 national wildlife
refuges covering over 92 million acres. These areas comprise the National
Wildlife Refuge System, the world’s largest collection of lands, with 77
million acres in Alaska and the remaining 15 million acres spread across the
other 49 states and several island territories.
Description
The Fish and Wildlife Service is the primary federal agency responsible
for conserving, protecting, and enhancing the Nation’s fish and wildlife
populations and their habitats. The Service shares some conservation
responsibilities with other federal, state, tribal, local, and private entities.
The Service also has specific trustee responsibilities for migratory birds,
threatened and endangered species, anadromous fish, and certain marine
mammals, as well as for lands and waters administered by the Service for
the management and protection of these resources.
National Wildlife Refuge System
Mission
The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System, as defined by the
National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 is:
“...to administer a national network of lands and waters for the
conservation, management, and where appropriate, restoration of the fish,
wildlife and plant resources and their habitats within the United States for
the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.”
Description
The National Wildlife Refuge Improvement Act of 1997, established, for
the first time, a clear legislative mission of wildlife conservation for the
National Wildlife Refuge System. Activities were initiated in 1997 to
complement the direction of this new legislation, including an effort to
complete comprehensive conservation plans for all refuges. These plans,
which are completed with full public involvement, help guide the future
management of refuges by establishing natural resources and recreation/
education programs. The Act states that each refuge shall be managed to:
n Fulfill the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System;
n Fulfill the individual purpose of each refuge;
n Consider the needs of wildlife first;
n Fulfill requirements of comprehensive conservation plans that are
prepared for each unit of the refuge system;
n Maintain the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of
the refuge system;
n Recognize that wildlife-dependent recreation activities including
hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and
environmental education and interpretation are legitimate and priority
public uses; and allow refuge managers authority to determine
compatible public uses.
Approximately 37.5 million people visited national wildlife refuges in 1998,
most to observe wildlife in their natural habitats. As visitation grows,
there are significant economic benefits to local communities. By analyzing
refuges, economists found that refuge visitors contribute more than $400
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter I
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 5
million annually to local economies. Nearly 40 percent of the country’s
adults spent $101 billion on wildlife-related pursuits in 1996, according
to the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated
Recreation (Fish and Wildlife Service 1996).
Volunteers continue to be a major contributor to the success of the refuge
system. In 1998, volunteers contributed more than 1.5 million hours on
refuges nationwide, a service valued at more than $20.6 million.
The wildlife and habitat vision for national wildlife refuges stresses that
wildlife comes first; that ecosystems, biodiversity, and wilderness are vital
concepts in refuge management; that refuges must be healthy; that growth
of refuges must be strategic; and that the refuge system serves as a model
for habitat management with broad participation from others.
Legal Policy Context
Administration of national wildlife refuges is guided by the mission and
goals of the National Wildlife Refuge System, Congressional legislation,
Presidential Executive Orders, and international treaties. Policies for
management options of the refuge are further refined by administrative
guidelines established by the Secretary of the Interior and by policy
guidelines established by the Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Management options of the refuge’s establishing authorities, Public Law 104,
Stat. 2957 (Section 108, H.R. 3338), and the National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act of 1997, the legal and policy guidance for the operation
of national wildlife refuges, are contained in documents and acts listed in
Section C. Guidance and direction can also be found in the following:
n National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966;
n Refuge Recreation Act of 1962;
n Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations;
n Fish and Wildlife Service Manual; and
n National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997.
Lands within the National Wildlife Refuge System are closed to public
uses unless specifically and legally opened. All programs and uses must
be evaluated based on mandates set forth in the National Wildlife Refuge
System Improvement Act. Those mandates are to:
n Contribute to ecosystem goals, as well as refuge purposes and goals;
n Conserve, manage, and restore fish, wildlife, and plant resources and
their habitats;
n Monitor the trends of fish, wildlife, and plants;
n Manage and ensure appropriate visitor uses as those uses benefit the
conservation of fish and wildlife resources and contribute to the
enjoyment of the public (these uses include hunting, fishing,
wildlife observation, wildlife photography and environmental education
and interpretation); and
n Ensure that visitor activities are compatible with refuge purposes.
Relationship to State Wildlife Agency
A provision of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of
1997, and subsequent agency policy, is that the Service shall ensure timely
and effective cooperation and collaboration with other federal agencies
and state fish and wildlife agencies during the course of acquiring and
managing refuges. State wildlife management areas and national wildlife
refuges provide the foundation for protection of species, and contribute to
the overall health and sustainment of fish and wildlife species in Louisiana.
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter I
6 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
The Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (http://
www.wlf.state.la.vs) is a state-partnering agency with the Service,
charged with enforcement responsibilities relating to migratory birds
and endangered species as well as managing state natural resources.
It also manages approximately 1.4 million acres of coastal marshes
and wildlife management areas. The Department coordinates the
state wildlife conservation program and provides public recreation
opportunities including an extensive hunting and fishing program on
state wildlife management areas, such as the 36,000-acre Red River
Wildlife Management Area in Concordia Parish (Figures 1). The state’s
participation and contribution throughout this comprehensive conservation
planning process provide for ongoing opportunities and open dialogue
to improve the ecological sustainment of fish and wildlife in Louisiana.
An integral part of the comprehensive conservation planning process is
integrating common mission objectives where appropriate.
Ecosystem Context
Overview
Sustainable communities and species conservation and recovery on refuges
require the joint efforts of private landowners, local communities, and
state and federal governments. The Fish and Wildlife Service is initiating
cooperative partnerships in an effort to reduce the declining trend of fish
and wildlife populations and biological diversity. Bayou Cocodrie National
Wildlife Refuge is part of the Lower Mississippi Valley (Figure 2).
The Lower Mississippi Valley once supported a vast bottomland hardwood
forest complex that extended along the Mississippi River from Illinois
to Louisiana. Today, less than 20 percent of this bottomland hardwood
forest remains and most is fragmented or remains in scattered patches
throughout the region (Figure 3). Flood waters once recharged wildlife
habitats and created rich, dynamic systems that supported a diverse
abundance of fish and wildlife species. The Lower Mississippi Valley is
bisected by levees and its flow is restricted by flood control projects
and agricultural diversion. Water quality is significantly impacted by
agricultural and industrial runoff. Rivers and water bodies throughout are
highly turbid, laden with pesticides, and support a small fraction of the
once abundant aquatic resources. These declines prompted the Service to
designate bottomland hardwood forests found in this ecosystem as areas
of special concern.
The Service is focusing efforts to adopt collaborative resource partnerships
within and outside the agency to reduce the declining trend of fish
and wildlife populations and biological diversity, establish conservation
priorities, clarify goals, and solve common threats and problems associated
with fish and wildlife resources. Biological objectives in the Lower
Mississippi Valley for species groups targeted in this plan reflect the
Partners-in-Flight Plan, North American Waterfowl Management Plan,
Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network, and the recovery of the
Louisiana sub-population of black bear (Figure 4).
Threats and Problems
National wildlife refuges in the Lower Mississippi Valley serve as part of
the last safety net to support biological diversity—the greatest challenge
facing the Service. Impacts and underlying causes and threats to biological
diversity within the Lower Mississippi Valley include:
n The loss of sustainable communities, including the loss of 20 million acres
of bottomland hardwood forests;
n The loss of connectivity between bottomland hardwood forest sites e.g.
forest fragmentation (Figure 1);
n The effects of constructing navigation and water diversion projects, and
the effects of agricultural and timber harvesting practices;
Hooded warbler
Bill Duyck - Cornell Lab of Ornithology
7
���������
�������
���
���� ���� ��
��
��
�����
����
�����������
��
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
8
����
���
���������
�������������
���
������
Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
9
�����
��������
���
����
����
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
10
����
Figure 4. Breeding Ranges and Proposed Critical Habitat for the Lousiana Black Bear
Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter I
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 11
n The simplification of the remaining wildlife habitats within the
ecosystem and gene pools; and
n The cumulative habitat effects of land and water resource development activities.
As a result of these causes and threats, many species endemic to the Lower
Mississippi Valley have become either extinct, threatened, or endangered.
The Louisiana black bear is listed as threatened under the Endangered
Species Act. The red wolf and Florida panther are no longer found in
the Lower Mississippi Valley; the ivory-billed woodpecker and Bachman’s
warbler, once known to occur in the area, are considered endangered, if
not extinct.
Elimination of forest habitats and forest fragmentation has decimated
wildlife species throughout the Lower Mississippi Valley (Figure 3).
Species most adversely affected by fragmentation are species that are
area sensitive or dependent on special habitat requirements such as
large, mature blocks of forest that offer secure nesting habitat and a
particular food source. Forest fragmentation affects migratory songbirds
mostly through high rates of nesting failure due to predation and cowbird
parasitism--both are recognized by the Service as serious threats to
wildlife in Louisiana. More than 70 species of breeding migratory songbirds
are found in this region. Some of these species, including Swainson’s warbler,
prothonotary warbler, wood thrush, and cerulean warbler have declined
significantly and need the benefits of large forest blocks to recover and
sustain their existence (pers. comm. Hunter, Fish and Wildlife Service).
Modifications to the historic flood plains have caused major declines in
fisheries and aquatic resource productivity. The reduction of ecological
functions from non-point source runoff of sediments, excess nutrients,
and pesticides/herbicides is a continual threat to the remaining fisheries
resources. The Service’s Draft Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Strategic
Management Plan for the Lower Mississippi River Ecosystem identifies
67 fish species as endangered, and 39 species as threatened. In addition,
16 other species are species of concern or proposed for listing. Only two
threatened/endangered fish species occur in Louisiana.
The lack of bottomland hardwood forests, coupled with the impacts
associated with fragmented forests, poses a serious threat to migratory
bird populations, black bear, and other resident species.
Conservation Priorities and Initiatives
Conservation priorities for national wildlife refuges in the Lower Mississippi
Valley focus on threatened and endangered species, trust species, and species
of area concern. By working with others, the Service is more effective in
achieving its overall mission and management goals. A combination of land
protection and habitat management methods is utilized by the Service and
others to compensate for bottomland hardwood habitat loss and to meet
shared/common long-term goals established for this area (Figure 2).
Bottomland hardwood forests are ranked as the highest conservation
priority of the Fish and Wildlife Service and other agencies on which
to focus management efforts. For example, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture is working with the Fish and Wildlife Service and landowners
to restore forests on private lands to contribute to the recovery of
the Louisiana black bear. The Lower Mississippi River Joint Venture (a
consortium of public and private conservation groups) initiated cooperative
efforts to restore lands that provide maximum benefits to migratory
songbirds and has identified conservation areas on which to focus future
Fragmentation
USFWS Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge
Cowbird in Willow flycatcher nest
John Harris
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter I
12 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
land protection and restoration efforts. The long-term goal is to provide
“forest islands” called forest bird conservation zones in the Lower
Mississippi Valley ranging in size from 10,000 to more than 100,000 acres.
The forest bird conservation zones are priority areas for forest restoration and
will someday serve as important “anchors” for biological diversity (Figure 1).
The Lower Mississippi Valley serves as the primary wintering habitat for
mid-continent waterfowl populations, as well as breeding and migration
habitat migratory songbirds returning from Central and South America.
Restoration of migratory songbird populations is a high priority of the
Partners-in-Flight Plan, a national and regional planning effort, developed
to emphasize land bird species as a priority for conservation. Habitat loss,
land bird population trends, and vulnerability of species and habitats to
threats are all factors used in the priority ranking of species (Bonney 1999).
Further, biologists are identifying focal species for each habitat type from
which population and habitat objectives and conservation actions can be
determined. This list of focal species, objectives, and conservation actions
will aid migratory bird management on the refuge (Figure 5).
The recovery of the Louisiana black bear involves a major conservation
endeavor between federal, state, and private participants, including
the Service, Natural Resources Conservation Service, state agencies,
universities, private conservation organizations, and the Black Bear
Conservation Committee. The Service’s recovery plan is to establish viable
populations, promote various land protection methods that will establish
migration corridors, and protect habitat. The Black Bear Conservation
Committee is made up of public and private partners in Mississippi,
Louisiana, and east Texas. The committee adheres to the Service’s
recovery plan. The overall goal of both the committee and the Service
is to restore and protect a series of large forest blocks connected by
corridors; to facilitate recovery of the bear in Louisiana; to identify
protection areas in Louisiana as special focus areas; and to support black
bear populations and provide movement corridors that serve as conduits of
genetic exchange within the Lower Mississippi Valley. These forest
blocks overlay the forest bird conservation zones identified by the
Service. Forest bird conservation zones are identified for this refuge as
well as Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge in Madison and Tensas
Parishes, Louisiana, the Red River/Three Rivers Wildlife Management
Area Complex in Concordia Parish, and the Atchafalaya Basin. The Black
Bear Conservation Committee uses education and outreach as tools to
promote the recovery of the black bear (Figure 1).
Conservation management on private lands is extremely important to the
future conservation of fish and wildlife resources. To achieve conservation
priorities on private lands and in conjunction with public lands, the
synergy of the all federal, state, tribal, and private organizations working
together will ensure that the Service not only protects the more important
areas, but also reduces redundancy and overlap. See Appendix II for a
detailed description of private landowner/partnership opportunities.
Discussing bird conservation
USFWS
Black bear
Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 13
��� �������
�����
��
���
�������
����
���������
������
����
���
���
�������
��������
�������������
USFWS,
Chuck Hunter
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter II
14 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
II. Refuge Description
Introduction
Although Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge was established in
1990, to date, only 13,168 acres have been acquired within the 22,269-acre
acquisition boundary. The Nature Conservancy was instrumental in
securing lands for the refuge. The potential wildlife habitat values of old
growth bottomland hardwoods and adjacent forests provided the impetus
to purchase the property from its original owners. In 1988, The Nature
Conservancy purchased 11,230 acres from the Fisher Lumber Company, a
subsidiary of General Motors, for resale to the Service (Figure 6).
Management efforts since 1990 have emphasized acquiring land, securing
staff to operate the new facility, and initiating conservation programs
that benefit resident wildlife species. However, Service acquisition of key
properties such as inholdings and bottomland hardwood habitat may not
be realized within the 15-year planning period due to budget constraints
and landowner preferences. The 22,269-acre boundary has a significant
“edge” which contributes to predation of nesting forest birds. Edge effect
is the tendency of a transitional zone between communities to contain a
greater variety of species and more dense populations of species than any
surrounding community. Such is the case between wildlife communities
that occupy dense bottomland hardwood forests and wildlife found in open,
cultivated agricultural lands.
Conservation management projects for the refuge include:
n Conducting comprehensive assessments of existing fish and wildlife resources;
n Recruiting and training staff and improving existing facilities;
n Defining refuge objectives that will contribute to maintaining biological
diversity within the Lower Mississippi Valley;
n Managing habitats to reduce threats and problems (i.e., forest
fragmentation, loss of old growth forests) associated with species of concern;
n Assisting in black bear recovery efforts; and
n Defining research within the old growth area and involving partners to
accomplish the research.
Northern parula
Bill Dyer - Cornell Lab of Ornithology
15
���� ���
����
���
���
���
����
����
��������
��
������
��
����
����
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter II
Purpose
Congress authorized the establishment of Bayou Cocodrie National
Wildlife Refuge on November 16, 1990, through Public Law 101-593
(Section 108, House Report 3338), to protect some of the last remaining,
least disturbed bottomland hardwoods in the Lower Mississippi Valley.
Congress stated the refuge purpose as follows:
“The Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge is established and shall
be managed for the purposes of (1) conservation and enhancement of
wetlands; (2) general wildlife management as a unit of the National Wildlife
Refuge System, including management of migratory birds; and (3) fish and
wildlife-oriented recreational activities.”
In establishing the refuge, Congress recognized the significance of this
area in its findings:
“The Bayou Cocodrie area is a bottomland hardwood swamp which borders
(supports or harbors) more than one hundred and fifty species of birds
and many other types of wildlife, including several species threatened
with extinction, such as the Louisiana population of black bears. The
Bayou Cocodrie area includes some of the least disturbed bottomland
hardwood forests in the southeast and significantly contributes to the
biological diversity in the region.”
In managing the refuge, the Secretary of the Interior shall manage:
“...an amount of refuge woodlands as a contiguous forest sufficient to
benefit the species of passerine birds that occupy this type of habitat. The
Secretary shall give special consideration to accomplishing this objective
through the use of current authority, including his authority to establish
Research Natural Areas within the Refuge.”
Expanding on the primary purpose, objectives were defined in the June
1992 Environmental Assessment and Land Protection Plan prepared by
the Service. The management objectives include:
n Providing wintering habitat for migratory waterfowl;
n Establishing habitat for a natural diversity of wildlife;
n Providing habitat for non-game migratory birds (neotropical migrants);
n Establishing a Research Natural Area; and
n Providing opportunities for environmental education, research,
interpretation, and other wildlife-dependent recreation.
Refuge Environment And Other Related Information
Fish, Wildlife, and Plant Populations
The refuge serves as a critical repository of gene pools, species, and
communities that must contribute to the overall health of the Lower
Mississippi Valley ecosystem. Named after the native alligator (crocodile)
and the bayou that runs through it, the refuge provides an important
ecological niche for fish, wildlife, and plant species. The Service manages
refuge resources and, where possible, coordinates with neighboring
land managers and agencies to conserve biological diversity. The high
quality forests, long growing season, abundant rainfall, and geographical
proximity to the Mississippi River provide habitat for a diversity of
resident species including migratory songbirds and black bear. The refuge
is home to a wide variety of amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and birds and
is well known locally for its wildlife habitat. Songbirds, white-tailed deer,
waterfowl, shorebirds, raptors, reptiles, amphibians, woodcock, furbearers,
and other mammals utilize this area. A list of wildlife species known or
predicted to inhabit the refuge is included in Section C. V.
Wood thrush
Mike Hopiak - Cornell Lab of Ornithology
16 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter II
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 17
A thorough documentation of the population status of wildlife other than
neotropical songbirds has not been conducted. Excellent documentation of
neotropical bird use of portions of the refuge has been accomplished under
Service sponsorship by the Louisiana State University Avian Laboratory.
Threatened Species and Species of Management Concern
Infrequently, refuge staff observe footprints of the transient Louisiana
black bear, which is listed as threatened under the Endangered Species
Act. The threatened bald eagle has been observed on the refuge. Initial
and unpublished studies have indicated that old growth trees on the refuge
are important roosting sites for the Rafinesque’s big-eared bat , a species
of management concern (unpub. reports, Cochran and Fish and Wildlife
Service 1999). The eastern cougar and the red wolf were former residents
of the area, but none have been documented in the last 40 years.
The refuge location and habitat features are significant for the future
conservation of the Louisiana black bear. Restoration efforts proposed
by the Black Bear Conservation Committee include proposed bear
management units that would expand the refuge boundary. The Service,
the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, and members of the
Black Bear committee are planning to eventually move females onto the
refuge, and other public lands near the refuge, in an effort to reestablish
breeding populations. The committee has also identified private lands
that could be used as corridors between breeding bear populations. A
combination of protected and managed public and private lands would
provide the necessary forested blocks and corridors for bears to move
about with minimal disturbance. The Natural Resources Conservation
Service plays a major role in black bear recovery efforts by implementing
land protection programs which provide an economic incentive for farmers
to restore farmlands and place them in conservation easements.
Avian Species
Avian species are extremely important wildlife resources identified on the
refuge with more than 186 species recorded within the refuge border
(unpub. data, Ouchley). The bottomland hardwood forests serve as important
habitat for breeding birds and migrants in the spring and fall. Surveys and
studies indicate that this refuge may contain the most diverse assemblage of
migratory bird species remaining in the Lower Mississippi Valley.
For migratory forest breeding songbirds and shorebirds, the ecological
and biological significance is transcontinental, providing breeding and
migration habitat for Gulf migrants returning from their wintering
grounds in Central and South America. Songbird studies have been
conducted in the Brooks Brake Unit, which contains a 750-acre old growth
forest stand. Additional surveys and monitoring would confirm breeding
songbird survey information, nest success, and other key measurements.
Such species as warblers, vireos, tanagers, flycatchers, and indigo buntings
are common residents.
The refuge and the Lower Mississippi Valley serve as the primary
wintering ground for mid-continent waterfowl populations breeding in
the prairies and parklands of Canada and the United States. Historic
conditions typical of refuge habitats once supported excellent habitat for
migratory waterfowl. Management efforts to improve wintering waterfowl
habitat on refuge lands are underway and will increase as additional lands
are purchased. Typical winter residents include mallards, teal, and wood
ducks. Waterfowl species known to nest in this area include wood ducks
and hooded mergansers. Restoration and management of wetlands on the
refuge would create additional resources for dabbling ducks.
Bear cub
Don Anderson Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter II
18 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
Waterfowl population objectives are tied to supporting the North
American Waterfowl Management Plan. A 440-acre moist soil
impoundment is managed adjacent to a recently reforested area and
cropland. The refuge impoundments, in conjunction with naturally flooded
forest habitat, will eventually support about 480,000 duck-use-days. The
refuge population objective will average between 5,000-10,000 ducks for
110 days (unpub. report, Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge 1998).
This population objective is supported by the moist soil unit, flooded
sloughs, Wallace Lake and Little Wallace Lake, as well as brakes subject
to flooding. Managers focus work on the moist soil units, selected sloughs
in the Brooks Brake Unit, and construction of wood duck boxes. The only
breeders utilizing the bottomland hardwood forests are wood ducks and
hooded mergansers.
Wading birds are abundant in the small lakes and numerous sloughs. The
backwater bays, sloughs, and depressions provide habitat for shorebirds
such as yellowlegs, sandpipers, plovers, gulls, and terns which can be found
using wetland mudflats and bayous during their spring and fall migrations.
Herons and egrets are plentiful.
Mammals
Mammals are numerous and observed throughout the refuge. No
comprehensive list of mammalian species exists for the refuge, although
it is known which mammals occur in this area (St. Amant 1951 and
Lowery 1981). The refuge area contains seven orders of mammals
including pouched mammals (opossums); insect-eaters (shrews and moles);
bats; flesh-eaters (long-tail weasel); gnawing mammals (southern flying
squirrel); rabbits; and even-toed hoofed mammals (white-tailed deer).
The bottomland hardwood communities are very productive for a wide
array of wildlife species, including game animals. Game species include
white-tailed deer, grey and fox squirrels, and swamp and cotton-tailed
rabbits. Furbearers include beaver, nutria, otter, striped skunk, coyote,
grey and red fox, mink, and bobcat. Present deer populations are
at carrying capacity, and hunting is designed to maintain this level.
Population levels have improved dramatically since Service acquisition,
as have herd health indicators. Average body weights are improving and
mature bucks may weigh in excess of 250 pounds live weight. Future deer
populations will be a reflection of both forest management and deer harvest.
Raccoon populations are monitored to ensure compatible levels with other
species. Negative impacts from excessive population numbers include
depredation on turkey, neotropical birds, and wading bird nests.
Feral hogs compete with resident wildlife for food and can cause crop
damage to neighboring farms. Hunting and removal programs should bring
these animals under control.
Amphibians and Reptiles
Although frequently observed, much is still unknown about reptile and
amphibian population levels on the refuge. At least thirty species of
reptiles and amphibians and a variety of native and non-native aquatic
species are known to be found on the refuge. The diverse group of
amphibians including salamanders, toads, and frogs are well adapted to the
aquatic and terrestrial environments, and moisture is typically important
for their survival. Reptiles including turtles, alligators, lizards, skinks, and
snakes are common.
Yellow-crowned night heron
USFWS
Alligator
USFWS
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter II
19
Aquatic Species
These species are most commonly observed along the main stem of
Bayou Cocodrie. Although limited, the refuge does provide an important
fishery resource for local fishermen. Most of the aquatic habitat consists of
beaver ponds, oxbow lakes such as Wallace and Little Wallace lakes, and
Cross Bayou streams which support commercial fishing of catfish, buffalo,
alligator gar, and freshwater drum. Sport fishing populations of crappie,
bass, and bream are also found in these lakes, although the populations
are low due to periodic water quality problems, particularly high turbidity.
Access to the lakes is very limited.
Mussels
A comprehensive mussel survey has not been completed for the refuge,
however, a survey was conducted at St. Catherine Creek National Wildlife
Refuge which is located 20 miles to the southeast. This survey indicated
the possibility of the following mussels occurring on the refuge: fat
pocketbook, mapleleaf, flat floater, paper pondshell, giant floater, Texas
liliput, pond mussel, yellow sandshell, papershell, pink papershell, and
southern mapleleaf.
Old Growth
Old growth is a vanishing native habitat in the Lower Mississippi Valley
and considered extremely important, if not one of the greatest ecological
assets of the refuge. This rare and vanishing hardwood plant community
has outstanding ecological value, especially for forest interior-breeding
songbirds. While there is no formal initiative in place that outlines a
specific technical approach for managing the old growth area, the Service
will monitor the quality and condition of this site and propose it for
Research Natural Area designation. Due to its significance, it will be
afforded special protection and will be used as a model for study on which
to base future management direction of the refuge.
Invasive Species
Also known as exotic or non-native species, invasive species are becoming
an increasing concern of refuge staff. Feral hogs and Chinese tallow pose
a threat to the biological diversity of the refuge. Feral hogs degrade
wildlife habitat, and being omnivores, prey on young livestock as well as
fawns and ground nesting birds. Feral hog habitat preferences include
moist bottomlands and dense vegetation along rivers and streams. Upland
habitats where oak mast is found also attract these scavengers. Feral hogs
are prolific reproducers. Control methods commonly used on the refuge
to reduce the populations include hunting and trapping. Chinese tallow
(Sapium sebiferum) is a small to medium-sized tree that is reported in
small numbers on the refuge. The plant is highly invasive, and could
quickly out-compete native plant species.
Habitats
The bottomland hardwood forests of the refuge are important for the
long-term survival of many plant and wildlife species, most notably
conservation of old growth trees, migratory songbirds, and black bear
(Figure 7). About 10,600 acres of bottomland hardwood forest are
within the refuge boundary. The existing forests exhibit poor canopy,
midstory, and understory structure to support sustainable populations of
priority bird species, including the swallow-tailed kite, Cerulean warbler,
Swainson’s warbler and American woodcock. The swallow-tailed kite and
Cerulean warbler are extirpated from the refuge, but historical records
suggest that the refuge was once included in the breeding range of these
species (Cooke 1904, Beyer 1900, Oberholser 1938). See Figure 5 for more
information on breeding birds that presently exist on the refuge.
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
20
����������
���
���
��
��
��
����
����
���
���
����
���
��
����
���
��������
���
���
��
Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter II
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 21
The refuge was established to protect the exemplary 750-acre old growth
forest noted for its outstanding wildlife habitat value. This area supports
a variety of sensitive species, including nesting songbirds. Natural
communities include bottomland hardwood forests, marsh or herbaceous
wetlands, swamps, streams, and lakes/deep-water habitat typical of the
ridge and swale topography associated with bottomland hardwood forests
in this area (Figure 8 ).
Due to the refuge’s location, soils, and annual rainfall, which exceeds
60 inches, much of the vegetation consists of bottomland hardwood
communities, with the exception of the recently reforested agricultural
portions where weeds and grasses predominate.
Forest plant communities differ with slight elevation changes and the
understory is reflective of sunlight conditions caused by the canopy
closure. Quick to recover from disturbances, soils are fertile with a high
site index and fast tree growth. Forest age ranges from very young to
relatively old, depending on the site. Trees range in type from red gum, red
oak, and sweet pecan on the ridges, to overcup oak, hackberry, and
green ash in the flats, to cypress and bitter pecan in the lowest areas.
Examples of dominant vegetation include cypress, cottonwood, black
willow, sweet pecan, overcup oak, Nuttall oak, winged elm, and Tupelo
gum. Sub-dominant plants include palmetto, switchcane, hawthorns, honey
locust, and box elder. Other understory plants include smilax, honeysuckle,
blackberry, dewberry, and a host of vines including rattan, muscadine, and
poison ivy. Wet site vegetation includes pickeral-weed, day flower, water
hyacinth, various sedges, and marsh mallow.
The refuge’s aquatic habitat includes bayous, creeks, lakes, beaver ponds,
and permanent and seasonal swamps. Bayou Cocodrie is a tributary of the
Red River, located west of the Mississippi River in east-central Louisiana.
Wetlands and deepwater habitat include small lakes, swamps, ponds, and
perennial and intermittent streams. Wallace Lake has permanent water.
Seasonal flood water remains in the shallow swales for several months, and
in recent years, many shallow swales in both the Brooks Brake and Wallace
Lake units held water year-round.
Bayou Cocodrie begins at Concordia Lake. This secondary waterway is
sluggish due to the flat terrain and management of the downstream weir
on Wild Cow Bayou. The backwater flooding is virtually gone because of
downstream pumping, resulting in the loss of seasonal flood waters. About
6 miles of this 30-mile river lie within the refuge boundary, and are flanked
by natural levees which result in some of the highest ground on the refuge.
As it exits the refuge, the bayou flows southward for a distance of 12 miles.
Fish habitat diversity is only fair due to the sluggish nature of the stream
and the impacts of land use in the watershed.
Old fields where former landowners actively clear-cut and then farmed
are scattered along the refuge. Since 1996, managers have been replanting
these areas in mixed hardwood seedlings. About 1,100 acres were managed
under a lease agreement between the refuge and local landowners to
produce millet, buckwheat, and perennial grasses for foraging of wintering
waterfowl, but the lease agreements have been discontinued. These lands
are scheduled for reforestation over the next two planting seasons.
Reforestation efforts will increase the present forest block size and provide
direct benefits to many nesting migratory birds and black bear, as well as
many other indigenous species.
Wallace lake
USFWS
Oldfield
USFWS
22 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
���������
��
��
��
���
����
��
���
���
��
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter II
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 23
Education and Visitor Services
Activities oriented toward interaction with and appreciation of wildlife
and native habitats are a high priority of the refuge. Wildlife-dependent
recreation includes wildlife observation (by hiking and canoeing), hunting,
fishing, and photography. Hunting and wildlife observation have been the
mainstay of this refuge. The staff also provide environmental education
and interpretive programs when requested by local civic and school groups.
Currently, there are no interpretive facilities on the refuge.
Since the passage of National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of
1997, the refuge has adopted hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife
photography, and environmental education and interpretation as the six
priority general public uses. These uses, as such, are management’s primary
focuses and over time programs will be developed to increase visitor
awareness and appreciation of fish and wildlife resources.
The public has yet to discover the natural beauty and wildlife of this refuge.
It is largely undeveloped and in 1999 received about 5,500 visitors. The
refuge offers hunting and wildlife observation as the primary recreation
activities because of lack of facilities and staff to support other programs.
Recreation data is limited. The refuge is open during the hunting season with
some fishing access allowed at the south end. Public access to the interior of
the refuge is limited to a 13-mile trail system located in the Brooks Brake
Unit. This area offers the best access from public roads. About 4 miles of
trail are used by all-terrain vehicles for access during the hunting season. A
0.5-mile trail is managed for wheelchair access.
The refuge serves as a location for wildlife-dependent recreation uses by
keeping valuable wildlife habitats in the public trust. Trails are maintained
for hunting access, wildlife observation, photography, and hiking. The staff
contributes time to local schools and civic groups when requested, and
periodically conducts specialized environmental education programs. Forest
tracts on private lands throughout Concordia Parish have added value for
hunting although much of the land is leased as hunting clubs.
There are other public lands within commuting distance that offer wildlife-dependent
recreation experiences. Five national wildlife refuges—
Tensas River, Catahoula, Grand Cote, and Lake Ophelia in Louisiana, and
St. Catherine Creek south of Natchez, Mississippi—are within a 2-hour
drive of Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge (Figure 2). Tensas
River National Wildlife Refuge offers an ever-expanding interpretive and
environmental education program. Catahoula National Wildlife Refuge
provides wildlife observation and photography opportunities with its wildlife
drive, observation sites, and trails around Catahoula Lake, one of the most
popular over-wintering waterfowl sites in the area. Waterfowl hunting as well
as big, small, and upland game hunting, using various forms of weaponry, is
offered on each refuge.
In Concordia Parish, the Red River/Three Rivers State Wildlife Management
Area Complex offers hunting and fishing activities. The Bayou Cocodrie
is a state designated scenic river (Louisiana Department of Wildlife and
Fisheries, 1998). In 1998, the state offered a total of 3 days of modern gun
deer hunting—2 days were managed for take of either doe or buck, and 1
day was managed for buck only. The state allows for the use of both modern
and primitive weapons. In addition to deer hunting, the Red River Wildlife
Management Area is also open to waterfowl and small game hunting.
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter II
24 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
The Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries and the Army Corps
of Engineers manage more than 60,000 acres of public lands in Concordia
Parish to support hunting and fishing. Other fishing opportunities are
available at nearby national wildlife refuges. Facilities found at these
refuges include fishing piers, boat ramps, and bank fishing areas. Some
refuges offer universally accessible fishing areas.
Refuge Administration
Refuge administration refers to the operation and maintenance of refuge
programs and facilities including new construction. The refuge staff
consists of six permanent employees. Until 1997, the refuge had two
employees and was managed on a custodial basis. The staff coordinates
extensively with landowners, conservation organizations, local agencies
and civic groups. The Service is concentrating efforts with the Natural
Resources Conservation Service to coordinate land conservation projects
on private lands. Of particular interest to the Service is the protection of
forested tracts near the refuge boundary that will assist in the long-term
recovery of the Louisiana black bear.
The staff is focusing efforts on protecting needed lands and developing a
systematic approach to manage biological resources. The staff maintains
one administrative site, the main headquarters located on Poole Road. The
administrative site contains an office, a connecting maintenance shop, and
a vehicle storage shed. The facility has limited space for present staff, and
lacks a safe fuel-storage building and informational/interpretive displays.
Three management units, Cross-Bayou, Brooks Brake, and Wallace Lake, are
entirely accessed by external roads maintained by the parish and the state.
At times, refuge trails are impassable due to localized flooding. Maintenance
access is via the same trail system used by visitors (Figure 9). Poole Road,
which serves as the main access to the refuge, is primarily gravel and once
served as the underlying bed for railroad transport. At times, railroad spikes
surface and pose problems for motor vehicle traffic. Boggy Bayou Road is
located at the southern terminus of the refuge and terminates next to Bayou
Cocodrie. Small boats are launched at the terminus of this road and school
buses utilize the terminus for a turnaround. This site is noted as an excellent
location to develop a trail head for boat/canoe launch purposes. Access to the
south end of the Brooks Brake Unit is limited and requires permission from
the landowner.
The roads and private lands adjoining the refuge have a direct influence
on wildlife as they remove habitat in proportion to the areas they occupy.
In addition, access provided to wildlife areas has resulted in increased
disturbance and poaching in some locations. Several species, including
nesting songbirds, avoid roads, trails, and roadside areas thereby reducing
availability of habitat (pers. comm., Hunter). Refuge trails are maintained
biannually to help provide habitat for birds and other wildlife that utilize edges.
The Federal Highway Administration is planning improvements for
Highway 84, the major road to the north of the refuge. Refuge staff
are coordinating the development of road improvements with the Federal
Highway Administration as part of the overall environmental compliance
requirements.
Jerome Ford and palmetto
USFWS
25
����
��
��
��
���
���
����
����
��
��
����
��
��
����
��
����
����
��
����
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter II
26 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
Fallen old growth tree
USFWS
Research Natural Area
Research Natural Areas are designated by federal land management
agencies to preserve plant and animal communities in a natural state
for research purposes. These areas protect and manage vanishing
native habitats that exhibit outstanding ecological value by preventing
unnatural encroachments and activities which directly or indirectly
modify ecological processes.
House Report 3338-4 describes the need for designating a Research
Natural Area as: “In managing the refuge, the Secretary shall manage an
amount of refuge woodlands as a contiguous mature forest sufficient to
benefit the species of passerine birds that occupy this type of habitat. The
Secretary shall give special consideration to accomplishing this objective
through the use of his current authority, including his authority to
establish Research Natural Areas within the refuge.”
A major feature associated with the refuge is the unique old growth site
in the south Brooks Brake Unit. When Congress established the refuge in
1990, it directed the Service to protect the old growth area and evaluate it
to be managed as a Research Natural Area. This designation is important
because the site will serve as a comparison model for scientists to learn
more about land management and to utilize techniques on other sites of the
refuge and within the Lower Mississippi Valley. Biologists will gain first-hand
knowledge of the values of old growth and coordinate new management
approaches to solving habitat issues related to old growth functions.
Archaeological or Historical Resources
No detailed archaeological or historical site investigations have been
documented for the refuge. The majority of past cultural resource
investigations focused along sites at Brushy Bayou, Cross-Bayou, and
Cocodrie Lake (Ford 1936; Keller and Campbell 1983; Servello 1976; Lower
Mississippi Valley Survey 1964; Cusick and McMakin 1994; Cusick et al.,
1995; and State of Louisiana Site Files). Many of these investigations
focused on the archaeological manifestations of early Native American
groups, (i.e., Marksville, Natchez and Tunica) which have resulted in the
identification of several major single mounds and mound groups (16Co9,
16Co14,16Co15, 16Co80, 16Co92, 16Co99, and 16Co102). Occupations of
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter II
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 27
these sites date from Poverty Point through the Coles Creek Periods
[ca. 2000 B.C. - 1250 A.D.] (Neuman 1984; Jeter et al., 1989). Cusick and
McMakin 1994, and Cusick et al., 1995, recorded several late 19th and early
20th century tenant farm sites and the early 20th century sharecropper
community of Frogmore (16Co159). The latter is located on Brushy Bayou
just north of the refuge. Frogmore centered around a cotton gin, a store,
and a post office. Levee and road construction and agricultural activities
have adversely impacted the archaeological deposits associated with many
of these sites. However, oral history interviews and documentary research
could provide a wealth of information regarding the refuge and the parish.
Lands Protection and Conservation
Of the total refuge acquisition boundary of 22,269 acres, the Service has
acquired 13,168 acres thus far, leaving a balance of 9,101 acres in private
ownership. The acquisition boundary includes a 5,000-acre expansion
based on recommendations contained in the Louisiana Black Bear Habitat
Protection Plan approved on September 28, 1999 (Figure 6).
The refuge staff is focusing on land acquisition within the refuge
acquisition boundary by coordinating priorities identified by the Lower
Mississippi River Ecosystem Team. Land protection goals set for the
refuge will support strategic growth in areas where there is greatest
concern, namely lands identified for migratory songbirds and black bear.
Property taxes are not paid by the Federal Government, but payments
are made to local communities to offset taxes on those properties removed
from the tax rolls. The refuge is exempt from land-based tax rolls but
contributes to the local parish through the use of the Refuge Revenue
Sharing Act of 1964. The local government is provided with a share
of revenues from refuge receipts in lieu of taxes it normally receives
from properties in private ownership. In 1999, Concordia Parish received
$49,813 as its share of these funds.
Private lands in Concordia Parish enrolled in conservation programs
contribute significantly to wildlife conservation. The Service has an active
partnership with several agencies and organizations to enroll private lands
in these programs. Approximately 1,600 acres adjacent to the refuge are
enrolled in the Wetlands Reserve Program administered by the Natural
Resources Conservation Service. Private land enrollment in conservation
programs will continue to be encouraged to augment Service program and
mission requirements. Concordia Parish topography is 5 percent lakes,
rivers and bayous; 63 percent cultivated crop lands; and 32 percent forests.
The topography is characterized by undulating lands or lands locally
referred to as ridges and swales. The swales are old river scars. The
average ridge elevation fluctuates to about 3 feet in grade and ridge width
varies between 120 to 350 feet. The swales or depressions vary from 50 to
300 feet wide. Surface gradient is 1 to 2 percent and drainage is localized.
Natural levees along present waterways generally range from 3 to 5 feet.
The refuge geology is underlain with Pleistocene deposits of the
Mississippi River which extend and dip toward the coast. A Pleistocene-age
eroded subsurface exists at 50 to 150 feet below the surface, with
Tertiary age sedimentary deposits beneath this subsurface (Saucier 1994).
Faulting is common, related to sediment loading and deep-seated salt
movement. These faults may provide conduits for potential cross-formation
groundwater flow.
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter II
28 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
Virtually all of the soils are Alligator-Tensas-Dundee-Sharkey-Tunica,
and Sharkey-Alligator-Tensas. These soils are clay or loam and have clay
and loam subsoils. The soils are fine textured and poorly drained with
low permeability. Standing water is common during rainy periods of the
year. These soil types are highly restrictive for urban and agricultural uses
because of their high shrink-swell characteristics and low bearing strength.
Hydrology and water management influences the function
of habitats on the refuge. Bayou Cocodrie is a meandering
tributary of the Red River. Historically, when the Red
River reached flood stage, backwater flooding was common
within the watershed. Since the development of flood control
structures, Bayou Cocodrie’s natural overflow is restricted
to large flood events. The natural sediment supplies at
the refuge are threatened by flood control and agricultural
operations, including the operation of the Wild Cow Bayou
weir that prevents the natural back flow of flood waters.
Previously built and nearby, levees, irrigation channels, and
pumps have influenced the change of riparian systems to water
development projects to support agriculture. Natural flooding
assists in maintaining healthy bottomland hardwood forest
habitat by recharging the forest with sediment and nutrients.
The refuge is within the 582-square-mile Tensas-Concordia
Levee area. The levee system borders the Red, Black, and
Tensas rivers and was built for flood control protection. For
the most part, the historic backwater flooding is impeded
because of the ring levee and pump systems operated on
the Wild Cow Bayou in western Concordia Parish. Bayou
Cocodrie functions more like a lake than a free-flowing stream
due to the weir on Wild Cow Bayou (Corps of Engineers 1990
and Soil Conservation Service 1968).
The subtropical climate is characterized by high humidity,
an absence of extreme temperatures, and abundant rainfall
distributed evenly throughout the year. The climate is controlled
by warm, moist air from the Gulf of Mexico, and cooler, drier
air from the central plains. Extended hot, sultry summers and
moderately cool winters are normal. The summers have about
85 days with highs greater than 90 degrees Fahrenheit. The
winters are marked by brief cool periods with average winter
highs in the mid-50s. Annual rainfall is 55 inches and the growing
season is approximately 220 days in duration. The average
annual runoff occurs from December to April. Evaporation
exceeds precipitation in the summer.
Contaminants are not well studied on the refuge. The Service completed
site contaminant inspections (Level 1) on properties prior to purchase
from 1993 through 1995. A preliminary Environmental Site Assessment
of the refuge, prior to Service acquisition, reported that the potential
for environmental contamination was low. Beginning in October 1997, the
Department of Toxicology of North Carolina State University initiated a
study to assess potential biological impacts and hazards resulting from
contaminant exposure and the importance of this exposure relative to
other biological impacts, such as habitat alteration. The final report
is pending. An integrated pest management plan is scheduled to be
developed in 2004.
Bayou Cocodrie
USFWS
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter II
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 29
The rural character and sparse population are characteristic of east-central
Louisiana. Census data from 1990 indicate that the parish had a population
of 20,828 people, which is a decline of 9 percent since the 1980 census.
The parish seat, Vidalia, had a decline in population from 6,000 in 1980,
to some 4,953 in 1990. Ferriday had a 1980 population of 5,500 and a 1990
population of 4,111. Population shifts in Concordia Parish, as a whole, are
largely attributable to a decline in the farming, oil, and gas sectors of the
economy since the early 1980s.
Per-capita income recorded for Louisiana in 1998 was $22,206 (USDA, ERS
1998). Overall, Louisiana ranks among the one of the poorest states. Oil
and gas production and agriculture have long been the main economic base
in Concordia Parish and regionally. Some of the major private employers in
Concordia Parish include Wal-Mart, Aluminum Company of America, D&D
Petroleum, Rogers Lumber International, Inc., and Ferriday Market.
Other major employers include the Concordia Parish Schools, Riverland
Medical Center, and Concordia Electric Cooperative (Fish and Wildlife
Service et al., 1998 Appraisal Report).
Lands adjacent to the refuge are privately owned and managed for
farmland, catfish, and timber. Concordia Parish consists of about 479,000
acres, of which 63 percent is cultivated cropland, and 32 percent is
woodland. The surrounding farmland primarily is farmed for soybean,
cotton, corn, and catfish. Scattered forests surrounding the refuge are
valued as private hunting clubs. There are approximately 1,050 farms
(averaging in size of 586 acres) in Concordia Parish with more than 700
receiving some form of payment from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Farm commodity prices, in general, have decreased since the mid-80s and
more dramatically since the passage of the 1996 Farm Bill. Poor farm
production, drought, and low commodity prices in the last three seasons
have encouraged many producers to sell their farms and/or enroll them in
some type of conservation program. Income derived from land sales and
enrollment in conservation programs (including restoration for waterfowl
and black bear habitat) is very important to the local economies (pers.
comm., Natural Resources Conservation Service 1999). Due to poor yields
in 1998, Concordia Parish claimed the largest Conservation Reserve
Program enrollment in the state. In 1999, the Wetlands Reserve Program
reported more than 8,000 acres enrolled with a total of more than $5 million
invested in Concordia Parish. Within the refuge boundaries, most of the
commercially owned timberlands were partially or totally harvested from
the 1920s to the 1940s, with final sales recorded in the 1970s and 1980s.
Refuge Related Problems
In 1990, Congress established the refuge to protect and restore bottomland
hardwood forests for a diversity of wildlife with special emphasis on
migratory birds and the Louisiana black bear. To date, the 13,168 acres
which make up the refuge are considered a significant shortfall and insufficient
to fully implement the purposes legislated by Congress (Figure 6).
The key biological value of the refuge is the bottomland hardwood forest
communities, particularly the rare old growth plant community. Many
migratory land birds depend upon the forest habitats for a portion of
their life cycle. Of the 186 species of birds and a host of other mammals,
reptiles, amphibians, and fish that utilize the refuge, 4 species have been
federally listed as either threatened or as species of management concern.
The Louisiana black bear has long been a focus of management efforts at
Bayou Cocodrie Refuge.
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter II
30 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
Road development, forest fragmentation, loss of older-aged forests,
recreational use, and rural development on lands surrounding the
refuge represent the land status trends in Concordia Parish. The
surrounding development has led to declining wildlife populations, habitat
degradation, wildlife/people conflicts, pesticide accumulation in the water,
pest management problems and a need for increased law enforcement to
administer hunting programs.
Many of the refuge’s significant resource problems and management
challenges are also reflected on a larger scale within the Lower Mississippi
Valley. These problems, both individually and cumulatively, play a
significant role in determining future conditions on this refuge as well as in
this draft comprehensive conservation plan. For the sake of clarity, these
resource problems and management challenges, detailed in the following
sections, are briefly summarized in the following paragraphs.
Forest Fragmentation
The greatest challenge to meeting refuge objectives is forest
fragmentation within a landscape scale. Although the refuge is mostly
forested it is considered fragmented because it is within a mostly
agricultural landscape. The present configuration and size of the refuge
is not sufficient to support or contribute to populations of area sensitive,
mature forest birds, such as the Swainson’s warbler. The refuge must
secure and restore more lands to manage a contiguous forest of sufficient
size to meet refuge ]objectives.
Forest Conditions
Present forest conditions found on the refuge (with the notable exception
of the proposed Research Natural Area) are marginal in quality as they
relate to being able to support mature forest bird species. Forest stands
on the refuge, with the exception noted above, are mid-successional
and exhibit classic mid-successional forest characteristics, that is, heavy
stocking, closed canopies, and little vertical structure. In order to provide
conditions suitable for many mature forest species, the refuge must
manage its mid-successional forest stands to provide mature forest
conditions, i.e., structure.
Lack of Inventory Information
The development of baseline data is a task expected to take years for
present staff to accomplish. National Wildlife Refuge System policy requires
inventories of plants, fish, wildlife and habitats. Monitoring of critical
parameters and trends of selected species and species groups, and the
subsequent basing of management on sound data, continue to be a problem
due to staffing constraints. No standard inventory and monitoring method
has been established. Fish, reptile, and amphibian conservation is overlooked
because of the lack of information and funding to manage these resources.
Low Operation and Maintenance Funds
The refuge is faced with the challenge of contributing substantially to
off-refuge ecosystem objectives, such as migratory bird and game species
management. These ever-increasing responsibilities, coupled with the
current low levels of funding, make it difficult to meet the demand for
biological services on and off the refuge. The refuge staff is also facing the
challenge of managing an active and increasing visitor services program.
The Red River and Three Rivers Wildlife Management Areas, managed
by the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, are the only other
public hunting and fishing areas in Concordia Parish. The refuge provides
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter II
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 31
hunting opportunities, but the demand for this activity makes it difficult to
develop other wildlife-dependent recreation opportunities such as fishing,
wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education
and interpretation. Access to the refuge is very limited due to terrain
conditions and lack of roads and trails.
Conservation Priorities
Priorities identified for Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge include a
stronger management emphasis on migratory songbirds. Focal species are
managed according to refuge size and location which, in part, contributes
to the overall health of the ecosystem. Identified migratory bird and
black bear protection areas typically overlay public and private lands. The
public land portions of these conservation zones may not contain sufficient
amounts or the kind of wildlife habitat (e.g., mature stand structure)
to support high priority species. As a result, the Service and partners
work collectively with landowners to achieve common goals and form
conservation partnerships. One such conservation partnership involves the
Natural Resources Conservation Service. Landowner participation in its
Wetlands Reserve Program may assist the Fish and Wildlife Service in
meeting wildlife objectives through the acquisition and restoration of 1,400
acres directly adjacent to the refuge.
A forest bird conservation zone of roughly 55,000 acres is identified for the
refuge and nearby private lands to support declining songbird populations
that once were abundant in this area. Also, reforestation to remove carbon
from the atmosphere on refuges and other lands in the Lower Mississippi
Valley is a long-term goal.
The following land birds either currently breed, or have historically
bred on the refuge and are ranked as high priority on which to focus
management efforts: swallow-tailed kite, Cerulean warbler, and Swainson’s
warbler; high priority: red-headed woodpecker, northern parula, yellow-billed
cuckoo, wood thrush, prothonotary warbler, white-eyed vireo,
American woodcock, and wood thrush. These species are “focal species”
that are assumed to be sensitive to habitat changes and represent the
needs of a larger group of migrant species (Figure 5).
The recovery of the Louisiana black bear includes 5,000 acres of lands for
an expansion as identified in the Louisiana Black Bear Habitat Protection
Plan. These lands are now within the approved acquisition boundary.
Yellow-billed cuckoo
L Page Brown - Cornell Lab of Ornithology
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter II
32 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
Long-term goals for the Louisiana black bear will be accomplished
when there are at least two viable bear populations that have genetic
interchange (joining Atchafalaya population with Tensas River population).
The black bear protection areas overlay the forest bird conservation zones
from the Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge in Madison and Tensas
Parishes, Louisiana, to the Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge and
the Red River Wildlife Management/Three Rivers Areas in Concordia
Parish, and the Atchafalaya Basin (Figures 1 and 4).
Staff discussing issues
USFWS
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter III
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 33
III. Plan Development
Overview
Early in the process of developing this draft plan and after public scoping
meetings, the planning team identified a list of issues and concerns that were
likely to be associated with the conservation management of the refuge.
Issues and Concerns:
Issue identification is a major factor in determining management goals
and objectives. To ensure that future management of the refuge is
reflective of the issues and concerns, a series of meetings and interviews
were conducted to guide the planning effort. The planning process was
coordinated with federal, state, and local agencies; organizations; and
surrounding communities. This coordination is essential to ensure support
for the plan and projects identified for the refuge.
Issues and concerns were generated based upon contact with citizens
and public agencies, as well as on resource needs identified by staff. A
Service planning team was assembled to evaluate and identify steps to
rectify these issues and resource needs, and to measure the impact of plan
implementation. Afterwards, the team developed a list of goals, objectives,
and strategies to shape the management of the refuge for the next 15 years.
Issue identification provided the basis for initiating the development
of management objectives and strategies. These issues play a role in
determining future conditions of the refuge and will be considered in the
long-term management plan. The issues and concerns described in the
following pages were generated by the public and Service staff.
Fish and Wildlife Populations
nMigratory songbird diversity and populations are declining significantly.
nNeighbors expressed a concern that Service management activities on the
refuge could attract fish eating birds that may feed on nearby catfish ponds.
nSome wildlife species including deer, beaver, feral hogs, and raccoon are
damaging or altering forest conditions to the detriment of other wildlife
species and habitat (e.g., affecting songbird habitat).
nThere is a lack of information about Service plans for management of the
Louisiana black bear. Sightings are rare. Refuge neighbors are concerned
about the effects that bears might have on people and property when and
if they do return to the refuge.
nThere is no management emphasis on certain wildlife species, including
fish, bats, shorebirds, reptiles, and amphibians.
Habitats
nThe refuge forest boundaries are heavily fragmented—forest conditions
and proportions are of poor habitat value to breeding birds.
nThere is a lack of surveys and studies conducted on the refuge.
nThere is a concern that the remaining old growth trees might be
harvested or overly managed by the Service.
nThe existing forests have received little management attention by the Service.
Staff discussing issues
USFWS
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter III
34 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
Education and Visitor Services
nCurrent access to the refuge headquarters and throughout the refuge is
difficult for both staff and visitors. Service employees and visitors must rely
on parish road conditions, while the conditions of internal trails dictate use.
nThe refuge offers limited opportunities to view and photograph wildlife.
The trails are impassable during high rainfall and prolonged flooding.
nThere are limited hunting and fishing opportunities on the refuge.
nThere are no educational/interpretive facilities or programs available to
local and regional schools, conservation clubs, and the community at large.
nThere is a lack of information about the purpose of the refuge and
available visitor opportunities.
Refuge Administration
nThe lack of staff to manage refuge biological programs and forestry
management is a fundamental issue.
nThe refuge entrance road (Poole Road) is at times unsafe because of
surface conditions.
nThe refuge office has inadequate space to support existing staff,
volunteers, and the visiting public.
nThere are few parking facilities and signs. There was a concern that
providing additional access or improved access might impact forest
habitats and fish and wildlife populations.
nSince most of the refuge boundary has not been surveyed, it is difficult to
enforce game violations and protect wildlife and habitat near refuge boundaries.
Land Protection and Conservation
nThere is a concern about sedimentation, erosion, and turbidity resulting
from land use activities off the refuge and the effects within the watershed.
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter I
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 35
IV
IV. Management Direction
Introduction
The Service manages fish and wildlife habitats considering the needs of
all resources in decision-making. But first and foremost, fish and wildlife
conservation assumes priority in refuge management. A requirement of
the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act is for the Service
to maintain the ecological health, diversity, and integrity of refuges. The
refuge is a vital link in the overall function of the ecosystem. Refuges in the
Lower Mississippi Valley include managed bottomland hardwood forests
and moist-soil areas. To offset the historic and continuing loss of these
habitats within the ecosystem, the refuge and other public lands provide
the biological “safety-net” for migratory non-game birds and waterfowl,
threatened and endangered species, and resident species.
Vision
The refuge’s abundant wildlife and biological communities form the basis
for future management of the refuge. The vision of land conservation
for the refuge describes the desired future conditions and management
standards developed collaboratively by the public and refuge staff. The
planning team, in conjunction with information gathered from the public,
formulated the following vision as a guide to future management of the refuge:
Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge will be transformed into one of
the finest examples of bottomland hardwood forest complexes, striving to
protect the habitats of fish and wildlife and to create new opportunities for
visitors to enjoy its unique biological resources.
Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
The goals, objectives, and strategies addressed below are the Service’s
response to the issues, concerns, and needs expressed by the planning
team, refuge staff, and public. These goals, objectives, and strategies
reflect the Service’s commitment to achieve the mandates of the National
Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, the mission of
the National Wildlife Refuge System, the North American Waterfowl
Management Plan, and the purpose and vision for Bayou Cocodrie National
Wildlife Refuge. Depending upon the availability of funds and staff, the
Service intends to accomplish these goals, objectives, and strategies during
the next 15 years.
Goal A:
Fish and Wildlife Populations
Contribute to the wildlife population goals and objectives established
in nationally and internationally significant management plans, including
Partners-in-Flight Plan; Louisiana Black Bear Protection Plan; North
American Waterfowl Management Plan; American Woodcock Management
Plan, and other plans for the Lower Mississippi Valley.
A. 1 Songbirds
Objective:
Support healthy populations of forest-dwelling migratory songbirds,
specifically 500 pairs of Swainson’s warblers, and reestablish populations of
Cerulean warblers and swallow-tailed kites (Figure 5 and Appendix IV).
Cerulean warbler
Bill Dyer - Cornell Lab of Ornithology
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter I
36 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
IV
Swainson’s warbler
USFWS
Black bear & cubs
Don Anderson, Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge
Discussion:
A wide-range goal for the Lower Mississippi Valley is to establish self-sustaining
populations for all of the forest breeding bird species. This
objective supports Bird Conservation Areas previously established for
this area (Figures 11 and 5). A minimum 20,000-acre target of managed
bottomland hardwood forest is needed to support 500 breeding pairs of
Swainson’s warbler. This would also allow for recolonization of the area by
Cerulean warblers and swallow-tailed kites (pers. comm., Hunter).
Present data for the refuge suggest densities for Swainson’s warbler are
now about 6 pairs per 100 acres, in optimal habitat, and indicate this figure
is lower than that found at Tensas River and Atchafalaya National Wildlife
Refuges in comparable habitat (Ouchley unpub. data, per observations).
The Service adopted a minimum effective population of 500 breeding pairs
per 20,000-acre forest patch (pers. comm., Hunter).
Strategies:
(1) Survey the refuge and determine baseline populations for forest-breeding
non-game birds.
(2) Establish point count stations to determine population size changes
over time.
(3) Conduct nest productivity studies, including predator disturbance
during the nesting season, both in existing forests and in areas undergoing
reforestation to determine actual population health for as many species as
possible. If population objectives are not met, then reevaluate management
actions and other possible causes and assess findings to determine
appropriate corrective measures.
(4) Manage beaver, muskrat, raccoons, and feral hogs to protect and
target forest breeding bird species, including the use of such techniques
as trapping.
A.2 Black Bear
Objective:
Assist in maintaining viable populations of those species of fish, wildlife,
and plants endemic to bottomland hardwoods of this area, including the
federally listed threatened Louisiana black bear.
Discussion:
The Louisiana black bear is listed as a threatened species under the
Endangered Species Act. The Service and partnering agencies and
organizations have identified two viable sub-populations in need of
recovery. These separated populations, one each in the Atchafalaya and
Tensas river basins, have potential open space to support immigration
and emigration corridors between them. The refuge is located between
the Red River/Three Rivers Wildlife Management Area Complex and the
Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge, making it ideally situated to help
link these two sub-populations. Management of the Louisiana black bear
is dependent upon providing sufficient habitat, including forested sites
on both public and private lands. Biologists are studying the present
landscape, land uses, and black bear behavior to determine how well bears
can adapt to the present landscape and move from one management area
to the next. Boundary expansions and reforestation of the refuge will
expedite recovery.
The Service is monitoring bear movement to determine if the refuge may
serve as a site for bear reintroduction. Adding forest areas aligned along
the identified corridor and adjacent to state and federal wildlife areas, as
well as enrolling private lands in conservation programs, will be essential
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter I
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 37
IV
to the recovery of the black bear. The addition of a wildlife movement
corridor will result in connecting forest blocks where numerous forest
interior species, including black bear, move between the large forest areas
of natural vegetation. Meeting this goal is considered sufficient to support
viable populations of black bear for long-term survival. Refer to Figure 4
for black bear information.
Strategies:
(1) Coordinate with neighbors, the Black Bear Conservation Committee,
Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, and other agencies/
organizations in Concordia Parish to facilitate bear conservation and
research program.
(2) Conduct outreach efforts involving neighbors, local residents, schools,
and businesses on bear biology and conservation and the effect bears will
have on activities of neighboring landowners.
(3) Encourage refuge visitors, as well as surrounding landowners, to report
bear sightings or suspected bear activity.
(4) Assist others with all phases of black bear management and nuisance
control in Concordia Parish.
(5) Provide habitat that supports the recovery of the Louisiana black bear.
A.3 Waterfowl and Shorebirds
Objective:
Provide habitat to support approximately 10,000 migrating waterfowl,
12,000 migrating shorebirds and other important associated migratory bird
populations, including woodcock. (Figures 10 and 11).
Discussion:
Since food is a limiting factor for southbound migrating shorebirds and
wintering waterfowl, adequate shallow water foraging habitat must be available
to meet shorebird foraging requirements during their southward migrations.
The refuge should support about 12,000 southbound migrating shorebirds.
For transient shorebirds, typically mudflat foraging habitat is abundant in
the Lower Mississippi Valley during the spring northward migration. In
early spring, agricultural fields are bare and winter flood water is receding;
in late spring, rice fields are flooded. During southward migration in late
summer and fall, fields of maturing crops are dry. Therefore, the period
from July 15 to September 30 is the period when foraging habitat for
shorebirds is least available. Food is also a limiting factor for wintering
waterfowl populations. About 300 acres of foraging habitat are needed on
the refuge to support the wintering waterfowl population goals within the
Lower Mississippi Valley.
Strategies:
(1) Conduct shorebird and other waterbird counts using International
Shorebird Survey protocol on 10-day intervals during migration and
wintering periods. Conduct mid-winter waterfowl surveys.
(2) Assess food quality and quantity on the refuge during peak periods of
shorebird movement.
(3) Assess food quality and quantity on and off the refuge during peak
periods of waterfowl use.
(4) Develop impoundment units with a moist soil component to support
waterfowl and shorebird use.
(5) Assess wintering and foraging habitat on and off refuge during peak
periods of woodcock use.
Shorebirds
Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge
Coot
Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge
38 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
���������
����
���
��
����
���
��
��
��
���
��
����
��
��
��
��
����
����
����
��
����
����
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 39
����
��
����
���
��
����
����
��
��
����
����
��
��
����
���
���
����
����
��
��
���
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Section A/Chapter I
40 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge
IV
A. 4 Resident and Other Species
Objective:
Manage to maintain healthy, viable resident populations, including white-tailed
deer (average harvest range 250-300 deer), turkey, and other
resident species.
Discussion:
The refuge will be managed to ensure healthy, viable resident populations
consistent with sound biological principles and other objectives of this plan.
White-tailed deer have the potential to adversely affect habitats unless
their numbers are kept at a level at or slightly below carrying capacity.
The refuge hunt program is designed to maintain the herd at this level
while offering quality hunting opportunities to the public. Current harvest
data indicates an annual harvest of 250-300 deer or approximately 1
deer harvested per 54 acres of hunted area. The harvest (per acre)
will be maintained with occasional fluctuations due to weather and
habitat conditions expected. Population level indicators will include browse
surveys, harvest data, and periodic health checks.
Raccoons may also have an adverse impact on other species in the event
of over-population. Nest predation on turkey, wood duck, and songbirds
may become so great as to limit the reproductive success of those species.
Over-populations may also facilitate the spread of canine distemper, a
common close contact type disease, to other species such as fox, coyote,
and domestic canids. In an effort to prevent raccoon over-populations,
the species is considered an incidental harvest species and may be taken
during any open hunting season.
Wild turkey populations are currently low on the refuge. This species
will benefit from increased management emphasis. Additional hunting
opportunities may become available as the turkey population reaches a
point where it can support such activities.
Reptiles and amphibians are abundant on the refuge and key species
to help biologists evaluate the environmental health of the ecosystem.
Knowledge of which species occur on the refuge is fundamental to an
understanding of the biological diversity of the area.
Strategies:
(1) Monitor the population status of key indicator species, white-tailed
deer, and turkey.
(2) Manage white-tailed deer population at current levels (average harvest
range is between 250-300/10,000 acres).
(3) Integrate population objectives for resident species into habitat
management plans.
(4) Establish hunting regulations for resident wildlife to maintain population
health and stability and habitat relationships. Coordinate with neighbors.
(5) Identify thresholds of disturbance and develop associated standards
and mitigation techniques that can be applied, whe
Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.
| Rating | |
| Title | Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan |
| Description | bayoucocodrie_draft.pdf |
| FWS Resource Links | http://library.fws.gov |
| Subject |
Document Wildlife refuges Planning |
| Location |
Region 4 Louisiana |
| FWS Site |
BAYOU COCODRIE NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE |
| Publisher | U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service |
| Date of Original | March 2001 |
| Type | Text |
| Format | |
| Source | NCTC Conservation Library |
| Rights | Public Domain |
| File Size | 4528128 Bytes |
| Original Format | Document |
| Length | 75 |
| Full Resolution File Size | 4528128 Bytes |
| Transcript | Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan I Table of Contents Reader’s Guide ____________________________________________________________ 1 Section A. Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan I. Background ____________________________________________________________ 3 Introduction____________________________________________________________ 3 Purpose and Need for Plan _______________________________________________ 3 Fish and Wildlife Service ________________________________________________ 4 Mission _____________________________________________________________ 4 Description__________________________________________________________ 4 National Wildlife Refuge System__________________________________________ 4 Mission _____________________________________________________________ 4 Description__________________________________________________________ 4 Legal Policy Context _________________________________________________ 5 Relationship to State Wildlife Agency___________________________________ 5 Ecosystem Context _____________________________________________________ 6 Overview ___________________________________________________________ 6 Threats and Problems ________________________________________________ 6 Conservation Priorities and Initiatives _________________________________ 11 II. Refuge Description ____________________________________________________ 14 Introduction___________________________________________________________ 14 Purpose ______________________________________________________________ 16 Refuge Environment and Other Related Information _______________________ 16 Education and Visitor Services __________________________________________ 23 Refuge Administration _________________________________________________ 24 Research Natural Areas ________________________________________________ 26 Archaeological and Historic Resources____________________________________ 26 Land Protection and Conservation _______________________________________ 27 Refuge Related Problems _______________________________________________ 29 Conservation Priorities _________________________________________________ 31 III. Plan Development ____________________________________________________ 33 Overview _____________________________________________________________ 33 Issues and Concerns____________________________________________________ 33 Fish and Wildlife Populations _________________________________________ 33 Habitats ___________________________________________________________ 33 Education and Visitor Services________________________________________ 34 Refuge Administration_______________________________________________ 34 Land Protection and Conservation ____________________________________ 34 IV. Management Direction _________________________________________________ 35 Introduction___________________________________________________________ 35 Vision ________________________________________________________________ 35 Goals, Objectives, and Strategies_________________________________________ 35 Fish and Wildlife Populations _________________________________________ 35 Habitat Management ________________________________________________ 41 Education and Visitor Services________________________________________ 45 Refuge Administration_______________________________________________ 51 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan II Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Land Protection and Conservation _______________________________________ 54 V. Plan Implementation____________________________________________________ 57 Background ___________________________________________________________ 57 Proposed Projects _____________________________________________________ 57 Fish and Wildlife Populations _________________________________________ 57 Habitats ___________________________________________________________ 58 Education and Visitor Services________________________________________ 60 Refuge Administration_______________________________________________ 62 Land Protection and Conservation ____________________________________ 64 Step-Down Management Plans __________________________________________ 67 Plan Performance ______________________________________________________ 67 Partnership Opportunities ______________________________________________ 68 Monitoring and Evaluation ______________________________________________ 68 Section B. Environmental Assessment I. Background ___________________________________________________________ 71 Introduction___________________________________________________________ 71 Purpose and Need for the Action_________________________________________ 71 Decisions to be Made ___________________________________________________ 71 Planning Study Area ___________________________________________________ 73 Comprehensive Conservation Planning Process and Issue Identification ______ 73 Managing Fish, Wildlife, and Habitats _________________________________ 73 Controlling Problem Species__________________________________________ 75 Managing Facilities and Staff _________________________________________ 75 Increasing Hunting, Wildlife Viewing, and Environmental Education Opportunies ________________________________________________________ 75 II. Alternatives___________________________________________________________ 76 Formulation of Alternatives _____________________________________________ 76 Description of the Alternatives __________________________________________ 76 Alternative A (No Action) ____________________________________________ 78 Alternative B (Proposed Action) ______________________________________ 78 Alternative C _______________________________________________________ 80 Comparison of Alternatives _____________________________________________ 81 Management Common to All Alternatives_________________________________ 82 Compatible Secondary Uses __________________________________________ 82 Other Management__________________________________________________ 85 III. Affected Environment ________________________________________________ 107 IV. Environmental Consequences __________________________________________ 109 Overview ____________________________________________________________ 109 Effects Common to All Alternatives _____________________________________ 109 Effects from Implementing Alternative A________________________________ 114 Effects from Implementing Alternative B ________________________________ 116 Effects from Implementing Alternative C ________________________________ 122 V. Consultation and Coordination __________________________________________ 125 Public Involvement Process ____________________________________________ 125 Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan III Section C. Appendices I. Glossary _____________________________________________________________ 127 II. References _________________________________________________________ 136 III. Relevant Legal Mandates ___________________________________________ 139 IV. Biota ______________________________________________________________ 147 V. Decisions and Approvals ______________________________________________ 156 VI. Management Methods and Procedures _________________________________ 168 Appendices IV Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge 1. Conservation Focus Management Areas __________________________________ 7 2. Lower Mississippi Valley Ecosystem _____________________________________ 8 3. Forest Cover Changes in the Lower Mississippi Valley _____________________ 9 4. Breeding Ranges and Proposed Critical Habitat for the Louisiana Black Bear _____________________________________________________________ 10 5. Priority Bird Species Associated with Refuge Bottomland Hardwood Forest ________________________________________________________ 13 6. Approved Acquisition Target Areas _____________________________________ 15 7. Existing Habitat Management __________________________________________ 20 8. Habitat Communities of Ridge and Swale Topography_____________________ 22 9. Refuge Land Use Features _____________________________________________ 25 10. Alternative B: (Service’s Proposed Action) Short-Term Projection ________ 38 11. Alternative B: (Service’s Proposed Action) Long-Term Projection _________ 39 12. Current and Proposed Visitor Facilities _________________________________ 47 13. Current and Proposed Organizational Structure__________________________ 53 14. Project/Staff Cost Summary for 2000-2015 _______________________________ 65 15. Step-Down Plans _____________________________________________________ 67 16. Refuge Location ______________________________________________________ 72 17. Planning Study Area __________________________________________________ 74 18. Existing Conditions___________________________________________________ 77 19. Alternative A: (No Action) Long-Term Projection _______________________ 79 20. Alternative C: Short-Term Projection __________________________________ 83 21. Alternative C: Long-Term Projection ___________________________________ 84 22. Comparison of Alternatives.____________________________________________ 87 23. Estimated Refuge Administration Costs _______________________________ 106 24. Planning Team Member Expertise ____________________________________ 126 25. Refuge Biota ________________________________________________________ 147 26. Private Lands Conservation Program Information _____________________ 170 27. Protection Priorities for the Proposed Expansion and Recommended Methods for Acquisition _________________________________________________________ 179 28. Land Acquisition Priorities __________________________________________ 180 Figures Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan V Guiding Principals of the National Wildlife Refuge System We are land stewards, guided by Aldo Leopold’s teachings that land is a community of life and that love and respect for the land is an extension of ethics. We seek to reflect that land ethic in our stewardship and to instill it in others. Wild lands and the perpetuation of diverse and abundant wildlife are essential to the quality of the American life. We are public servants. We owe our employers, the American people, hard work, integrity, fairness, and a voice in the protection of their trust resources. Management, training from preservation to active manipulation of habitats and populations, is necessary to achieve the missions of the National Wildlife Refuge System and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Wildlife-dependent uses involving hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation, when compatible, are legitimate and appro-priate uses of the National Wildlife Refuge System. Partnerships with those who want to help us meet our mission are welcome and indeed essential. Employees are our most valuable resource. They are respected and deserve an empowering, mentoring, and caring work environment. We respect the rights, beliefs, and opinions of our neighbors. VI Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1 Reader’s Guide The National Wildlife Refuge System has the mission of integrating public land management; fish, wildlife and plant conservation; and wildlife-dependent recreation and education efforts to support diverse public interests. This Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan, upon final approval, and Environmental Assessment for Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge will assist in guiding management over the next 15 years. The Fish and Wildlife Service’s planning process for all national wildlife refuges involves the development of broad comprehensive conservation plans, followed by the development of detailed step-down management plans. Using public input, the Fish and Wildlife Service developed three alternative approaches to manage Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge. Each alternative described in the environmental assessment was formulated to project future conditions. The possible effects of implementing each alternative are also described. Alternative B is tentatively selected as the Service’s Proposed Plan (Action). Section A. Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan for Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge A key purpose of this section is to detail the proposed conservation actions for the refuge over a 15-year time frame. Chapter I provides an overview of the Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Wildlife Refuge System, and the Lower Mississippi Valley. Chapter II describes the refuge environment and the resource problems and challenges facing Service managers. Chapter III describes public involvement as part of plan development and the underlying problems and concerns raised by the public and Service managers. Chapter IV describes the desired future management direction reflected through goals, objectives, and strategies. Chapter IV also reflects the proposed management outlined in Alternative B, and describes desired management activities and appropriate and compatible recreational and permitted uses of the refuge. Chapter V lists projects that the Service will strive to accomplish to meet the goals set for the refuge. Section B. Environmental Assessment for Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge The environmental assessment was prepared to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act. Chapter I introduces the reader to the plan, planning study area, issues and problems associated with the refuge, other activities that are relevant to plan development, and planning process and issue identification. Chapter II describes three alternatives formulated by the Service to accomplish the refuge purposes and goals. Chapter III describes the refuge environment. Chapter IV addresses the predicted effects from implementing each alternative. Chapter V describes public and private entities consulted while conducting the planning effort. Section C. Appendices This section identifies terms, references, laws and authorities, and methods utilized to develop plans; lists biota; partnering information useful to land owners and managers; and decisions and approvals for implementing the plan. After public comments are received regarding this draft, the Service will publish responses to those comments in the final plan. March 2001 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge P.O. Box 1772 Ferriday, LA 71334 318-336-7119 http://www.fws.gov http://bayoucocodrie.fws.gov/ index.html Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge will be transformed into one of the finest examples of bottomland hardwood forest complexes, striving to protect the habitats of fish and wildlife, and create new opportunities for visitors to enjoy its unique biological resources. VISION Cypress swale USFWS 2 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Located in the Lower Mississippi Valley and established in 1990, Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge is composed of fragmented forest patches, parts of which retain a diverse assemblage of mature and old age bottomland hardwood forests. This document proposes management actions to improve conditions for wildlife, associated habitats, and recreation opportunities on the refuge. The vision statement for the refuge reflects the desired future conditions within the context of the National Wildlife Refuge System mission, refuge purposes, and other relevant mandates. Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 3 SECTION A I. Background Introduction Contained in this Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan for Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge are the proposed management actions and direction for the refuge over the next 15 years. When fully implemented this plan will strive to achieve the refuge vision. Overriding considerations reflected in the plan are that fish and wildlife conservation requires first priority in refuge management, and that wildlife-dependent recreation is allowed and encouraged as long as it is compatible with, or does not detract from, the mission or the refuge purposes. A planning team developed a range of alternatives that best met the goals and objectives of the refuge and could be implemented within the 15-year period. After reviewing comments and management needs the alternatives were evaluated. The proposed alternative is described in Chapter IV, Management Direction. Other alternatives are addressed in Section B, Environmental Assessment. Purpose and Need for Plan The purpose of the plan is to identify the role the refuge will play in support of the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System and to provide guidance in refuge management activities. The plan is needed to: n Provide a clear statement of direction for the future management of the refuge; n Provide refuge neighbors, visitors, and government officials with an understanding of Service management actions on and around the refuge; n Ensure that Service management actions, including land protection and recreation/education programs, are consistent with the mandates of the National Wildlife Refuge System; n Ensure that the management of the refuge is consistent with federal, state, and county plans; and n Provide a basis for the development of budget requests for operations, maintenance, and capital improvement needs. Perhaps the greatest need of the Service is communication with the public and the public’s participation in efforts to carry out the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System. Many agencies, organizations, institutions, and businesses have developed relationships with the Service to advance the mission of national wildlife refuges. This draft comprehensive conservation plan supports the Partners-in- Flight Initiative; the Lower Mississippi Valley Migratory Bird Wetland Conservation Initiative; the North American Waterfowl Management Plan; the Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network; the American Woodcock Management Plan; and the National Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan. For further information regarding migratory birds, see website http://birds.fws.gov/. Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Old growth cypress swale USFWS Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter I 4 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Fish and Wildlife Service Mission As part of its mission, the Service manages more than 530 national wildlife refuges covering over 92 million acres. These areas comprise the National Wildlife Refuge System, the world’s largest collection of lands, with 77 million acres in Alaska and the remaining 15 million acres spread across the other 49 states and several island territories. Description The Fish and Wildlife Service is the primary federal agency responsible for conserving, protecting, and enhancing the Nation’s fish and wildlife populations and their habitats. The Service shares some conservation responsibilities with other federal, state, tribal, local, and private entities. The Service also has specific trustee responsibilities for migratory birds, threatened and endangered species, anadromous fish, and certain marine mammals, as well as for lands and waters administered by the Service for the management and protection of these resources. National Wildlife Refuge System Mission The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System, as defined by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 is: “...to administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management, and where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife and plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.” Description The National Wildlife Refuge Improvement Act of 1997, established, for the first time, a clear legislative mission of wildlife conservation for the National Wildlife Refuge System. Activities were initiated in 1997 to complement the direction of this new legislation, including an effort to complete comprehensive conservation plans for all refuges. These plans, which are completed with full public involvement, help guide the future management of refuges by establishing natural resources and recreation/ education programs. The Act states that each refuge shall be managed to: n Fulfill the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System; n Fulfill the individual purpose of each refuge; n Consider the needs of wildlife first; n Fulfill requirements of comprehensive conservation plans that are prepared for each unit of the refuge system; n Maintain the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the refuge system; n Recognize that wildlife-dependent recreation activities including hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation are legitimate and priority public uses; and allow refuge managers authority to determine compatible public uses. Approximately 37.5 million people visited national wildlife refuges in 1998, most to observe wildlife in their natural habitats. As visitation grows, there are significant economic benefits to local communities. By analyzing refuges, economists found that refuge visitors contribute more than $400 Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter I Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 5 million annually to local economies. Nearly 40 percent of the country’s adults spent $101 billion on wildlife-related pursuits in 1996, according to the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation (Fish and Wildlife Service 1996). Volunteers continue to be a major contributor to the success of the refuge system. In 1998, volunteers contributed more than 1.5 million hours on refuges nationwide, a service valued at more than $20.6 million. The wildlife and habitat vision for national wildlife refuges stresses that wildlife comes first; that ecosystems, biodiversity, and wilderness are vital concepts in refuge management; that refuges must be healthy; that growth of refuges must be strategic; and that the refuge system serves as a model for habitat management with broad participation from others. Legal Policy Context Administration of national wildlife refuges is guided by the mission and goals of the National Wildlife Refuge System, Congressional legislation, Presidential Executive Orders, and international treaties. Policies for management options of the refuge are further refined by administrative guidelines established by the Secretary of the Interior and by policy guidelines established by the Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service. Management options of the refuge’s establishing authorities, Public Law 104, Stat. 2957 (Section 108, H.R. 3338), and the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, the legal and policy guidance for the operation of national wildlife refuges, are contained in documents and acts listed in Section C. Guidance and direction can also be found in the following: n National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966; n Refuge Recreation Act of 1962; n Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations; n Fish and Wildlife Service Manual; and n National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997. Lands within the National Wildlife Refuge System are closed to public uses unless specifically and legally opened. All programs and uses must be evaluated based on mandates set forth in the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act. Those mandates are to: n Contribute to ecosystem goals, as well as refuge purposes and goals; n Conserve, manage, and restore fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats; n Monitor the trends of fish, wildlife, and plants; n Manage and ensure appropriate visitor uses as those uses benefit the conservation of fish and wildlife resources and contribute to the enjoyment of the public (these uses include hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography and environmental education and interpretation); and n Ensure that visitor activities are compatible with refuge purposes. Relationship to State Wildlife Agency A provision of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, and subsequent agency policy, is that the Service shall ensure timely and effective cooperation and collaboration with other federal agencies and state fish and wildlife agencies during the course of acquiring and managing refuges. State wildlife management areas and national wildlife refuges provide the foundation for protection of species, and contribute to the overall health and sustainment of fish and wildlife species in Louisiana. Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter I 6 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge The Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (http:// http://www.wlf.state.la.vs) is a state-partnering agency with the Service, charged with enforcement responsibilities relating to migratory birds and endangered species as well as managing state natural resources. It also manages approximately 1.4 million acres of coastal marshes and wildlife management areas. The Department coordinates the state wildlife conservation program and provides public recreation opportunities including an extensive hunting and fishing program on state wildlife management areas, such as the 36,000-acre Red River Wildlife Management Area in Concordia Parish (Figures 1). The state’s participation and contribution throughout this comprehensive conservation planning process provide for ongoing opportunities and open dialogue to improve the ecological sustainment of fish and wildlife in Louisiana. An integral part of the comprehensive conservation planning process is integrating common mission objectives where appropriate. Ecosystem Context Overview Sustainable communities and species conservation and recovery on refuges require the joint efforts of private landowners, local communities, and state and federal governments. The Fish and Wildlife Service is initiating cooperative partnerships in an effort to reduce the declining trend of fish and wildlife populations and biological diversity. Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge is part of the Lower Mississippi Valley (Figure 2). The Lower Mississippi Valley once supported a vast bottomland hardwood forest complex that extended along the Mississippi River from Illinois to Louisiana. Today, less than 20 percent of this bottomland hardwood forest remains and most is fragmented or remains in scattered patches throughout the region (Figure 3). Flood waters once recharged wildlife habitats and created rich, dynamic systems that supported a diverse abundance of fish and wildlife species. The Lower Mississippi Valley is bisected by levees and its flow is restricted by flood control projects and agricultural diversion. Water quality is significantly impacted by agricultural and industrial runoff. Rivers and water bodies throughout are highly turbid, laden with pesticides, and support a small fraction of the once abundant aquatic resources. These declines prompted the Service to designate bottomland hardwood forests found in this ecosystem as areas of special concern. The Service is focusing efforts to adopt collaborative resource partnerships within and outside the agency to reduce the declining trend of fish and wildlife populations and biological diversity, establish conservation priorities, clarify goals, and solve common threats and problems associated with fish and wildlife resources. Biological objectives in the Lower Mississippi Valley for species groups targeted in this plan reflect the Partners-in-Flight Plan, North American Waterfowl Management Plan, Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network, and the recovery of the Louisiana sub-population of black bear (Figure 4). Threats and Problems National wildlife refuges in the Lower Mississippi Valley serve as part of the last safety net to support biological diversity—the greatest challenge facing the Service. Impacts and underlying causes and threats to biological diversity within the Lower Mississippi Valley include: n The loss of sustainable communities, including the loss of 20 million acres of bottomland hardwood forests; n The loss of connectivity between bottomland hardwood forest sites e.g. forest fragmentation (Figure 1); n The effects of constructing navigation and water diversion projects, and the effects of agricultural and timber harvesting practices; Hooded warbler Bill Duyck - Cornell Lab of Ornithology 7 ��������� ������� ��� ���� ���� �� �� �� ����� ���� ����������� �� Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 8 ���� ��� ��������� ���� ��������� ��� ������ Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge 9 �� ��� �������� ��� ���� ���� Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 10 ���� Figure 4. Breeding Ranges and Proposed Critical Habitat for the Lousiana Black Bear Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter I Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 11 n The simplification of the remaining wildlife habitats within the ecosystem and gene pools; and n The cumulative habitat effects of land and water resource development activities. As a result of these causes and threats, many species endemic to the Lower Mississippi Valley have become either extinct, threatened, or endangered. The Louisiana black bear is listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. The red wolf and Florida panther are no longer found in the Lower Mississippi Valley; the ivory-billed woodpecker and Bachman’s warbler, once known to occur in the area, are considered endangered, if not extinct. Elimination of forest habitats and forest fragmentation has decimated wildlife species throughout the Lower Mississippi Valley (Figure 3). Species most adversely affected by fragmentation are species that are area sensitive or dependent on special habitat requirements such as large, mature blocks of forest that offer secure nesting habitat and a particular food source. Forest fragmentation affects migratory songbirds mostly through high rates of nesting failure due to predation and cowbird parasitism--both are recognized by the Service as serious threats to wildlife in Louisiana. More than 70 species of breeding migratory songbirds are found in this region. Some of these species, including Swainson’s warbler, prothonotary warbler, wood thrush, and cerulean warbler have declined significantly and need the benefits of large forest blocks to recover and sustain their existence (pers. comm. Hunter, Fish and Wildlife Service). Modifications to the historic flood plains have caused major declines in fisheries and aquatic resource productivity. The reduction of ecological functions from non-point source runoff of sediments, excess nutrients, and pesticides/herbicides is a continual threat to the remaining fisheries resources. The Service’s Draft Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Strategic Management Plan for the Lower Mississippi River Ecosystem identifies 67 fish species as endangered, and 39 species as threatened. In addition, 16 other species are species of concern or proposed for listing. Only two threatened/endangered fish species occur in Louisiana. The lack of bottomland hardwood forests, coupled with the impacts associated with fragmented forests, poses a serious threat to migratory bird populations, black bear, and other resident species. Conservation Priorities and Initiatives Conservation priorities for national wildlife refuges in the Lower Mississippi Valley focus on threatened and endangered species, trust species, and species of area concern. By working with others, the Service is more effective in achieving its overall mission and management goals. A combination of land protection and habitat management methods is utilized by the Service and others to compensate for bottomland hardwood habitat loss and to meet shared/common long-term goals established for this area (Figure 2). Bottomland hardwood forests are ranked as the highest conservation priority of the Fish and Wildlife Service and other agencies on which to focus management efforts. For example, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is working with the Fish and Wildlife Service and landowners to restore forests on private lands to contribute to the recovery of the Louisiana black bear. The Lower Mississippi River Joint Venture (a consortium of public and private conservation groups) initiated cooperative efforts to restore lands that provide maximum benefits to migratory songbirds and has identified conservation areas on which to focus future Fragmentation USFWS Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge Cowbird in Willow flycatcher nest John Harris Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter I 12 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge land protection and restoration efforts. The long-term goal is to provide “forest islands” called forest bird conservation zones in the Lower Mississippi Valley ranging in size from 10,000 to more than 100,000 acres. The forest bird conservation zones are priority areas for forest restoration and will someday serve as important “anchors” for biological diversity (Figure 1). The Lower Mississippi Valley serves as the primary wintering habitat for mid-continent waterfowl populations, as well as breeding and migration habitat migratory songbirds returning from Central and South America. Restoration of migratory songbird populations is a high priority of the Partners-in-Flight Plan, a national and regional planning effort, developed to emphasize land bird species as a priority for conservation. Habitat loss, land bird population trends, and vulnerability of species and habitats to threats are all factors used in the priority ranking of species (Bonney 1999). Further, biologists are identifying focal species for each habitat type from which population and habitat objectives and conservation actions can be determined. This list of focal species, objectives, and conservation actions will aid migratory bird management on the refuge (Figure 5). The recovery of the Louisiana black bear involves a major conservation endeavor between federal, state, and private participants, including the Service, Natural Resources Conservation Service, state agencies, universities, private conservation organizations, and the Black Bear Conservation Committee. The Service’s recovery plan is to establish viable populations, promote various land protection methods that will establish migration corridors, and protect habitat. The Black Bear Conservation Committee is made up of public and private partners in Mississippi, Louisiana, and east Texas. The committee adheres to the Service’s recovery plan. The overall goal of both the committee and the Service is to restore and protect a series of large forest blocks connected by corridors; to facilitate recovery of the bear in Louisiana; to identify protection areas in Louisiana as special focus areas; and to support black bear populations and provide movement corridors that serve as conduits of genetic exchange within the Lower Mississippi Valley. These forest blocks overlay the forest bird conservation zones identified by the Service. Forest bird conservation zones are identified for this refuge as well as Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge in Madison and Tensas Parishes, Louisiana, the Red River/Three Rivers Wildlife Management Area Complex in Concordia Parish, and the Atchafalaya Basin. The Black Bear Conservation Committee uses education and outreach as tools to promote the recovery of the black bear (Figure 1). Conservation management on private lands is extremely important to the future conservation of fish and wildlife resources. To achieve conservation priorities on private lands and in conjunction with public lands, the synergy of the all federal, state, tribal, and private organizations working together will ensure that the Service not only protects the more important areas, but also reduces redundancy and overlap. See Appendix II for a detailed description of private landowner/partnership opportunities. Discussing bird conservation USFWS Black bear Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 13 ��� ����� �� ����� �� ��� ������� ���� ��������� ������ ���� ��� ��� ������� �������� ���� ��������� USFWS, Chuck Hunter Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter II 14 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge II. Refuge Description Introduction Although Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1990, to date, only 13,168 acres have been acquired within the 22,269-acre acquisition boundary. The Nature Conservancy was instrumental in securing lands for the refuge. The potential wildlife habitat values of old growth bottomland hardwoods and adjacent forests provided the impetus to purchase the property from its original owners. In 1988, The Nature Conservancy purchased 11,230 acres from the Fisher Lumber Company, a subsidiary of General Motors, for resale to the Service (Figure 6). Management efforts since 1990 have emphasized acquiring land, securing staff to operate the new facility, and initiating conservation programs that benefit resident wildlife species. However, Service acquisition of key properties such as inholdings and bottomland hardwood habitat may not be realized within the 15-year planning period due to budget constraints and landowner preferences. The 22,269-acre boundary has a significant “edge” which contributes to predation of nesting forest birds. Edge effect is the tendency of a transitional zone between communities to contain a greater variety of species and more dense populations of species than any surrounding community. Such is the case between wildlife communities that occupy dense bottomland hardwood forests and wildlife found in open, cultivated agricultural lands. Conservation management projects for the refuge include: n Conducting comprehensive assessments of existing fish and wildlife resources; n Recruiting and training staff and improving existing facilities; n Defining refuge objectives that will contribute to maintaining biological diversity within the Lower Mississippi Valley; n Managing habitats to reduce threats and problems (i.e., forest fragmentation, loss of old growth forests) associated with species of concern; n Assisting in black bear recovery efforts; and n Defining research within the old growth area and involving partners to accomplish the research. Northern parula Bill Dyer - Cornell Lab of Ornithology 15 ���� ��� ���� ��� ��� ��� ���� ���� �������� �� ��� ��� �� ���� ���� Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter II Purpose Congress authorized the establishment of Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge on November 16, 1990, through Public Law 101-593 (Section 108, House Report 3338), to protect some of the last remaining, least disturbed bottomland hardwoods in the Lower Mississippi Valley. Congress stated the refuge purpose as follows: “The Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge is established and shall be managed for the purposes of (1) conservation and enhancement of wetlands; (2) general wildlife management as a unit of the National Wildlife Refuge System, including management of migratory birds; and (3) fish and wildlife-oriented recreational activities.” In establishing the refuge, Congress recognized the significance of this area in its findings: “The Bayou Cocodrie area is a bottomland hardwood swamp which borders (supports or harbors) more than one hundred and fifty species of birds and many other types of wildlife, including several species threatened with extinction, such as the Louisiana population of black bears. The Bayou Cocodrie area includes some of the least disturbed bottomland hardwood forests in the southeast and significantly contributes to the biological diversity in the region.” In managing the refuge, the Secretary of the Interior shall manage: “...an amount of refuge woodlands as a contiguous forest sufficient to benefit the species of passerine birds that occupy this type of habitat. The Secretary shall give special consideration to accomplishing this objective through the use of current authority, including his authority to establish Research Natural Areas within the Refuge.” Expanding on the primary purpose, objectives were defined in the June 1992 Environmental Assessment and Land Protection Plan prepared by the Service. The management objectives include: n Providing wintering habitat for migratory waterfowl; n Establishing habitat for a natural diversity of wildlife; n Providing habitat for non-game migratory birds (neotropical migrants); n Establishing a Research Natural Area; and n Providing opportunities for environmental education, research, interpretation, and other wildlife-dependent recreation. Refuge Environment And Other Related Information Fish, Wildlife, and Plant Populations The refuge serves as a critical repository of gene pools, species, and communities that must contribute to the overall health of the Lower Mississippi Valley ecosystem. Named after the native alligator (crocodile) and the bayou that runs through it, the refuge provides an important ecological niche for fish, wildlife, and plant species. The Service manages refuge resources and, where possible, coordinates with neighboring land managers and agencies to conserve biological diversity. The high quality forests, long growing season, abundant rainfall, and geographical proximity to the Mississippi River provide habitat for a diversity of resident species including migratory songbirds and black bear. The refuge is home to a wide variety of amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and birds and is well known locally for its wildlife habitat. Songbirds, white-tailed deer, waterfowl, shorebirds, raptors, reptiles, amphibians, woodcock, furbearers, and other mammals utilize this area. A list of wildlife species known or predicted to inhabit the refuge is included in Section C. V. Wood thrush Mike Hopiak - Cornell Lab of Ornithology 16 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter II Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 17 A thorough documentation of the population status of wildlife other than neotropical songbirds has not been conducted. Excellent documentation of neotropical bird use of portions of the refuge has been accomplished under Service sponsorship by the Louisiana State University Avian Laboratory. Threatened Species and Species of Management Concern Infrequently, refuge staff observe footprints of the transient Louisiana black bear, which is listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. The threatened bald eagle has been observed on the refuge. Initial and unpublished studies have indicated that old growth trees on the refuge are important roosting sites for the Rafinesque’s big-eared bat , a species of management concern (unpub. reports, Cochran and Fish and Wildlife Service 1999). The eastern cougar and the red wolf were former residents of the area, but none have been documented in the last 40 years. The refuge location and habitat features are significant for the future conservation of the Louisiana black bear. Restoration efforts proposed by the Black Bear Conservation Committee include proposed bear management units that would expand the refuge boundary. The Service, the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, and members of the Black Bear committee are planning to eventually move females onto the refuge, and other public lands near the refuge, in an effort to reestablish breeding populations. The committee has also identified private lands that could be used as corridors between breeding bear populations. A combination of protected and managed public and private lands would provide the necessary forested blocks and corridors for bears to move about with minimal disturbance. The Natural Resources Conservation Service plays a major role in black bear recovery efforts by implementing land protection programs which provide an economic incentive for farmers to restore farmlands and place them in conservation easements. Avian Species Avian species are extremely important wildlife resources identified on the refuge with more than 186 species recorded within the refuge border (unpub. data, Ouchley). The bottomland hardwood forests serve as important habitat for breeding birds and migrants in the spring and fall. Surveys and studies indicate that this refuge may contain the most diverse assemblage of migratory bird species remaining in the Lower Mississippi Valley. For migratory forest breeding songbirds and shorebirds, the ecological and biological significance is transcontinental, providing breeding and migration habitat for Gulf migrants returning from their wintering grounds in Central and South America. Songbird studies have been conducted in the Brooks Brake Unit, which contains a 750-acre old growth forest stand. Additional surveys and monitoring would confirm breeding songbird survey information, nest success, and other key measurements. Such species as warblers, vireos, tanagers, flycatchers, and indigo buntings are common residents. The refuge and the Lower Mississippi Valley serve as the primary wintering ground for mid-continent waterfowl populations breeding in the prairies and parklands of Canada and the United States. Historic conditions typical of refuge habitats once supported excellent habitat for migratory waterfowl. Management efforts to improve wintering waterfowl habitat on refuge lands are underway and will increase as additional lands are purchased. Typical winter residents include mallards, teal, and wood ducks. Waterfowl species known to nest in this area include wood ducks and hooded mergansers. Restoration and management of wetlands on the refuge would create additional resources for dabbling ducks. Bear cub Don Anderson Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter II 18 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Waterfowl population objectives are tied to supporting the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. A 440-acre moist soil impoundment is managed adjacent to a recently reforested area and cropland. The refuge impoundments, in conjunction with naturally flooded forest habitat, will eventually support about 480,000 duck-use-days. The refuge population objective will average between 5,000-10,000 ducks for 110 days (unpub. report, Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge 1998). This population objective is supported by the moist soil unit, flooded sloughs, Wallace Lake and Little Wallace Lake, as well as brakes subject to flooding. Managers focus work on the moist soil units, selected sloughs in the Brooks Brake Unit, and construction of wood duck boxes. The only breeders utilizing the bottomland hardwood forests are wood ducks and hooded mergansers. Wading birds are abundant in the small lakes and numerous sloughs. The backwater bays, sloughs, and depressions provide habitat for shorebirds such as yellowlegs, sandpipers, plovers, gulls, and terns which can be found using wetland mudflats and bayous during their spring and fall migrations. Herons and egrets are plentiful. Mammals Mammals are numerous and observed throughout the refuge. No comprehensive list of mammalian species exists for the refuge, although it is known which mammals occur in this area (St. Amant 1951 and Lowery 1981). The refuge area contains seven orders of mammals including pouched mammals (opossums); insect-eaters (shrews and moles); bats; flesh-eaters (long-tail weasel); gnawing mammals (southern flying squirrel); rabbits; and even-toed hoofed mammals (white-tailed deer). The bottomland hardwood communities are very productive for a wide array of wildlife species, including game animals. Game species include white-tailed deer, grey and fox squirrels, and swamp and cotton-tailed rabbits. Furbearers include beaver, nutria, otter, striped skunk, coyote, grey and red fox, mink, and bobcat. Present deer populations are at carrying capacity, and hunting is designed to maintain this level. Population levels have improved dramatically since Service acquisition, as have herd health indicators. Average body weights are improving and mature bucks may weigh in excess of 250 pounds live weight. Future deer populations will be a reflection of both forest management and deer harvest. Raccoon populations are monitored to ensure compatible levels with other species. Negative impacts from excessive population numbers include depredation on turkey, neotropical birds, and wading bird nests. Feral hogs compete with resident wildlife for food and can cause crop damage to neighboring farms. Hunting and removal programs should bring these animals under control. Amphibians and Reptiles Although frequently observed, much is still unknown about reptile and amphibian population levels on the refuge. At least thirty species of reptiles and amphibians and a variety of native and non-native aquatic species are known to be found on the refuge. The diverse group of amphibians including salamanders, toads, and frogs are well adapted to the aquatic and terrestrial environments, and moisture is typically important for their survival. Reptiles including turtles, alligators, lizards, skinks, and snakes are common. Yellow-crowned night heron USFWS Alligator USFWS Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter II 19 Aquatic Species These species are most commonly observed along the main stem of Bayou Cocodrie. Although limited, the refuge does provide an important fishery resource for local fishermen. Most of the aquatic habitat consists of beaver ponds, oxbow lakes such as Wallace and Little Wallace lakes, and Cross Bayou streams which support commercial fishing of catfish, buffalo, alligator gar, and freshwater drum. Sport fishing populations of crappie, bass, and bream are also found in these lakes, although the populations are low due to periodic water quality problems, particularly high turbidity. Access to the lakes is very limited. Mussels A comprehensive mussel survey has not been completed for the refuge, however, a survey was conducted at St. Catherine Creek National Wildlife Refuge which is located 20 miles to the southeast. This survey indicated the possibility of the following mussels occurring on the refuge: fat pocketbook, mapleleaf, flat floater, paper pondshell, giant floater, Texas liliput, pond mussel, yellow sandshell, papershell, pink papershell, and southern mapleleaf. Old Growth Old growth is a vanishing native habitat in the Lower Mississippi Valley and considered extremely important, if not one of the greatest ecological assets of the refuge. This rare and vanishing hardwood plant community has outstanding ecological value, especially for forest interior-breeding songbirds. While there is no formal initiative in place that outlines a specific technical approach for managing the old growth area, the Service will monitor the quality and condition of this site and propose it for Research Natural Area designation. Due to its significance, it will be afforded special protection and will be used as a model for study on which to base future management direction of the refuge. Invasive Species Also known as exotic or non-native species, invasive species are becoming an increasing concern of refuge staff. Feral hogs and Chinese tallow pose a threat to the biological diversity of the refuge. Feral hogs degrade wildlife habitat, and being omnivores, prey on young livestock as well as fawns and ground nesting birds. Feral hog habitat preferences include moist bottomlands and dense vegetation along rivers and streams. Upland habitats where oak mast is found also attract these scavengers. Feral hogs are prolific reproducers. Control methods commonly used on the refuge to reduce the populations include hunting and trapping. Chinese tallow (Sapium sebiferum) is a small to medium-sized tree that is reported in small numbers on the refuge. The plant is highly invasive, and could quickly out-compete native plant species. Habitats The bottomland hardwood forests of the refuge are important for the long-term survival of many plant and wildlife species, most notably conservation of old growth trees, migratory songbirds, and black bear (Figure 7). About 10,600 acres of bottomland hardwood forest are within the refuge boundary. The existing forests exhibit poor canopy, midstory, and understory structure to support sustainable populations of priority bird species, including the swallow-tailed kite, Cerulean warbler, Swainson’s warbler and American woodcock. The swallow-tailed kite and Cerulean warbler are extirpated from the refuge, but historical records suggest that the refuge was once included in the breeding range of these species (Cooke 1904, Beyer 1900, Oberholser 1938). See Figure 5 for more information on breeding birds that presently exist on the refuge. Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 20 ������� ��� ��� ��� �� �� �� ���� ���� ��� ��� ���� ��� �� ���� ��� ���� ���� ��� ��� �� Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter II Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 21 The refuge was established to protect the exemplary 750-acre old growth forest noted for its outstanding wildlife habitat value. This area supports a variety of sensitive species, including nesting songbirds. Natural communities include bottomland hardwood forests, marsh or herbaceous wetlands, swamps, streams, and lakes/deep-water habitat typical of the ridge and swale topography associated with bottomland hardwood forests in this area (Figure 8 ). Due to the refuge’s location, soils, and annual rainfall, which exceeds 60 inches, much of the vegetation consists of bottomland hardwood communities, with the exception of the recently reforested agricultural portions where weeds and grasses predominate. Forest plant communities differ with slight elevation changes and the understory is reflective of sunlight conditions caused by the canopy closure. Quick to recover from disturbances, soils are fertile with a high site index and fast tree growth. Forest age ranges from very young to relatively old, depending on the site. Trees range in type from red gum, red oak, and sweet pecan on the ridges, to overcup oak, hackberry, and green ash in the flats, to cypress and bitter pecan in the lowest areas. Examples of dominant vegetation include cypress, cottonwood, black willow, sweet pecan, overcup oak, Nuttall oak, winged elm, and Tupelo gum. Sub-dominant plants include palmetto, switchcane, hawthorns, honey locust, and box elder. Other understory plants include smilax, honeysuckle, blackberry, dewberry, and a host of vines including rattan, muscadine, and poison ivy. Wet site vegetation includes pickeral-weed, day flower, water hyacinth, various sedges, and marsh mallow. The refuge’s aquatic habitat includes bayous, creeks, lakes, beaver ponds, and permanent and seasonal swamps. Bayou Cocodrie is a tributary of the Red River, located west of the Mississippi River in east-central Louisiana. Wetlands and deepwater habitat include small lakes, swamps, ponds, and perennial and intermittent streams. Wallace Lake has permanent water. Seasonal flood water remains in the shallow swales for several months, and in recent years, many shallow swales in both the Brooks Brake and Wallace Lake units held water year-round. Bayou Cocodrie begins at Concordia Lake. This secondary waterway is sluggish due to the flat terrain and management of the downstream weir on Wild Cow Bayou. The backwater flooding is virtually gone because of downstream pumping, resulting in the loss of seasonal flood waters. About 6 miles of this 30-mile river lie within the refuge boundary, and are flanked by natural levees which result in some of the highest ground on the refuge. As it exits the refuge, the bayou flows southward for a distance of 12 miles. Fish habitat diversity is only fair due to the sluggish nature of the stream and the impacts of land use in the watershed. Old fields where former landowners actively clear-cut and then farmed are scattered along the refuge. Since 1996, managers have been replanting these areas in mixed hardwood seedlings. About 1,100 acres were managed under a lease agreement between the refuge and local landowners to produce millet, buckwheat, and perennial grasses for foraging of wintering waterfowl, but the lease agreements have been discontinued. These lands are scheduled for reforestation over the next two planting seasons. Reforestation efforts will increase the present forest block size and provide direct benefits to many nesting migratory birds and black bear, as well as many other indigenous species. Wallace lake USFWS Oldfield USFWS 22 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge ����� �� �� �� �� �� ��� ���� �� ��� ��� �� Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter II Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 23 Education and Visitor Services Activities oriented toward interaction with and appreciation of wildlife and native habitats are a high priority of the refuge. Wildlife-dependent recreation includes wildlife observation (by hiking and canoeing), hunting, fishing, and photography. Hunting and wildlife observation have been the mainstay of this refuge. The staff also provide environmental education and interpretive programs when requested by local civic and school groups. Currently, there are no interpretive facilities on the refuge. Since the passage of National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, the refuge has adopted hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation as the six priority general public uses. These uses, as such, are management’s primary focuses and over time programs will be developed to increase visitor awareness and appreciation of fish and wildlife resources. The public has yet to discover the natural beauty and wildlife of this refuge. It is largely undeveloped and in 1999 received about 5,500 visitors. The refuge offers hunting and wildlife observation as the primary recreation activities because of lack of facilities and staff to support other programs. Recreation data is limited. The refuge is open during the hunting season with some fishing access allowed at the south end. Public access to the interior of the refuge is limited to a 13-mile trail system located in the Brooks Brake Unit. This area offers the best access from public roads. About 4 miles of trail are used by all-terrain vehicles for access during the hunting season. A 0.5-mile trail is managed for wheelchair access. The refuge serves as a location for wildlife-dependent recreation uses by keeping valuable wildlife habitats in the public trust. Trails are maintained for hunting access, wildlife observation, photography, and hiking. The staff contributes time to local schools and civic groups when requested, and periodically conducts specialized environmental education programs. Forest tracts on private lands throughout Concordia Parish have added value for hunting although much of the land is leased as hunting clubs. There are other public lands within commuting distance that offer wildlife-dependent recreation experiences. Five national wildlife refuges— Tensas River, Catahoula, Grand Cote, and Lake Ophelia in Louisiana, and St. Catherine Creek south of Natchez, Mississippi—are within a 2-hour drive of Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge (Figure 2). Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge offers an ever-expanding interpretive and environmental education program. Catahoula National Wildlife Refuge provides wildlife observation and photography opportunities with its wildlife drive, observation sites, and trails around Catahoula Lake, one of the most popular over-wintering waterfowl sites in the area. Waterfowl hunting as well as big, small, and upland game hunting, using various forms of weaponry, is offered on each refuge. In Concordia Parish, the Red River/Three Rivers State Wildlife Management Area Complex offers hunting and fishing activities. The Bayou Cocodrie is a state designated scenic river (Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, 1998). In 1998, the state offered a total of 3 days of modern gun deer hunting—2 days were managed for take of either doe or buck, and 1 day was managed for buck only. The state allows for the use of both modern and primitive weapons. In addition to deer hunting, the Red River Wildlife Management Area is also open to waterfowl and small game hunting. Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter II 24 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge The Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries and the Army Corps of Engineers manage more than 60,000 acres of public lands in Concordia Parish to support hunting and fishing. Other fishing opportunities are available at nearby national wildlife refuges. Facilities found at these refuges include fishing piers, boat ramps, and bank fishing areas. Some refuges offer universally accessible fishing areas. Refuge Administration Refuge administration refers to the operation and maintenance of refuge programs and facilities including new construction. The refuge staff consists of six permanent employees. Until 1997, the refuge had two employees and was managed on a custodial basis. The staff coordinates extensively with landowners, conservation organizations, local agencies and civic groups. The Service is concentrating efforts with the Natural Resources Conservation Service to coordinate land conservation projects on private lands. Of particular interest to the Service is the protection of forested tracts near the refuge boundary that will assist in the long-term recovery of the Louisiana black bear. The staff is focusing efforts on protecting needed lands and developing a systematic approach to manage biological resources. The staff maintains one administrative site, the main headquarters located on Poole Road. The administrative site contains an office, a connecting maintenance shop, and a vehicle storage shed. The facility has limited space for present staff, and lacks a safe fuel-storage building and informational/interpretive displays. Three management units, Cross-Bayou, Brooks Brake, and Wallace Lake, are entirely accessed by external roads maintained by the parish and the state. At times, refuge trails are impassable due to localized flooding. Maintenance access is via the same trail system used by visitors (Figure 9). Poole Road, which serves as the main access to the refuge, is primarily gravel and once served as the underlying bed for railroad transport. At times, railroad spikes surface and pose problems for motor vehicle traffic. Boggy Bayou Road is located at the southern terminus of the refuge and terminates next to Bayou Cocodrie. Small boats are launched at the terminus of this road and school buses utilize the terminus for a turnaround. This site is noted as an excellent location to develop a trail head for boat/canoe launch purposes. Access to the south end of the Brooks Brake Unit is limited and requires permission from the landowner. The roads and private lands adjoining the refuge have a direct influence on wildlife as they remove habitat in proportion to the areas they occupy. In addition, access provided to wildlife areas has resulted in increased disturbance and poaching in some locations. Several species, including nesting songbirds, avoid roads, trails, and roadside areas thereby reducing availability of habitat (pers. comm., Hunter). Refuge trails are maintained biannually to help provide habitat for birds and other wildlife that utilize edges. The Federal Highway Administration is planning improvements for Highway 84, the major road to the north of the refuge. Refuge staff are coordinating the development of road improvements with the Federal Highway Administration as part of the overall environmental compliance requirements. Jerome Ford and palmetto USFWS 25 ���� �� �� �� ��� ��� ���� ���� �� �� ���� �� �� ���� �� ���� ���� �� ���� Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter II 26 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Fallen old growth tree USFWS Research Natural Area Research Natural Areas are designated by federal land management agencies to preserve plant and animal communities in a natural state for research purposes. These areas protect and manage vanishing native habitats that exhibit outstanding ecological value by preventing unnatural encroachments and activities which directly or indirectly modify ecological processes. House Report 3338-4 describes the need for designating a Research Natural Area as: “In managing the refuge, the Secretary shall manage an amount of refuge woodlands as a contiguous mature forest sufficient to benefit the species of passerine birds that occupy this type of habitat. The Secretary shall give special consideration to accomplishing this objective through the use of his current authority, including his authority to establish Research Natural Areas within the refuge.” A major feature associated with the refuge is the unique old growth site in the south Brooks Brake Unit. When Congress established the refuge in 1990, it directed the Service to protect the old growth area and evaluate it to be managed as a Research Natural Area. This designation is important because the site will serve as a comparison model for scientists to learn more about land management and to utilize techniques on other sites of the refuge and within the Lower Mississippi Valley. Biologists will gain first-hand knowledge of the values of old growth and coordinate new management approaches to solving habitat issues related to old growth functions. Archaeological or Historical Resources No detailed archaeological or historical site investigations have been documented for the refuge. The majority of past cultural resource investigations focused along sites at Brushy Bayou, Cross-Bayou, and Cocodrie Lake (Ford 1936; Keller and Campbell 1983; Servello 1976; Lower Mississippi Valley Survey 1964; Cusick and McMakin 1994; Cusick et al., 1995; and State of Louisiana Site Files). Many of these investigations focused on the archaeological manifestations of early Native American groups, (i.e., Marksville, Natchez and Tunica) which have resulted in the identification of several major single mounds and mound groups (16Co9, 16Co14,16Co15, 16Co80, 16Co92, 16Co99, and 16Co102). Occupations of Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter II Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 27 these sites date from Poverty Point through the Coles Creek Periods [ca. 2000 B.C. - 1250 A.D.] (Neuman 1984; Jeter et al., 1989). Cusick and McMakin 1994, and Cusick et al., 1995, recorded several late 19th and early 20th century tenant farm sites and the early 20th century sharecropper community of Frogmore (16Co159). The latter is located on Brushy Bayou just north of the refuge. Frogmore centered around a cotton gin, a store, and a post office. Levee and road construction and agricultural activities have adversely impacted the archaeological deposits associated with many of these sites. However, oral history interviews and documentary research could provide a wealth of information regarding the refuge and the parish. Lands Protection and Conservation Of the total refuge acquisition boundary of 22,269 acres, the Service has acquired 13,168 acres thus far, leaving a balance of 9,101 acres in private ownership. The acquisition boundary includes a 5,000-acre expansion based on recommendations contained in the Louisiana Black Bear Habitat Protection Plan approved on September 28, 1999 (Figure 6). The refuge staff is focusing on land acquisition within the refuge acquisition boundary by coordinating priorities identified by the Lower Mississippi River Ecosystem Team. Land protection goals set for the refuge will support strategic growth in areas where there is greatest concern, namely lands identified for migratory songbirds and black bear. Property taxes are not paid by the Federal Government, but payments are made to local communities to offset taxes on those properties removed from the tax rolls. The refuge is exempt from land-based tax rolls but contributes to the local parish through the use of the Refuge Revenue Sharing Act of 1964. The local government is provided with a share of revenues from refuge receipts in lieu of taxes it normally receives from properties in private ownership. In 1999, Concordia Parish received $49,813 as its share of these funds. Private lands in Concordia Parish enrolled in conservation programs contribute significantly to wildlife conservation. The Service has an active partnership with several agencies and organizations to enroll private lands in these programs. Approximately 1,600 acres adjacent to the refuge are enrolled in the Wetlands Reserve Program administered by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. Private land enrollment in conservation programs will continue to be encouraged to augment Service program and mission requirements. Concordia Parish topography is 5 percent lakes, rivers and bayous; 63 percent cultivated crop lands; and 32 percent forests. The topography is characterized by undulating lands or lands locally referred to as ridges and swales. The swales are old river scars. The average ridge elevation fluctuates to about 3 feet in grade and ridge width varies between 120 to 350 feet. The swales or depressions vary from 50 to 300 feet wide. Surface gradient is 1 to 2 percent and drainage is localized. Natural levees along present waterways generally range from 3 to 5 feet. The refuge geology is underlain with Pleistocene deposits of the Mississippi River which extend and dip toward the coast. A Pleistocene-age eroded subsurface exists at 50 to 150 feet below the surface, with Tertiary age sedimentary deposits beneath this subsurface (Saucier 1994). Faulting is common, related to sediment loading and deep-seated salt movement. These faults may provide conduits for potential cross-formation groundwater flow. Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter II 28 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Virtually all of the soils are Alligator-Tensas-Dundee-Sharkey-Tunica, and Sharkey-Alligator-Tensas. These soils are clay or loam and have clay and loam subsoils. The soils are fine textured and poorly drained with low permeability. Standing water is common during rainy periods of the year. These soil types are highly restrictive for urban and agricultural uses because of their high shrink-swell characteristics and low bearing strength. Hydrology and water management influences the function of habitats on the refuge. Bayou Cocodrie is a meandering tributary of the Red River. Historically, when the Red River reached flood stage, backwater flooding was common within the watershed. Since the development of flood control structures, Bayou Cocodrie’s natural overflow is restricted to large flood events. The natural sediment supplies at the refuge are threatened by flood control and agricultural operations, including the operation of the Wild Cow Bayou weir that prevents the natural back flow of flood waters. Previously built and nearby, levees, irrigation channels, and pumps have influenced the change of riparian systems to water development projects to support agriculture. Natural flooding assists in maintaining healthy bottomland hardwood forest habitat by recharging the forest with sediment and nutrients. The refuge is within the 582-square-mile Tensas-Concordia Levee area. The levee system borders the Red, Black, and Tensas rivers and was built for flood control protection. For the most part, the historic backwater flooding is impeded because of the ring levee and pump systems operated on the Wild Cow Bayou in western Concordia Parish. Bayou Cocodrie functions more like a lake than a free-flowing stream due to the weir on Wild Cow Bayou (Corps of Engineers 1990 and Soil Conservation Service 1968). The subtropical climate is characterized by high humidity, an absence of extreme temperatures, and abundant rainfall distributed evenly throughout the year. The climate is controlled by warm, moist air from the Gulf of Mexico, and cooler, drier air from the central plains. Extended hot, sultry summers and moderately cool winters are normal. The summers have about 85 days with highs greater than 90 degrees Fahrenheit. The winters are marked by brief cool periods with average winter highs in the mid-50s. Annual rainfall is 55 inches and the growing season is approximately 220 days in duration. The average annual runoff occurs from December to April. Evaporation exceeds precipitation in the summer. Contaminants are not well studied on the refuge. The Service completed site contaminant inspections (Level 1) on properties prior to purchase from 1993 through 1995. A preliminary Environmental Site Assessment of the refuge, prior to Service acquisition, reported that the potential for environmental contamination was low. Beginning in October 1997, the Department of Toxicology of North Carolina State University initiated a study to assess potential biological impacts and hazards resulting from contaminant exposure and the importance of this exposure relative to other biological impacts, such as habitat alteration. The final report is pending. An integrated pest management plan is scheduled to be developed in 2004. Bayou Cocodrie USFWS Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter II Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 29 The rural character and sparse population are characteristic of east-central Louisiana. Census data from 1990 indicate that the parish had a population of 20,828 people, which is a decline of 9 percent since the 1980 census. The parish seat, Vidalia, had a decline in population from 6,000 in 1980, to some 4,953 in 1990. Ferriday had a 1980 population of 5,500 and a 1990 population of 4,111. Population shifts in Concordia Parish, as a whole, are largely attributable to a decline in the farming, oil, and gas sectors of the economy since the early 1980s. Per-capita income recorded for Louisiana in 1998 was $22,206 (USDA, ERS 1998). Overall, Louisiana ranks among the one of the poorest states. Oil and gas production and agriculture have long been the main economic base in Concordia Parish and regionally. Some of the major private employers in Concordia Parish include Wal-Mart, Aluminum Company of America, D&D Petroleum, Rogers Lumber International, Inc., and Ferriday Market. Other major employers include the Concordia Parish Schools, Riverland Medical Center, and Concordia Electric Cooperative (Fish and Wildlife Service et al., 1998 Appraisal Report). Lands adjacent to the refuge are privately owned and managed for farmland, catfish, and timber. Concordia Parish consists of about 479,000 acres, of which 63 percent is cultivated cropland, and 32 percent is woodland. The surrounding farmland primarily is farmed for soybean, cotton, corn, and catfish. Scattered forests surrounding the refuge are valued as private hunting clubs. There are approximately 1,050 farms (averaging in size of 586 acres) in Concordia Parish with more than 700 receiving some form of payment from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Farm commodity prices, in general, have decreased since the mid-80s and more dramatically since the passage of the 1996 Farm Bill. Poor farm production, drought, and low commodity prices in the last three seasons have encouraged many producers to sell their farms and/or enroll them in some type of conservation program. Income derived from land sales and enrollment in conservation programs (including restoration for waterfowl and black bear habitat) is very important to the local economies (pers. comm., Natural Resources Conservation Service 1999). Due to poor yields in 1998, Concordia Parish claimed the largest Conservation Reserve Program enrollment in the state. In 1999, the Wetlands Reserve Program reported more than 8,000 acres enrolled with a total of more than $5 million invested in Concordia Parish. Within the refuge boundaries, most of the commercially owned timberlands were partially or totally harvested from the 1920s to the 1940s, with final sales recorded in the 1970s and 1980s. Refuge Related Problems In 1990, Congress established the refuge to protect and restore bottomland hardwood forests for a diversity of wildlife with special emphasis on migratory birds and the Louisiana black bear. To date, the 13,168 acres which make up the refuge are considered a significant shortfall and insufficient to fully implement the purposes legislated by Congress (Figure 6). The key biological value of the refuge is the bottomland hardwood forest communities, particularly the rare old growth plant community. Many migratory land birds depend upon the forest habitats for a portion of their life cycle. Of the 186 species of birds and a host of other mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and fish that utilize the refuge, 4 species have been federally listed as either threatened or as species of management concern. The Louisiana black bear has long been a focus of management efforts at Bayou Cocodrie Refuge. Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter II 30 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Road development, forest fragmentation, loss of older-aged forests, recreational use, and rural development on lands surrounding the refuge represent the land status trends in Concordia Parish. The surrounding development has led to declining wildlife populations, habitat degradation, wildlife/people conflicts, pesticide accumulation in the water, pest management problems and a need for increased law enforcement to administer hunting programs. Many of the refuge’s significant resource problems and management challenges are also reflected on a larger scale within the Lower Mississippi Valley. These problems, both individually and cumulatively, play a significant role in determining future conditions on this refuge as well as in this draft comprehensive conservation plan. For the sake of clarity, these resource problems and management challenges, detailed in the following sections, are briefly summarized in the following paragraphs. Forest Fragmentation The greatest challenge to meeting refuge objectives is forest fragmentation within a landscape scale. Although the refuge is mostly forested it is considered fragmented because it is within a mostly agricultural landscape. The present configuration and size of the refuge is not sufficient to support or contribute to populations of area sensitive, mature forest birds, such as the Swainson’s warbler. The refuge must secure and restore more lands to manage a contiguous forest of sufficient size to meet refuge ]objectives. Forest Conditions Present forest conditions found on the refuge (with the notable exception of the proposed Research Natural Area) are marginal in quality as they relate to being able to support mature forest bird species. Forest stands on the refuge, with the exception noted above, are mid-successional and exhibit classic mid-successional forest characteristics, that is, heavy stocking, closed canopies, and little vertical structure. In order to provide conditions suitable for many mature forest species, the refuge must manage its mid-successional forest stands to provide mature forest conditions, i.e., structure. Lack of Inventory Information The development of baseline data is a task expected to take years for present staff to accomplish. National Wildlife Refuge System policy requires inventories of plants, fish, wildlife and habitats. Monitoring of critical parameters and trends of selected species and species groups, and the subsequent basing of management on sound data, continue to be a problem due to staffing constraints. No standard inventory and monitoring method has been established. Fish, reptile, and amphibian conservation is overlooked because of the lack of information and funding to manage these resources. Low Operation and Maintenance Funds The refuge is faced with the challenge of contributing substantially to off-refuge ecosystem objectives, such as migratory bird and game species management. These ever-increasing responsibilities, coupled with the current low levels of funding, make it difficult to meet the demand for biological services on and off the refuge. The refuge staff is also facing the challenge of managing an active and increasing visitor services program. The Red River and Three Rivers Wildlife Management Areas, managed by the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, are the only other public hunting and fishing areas in Concordia Parish. The refuge provides Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter II Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 31 hunting opportunities, but the demand for this activity makes it difficult to develop other wildlife-dependent recreation opportunities such as fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation. Access to the refuge is very limited due to terrain conditions and lack of roads and trails. Conservation Priorities Priorities identified for Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge include a stronger management emphasis on migratory songbirds. Focal species are managed according to refuge size and location which, in part, contributes to the overall health of the ecosystem. Identified migratory bird and black bear protection areas typically overlay public and private lands. The public land portions of these conservation zones may not contain sufficient amounts or the kind of wildlife habitat (e.g., mature stand structure) to support high priority species. As a result, the Service and partners work collectively with landowners to achieve common goals and form conservation partnerships. One such conservation partnership involves the Natural Resources Conservation Service. Landowner participation in its Wetlands Reserve Program may assist the Fish and Wildlife Service in meeting wildlife objectives through the acquisition and restoration of 1,400 acres directly adjacent to the refuge. A forest bird conservation zone of roughly 55,000 acres is identified for the refuge and nearby private lands to support declining songbird populations that once were abundant in this area. Also, reforestation to remove carbon from the atmosphere on refuges and other lands in the Lower Mississippi Valley is a long-term goal. The following land birds either currently breed, or have historically bred on the refuge and are ranked as high priority on which to focus management efforts: swallow-tailed kite, Cerulean warbler, and Swainson’s warbler; high priority: red-headed woodpecker, northern parula, yellow-billed cuckoo, wood thrush, prothonotary warbler, white-eyed vireo, American woodcock, and wood thrush. These species are “focal species” that are assumed to be sensitive to habitat changes and represent the needs of a larger group of migrant species (Figure 5). The recovery of the Louisiana black bear includes 5,000 acres of lands for an expansion as identified in the Louisiana Black Bear Habitat Protection Plan. These lands are now within the approved acquisition boundary. Yellow-billed cuckoo L Page Brown - Cornell Lab of Ornithology Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter II 32 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Long-term goals for the Louisiana black bear will be accomplished when there are at least two viable bear populations that have genetic interchange (joining Atchafalaya population with Tensas River population). The black bear protection areas overlay the forest bird conservation zones from the Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge in Madison and Tensas Parishes, Louisiana, to the Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge and the Red River Wildlife Management/Three Rivers Areas in Concordia Parish, and the Atchafalaya Basin (Figures 1 and 4). Staff discussing issues USFWS Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter III Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 33 III. Plan Development Overview Early in the process of developing this draft plan and after public scoping meetings, the planning team identified a list of issues and concerns that were likely to be associated with the conservation management of the refuge. Issues and Concerns: Issue identification is a major factor in determining management goals and objectives. To ensure that future management of the refuge is reflective of the issues and concerns, a series of meetings and interviews were conducted to guide the planning effort. The planning process was coordinated with federal, state, and local agencies; organizations; and surrounding communities. This coordination is essential to ensure support for the plan and projects identified for the refuge. Issues and concerns were generated based upon contact with citizens and public agencies, as well as on resource needs identified by staff. A Service planning team was assembled to evaluate and identify steps to rectify these issues and resource needs, and to measure the impact of plan implementation. Afterwards, the team developed a list of goals, objectives, and strategies to shape the management of the refuge for the next 15 years. Issue identification provided the basis for initiating the development of management objectives and strategies. These issues play a role in determining future conditions of the refuge and will be considered in the long-term management plan. The issues and concerns described in the following pages were generated by the public and Service staff. Fish and Wildlife Populations nMigratory songbird diversity and populations are declining significantly. nNeighbors expressed a concern that Service management activities on the refuge could attract fish eating birds that may feed on nearby catfish ponds. nSome wildlife species including deer, beaver, feral hogs, and raccoon are damaging or altering forest conditions to the detriment of other wildlife species and habitat (e.g., affecting songbird habitat). nThere is a lack of information about Service plans for management of the Louisiana black bear. Sightings are rare. Refuge neighbors are concerned about the effects that bears might have on people and property when and if they do return to the refuge. nThere is no management emphasis on certain wildlife species, including fish, bats, shorebirds, reptiles, and amphibians. Habitats nThe refuge forest boundaries are heavily fragmented—forest conditions and proportions are of poor habitat value to breeding birds. nThere is a lack of surveys and studies conducted on the refuge. nThere is a concern that the remaining old growth trees might be harvested or overly managed by the Service. nThe existing forests have received little management attention by the Service. Staff discussing issues USFWS Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter III 34 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge Education and Visitor Services nCurrent access to the refuge headquarters and throughout the refuge is difficult for both staff and visitors. Service employees and visitors must rely on parish road conditions, while the conditions of internal trails dictate use. nThe refuge offers limited opportunities to view and photograph wildlife. The trails are impassable during high rainfall and prolonged flooding. nThere are limited hunting and fishing opportunities on the refuge. nThere are no educational/interpretive facilities or programs available to local and regional schools, conservation clubs, and the community at large. nThere is a lack of information about the purpose of the refuge and available visitor opportunities. Refuge Administration nThe lack of staff to manage refuge biological programs and forestry management is a fundamental issue. nThe refuge entrance road (Poole Road) is at times unsafe because of surface conditions. nThe refuge office has inadequate space to support existing staff, volunteers, and the visiting public. nThere are few parking facilities and signs. There was a concern that providing additional access or improved access might impact forest habitats and fish and wildlife populations. nSince most of the refuge boundary has not been surveyed, it is difficult to enforce game violations and protect wildlife and habitat near refuge boundaries. Land Protection and Conservation nThere is a concern about sedimentation, erosion, and turbidity resulting from land use activities off the refuge and the effects within the watershed. Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter I Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 35 IV IV. Management Direction Introduction The Service manages fish and wildlife habitats considering the needs of all resources in decision-making. But first and foremost, fish and wildlife conservation assumes priority in refuge management. A requirement of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act is for the Service to maintain the ecological health, diversity, and integrity of refuges. The refuge is a vital link in the overall function of the ecosystem. Refuges in the Lower Mississippi Valley include managed bottomland hardwood forests and moist-soil areas. To offset the historic and continuing loss of these habitats within the ecosystem, the refuge and other public lands provide the biological “safety-net” for migratory non-game birds and waterfowl, threatened and endangered species, and resident species. Vision The refuge’s abundant wildlife and biological communities form the basis for future management of the refuge. The vision of land conservation for the refuge describes the desired future conditions and management standards developed collaboratively by the public and refuge staff. The planning team, in conjunction with information gathered from the public, formulated the following vision as a guide to future management of the refuge: Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge will be transformed into one of the finest examples of bottomland hardwood forest complexes, striving to protect the habitats of fish and wildlife and to create new opportunities for visitors to enjoy its unique biological resources. Goals, Objectives, and Strategies The goals, objectives, and strategies addressed below are the Service’s response to the issues, concerns, and needs expressed by the planning team, refuge staff, and public. These goals, objectives, and strategies reflect the Service’s commitment to achieve the mandates of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System, the North American Waterfowl Management Plan, and the purpose and vision for Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge. Depending upon the availability of funds and staff, the Service intends to accomplish these goals, objectives, and strategies during the next 15 years. Goal A: Fish and Wildlife Populations Contribute to the wildlife population goals and objectives established in nationally and internationally significant management plans, including Partners-in-Flight Plan; Louisiana Black Bear Protection Plan; North American Waterfowl Management Plan; American Woodcock Management Plan, and other plans for the Lower Mississippi Valley. A. 1 Songbirds Objective: Support healthy populations of forest-dwelling migratory songbirds, specifically 500 pairs of Swainson’s warblers, and reestablish populations of Cerulean warblers and swallow-tailed kites (Figure 5 and Appendix IV). Cerulean warbler Bill Dyer - Cornell Lab of Ornithology Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter I 36 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge IV Swainson’s warbler USFWS Black bear & cubs Don Anderson, Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge Discussion: A wide-range goal for the Lower Mississippi Valley is to establish self-sustaining populations for all of the forest breeding bird species. This objective supports Bird Conservation Areas previously established for this area (Figures 11 and 5). A minimum 20,000-acre target of managed bottomland hardwood forest is needed to support 500 breeding pairs of Swainson’s warbler. This would also allow for recolonization of the area by Cerulean warblers and swallow-tailed kites (pers. comm., Hunter). Present data for the refuge suggest densities for Swainson’s warbler are now about 6 pairs per 100 acres, in optimal habitat, and indicate this figure is lower than that found at Tensas River and Atchafalaya National Wildlife Refuges in comparable habitat (Ouchley unpub. data, per observations). The Service adopted a minimum effective population of 500 breeding pairs per 20,000-acre forest patch (pers. comm., Hunter). Strategies: (1) Survey the refuge and determine baseline populations for forest-breeding non-game birds. (2) Establish point count stations to determine population size changes over time. (3) Conduct nest productivity studies, including predator disturbance during the nesting season, both in existing forests and in areas undergoing reforestation to determine actual population health for as many species as possible. If population objectives are not met, then reevaluate management actions and other possible causes and assess findings to determine appropriate corrective measures. (4) Manage beaver, muskrat, raccoons, and feral hogs to protect and target forest breeding bird species, including the use of such techniques as trapping. A.2 Black Bear Objective: Assist in maintaining viable populations of those species of fish, wildlife, and plants endemic to bottomland hardwoods of this area, including the federally listed threatened Louisiana black bear. Discussion: The Louisiana black bear is listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. The Service and partnering agencies and organizations have identified two viable sub-populations in need of recovery. These separated populations, one each in the Atchafalaya and Tensas river basins, have potential open space to support immigration and emigration corridors between them. The refuge is located between the Red River/Three Rivers Wildlife Management Area Complex and the Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge, making it ideally situated to help link these two sub-populations. Management of the Louisiana black bear is dependent upon providing sufficient habitat, including forested sites on both public and private lands. Biologists are studying the present landscape, land uses, and black bear behavior to determine how well bears can adapt to the present landscape and move from one management area to the next. Boundary expansions and reforestation of the refuge will expedite recovery. The Service is monitoring bear movement to determine if the refuge may serve as a site for bear reintroduction. Adding forest areas aligned along the identified corridor and adjacent to state and federal wildlife areas, as well as enrolling private lands in conservation programs, will be essential Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter I Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 37 IV to the recovery of the black bear. The addition of a wildlife movement corridor will result in connecting forest blocks where numerous forest interior species, including black bear, move between the large forest areas of natural vegetation. Meeting this goal is considered sufficient to support viable populations of black bear for long-term survival. Refer to Figure 4 for black bear information. Strategies: (1) Coordinate with neighbors, the Black Bear Conservation Committee, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, and other agencies/ organizations in Concordia Parish to facilitate bear conservation and research program. (2) Conduct outreach efforts involving neighbors, local residents, schools, and businesses on bear biology and conservation and the effect bears will have on activities of neighboring landowners. (3) Encourage refuge visitors, as well as surrounding landowners, to report bear sightings or suspected bear activity. (4) Assist others with all phases of black bear management and nuisance control in Concordia Parish. (5) Provide habitat that supports the recovery of the Louisiana black bear. A.3 Waterfowl and Shorebirds Objective: Provide habitat to support approximately 10,000 migrating waterfowl, 12,000 migrating shorebirds and other important associated migratory bird populations, including woodcock. (Figures 10 and 11). Discussion: Since food is a limiting factor for southbound migrating shorebirds and wintering waterfowl, adequate shallow water foraging habitat must be available to meet shorebird foraging requirements during their southward migrations. The refuge should support about 12,000 southbound migrating shorebirds. For transient shorebirds, typically mudflat foraging habitat is abundant in the Lower Mississippi Valley during the spring northward migration. In early spring, agricultural fields are bare and winter flood water is receding; in late spring, rice fields are flooded. During southward migration in late summer and fall, fields of maturing crops are dry. Therefore, the period from July 15 to September 30 is the period when foraging habitat for shorebirds is least available. Food is also a limiting factor for wintering waterfowl populations. About 300 acres of foraging habitat are needed on the refuge to support the wintering waterfowl population goals within the Lower Mississippi Valley. Strategies: (1) Conduct shorebird and other waterbird counts using International Shorebird Survey protocol on 10-day intervals during migration and wintering periods. Conduct mid-winter waterfowl surveys. (2) Assess food quality and quantity on the refuge during peak periods of shorebird movement. (3) Assess food quality and quantity on and off the refuge during peak periods of waterfowl use. (4) Develop impoundment units with a moist soil component to support waterfowl and shorebird use. (5) Assess wintering and foraging habitat on and off refuge during peak periods of woodcock use. Shorebirds Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge Coot Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge 38 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge ��������� ���� ��� �� ���� ��� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ���� ���� ���� �� ���� ���� Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 39 ���� �� ���� ��� �� ���� ���� �� �� ���� ���� �� �� ���� ��� ��� ���� ���� �� �� ��� Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Section A/Chapter I 40 Bayou Cocodrie National Wildlife Refuge IV A. 4 Resident and Other Species Objective: Manage to maintain healthy, viable resident populations, including white-tailed deer (average harvest range 250-300 deer), turkey, and other resident species. Discussion: The refuge will be managed to ensure healthy, viable resident populations consistent with sound biological principles and other objectives of this plan. White-tailed deer have the potential to adversely affect habitats unless their numbers are kept at a level at or slightly below carrying capacity. The refuge hunt program is designed to maintain the herd at this level while offering quality hunting opportunities to the public. Current harvest data indicates an annual harvest of 250-300 deer or approximately 1 deer harvested per 54 acres of hunted area. The harvest (per acre) will be maintained with occasional fluctuations due to weather and habitat conditions expected. Population level indicators will include browse surveys, harvest data, and periodic health checks. Raccoons may also have an adverse impact on other species in the event of over-population. Nest predation on turkey, wood duck, and songbirds may become so great as to limit the reproductive success of those species. Over-populations may also facilitate the spread of canine distemper, a common close contact type disease, to other species such as fox, coyote, and domestic canids. In an effort to prevent raccoon over-populations, the species is considered an incidental harvest species and may be taken during any open hunting season. Wild turkey populations are currently low on the refuge. This species will benefit from increased management emphasis. Additional hunting opportunities may become available as the turkey population reaches a point where it can support such activities. Reptiles and amphibians are abundant on the refuge and key species to help biologists evaluate the environmental health of the ecosystem. Knowledge of which species occur on the refuge is fundamental to an understanding of the biological diversity of the area. Strategies: (1) Monitor the population status of key indicator species, white-tailed deer, and turkey. (2) Manage white-tailed deer population at current levels (average harvest range is between 250-300/10,000 acres). (3) Integrate population objectives for resident species into habitat management plans. (4) Establish hunting regulations for resident wildlife to maintain population health and stability and habitat relationships. Coordinate with neighbors. (5) Identify thresholds of disturbance and develop associated standards and mitigation techniques that can be applied, whe |
| Tag | Library-Source-CCPs |
| Date created | 2012-08-31 |
|
|