Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan

              Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan
U.S. Department of the Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service
Southeast Region
October 2009
COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN
BAYOU TECHE
NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
St. Mary Parish, Louisiana
U.S. Department of the Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service
Southeast Region
Atlanta, Georgia
October 2009
Table of Contents i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... 1
I. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................ 3
Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 3
Purpose And Need For The Plan .................................................................................................3
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ...................................................................................................... 3
National Wildlife Refuge System .................................................................................................. 5
Legal and Policy Context .............................................................................................................. 7
National and International Conservation Plans and Initiatives ..................................................... 8
Regional Conservation Plans and Initiatives .............................................................................. 10
Lower Mississippi River Valley Ecosystem ................................................................................. 11
Relationship To State Wildlife Agency ........................................................................................ 12
II. REFUGE OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................................... 15
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 15
Bayou Teche Refuge History and Purpose ................................................................................ 15
Special Designations .................................................................................................................. 19
Ecological Threats and Problems ...............................................................................................19
Physical Resources .................................................................................................................... 19
Climate .............................................................................................................................. 19
Geology, Hydrology, and Topography .............................................................................. 20
Soils ................................................................................................................................. 20
Biological Resources .................................................................................................................. 20
Habitat ............................................................................................................................... 20
Wildlife ...............................................................................................................................21
Cultural Resources ..................................................................................................................... 21
Socioeconomic Environment ...................................................................................................... 26
Refuge Administration and Management ................................................................................... 26
Land Protection and Conservation .................................................................................... 26
Visitor Services ................................................................................................................. 27
Personnel, Operations, and Maintenance ......................................................................... 27
III. PLAN DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................................. 29
Planning Process and Public Involvement ................................................................................. 29
Wilderness review ...................................................................................................................... 30
Summary of Issues, Concerns, and Opportunities ..................................................................... 30
Fish and Wildlife Population Management ........................................................................ 30
Habitat Management ......................................................................................................... 30
Resource Protection .......................................................................................................... 31
Visitor Services ................................................................................................................. 31
Refuge Administration ....................................................................................................... 31
ii Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
IV. MANAGEMENT DIRECTION ....................................................................................................... 33
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 33
Vision ........................................................................................................................................ 33
Goals, Objectives, and Strategies .............................................................................................. 33
V. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................................................ 45
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 45
Proposed Projects ...................................................................................................................... 45
Fish And Wildlife Population Management ....................................................................... 45
Habitat Management......................................................................................................... 47
Resource Protection AND Refuge Administration ............................................................ 48
Visitor Services ................................................................................................................. 50
Funding and Personnel .............................................................................................................. 52
Partnership/Volunteers Opportunities ........................................................................................ 56
Step-Down Management Plans .................................................................................................. 56
Monitoring and Adaptive Management ....................................................................................... 57
Plan Review and Revision.......................................................................................................... 57
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A. GLOSSARY ................................................................................................................ 59
APPENDIX B. REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CITATIONS ...................................................... 69
APPENDIX C. RELEVANT LEGAL MANDATES AND EXECUTIVE ORDERS ............................... 71
APPENDIX D. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ........................................................................................... 85
Summary Of Public Scoping Comments .................................................................................... 85
Draft Plan Comments and Service responses ........................................................................... 86
APPENDIX E. APPROPRIATE USE DETERMINATIONS ................................................................ 89
APPENDIX F. COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATIONS ....................................................................... 93
APPENDIX G. INTRA-SERVICE SECTION 7 BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION .................................. 103
APPENDIX H. REFUGE BIOTA ....................................................................................................... 109
APPENDIX I. BUDGET REQUESTS ............................................................................................... 111
APPENDIX J. LIST OF PREPARERS ............................................................................................. 113
APPENDIX K. CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION ................................................................ 115
Overview ................................................................................................................................. 115
Core Planning Team Members ................................................................................................ 116
Table of Contents iii
APPENDIX L. FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT .................................................................. 117
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 117
Alternatives ............................................................................................................................... 117
Alternative A. No Action Alternative ............................................................................... 117
Alternative B. Preferred Alternative ................................................................................. 117
Alternative C. User Focused Management .................................................................... 118
iv Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Location of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge within the Southeast
Louisiana NWR Complex ................................................................................................... 4
Figure 2. Location of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge in relation to regional
conservation areas ........................................................................................................... 13
Figure 3. Status boundary of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge, St. Mary Parish,
Louisiana, and vicinity (topo) ............................................................................................ 16
Figure 4. Status and acquisition boundary of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge,
St. Mary Parish, Louisiana, and vicinity ............................................................................ 17
Figure 5. Boundary of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge, St. Mary Parish, Louisiana .............. 18
Figure 6. Centerville unit of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge ................................................. 22
Figure 7. Franklin unit of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge ..................................................... 23
Figure 8. Garden City and Bayou Sale’ units of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge .................. 24
Figure 9. North Bend West and North Bend East units of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge ... 25
Figure 11. Current staffing chart for Mandalay and Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuges ............. 53
Figure 12. Proposed staffing chart for Mandalay and Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuges ......... 54
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Summary of proposed projects ............................................................................................. 55
Table 2. Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge step-down management plans related to
the goals and objectives of the comprehensive conservation plan ....................................... 56
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1
COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN
Executive Summary
The Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has prepared this Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP)
to guide the management of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) in St. Mary Parish,
Louisiana. The CCP outlines programs and corresponding resource needs for the next 15 years, as
mandated by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997.
Before the Service began planning, it conducted a biological review of the refuge’s wildlife and habitat
management programs and conducted public scoping meetings to solicit public opinion of the issues
the CCP should address. The biological review team was composed of biologists from federal and
state agencies and non-governmental organizations that have an interest in the refuge. The refuge
staff held one public meeting to solicit reaction to the proposed alternatives. Also, a 30-day public
review and comment period of the Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental
Assessment was provided.
The Service developed and analyzed three alternatives. Alternative A was a proposal to maintain the
status quo. Under this alternative, no new actions would be taken to improve or enhance the refuge’s
current habitat, wildlife, and public use management programs. The existing programs would be
continued with no changes. Species of federal responsibility, such as threatened and endangered
species and migratory birds, would continue to be monitored at present levels. Additional species
monitoring would occur as opportunistic events when volunteers offer support. Current programs of
marsh management would be maintained with no improvements or adaptations. No progressive
wetland restoration projects would be implemented. All public use programs of fishing, hunting,
wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation would
continue at present levels and with current facilities, but no programs or facilities would be updated or
expanded.
Acquisition of lands into the refuge would occur when funding was appropriated and willing sellers
would offer land that is quality waterfowl or Louisiana black bear habitat. Staff would consist of a
manager and a wildlife biologist supporting both Mandalay NWR and Bayou Teche NWR, a part-time
law enforcement officer supporting Bayou Teche NWR, along with supplementary support from the
remainder of the Southeast Louisiana NWR Complex staff when needed. The refuge headquarters
would serve only as administrative offices, with no enhancement of the grounds for public use and
interpretation.
Alternative B, the alternative on which this CCP is based, proposes management of the natural
resources of Bayou Teche NWR based on maintaining and improving Louisiana black bear and
wetland habitats, monitoring targeted flora and fauna representative of the Lower Atchafalaya Basin,
and providing quality public use programs and wildlife-dependent recreational activities. All species
occurring on the refuge will be considered, and certain targeted species will be managed for and
monitored in addition to species of federal responsibility. These species will be chosen based on the
criteria that they are indicators of the health of important habitat or species of concern. More
research will be conducted on the refuge’s aquatic species.
Wetland loss will be documented and, whenever possible, restored. Public use programs will be
improved by offering more facilities and wildlife observation areas. Public use facilities will undergo
2 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
annual reviews for maintenance needs and safety concerns. Overall public use will be monitored to
determine if any negative impacts are occurring to refuge resources from overuse. Education
programs will be reviewed and improved to complement current refuge management and current
staffing. Archaeological resources will be surveyed.
Land acquisitions within the approved acquisition boundary will be based on importance of the habitat
for target management species. The refuge headquarters will not only house small administrative
offices, but will offer interpretation of refuge wildlife and habitats and demonstrate habitat
improvements for individual landowners. The main interpretive facilities will be housed at the
Southeast Louisiana NWR Complex headquarters in Lacombe, Louisiana.
In general, under Alternative B, management decisions and actions will support wildlife species and
habitat occurring on the refuge based on well planned strategies and sound scientific judgment.
Quality wildlife-dependent recreational uses, environmental education, and interpretation programs
will be offered to support and explain the natural resources of the refuge.
Alternative C proposed managing the natural resources of Bayou Teche NWR for maximized public
use activities, including wildlife-dependent recreational activities. The majority of staff time and efforts
would support public use activities, including hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife
photography, and environmental education and interpretation. Federal trust species and
archaeological resources would be monitored as mandated, but other species targeted for
management would depend on which ones the public is interested in utilizing.
All refuge management programs for conservation of wildlife and habitat, such as monitoring,
surveying, and marsh management, would support species and resources of importance for public
use. Emphasis would be placed more on interpreting and demonstrating these programs than actual
implementation. Providing access with trails and by dredging for boat access would be maximized to
provide public use facilities throughout the refuge.
Land acquisitions within the approved acquisition boundary would be based on importance of the
habitat for public use. The refuge headquarters at Mandalay NWR would provide small administrative
offices, a visitor center, and be developed for public use activities such as interpretation and
outreach.
In general, under Alternative C, the focus of refuge management would be on expanding public use
activities to the fullest extent possible while conducting only mandated resource protection such as
conservation of threatened and endangered species, migratory birds, and archaeological resources.
The Service selected Alternative B as its preferred alternative. This decision was based on the
mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System, the purposes for which Bayou Teche NWR was
established, and the priorities of the Lower Mississippi River Ecosystem.
Implementing this CCP will result in a diversity of habitats for a variety of fish and wildlife species,
enhance resident wildlife populations, restore wetlands, and provide opportunities for compatible
wildlife-dependent recreation and environmental education and interpretation activities.
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 3
I. Background
INTRODUCTION
This Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) for Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) was
prepared to guide management actions and direction for the refuge. Fish and wildlife conservation
will receive first priority in refuge management; wildlife-dependent recreation will be allowed and
encouraged as long as it is compatible with, and does not detract from, the mission of the refuge or
the purposes for which it was established.
A planning team developed a range of alternatives that best met the goals and objectives of the
refuge and that could be implemented within the 15-year planning period. The Draft Comprehensive
Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment (Draft CCP/EA) described the Fish and Wildlife
Service’s proposed plan, as well as other alternatives considered and their effects on the
environment. The Draft CCP/EA) was made available to state and federal government agencies,
conservation partners, and the general public for review and comment. The comments from each
entity were considered in the development of this CCP.
PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PLAN
The purpose of the CCP is to identify the role that Bayou Teche NWR will play in support of the
mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System), and to provide long-term guidance
to the refuge’s management programs and activities for the next 15 years.
The CCP will:
• Provide a clear statement of the desired future conditions when refuge purposes and goals
are accomplished;
• Provide refuge neighbors, visitors, and government officials with an understanding of Service
management actions on and around the refuge;
• Ensure that Service management actions, including land protection and recreation/education
programs, are consistent with the mandates of the Refuge System; and
• Provide a basis for the development of budget requests for operations, maintenance, and
capital improvement needs.
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) traces its roots to 1871, with the establishment of the
Commission of Fisheries involved with research and fish culture. The once independent commission was
renamed the Bureau of Fisheries and placed under the Department of Commerce and Labor in 1903.
The Service also traces its roots to 1886, with the establishment of a Division of Economic
Ornithology and Mammalogy in the Department of Agriculture. Research on the relationship of birds
and animals to agriculture shifted to delineation of the range of plants and animals so the name was
changed to the Division of the Biological Survey in 1896.
The Department of Commerce, Bureau of Fisheries, was combined with the Department of
Agriculture, Bureau of Biological Survey, on June 30, 1940, and transferred to the Department of the
4 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Figure 1. Location of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge within the Southeast Louisiana
NWR Complex
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 5
Interior as the Fish and Wildlife Service. The name was changed to the Bureau of Sport Fisheries
and Wildlife in 1956 and finally to the Fish and Wildlife Service in 1974.
The Service, working with others, is responsible for conserving, protecting, and enhancing fish and
wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people through federal programs
relating to migratory birds, endangered species, interjurisdictional fish and marine mammals, and
inland sport fisheries (142 DM 1.1).
As part of its mission, the Service manages more than 540 national wildlife refuges covering over 95
million acres. These areas comprise the National Wildlife Refuge System, the world’s largest collection of
lands set aside specifically for fish and wildlife. The majority of these lands, 77 million acres, is in Alaska.
The remaining acres are spread across the other 49 states and several United States territories. In
addition to refuges, the Service manages thousands of small wetlands, national fish hatcheries, 64 fishery
resource offices, and 78 ecological services field stations. The Service enforces federal wildlife laws,
administers the Endangered Species Act, manages migratory bird populations, restores nationally
significant fisheries, conserves and restores wildlife habitat, and helps foreign governments with their
conservation efforts. It also oversees the Federal Aid program that distributes hundreds of millions of
dollars in excise taxes on fishing and hunting equipment to state fish and wildlife agencies.
NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM
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.”
The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Improvement Act) established, for the
first time, a clear legislative mission of wildlife conservation for the National Wildlife Refuge System
(Refuge System). Actions were initiated in 1997 to comply with 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. Consistent with the Improvement
Act, approved plans will serve as the guidelines for refuge management for the next 15 years. The
Improvement Act states that each refuge shall be managed to:
• Fulfill the mission of the Refuge System;
• Fulfill the individual purposes of each refuge;
• Consider the needs of wildlife first;
• Fulfill requirements of comprehensive conservation plans that are prepared for each unit of
the Refuge System;
• Maintain the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the Refuge System;
and
• 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.
6 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
The following are just a few examples of your national network of conservation lands. Pelican Island
National Wildlife Refuge, the first refuge, was established in 1903 for the protection of colonial nesting
birds in Florida, such as the snowy egret and the brown pelican. Western refuges were established for
American bison (1906), elk (1912), prong-horned antelope (1931), and desert bighorn sheep (1936)
after over-hunting, competition with cattle, and natural disasters decimated once-abundant herds. The
drought conditions of the 1930s Dust Bowl severely depleted breeding populations of ducks and geese.
Refuges established during the Great Depression focused on waterfowl production areas (i.e.,
protection of prairie wetlands in America’s heartland). The emphasis on waterfowl continues today but
also includes protection of wintering habitat in response to a dramatic loss of bottomland hardwoods.
By 1973, the Service had begun to focus on establishing refuges for endangered species.
Recreational visits to national wildlife refuges generate substantial economic activity. In 2006, 34.8 million
visited refuges in the lower 48 states for recreation. Their spending generated almost $1.7 billion
of sales in regional economies. In a study completed in 2002 on 15 refuges, visitation had grown
36 percent in 7 years. At the same time, the number of jobs generated in surrounding
communities grew to 120 per refuge, up from 87 jobs in 1995, pouring more than $2.2 million into
local economies. The 15 refuges in the study were Chincoteague (Virginia); National Elk
(Wyoming); Crab Orchard (Illinois); Eufaula (Alabama); Charles M. Russell (Montana); Umatilla
(Oregon); Quivira (Kansas); Mattamuskeet (North Carolina); Upper Souris (North Dakota); San
Francisco Bay (California); Laguna Atacosa (Texas); Horicon (Wisconsin); Las Vegas (Nevada);
Tule Lake (California); and Tensas River (Louisiana)—the same refuges identified for the 1995
study. Other findings also validate the belief that communities near refuges benefit economically.
Expenditures on food, lodging, and transportation grew to $6.8 million per refuge, up 31 percent
from $5.2 million in 1995. For each federal dollar spent on the Refuge System, surrounding
communities benefited with $4.43 in recreation expenditures and $1.42 in job-related income
(Caudill and Laughland, unpubl. data).
Volunteers continue to be a major contributor to the success of the Refuge System. In 2005,
37,996 volunteers contributed more than 1.5 million hours on refuges nationwide, a service
valued at more than $26 million.
The wildlife and habitat vision for national wildlife refuges stresses that wildlife come first; that
ecosystems, biodiversity, and wilderness are vital concepts in refuge management; that refuges must
be healthy and growth must be strategic; and that the Refuge System serves as a model for habitat
management with broad participation from others.
The Improvement Act stipulates that comprehensive conservation plans be prepared in consultation
with adjoining federal, state, and private landowners and that the Service develop and implement a
process to ensure an opportunity for active public involvement in the preparation and revision (every
15 years) of the plans.
All lands of the Refuge System will be managed in accordance with an approved comprehensive
conservation plan that will guide management decisions and set forth strategies for achieving refuge
unit purposes. The plan will be consistent with sound resource management principles, practices,
and legal mandates, including Service compatibility standards and other Service policies, guidelines,
and planning documents (602 FW 1.1).
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 7
LEGAL AND POLICY CONTEXT
Legal Mandates, Administrative and Policy Guidelines, and Other Special Considerations
Administration of national wildlife refuges is guided by the mission and goals of the Refuge System,
congressional legislation, presidential executive orders, and international treaties. Policies for
management options of refuges 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. Select legal summaries of treaties and laws relevant to administration of the Refuge System
and management of the Bayou Teche NWR are provided in Appendix C.
Treaties, laws, administrative guidelines, and policy guidelines assist the refuge manager in making
decisions pertaining to soil, water, air, flora, fauna, and other natural resources; historical and cultural
resources; research and recreation on refuge lands; and provide a framework for cooperation
between Bayou Teche NWR and other partners, such as The Nature Conservancy, Trust for Public
Lands, U.S. Geological Survey, Louisiana State University, Black Bear Conservation Committee, and
private landowners, etc.
Lands within the Refuge System are closed to public use unless specifically and legally opened. No
refuge use may be allowed unless it is determined to be appropriate and compatible. The refuge
manager determines if a use is appropriate based on sound professional judgment; uses that are
illegal, inconsistent with existing policy, or unsafe may not be found appropriate. When a use is
found appropriate, it must then be determined to be compatible before it is allowed on a refuge. A
compatible use is a use that, in the sound professional judgment of the refuge manager, will not
materially interfere with or detract from the fulfillment of the mission of the Refuge System or the
purposes of the refuge. All programs and uses must be evaluated based on mandates set forth in the
Improvement Act. Those mandates are to:
• Contribute to ecosystem goals, as well as refuge purposes and goals;
• Conserve, manage, and restore fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats;
• Monitor the trends of fish, wildlife, and plants;
• 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; and
• Ensure that visitor activities are compatible with refuge purposes.
The Improvement Act further identifies six priority wildlife-dependent recreational uses. These uses
are: hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and
interpretation. As priority public uses of the Refuge System, they receive priority consideration over
other public uses in planning and management.
Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health Policy
The Improvement Act directs the Service to ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health of the Refuge System are maintained for the benefit of present and future
generations of Americans. The policy is an additional directive for refuge managers to follow
while achieving refuge purpose(s) and the Refuge System mission. It provides for the
consideration and protection of the broad spectrum of fish, wildlife, and habitat resources found
on refuges and associated ecosystems. When evaluating the appropriate management direction
for refuges, refuge managers will use sound professional judgment to determine their refuges’
contributions to biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health at multiple landscape
8 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
scales. Sound professional judgment incorporates field experience, knowledge of refuge
resources, refuge role within an ecosystem, applicable laws, and best available science, including
consultation with others both inside and outside the Service.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-58) was signed into law by President Bush on August
8, 2005. Section 384 of the Act establishes the Coastal Impact Assistance Program (CIAP), which
authorizes funds to be distributed to Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas producing states to mitigate
the impacts of outer continental shelf oil and gas activities. States to share these funds are Alabama,
Alaska, California, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. (See further discussion below under
conservation plans and initiatives.)
NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL CONSERVATION PLANS AND INITIATIVES
Multiple partnerships have been developed among government and private entities to address the
environmental problems affecting regions. There is a large amount of conservation and protection
information that defines the role of the refuge at the local, national, international, and ecosystem
levels. Conservation initiatives include broad-scale planning and cooperation between affected
parties to address declining trends of natural, physical, social, and economic environments. The
conservation guidance described below, along with issues, problems, and trends, was reviewed and
integrated where appropriate into this CCP.
This CCP supports, among others, the Partners-in-Flight Plan, the North American Waterfowl
Management Plan, the Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network, and the National Wetlands
Priority Conservation Plan.
North American Bird Conservation Initiative. Started in 1999, the North American Bird
Conservation Initiative is a coalition of government agencies, private organizations, academic
institutions, and private industry leaders in the United States, Canada, and Mexico working to ensure
the long-term health of North America's native bird populations by fostering an integrated approach to
bird conservation to benefit all birds in all habitats. The four international and national bird initiatives
include the North American Waterfowl Management Plan, Partners-in-Flight, Waterbird Conservation
for the Americas, and the U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan.
North American Waterfowl Management Plan. The North American Waterfowl Management Plan
is an international action plan to conserve migratory birds throughout the continent. The plan's goal is
to return waterfowl populations to their 1970s levels by conserving wetland and upland habitat.
Canada and the United States signed the plan in 1986 in reaction to critically low numbers of
waterfowl. Mexico joined in 1994, making it a truly continental effort. The plan is a partnership of
federal, provincial/state and municipal governments, non-governmental organizations, private
companies, and many individuals, all working towards achieving better wetland habitat for the benefit
of migratory birds, other wetland-associated species, and people. Plan projects are international in
scope, but implemented at regional levels. These projects contribute to the protection of habitat and
wildlife species across the North American landscape.
Partners-in-Flight Bird Conservation Plan. Managed as part of the Partners-in-Flight Plan, the
Coastal Prairies physiographic area represents a scientifically based land bird conservation planning
effort that ensures long-term maintenance of healthy populations of native land birds, primarily non-game
land birds. Non-game land birds have been vastly under-represented in conservation efforts,
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 9
and many are exhibiting significant declines. This plan is voluntary and non-regulatory, and focuses
on relatively common species in areas where conservation actions can be most effective, rather than
the frequent local emphasis on rare and peripheral populations.
U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan. The U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan is a partnership effort
throughout the United States to ensure that stable and self-sustaining populations of shorebird
species are restored and protected. The plan was developed by a wide range of agencies,
organizations, and shorebird experts for separate regions of the country, and identifies conservation
goals, critical habitat conservation needs, key research needs, and proposed education and outreach
programs to increase awareness of shorebirds and the threats they face.
Northern American Waterbird Conservation Plan. This plan provides a framework for the
conservation and management of 210 species of waterbirds in 29 nations. Threats to waterbird
populations include destruction of inland and coastal wetlands, introduced predators and invasive
species, pollutants, mortality from fisheries and industries, disturbance, and conflicts arising from
abundant species. Particularly important habitats of the southeast region include pelagic areas,
marshes, forested wetlands, and barrier and sea island complexes. Fifteen species of waterbirds are
federally listed, including breeding populations of wood storks, Mississippi sandhill cranes, whooping
cranes, interior least terns, and Gulf Coast populations of brown pelicans. A key objective of this plan
is the standardization of data collection efforts to better recommend effective conservation measures.
Coastal Impact Assistance Program (CIAP). Signed in 2005, this law authorizes the Secretary of
the Interior to distribute $250 million for each of the fiscal years 2007 through 2010 to oil and gas
producing states (Alabama, Alaska, California, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas) and coastal
political subdivisions to be used for one or more of the following purposes:
• Projects and activities for the conservation, protection, or restoration of
coastal areas, including wetlands.
• Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, or natural resources.
• Planning assistance and the administrative costs of complying with this
section.
• Implementation of a federally approved marine, coastal, or comprehensive
conservation management plan.
• Mitigation of the impact of Outer Continental Shelf activities through funding
or onshore infrastructure projects and public service needs.
In a Continuing Resolution dated February 16, 2007, Congress approved a 3 percent appropriation
of the CIAP funds to be used by Minerals Management Service (MMS) to administer the CIAP
program. MMS will lead the CIAP by establishing an environment that will enhance partner
communications and an effective business relationship. Each eligible state will be allocated their
share based on the state’s Qualified Outer Continental Shelf Revenue generated off of its coast in
proportion to total revenue generated off the coasts of all eligible states. MMS will respond to
recipients needs and provide advice through guidance, direction, training, and by ensuring that
monitoring and evaluation are incorporated into a system of accountability designed to accomplish
the results intended by the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
10 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
REGIONAL CONSERVATION PLANS AND INITIATIVES
In the Louisiana Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy, developed in 2005 by the Louisiana
Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF), Bayou Teche NWR is located in the plan’s Mississippi
River Alluvial Plain eco-region and the Vermilion-Teche management basin. Bayou Teche NWR is
composed primarily of cypress-tupelo swamp with some areas of bottomland hardwood forests.
Bottomland hardwood forest loss statewide is estimated to be 50 to 75 percent of the original pre-settlement
acreage and contains 34 species of conservation concern to the state. The following
strategies are listed in the plan which the Service can partner with LDWF:
• Partner with the Black Bear Conservation Committee (BBCC) and the Service’s
Ecological Services Office to continue supporting recovery efforts for the Louisiana black
bear.
• Continue research on the ecology and support repatriation efforts for the Louisiana black
bear.
• Work with BBCC, Department of Transportation and Development, Natural Resources
Conservation Service, the Service’s Ecological Services Office , USDA Forest Service,
private landowners, etc., to promote corridors for black bears and other wildlife species.
The Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act program (CWPPRA or “Breaux Act”)
provides for targeted funds to be used for planning and implementing projects that create, protect,
restore, and enhance wetlands in coastal Louisiana. Passed in 1990 and authorized until 2019, the
federal funds created by this Act are managed by the CWPPRA Task Force, a group composed of
five federal agencies, including the Service, and the State of Louisiana.
To address larger wetland restoration projects with more ecosystem-scale impacts than CWPPRA,
the Louisiana Coastal Area Ecosystem Restoration Study (LCA) began in 2001. LCA seeks future
Water Resources Development Act authorization and funding to identify critical human and natural
ecological needs for coastal Louisiana, seeks alternatives to meet the needs including restoration
priorities, and presents long-term large-scale strategies named the LCA Plan. Bayou Teche NWR is
located in the Deltaic Plain area of LCA.
Coast 2050: Toward a Sustainable Coastal Louisiana was approved in 1998 by the State of Louisiana
and its federal partners. Coast 2050 is a joint planning initiative among the Louisiana Wetland
Conservation and Restoration Authority, Louisiana Department of Natural Resources Coastal Zone
Management Authority, and the CWPPRA Task Force for protecting and sustaining the state’s
coastal resources for future generations in a manner consistent with the welfare of the people. In this
plan, Bayou Teche NWR is located in Region 3 (Terrebonne, Atchafalaya, Teche/Vermilion). The
plan emphasizes that immediate attention should be placed in the Barataria Basin with ecosystem
strategies to restore swamps, restore and sustain marshes, protect bay/lake shorelines, and restore
barrier islands and Gulf shorelines.
In 1989, the Louisiana Legislature passed Act 6 (LA R.S. 49:213.1 et seq. of the Second
Extraordinary Session of the Legislature) recognizing the catastrophic nature of Louisiana’s
coastal land loss and expanded the state’s capacity to respond to the crisis by creating the
Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Authority (State Wetlands Authority); the Wetlands
Conservation and Restoration Fund (the Fund); the Governor’s Office of Coastal Activities
(GOCA); and the Office of Coastal Restoration and Management. The State Wetlands Authority
is a policy level decision-making group made up of the Governor’s Executive Assistant for
Coastal Activities, the Commissioner of the Division of Administration, and the secretaries of five
state agencies - the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Environmental Quality, Natural
Resources, Transportation and Development, and Agriculture and Forestry. The State Wetlands
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 11
Authority is the sponsor and official author of the State Plan, an annual summary of coastal
restoration projects and recommendations for funding from the Fund. The Fund’s income is from
a portion of the state’s mineral income and severance taxes from oil and gas production on state
lands and is dedicated to state sponsored coastal restoration projects. The GOCA coordinates
policy among the many agencies involved in Louisiana’s coastal restoration effort while the Office
of Coastal Restoration and Management within DNR handles day-to-day implementation of
coastal restoration in coordination with the Coastal Zone Management Office.
LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER VALLEY ECOSYSTEM
Bayou Teche NWR lies within a physiographic region designated by the Service as the Lower
Mississippi River Ecosystem (LMRE). The LMRE serves as the primary wintering habitat for mid-continent
waterfowl populations, as well as breeding and migration habitat for migratory songbirds
returning from Central and South America. Geographically, the refuges lie in the southern part of
the LMRE. Bayou Teche NWR has opportunities to contribute to many of the goals and objectives
of the LMRE. The following goals of the LMRE are applicable to the refuges:
• Conserve, enhance, protect, and monitor migratory bird populations and their habitats in the
LMRE;
• Protect, restore, and manage the wetlands of the LMRE;
• Protect and/or restore imperiled habitats and viable populations of all threatened, endangered,
and candidate species and species of concern in the LMRE;
• Protect, restore, and manage the fisheries and other aquatic resources historically associated
with the wetlands and waters of the LMRE;
• Restore, manage, and protect national wildlife refuges and national fish hatcheries;
• Increase public awareness and support for LMRE resources and their management;
• Enforce natural resource laws; and
• Protect, restore, and enhance water and air quality throughout the LMRE.
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. According to the LMRE Team, the
greatest threats to biological diversity within the Lower Mississippi Valley include:
• The loss of sustainable communities, including the loss of 20 million acres of bottomland
hardwood forest;
• The loss of connectivity between bottomland hardwood forest sites (e.g., forest
fragmentation);
• The effects of agricultural and timber harvesting practices;
• The simplification of the remaining wildlife habitats within the ecosystem and gene pools;
• The effects of constructing navigation and water diversion projects; and
• The cumulative habitat effects of land and water resource development activities.
Priorities identified by the LMRE to which the refuges can contribute include:
• Continue to work with the Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Task Force, private landowners, and
other entities to protect and restore coastal wetlands, consistent with the Coast 2050 Plan and
associated project planning, evaluation, and implementation activities;
• Consider all grant opportunities available to the LMRE Team and partners and work to
improve internal coordination of these programs to assure that the contributions to these
programs are of maximum benefit to the resource;
12 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
• Support environmental education efforts underway by Service offices to enhance and expand
knowledge, awareness, and appreciation of trust resources; and
• Control invasive/exotic species.
RELATIONSHIP TO STATE WILDLIFE AGENCY
A provision of the Improvement Act, and subsequent agency policy, is that the Service shall ensure
timely and effective cooperation and collaboration with other state fish and game agencies and tribal
governments during the course of acquiring and managing refuges. State wildlife management areas
and national wildlife refuges provide the foundation for the protection of species, and contribute to the
overall health and sustainability of fish and wildlife species in the State of Louisiana.
In Louisiana, the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF)
(http://www.wlf.louisiana.gov) is vested with responsibility for conservation and management of
wildlife in the state, including aquatic life, and is authorized to execute the laws enacted for the
control and supervision of programs relating to the management, protection, conservation, and
replenishment of wildlife, fish, and aquatic life, and the regulation of the shipping of wildlife fish, furs,
and skins. LDWF’s mission is to manage, conserve, and promote wise utilization of Louisiana’s
renewable fish and wildlife resources and their supporting habitats through replenishment, protection,
enhancement, research, development, and education for the social and economic benefit of current
and future generations; to provide opportunities for knowledge of and use and enjoyment of these
resources; and to promote a safe and healthy environment for the users of the resources. LDWF is
divided into seven divisions for management of the state’s resources: Enforcement, Fur and Refuge,
Public Information, Inland Fisheries, Marine Fisheries, Management and Finance, and Wildlife.
The participation of LDWF throughout this comprehensive conservation planning process has been
valuable. Not only have LDWF personnel participated in the biological reviews, they are also active
partners in annual hunt coordination, planning, and various wildlife and habitat surveys. A key part of
the planning process is the integration of common objectives between the Service and LDWF.
Several LDWF Wildlife Management Areas are located near Bayou Teche NWR (Figure 2).
The state’s participation and contribution throughout this planning process will provide for ongoing
opportunities and open dialogue to improve the ecological sustainability of fish and wildlife in the
State of Louisiana. An essential part of comprehensive conservation planning is integrating common
mission objectives where appropriate.
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 13
Figure 2. Location of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge in relation to regional
conservation areas
14 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 15
II. Refuge Overview
INTRODUCTION
Bayou Teche NWR is located near the town of Franklin in St. Mary Parish, Louisiana (Figures 3, 4, and
5). The refuge is composed of wet bottomland hardwood forests laced with bayous and canals and was
established on lands important to the coastal subpopulation of the Louisiana black bear. The refuge
consists of 6 separate units, ranging in size from 3,724 acres to 80 acres. Bayou Teche NWR is one of 8
refuges within the Southeast Louisiana NWR Complex administered from Lacombe, Louisiana.
BAYOU TECHE REFUGE HISTORY AND PURPOSE
Bayou Teche NWR was established on October 31, 2001, when the Service purchased 9,028 acres
from the Trust for Public Lands. All acquired land had been previously purchased from the Bailey
Estate by the Trust for Public Lands. The primary purpose of the refuge is to conserve and manage
habitat for the Louisiana black bear, a federally threatened subspecies of the American black bear.
The Louisiana black bear was listed as threatened by the Service in 1992, because of extensive loss
of habitat in the bear’s historical range. Presently, only three areas in Louisiana have viable bear
populations: (1) Tensas River Basin; (2) Atchafalaya Basin Floodway; and (3) Lower Iberia-St. Mary
Parish area south of U.S. Highway 90, along the southern rim of the Atchafalaya River Floodway. In
response to the listing of the Louisiana black bear, the BBCC was formed. The BBCC is a broad
coalition of over 50 state and federal agencies, forest and agricultural companies, conservation
organizations, and universities working together through a variety of interests for the black bear and
its associated natural resources. The BBCC prepared a Restoration Plan containing recovery criteria
and recommended recovery actions, which became part of the Service’s Recovery Plan. The goal of
bear population recovery includes not only managing for viable, breeding populations and long-term
habitat protection, but also providing interconnecting corridors between subpopulations.
In 1999, the Service finalized the Louisiana Black Bear Habitat Protection Project, which proposed
establishing two new national wildlife refuges and expanding one existing refuge to protect essential
black bear habitat. Bayou Teche NWS was one of the proposed national wildlife refuges. This
project was coordinated from its earliest stages with the BBCC and the LDWF. Although the
proposed refuge was supported by the St. Mary Parish Tourism Commission, opposition was
expressed by others including the Farm Bureaus in St. Mary and Iberia Parishes, sugar cane industry
officials, and the St. Mary Parish Council. Resolutions in opposition to the refuge were received from
the St. Mary Parish Council, the Iberia Parish Council, and St. Mary Parish Waterworks District 5.
A series of 5 public meetings involving discussion among Service personnel, congressional staffers,
Farm Bureau representatives, and sugar cane industry officials proved productive, and key issues
were resolved. Major issues involved plans to plant trees on sugar cane lands within the proposed
acquisition boundary; continued petroleum production and exploration; the potential impact of air
quality standards on the carbon black plants and other nearby industries; parish drainage; limitations
on hunting and fishing activities; and changes in pesticide use and private access by adjacent
landowners. Other concerns were fears of condemnation of lands, the impact of the refuge on the
future construction of I-49; loss of tax payments to the local government; and differing views of the
types of public uses to allow on the proposed refuge. The Final Environmental Assessment for the
Land Protection Plan for the Louisiana Black Bear Habitat Protection Project provides additional
details of the issues and their resolution.
16 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Figure 3. Status boundary of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge, St. Mary Parish,
Louisiana, and vicinity (topo)
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 17
Figure 4. Status and acquisition boundary of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge, St. Mary
Parish, Louisiana, and vicinity
18 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Figure 5. Boundary of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge, St. Mary Parish, Louisiana
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 19
The purpose of Bayou Teche NWR, based upon land acquisition documents and its establishing
authority, are as follows:
“… to conserve (A) fish or wildlife which are listed as endangered species or threatened species… or
(B) plants…” 16 U.S.C. 1534 (Endangered Species Act of 1973).
SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS
The entire Bayou Teche NWR except for the Centerville unit (only unit north of U. S. Highway 90) has
been officially proposed as critical habitat for the Louisiana black bear by the Service (USFWS 2008,
CFR 73 FR 25354).
ECOLOGICAL THREATS AND PROBLEMS
The primary ecological threats and problems of Bayou Teche NWR center around conservation
issues identified for the coastal subpopulation of the Louisiana black bear. Habitat fragmentation in
the southeastern Coastal Plain is widely regarded as a central issue in the management of black bear
populations. The bears at Bayou Teche NWR exist in small isolated forest patches surrounded by
agriculture or otherwise unsuitable habitat. The major ecological threats and problems on the refuge
include the poor quality of bear habitat; the limitation to the number of bears the area can support
caused by the small size and fragmentation of the refuge units; and the lack of movement corridors
that are needed to link the coastal and other bear populations in Louisiana. Urban encroachment
causes direct loss of foraging, dispersal, and denning habitats; increased potential for human/bear
conflicts; increased vehicle-associated bear mortality; and reduced use of adjacent, high-quality
foraging and denning habitats because of urban-associated audible and visual disturbances.
There are numerous oil and gas pipelines that traverse the refuge. The potential for spills, leaks, and
contaminants exist. Maintenance of existing facilities, developing new structures for mineral
extraction, and spills including clean up operations have the potential to adversely affect wetlands
and refuge habitats. The Southeast Louisiana NWR Complex Contingency Plan will be utilized to
address any such spill occurrences.
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
CLIMATE
The climate in southern Louisiana is humid and subtropical with long, hot summers. The fall and
spring are warm and often free of killing frost. Winters are usually mild and cool, but temperatures
occasionally drop to the lower teens. The lowest recorded in recent history was 10º F.; the average
frost-free period is 264 days and extends from February 27 to November 18. The average annual
rainfall is 65 inches, but amounts exceeding 87 inches have been recorded. Tropical disturbances
and hurricanes occur often and can cause changes in salinity and storm-related flooding.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recently concluded that warming of the
climate is undeniable. Coasts are projected to be exposed to increasing risks, including coastal
erosion, due to climate change and sea-level rise and the effect will be exacerbated by increasing
human-induced pressures on coastal areas. Coastal wetlands are projected to be negatively
affected by sea-level rise.
In an effort to address the potential effects of sea level rise on national wildlife refuges, the Service
contracted the application of the Sea-level Affecting Marshes Model (SLAMM) for most Region 4
refuges (SLAMM Report for Bayou Teche NWR 2008).
20 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Model results suggest that Bayou Teche NWR is subject to dramatic changes as a result of global
sea level rise. The combination of global sea level rise and local subsidence results in predictions of
saltwater intrusion with significant effects. Swamps, fresh marshes, and tidal marshes are all subject
to dramatic losses under all scenarios examined. In most of the scenarios run, salt marsh migrates
into the Bayou Teche NWR by the year 2100.
GEOLOGY, HYDROLOGY, AND TOPOGRAPHY
Bayou Teche NWR is within both the Teche/Vermillion and Atchafalaya Basins. Bayou Teche and
the Vermillion River were historically supplied with freshwater from the Atchafalaya River via Bayou
Cortableu. A system of flood protection levees, constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to
parallel the Atchafalaya River after the major flood of 1927, severed this connection. Although this
region of the coast is geologically stable, geomorphologic and hydrologic conditions have been
altered by the dredging of navigation and petroleum access canals and the construction of spoil
banks and levees. The effects of these alterations vary greatly from place-to-place, but generally
they have created artificial barriers between wetlands and wetland maintenance processes, or
removed natural barriers between wetlands and wetland decay processes. Historically, distributaries
of the Mississippi River, such as the nearby Atchafalaya River, provided alluvium and regenerative
organic soils for the vicinity of the present-day Bayou Teche NWR. In the present-day, the refuge is
disconnected from these natural wetland maintenance processes and is bisected by roughly 14 miles
of man-made levees and 9 miles of canals. Man-made levees on the Atchafalaya River to the north
and east and the east-west running Gulf Intracoastal Waterway to the south of the refuge are
significant features which interrupt the natural hydrology of the refuge and surrounding habitat. The
refuge is predominantly forested land with canals, marshland, swamps, natural bayous, and
maintained levees and other rights-of-way. Natural levee ridges have been built up along Bayou
Teche and other small streams and range in elevation from near sea level to 16 feet. The relief is
level to gently sloping and drainage is south to the Gulf of Mexico.
SOILS
On the approximately 7,100 acres of bald cypress-tupelo forests on Bayou Teche NWR, soils are
predominantly Maurepas muck and are always very wet with surface water standing most often
throughout the growing season. Drier site bottomland hardwood forests on the remaining 1,800
acres of forested habitat are predominantly Harahan and Allemands soils (drained), but also Aquents-dredged
(1-5 percent slopes and occasionally flooded), Schriever clay (frequently flooded), and
Schriever clay (0-1 percent slopes).
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
HABITAT
Bayou Teche NWR is surrounded by private lands, which represent a mix of forested, agricultural, and
industrial lands used for a variety of purposes. The most common uses include hunting leases on
forested lands, oil and gas production, sugarcane production, and carbon black plants. The six units of
the refuge are separated from each other (Figures 6, 7, 8, and 9). Some units are separated by
contiguous forested habitat under private ownership; however, other units are separated by agricultural
fields, light business and residential development, or linear anthropogenic features such as railroads and
highways. Most notably, the northernmost unit, the Centerville Unit, is separated from others by Bayou
Teche and a four-lane highway, Highway 90, with associated development. The units of the refuge are in
forest, except the waterways, which include canals, ditches, and man-made ponds. Much of the forest is
in some state of degradation. Approximately 7,100 acres of the total 9,028 acres are composed of bald
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 21
cypress-tupelo forests. The sites are always wet with surface water standing often throughout the
growing season. Drier-site bottomland hardwood forests make up the remaining roughly 1,800 acres of
forested habitat. Levees and rights-of-way for oil and gas pipelines, railroad, and electric power lines
cross the refuge and are maintained and cleared regularly by servitude holders.
The old spoil banks and other elevated lands on the refuge and their associated woodland habitats
represent the core habitat for Louisiana black bears. They supply important summer and fall food
resources as well as winter ground denning sites. The spoil banks are used as travel paths within the
swamp and as connecting links to ridges that extend into the marshes. The cypress-tupelo swamp
habitats provide spring and summer food resources, as well as winter denning habitat in the rare
remnant hollow cypress trees. The habitats of Bayou Teche NWR represent a complex of important
bear habitats that offer food, cover, travel corridors, and den sites.
WILDLIFE
While other public lands in Louisiana have Louisiana black bears, Bayou Teche NWR is the only
public land established specifically for the conservation of the Louisiana black bear with the bear as
the top priority management objective. Other priority species include migratory birds such as bald
eagles and other raptors, waterfowl, neotropical songbirds, and wading birds. The forested habitat
offers diverse habitat for neotropical birds for breeding as well as winter range. The coastal area
where Bayou Teche NWR is located is used by many migratory birds moving west around the Gulf or
staging prior to migrating across the northwest Gulf of Mexico. Waterfowl use in the area is primarily
by wood ducks, gadwalls, and green-winged teal. Wading birds are one of the most visible wildlife
components of the refuge including great blue herons, cattle egrets, little blue herons, great egrets,
snowy egrets, yellow-crowned night herons, and white ibis.
Other wildlife includes game species such as white-tailed deer, swamp rabbit, cottontail rabbit, grey
squirrels, fox squirrels, and furbearers. With so much wetland habitat, amphibians and reptiles such
as snakes, frogs, lizards, turtles, and alligator are abundant. Wildlife surveys other than cursory
waterfowl and wading bird rookeries have not yet been conducted on Bayou Teche NWR. Nuisance
wildlife species are not a recognizable problem at this time.
The natural bayous and numerous pipeline canals in Bayou Teche NWR contain a rich mixture of
game fish, including crappie, bass, bream, and catfish.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Around 500 A.D., the Chitimacha tribe began to settle on land around the bayous of what is now
southern Louisiana, migrating there from the areas surrounding modern Natchez, Mississippi. They
lived peacefully for hundreds of years until the early 1700s when marauding bands of heavily armed
Frenchmen, often allied with other native tribes, began slaving raids. The conflicts escalated into a
devastating 12-year war for the Chitimacha. By the time peace was reached in 1718, the population
had declined drastically through warfare and disease. For the next 100 years, the Chitimacha tribe
suffered under the increasing encroachment from not only French, but also Spanish and finally United
States settlers. In the mid-1800s, the Chitimacha sued the United States for confirmation of title to
their tribal land. A governmental decree established 1,062 acres as Chitimacha land. The acreage
has been reduced to 261.8 acres in subsequent years by continued litigation and sale of the land to
pay taxes. The governing Council is involved in ongoing negotiations with the United States to obtain
compensation for the land expropriations of the past. Today, about 350 tribal members live on the
Chitimacha Reservation, which lies in the northern part of the community of Charenton, in St. Mary
Parish; total tribe membership is approximately 950.
22 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Figure 6. Centerville unit of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 23
Figure 7. Franklin unit of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
24 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Figure 8. Garden City and Bayou Sale’ units of Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 25
Figure 9. North Bend West and North Bend East units of Bayou Teche National Wildlife
Refuge
26 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
In accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and the
Archaeological Resources Protection Act, the Service coordinated the Louisiana Black Bear
Habitat Protection Plan, which included the acquisition of Bayou Teche NWR, with the State of
Louisiana’s Historic Preservation Office. Any future plans or actions that might affect eligible
cultural resources will be carried out with appropriate identification, evaluation, and protection
measures as specified in the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and the
Archaeological Resources Protection Act.
SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
St. Mary Parish derives its name from a district set up by the Catholic Church. The 2005 population
of St. Mary Parish was 51,416, of which 82 percent was considered living in urban areas and 18
percent living in rural areas. The parish population has been declining for the past few decades as
people move to more urban settings outside of St. Mary Parish. The 2005 parish population shows
an 11 percent decline from the 1990 census. The 2002 per capita personal income was $24,059.
There are six communities within the parish; Franklin has been the parish seat since 1820. The
major industries are shipbuilding and repair. The dominant agricultural cash crop is sugarcane.
There are currently no interstate highways in the parish although it is planned to upgrade U.S.
Highway 90 to an interstate as a continuation of I-49 from Lafayette to New Orleans, Louisiana.
Early European settlers included French, Acadian, German, Danish, and Irish. By the 1830s, Bayou
Teche was like the main street of Acadiana (the Louisiana region settled by descendants from
Acadian exiles from Canada), with one sugarcane plantation after another along its banks. Franklin’s
culture and architecture is heavily influenced by an unusually large number of English that settled
after the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. With the development of the steamboat, Franklin became an
interior port for sugar. The sugar cane planters were among the south’s wealthiest agriculturists.
They built grand plantation homes and mansions. Most of these mansions are still standing and well
preserved. Franklin’s Historic District is listed in the National Register of Historic Places. Modern
recreational activities and tourism attractions within the parish offer fishing, camping, two historic
districts, plantation homes, swamp tours, and several museums depicting histories of cypress
logging, aviation, the Chitimacha Indian tribe, the oil and gas industry, and mardi gras in the area.
REFUGE ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT
LAND PROTECTION AND CONSERVATION
The major management activities on Bayou Teche NWR include monitoring the bear population in
and near the refuge, monitoring oil and gas activities, providing law enforcement, providing
environmental education and outreach, and a maintaining a wood duck nest box program.
When staff is available, the bears are monitored by establishing bait stations and motion detecting
cameras. Oil and gas activities are handled on an as needed basis by available staff. Law
enforcement patrols are performed on a part-time basis by officers stationed at Atchafalaya NWR and
Mandalay NWR. These officers are looking for illegal hunting and fishing, narcotics, illegal nighttime
use of the refuge, and littering violations. The Mandalay NWR staff, along with several employees
from the Southeast Louisiana NWR Complex headquarters, annually participates in the Bayou Teche
Bear Festival each April in Franklin, sponsoring the bear educational area.
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 27
VISITOR SERVICES
The refuge is open year-round to the public from sunrise to sunset, with seasonal restrictions in some
areas (Figure 10). The refuge can be accessed by vehicle, on foot, or by boat. An unmanned office
has been established in Franklin. It will provide information and brochures to the public, as well as a
safe location to store equipment utilized by the staff when assigned to maintain and patrol the Bayou
Teche NWR. Services offered to the public are wildlife observation, photography, boating, fishing,
and hunting on certain units for deer, small game, and waterfowl. An archery deer hunt, a gun deer
season with hunters determined by a lottery drawing, and a youth gun deer hunt are offered. Vehicle
access is available off the Alice-C Road into the Garden City unit via the Steven R and the Janet E
roads, which have been hard surfaced with limestone. The Centerville unit can be accessed by the
Stinson road, which has also been lime-stoned. The North Bend East unit is accessible by the
Adam’s Lane east, also hard surfaced. Other access roads are low-grade farm roads and can be
traveled by vehicle only during dry weather, or by foot and ATV in wet seasons. Refuge signs
indicate vehicle restrictions. Boats can be used on open waterways on the refuge; some interior
waterways are designated for non-motorized boats only.
Recreational fishing is permitted from legal sunrise until legal sunset; commercial fishing is not
allowed. All refuge hunters are required to possess a signed hunt permit that is printed on the hunt
brochure, which may be obtained by mail, is available at the refuge headquarters in Houma and the
Complex headquarters in Lacombe, or from the refuge website http://www.fws.gov/bayouteche/.
More specific regulations and prohibited activities are contained in the hunting and fishing brochure.
PERSONNEL, OPERATIONS, AND MAINTENANCE
Presently, Bayou Teche NWR does not have specific staff assigned to it, but is managed by the staff
of Mandalay NWR. Mandalay NWR has a 2-person staff consisting of a refuge manager and a
wildlife biologist who work out of the headquarters near Houma. They receive assistance in areas
such as law enforcement, maintenance, and visitor services, when needed, from other staff of the
Southeast Louisiana NWR Complex located in Lacombe. Bayou Teche NWR does not have a
separate refuge budget; funds and projects are administered by the Mandalay NWR budget and the
Southeast Louisiana NWR Complex.
28 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Figure 10. Public use areas and facilities on Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 29
III. Plan Development
PLANNING PROCESS AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
In accordance with Service guidelines and National Environmental Policy Act recommendations,
public involvement has been a crucial factor throughout the development of this CCP for Bayou
Teche NWR. This CCP has been written with input and assistance from interested citizens,
conservation organizations, and employees of local and state agencies. The participation of these
stakeholders and their ideas has been of great value in setting the management direction for the
refuge. The Service, as a whole, and the refuge staff, in particular, are very grateful to each one who
contributed time, expertise, and ideas to the planning process. The staff remains impressed by the
passion and commitment of so many individuals for the lands and waters administered by the refuge.
In November 2006, the planning process began with a biological review for Bayou Teche NWR to
assess the status of current biological information and programs on the refuge, identify information gaps
and needs, and gather input on potential management goals and objectives. Diverse teams consisting
of Service, university, state, and non-governmental personnel were invited to attend and provide input.
Issues discussed were marsh and forest management, aquatic systems, migratory birds, threatened
and endangered species including the Louisiana Black Bear, non-game birds, mammals, reptiles and
amphibians, insects, water quality, contaminants, urbanization, and land acquisition.
A visitor services review was conducted in November 2006 to provide guidance for managing the
education and visitor services program and resulted in the development of short- to long-term
recommendations to improve the quality of visitor experiences and understanding of the refuge. The
review team was composed of staff and other professionals from the Service’s regional office.
General recommendations were to develop a visitor services plan, strengthen the volunteer program,
and provide sufficient law enforcement.
Formal public involvement began with an open house held in April 2007 for the general public to give
suggestions and comments regarding the future of the refuge. Announcements giving the location,
date, and time for the scoping meeting appeared in local newspapers and were furnished to local
residents. The scoping meeting was held in Franklin, Louisiana. Approximately 11 people attended
the open discussion of the CCP process for the future management of Bayou Teche NWR. After
orienting attendees to the CCP process, they could move freely among the following discussion
areas: (1) Public programs and visitor facilities; (2) wildlife and habitat management; and (3) refuge
administration. Each area offered information and a chance to make written and oral statements
(Appendix D). Also, comment cards were available, which could be mailed to the refuge.
Approximately 17 comments and questions were recorded for the Bayou Teche NWR meeting. Input
obtained from the scoping meetings was used to develop the Draft CCP/EA. No major conflicts were
declared in the comments received from the public.
Initial planning began in May 2007 with a meeting of planning team members. Early in the process of
developing this CCP, the planning team identified a list of issues and concerns that were likely to be
associated with the conservation and management of Bayou Teche NWR based on the reviews and
public scoping. A mailing list of the public, landowners, state and tribal agencies, non-profit
organizations, local governments, and other interested stakeholders was initiated.
30 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
WILDERNESS REVIEW
Refuge planning policy requires a wilderness review as part of the comprehensive conservation
planning process. The lands within the boundary of Bayou Teche NWR were reviewed for their
suitability in meeting the criteria for wilderness, as defined by the Wilderness Act of 1964. The refuge
does not contain the required 5,000 contiguous road-less acres. Bayou Teche NWR comprises
9,028 acres which is separated into 6 individual non-contiguous management units with none being
over 5,000 acres. Further, the proximity of the city of Franklin, urban sprawl, and U.S. Highway 90
detracts from any semblance of a wilderness setting. Therefore, the suitability of refuge lands on
Bayou Teche NWR for wilderness designation is not further analyzed in this CCP.
SUMMARY OF ISSUES, CONCERNS, AND OPPORTUNITIES
The planning team identified a number of issues, concerns, and opportunities related to fish and
wildlife protection, habitat restoration, recreation, and management of threatened and endangered
species. Additionally, the planning team considered federal and state mandates, as well as
applicable local ordinances, regulations, and plans. The team also directed the process of obtaining
public input through the public scoping meeting, written comments, and personal contacts. All public
and advisory team comments were considered. The team considered all issues that were raised
throughout the planning process, and has developed a plan that attempts to balance the competing
opinions regarding important issues. The team identified those issues that, in the team’s best
professional judgment, are most significant to the refuge. A summary of the significant issues follows.
FISH AND WILDLIFE POPULATION MANAGEMENT
As previously stated, Bayou Teche NWR was established under the authority of the Endangered
Species Act, with a primary mission of conservation of habitat for the threatened Louisiana black
bear. The refuge was established in 2001 and presently has no staff located in close proximity;
therefore, little active management has occurred to date. As a result of the overall low population
size and isolation, bears at Bayou Teche NWR and surrounding areas are inherently vulnerable to
extinction. Monitoring of the bear population is accomplished with assistance from student interns
when funding is available.
HABITAT MANAGEMENT
Habitat degradation and loss is an issue in most of southern Louisiana, but the Bayou Teche NWR
area seems unique in that it represents coastal forests isolated from sediment loading but with
enough freshwater input to cause persistent flooding. The refuge represents a non-tidal, degraded
site with degradation from a combination of persistent flooding from ring levees and deepwater
flooding from subsidence. Flood depths have become greater than those required for successful
regeneration of tree species in many historic swamp forests throughout coastal Louisiana. The
primary issue on the refuge is retention, maintenance, and improvement of forested habitat, with
particular emphasis on bottomland hardwood forests to benefit and support the Louisiana black bear
and other natural wildlife communities.
Native cane is another limited habitat resource on the refuge. Cane stands or brakes are valuable to
wildlife by providing dense cover without accompanying impenetrable herbaceous growth and leaf
litter within the stands. Cane brakes supply habitat to specialty species such as American woodcock,
Swainson’s warbler, and hooded warbler. The native cane found on Bayou Teche NWR is a valued
resource for the Chitamacha Tribe, which historically occupied the area and still uses cane in the
creation of traditional baskets. The tribe collected cane on the refuge lands previous to acquisition by
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 31
the Service and has expressed interest in opportunities to do so in the future, seeing the refuge as a
protected reservoir for this plant species of limited distribution.
The Louisiana Natural Heritage Program of the LDWF tracks native rare plants. Four rare plants
have been documented on the refuge - Willdenow’s fern, Louisiana wood fern, millet beak sedge, and
cypress knee sedge. More complete documentation of the plant diversity of the refuge could be
accomplished with a baseline floristic survey.
RESOURCE PROTECTION
Resource protection from the impacts of mineral resource exploration and production while providing
access to oil and gas companies is an important issue on Bayou Teche NWR. Law enforcement
issues include illegal hunting and fishing, illegal trespass with vehicles, littering, narcotics use, and
nighttime use of the refuge. The fragmented nature of the refuge reduces its effectiveness in
providing high-quality habitat for the Louisiana black bear and other species associated with
bottomland hardwood forests. Any future opportunities to connect the separate units of the refuge
will create a more contiguous protected area for the bears. Other benefits, such as increasing high-quality
protected habitat, creating safe access corridors for bears to cross Highway 90, and protecting
valuable bottomland hardwood forests, can be realized with future land acquisition.
VISITOR SERVICES
Recreational opportunities such as boating, fishing, wildlife observation, and hunting of white-tailed
deer, small animals, and waterfowl are available to the public on Bayou Teche NWR. The units of the
refuge are accessible by car, truck, foot, ATV, or boat, dependent on the area and the time of year.
Most of the current public use on the refuge is hunting and fishing. Issues and concerns include
improving access roads, maintaining and improving signage, and developing future facilities and
services on this refuge.
REFUGE ADMINISTRATION
Presently, two positions cover the administration of Mandalay and Bayou Teche NWRs from the
headquarters in Houma, Louisiana. Limited support is available from the staff of Southeast Louisiana
NWR Complex in Lacombe, a drive of several hours from Mandalay and Bayou Teche NWRs.
Funding is administered through the Southeast Louisiana NWR Complex.
At this time, Bayou Teche NWR is not staffed and is considered a satellite of Mandalay NWR.
32 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 33
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 Improvement Act is for the Service to maintain the ecological health, diversity,
and integrity of refuges. Public uses are allowed if they are appropriate and compatible with wildlife
and habitat conservation. The Service has identified six priority wildlife-dependent public uses.
These uses are hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental
education and interpretation and are emphasized in this CCP.
Described below is the CCP for managing the refuge over the next 15 years. This management
direction contains the goals, objectives, and strategies that will be used to achieve the refuge vision.
Three alternatives for managing the refuge were considered:
A – No-Action (Current Management)
B – Resource-Focused Management (Preferred Alternative)
C – User-Focused Management
All of the alternatives were described in the Alternatives section of the Environmental Assessment,
which was section B of the Draft CCP. Based on the mission of the Refuge System, the purposes for
which Bayou Teche NWR was established, and the focus of the LMRE priorities, the Service selected
Alternative B as the preferred management direction.
Implementing Alternative B will result in a diversity of habitats for a variety of fish and wildlife species.
It will enhance resident wildlife populations, restore wetlands, and provide opportunities for a variety
of compatible wildlife-dependent recreation, education, and interpretive activities.
VISION
Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge is the only national wildlife refuge established primarily for the
threatened Louisiana black bear. The refuge plays an integral role in its life cycle. Prime black bear
habitat will be managed to provide quality foraging and denning environment. Wildlife management
strategies will include conservation of resident species and migratory birds. The refuge will play a
critical role in coastal restoration efforts by cooperating with research agencies to aid in the
understanding of coastal loss issues in south Louisiana. Visitors to the refuge will enjoy a quality
outdoor experience centered on the traditional uses of hunting and fishing, while cultivating a
conservation ethic that promotes stewardship of this important wildlife habitat.
GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND STRATEGIES
The goals, objectives, and strategies presented are the Service’s response to the issues, concerns,
and needs expressed by the planning team, the refuge staff, partners, and the public. Chapter V,
Plan Implementation, identifies the projects associated with the various strategies.
34 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
These goals, objectives, and strategies reflect the Service’s commitment to achieve the mandates of
the Improvement Act, the mission of the Refuge System, and the purposes and vision of Bayou
Teche NWR. With adequate staffing and funding, we intend to accomplish these goals, objectives,
and strategies within the next 15 years.
GOAL 1. Identify, conserve, manage, and restore populations of native fish and wildlife species
representative of the Lower Atchafalaya Basin, with emphasis on Louisiana black bears, migratory
birds, and other threatened and endangered species.
Background: The diversity and quality of habitats on Bayou Teche NWR provide areas for feeding,
roosting, nesting, and staging for numerous species. The refuge attracts upwards of 15 species of
migratory waterfowl, including 3 species of resident waterfowl, shorebirds, wading birds, neotropical
migratory songbirds, raptors, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, and numerous fish species. Bald
eagles use refuge habitats for foraging.
Black bears require food, water, escape cover, den sites, and dispersal areas. Quality black bear
habitat consists of diverse forests with stable and varied food supplies, suitable denning sites, and
escape cover with minimal human contact (in Louisiana primarily bottomland hardwoods). The
Louisiana black bear uses a variety of habitat types within the refuge.
Freshwater species are supported with the fishery varying with the seasons and accompanying shifts
in salinity. The refuge wetlands are important spawning, nursery, and feeding grounds for many
aquatic species, including crustaceans and fish species. On occasion, when salinities increase,
saltwater species may use the refuge.
Objective 1.1: Manage and protect threatened and endangered species, primarily Louisiana black
bears, through implementation of recovery plans.
Discussion: Bayou Teche NWR, which was created in 2001 to conserve the Louisiana black bear, is
located centrally within the area occupied by the coastal black bear population. The refuge serves an
important role in the lifecycle of numerous bears located in the coastal sub-population.
The refuge is also home to four state-listed plant species. The following plants have been identified
within the refuge boundary: Carex decomposita, Dryopteris ludoviciana, Rhynchospora miliacea, and
Thelypteris interrupta.
Strategies:
• Coordinate with the Service’s Ecological Services office, LDWF, universities, and Black
Bear Conservation Committee in recovery efforts of the coastal population of the
Louisiana black bear.
• Respond to nuisance bear calls when needed; assist adjacent landowners with bear
issues.
• Coordinate with the Service’s Ecological Services office, LDWF, and universities to index
threatened and endangered plant species on the refuge and monitor and document
locations with field technicians.
• Reference the Louisiana Black Bear Management Plan for management direction.
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 35
Objective 1.2: Monitor species of concern, targeted species, and species of federal responsibility in
order to assess management goals.
Discussion: Off-refuge conditions that influence bear survivorship, such as public intolerance for
black bears, conditions which promote nuisance bear behavior, and habitat loss, degradation and/or
fragmentation, directly impact both the subpopulation as a whole and the individuals that use the
refuge. It is important for refuge staff, where feasible, to continue monitoring bear use on the refuge
via bait stations and trail cameras to document the importance of the refuge habitat to this isolated
population. Monitoring will also aid in strategies and future management practices of refuge habitat.
Swine are commonly introduced into the wild in Louisiana, creating populations of feral hogs. These
hogs are also commonly live-captured and moved from occupied to unoccupied areas. Introductions
are conducted by hunters acting to create hunting opportunities by introducing feral animals. Feral
hogs are prolific, with reproductive rates four times that of native ungulate species. Feral hogs
jeopardize the refuge mission by damaging habitat and impacting native plant and animal species.
They have been documented to cause soil erosion, leaching of minerals and nutrients, habitat
destruction, native plant species destruction, exotic plant species invasion, and changes in vegetative
succession rates. Feral hogs also impact native wildlife through direct competition for food and
predation of native amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and ground-nesting birds.
American alligators are opportunistic carnivores and a top predator on the refuge. The refuge does
not currently participate in the alligator harvest season. In the future, if populations are deemed
sustainable, an alligator harvest program may be considered.
Nutria are invasive exotic species from South America that destroy healthy marsh habitats and further
increase marsh deterioration and coastal erosion by foraging on marsh vegetation. In some
instances, these marsh habitats are so damaged that it may take years for the vegetation to return.
This rebound usually occurs only if the nutria population is reduced well below carrying capacity of
these fragile marsh habitats. In the future, it may be feasible to become a participant in the coast-wide
nutria control program.
Forests in the vicinity of St. Mary Parish, including that of the refuge, play an important role in bird
migration by virtue of their geographic position along important migration pathways. Bayou Teche
NWR lies near the downstream terminus of the Atchafalaya Basin, a nearly 600,000-acre forested
wetland surrounding the Atchafalaya River. As such, it serves as an important link for trans-Gulf
migratory birds between that large expanse of forested habitat and their wintering areas.
Strategies:
• Continue bear bait stations on refuge (concentrate on using natural baits).
• Coordinate and cooperate with university research on the Louisiana black bear.
• Continue survival of the coastal population of the Louisiana black bear.
• Monitor use of refuge with trail cameras.
• Continue use of a summer student biological technician to help collect data.
• Continue feral hog control (refer to Hunt Plan).
• Monitor alligator and nutria population via spotlight surveys to determine need for
management actions.
• Coordinate with the Service’s Ecological Services office, LDWF, fisheries, local birding
groups, and universities to assess use of refuge by neotropical migratory birds.
36 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Objective 1.3: Monitor resident and other species utilizing habitat on the refuge.
Discussion: The refuge currently supports a population of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus)
that appears to be of relatively low density. The habitat on the refuge is not consistent with quality
deer habitat due mostly to low elevations and year-round inundation. There are areas on the refuge
of higher elevations that include forested habitat and provide better management opportunities for
game animals. These areas occur mostly in the bottomland hardwood forest habitats on the refuge.
These forested areas include hard-mast bearing trees (e.g., oaks) and other woody species beneficial
to deer and other small mammals. Deer use the marsh and swamp areas for foraging on herbaceous
vegetation, but management options for those habitats are limited.
Squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis) and rabbits (Sylvilagus aquaticus) are the two primary small game
animals on the refuge. The above-mentioned forest management practices would improve the
squirrel habitat. Squirrels are cavity nesters and any forest management plan developed for the
refuge should contain some protection of cavity trees for squirrel den sites in addition to promoting
hard-mast producing trees.
The rabbit population on the refuge is subject to seasonal fluctuations due to the hydrology of the
area. Natural openings within the bottomland hardwood forests on the refuge provide excellent
foraging habitat for rabbits. A large portion of the refuge is flooded year-round and the remaining
areas flood occasionally either from high water levels in the Atchafalaya River or from strong
southerly winds pushing water up from the Gulf of Mexico. These unpredictable high water events
can dramatically impact the rabbit population, particularly when they occur during the spring when the
rabbits are nesting. Rabbit populations tend to recover quickly without any additional management.
Coastal Louisiana traditionally supports a significant population of furbearers including raccoon, otter,
muskrat, mink and bobcat. Since nutria have become established in the region, native aquatic
furbearer populations have declined. Controlling the nutria population is by far the most proactive
management strategy that would benefit the aquatic furbearers on the refuge.
Strategies:
• Monitor forage availability for white-tailed deer, herd density (browse surveys), and harvest.
• Monitor use of forested areas by squirrels.
• Monitor use of marsh and forested wetlands by rabbits.
• Monitor densities of other fur-bearer species using habitat on the refuge.
Objective 1.4: Monitor fish and shellfish habitat on the refuge.
Discussion: The marshes, swamps, and waterways of the Bayou Teche–St. Mary Parish area are on
the lower end of the Atchafalaya Basin and serve as nursery grounds for many fish and shellfish
found in the Gulf of Mexico. Freshwater sport fishing for largemouth bass, crappie, sunfish, and
catfish is popular and commercial fisherman catch catfish and gar within the surrounding vicinity of
the refuge. Salinity can rise in the waters of Bayou Teche NWR following significant weather
patterns. Most recently (2005), Hurricane Rita raised marsh salinities to 8-10ppm and increased
oxygen demand from storm debris, causing significant fish kills in the area.
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 37
Strategies:
• Monitor fish and shellfish species present on refuge via coordination with LDWF, Inland and
Marine Fish divisions, and report all fish kills
• Continue correspondence with local fishermen and sportsmen to assess species in daily catch
GOAL 2. To restore, improve, and maintain a mosaic of forested and wetland habitats native to the
Lower Atchafalaya Basin in order to ensure healthy and viable plant and animal communities, with an
emphasis on threatened and endangered species.
Background: The key purpose of the refuge is to provide habitat for a natural diversity of wildlife with
emphasis on threatened and endangered species, primarily the Louisiana black bear, wintering and
nesting habitat for migratory and resident waterfowl, non-game migratory birds, and resident birds
and plants. The refuge contains approximately 7,500 acres of cypress/tupelo, scrub/shrub, and
floating marsh and 1,500 acres of bottomland hardwood forests.
The Bayou Teche NWR is within both the Teche/Vermillion and Atchafalaya Basins. Clay swamps
are generally lower in elevation than surrounding land and the high clay content of the soil results in
water-saturated conditions and surface flooding for significant periods during most years. Soil types
are predominantly Maurepas muck (frequently flooded), Barbary muck (frequently flooded), and
Harahan and Allemands soils (drained) (NRCS 2007). Drainage is south to the Gulf of Mexico.
The primarily bottomland hardwood - wetland forested habitat functions more similarly in some
respects to habitats of the Mississippi Alluvial Valley (MAV). Yet, this area of south Louisiana is faced
with problems not occurring northwards in the MAV. Coastal erosion and saltwater intrusion have
caused substantial loss of coastal habitat throughout south Louisiana. The cypress/tupelo swamp
and marsh areas on the refuge have suffered tremendous degradation due to saltwater intrusion and
changes in hydrology. Water levels in these areas have risen over the years due to subsidence and
marsh degradation.
Objective 2.1: Manage and maintain fresh marsh and other aquatic habitats for refuge resources.
Discussion: The refuge features freshwater marshes and waterways with associated spoil banks and
natural ridges. It contains freshwater marshes that are diverse and nutrient rich habitats which play a
vital role in the hydrology of this region and are home to an abundance of fish and wildlife species.
The marsh soils are primarily organic and mucky, and are affected by some sediment recharge from
the lower Atchafalaya River. Drainage is south to the Gulf of Mexico.
Strategies:
• Control invasive aquatic plant species in canals and waterways.
• Plan mitigation projects to revive flotant marsh areas.
• Maintain fish, amphibian, and reptile populations.
• Develop a habitat management plan by 2012.
�� Monitor effects of public use on habitat and refuge resources.
Objective 2.2: Manage, maintain, and enhance when possible bottomland hardwood and
cypress/tupelo swamp habitats and associated ridges and spoil banks for refuge resources.
38 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Discussion: The cypress/tupelo swamp areas on the refuge provide excellent rookery habitat for
wading birds and play an important role in the hydrology of the refuge. The swamp soils are primarily
organic and mucky, and are affected by some sediment recharge from the lower Atchafalaya River.
Drainage is south to the Gulf of Mexico.
Strategies:
• Stabilize shorelines via cooperation with research projects, state and federal agencies, and
coastal restoration grants.
• Plant hardwood species when opportunity arises.
• Develop a habitat management plan by 2012.
Objective 2.3: Support partnerships to protect natural habitats of the Teche/Vermillion and
Atchafalaya Basins.
Discussion: Bayou Teche NWR is within both the Teche/Vermillion and Atchafalaya Basins. These
wetlands are among the most productive natural ecosystems in the world. The area provides habitat
for outstanding wildlife resources, including stop-over habitat for millions of neartic-neotropical
migratory landbirds, wintering habitat for waterfowl, aquatic conditions for fisheries, and wetland
forests for mammals such as the Louisiana black bear.
These forested wetlands were historically connected to the Mississippi River and its tributaries
through seasonal inputs of nutrient- and sediment-laden floodwaters. In their natural condition, they
provide ecosystem benefits, including food and habitat for fish and wildlife, flood protection, erosion
control, and ground water exchange. However, extensive anthropogenic modifications have affected
the stability of the coastal Louisiana forests by reducing their capacity to offset subsidence. Impacts
include levee construction along both the Atchafalaya and Mississippi Rivers to prevent overbank
flooding, reduction of water flow to swamps, oil and gas mining, and canal dredging. Collectively,
these impacts influence the persistence of coastal wetland forests such that approximately 230,000
additional acres of swamp forest are expected to be degraded or killed in Louisiana by the year 2050.
Strategies:
• Continue cooperation with USGS on cypress/tupelo swamp salt tolerance study on the refuge.
• Continue to cooperate with LDNR’s Coast-wide Reference Monitoring System (CRMS)
project.
• Promote future projects with state and federal agencies, universities, and non-governmental
organizations to improve habitat, fund coastal erosion projects, and acquire additional refuge
lands as funding and willing sellers are available.
Goal 3. Provide opportunities for wildlife-dependent recreation and environmental education and
interpretation in accordance with the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997.
Background: Bayou Teche NWR is a relatively young refuge (established 2001). Management
efforts during the first 6 years have been focused on the following priorities: (1) Maintenance of
Louisiana black bear habitat; (2) exotic/invasive plant and animal control; and (3) public use and
wildlife-dependent recreation. The refuge was opened to public use in 2002, and currently hosts
hunting, fishing, and wildlife observation activities. Public hunting opportunities include archery deer,
lottery gun deer, youth gun deer, small game (e.g., squirrel and rabbit), and waterfowl. Annual
harvest averages 2.2, 50, and 13.2 for deer, small game, and waterfowl, respectively.
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 39
Fishing is the most common form of public use on the refuge. Fishing for largemouth bass, bream, and
catfish is excellent and popular with local fishermen. Sport fishing in this region is considered to be a
traditional form of wildlife-dependent recreation. The Garden City Unit of the refuge, historically known
as Quintana, is well known for excellent fishing opportunities. Refuge regulations against unsupervised
lines and nets and night activities have restricted pre-establishment activities of frogging and use of
trotline, jug lines and nets, with current fishing restricted to recreational hook and line fishing from both
boats and banks.
Currently, Bayou Teche NWR has no staff; the refuge is administered through Mandalay NWR, which
is located east near Houma, Louisiana.
Objective 3.1: Develop and implement a Visitor Services Management Plan.
Discussion: A visitor services plan is critical to the future direction of the refuge’s visitor services
program. This plan will communicate the goals, objectives, and strategies for the visitor services
program and will outline future funding and staffing needs. The plan will also demonstrate how the
visitor services program is integrated with the natural and cultural resource management program
and how it supports visitor understanding and appreciation of the natural and cultural resource
management program.
A substantial portion of Bayou Teche NWR is accessible by boat only; yet there are presently a few
walking trails on the refuge in the bottomland hardwood forests and adjacent levee systems. The
refuge staff, in coordination with the Louisiana trails grant program, St. Mary Parish, the city of
Franklin, and the local Cajun Coast Tourism bureau, has plans to develop a nature trail boardwalk in
the Garden City Unit in the near future. The funding for this project has been secured. It will provide
access to a portion of the refuge for wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental
education and interpretation. A visitor contact station is located within the newly located
headquarters building. The majority of visitors are recreational fishermen or hunters; but the future
plans for additional access points within the refuge should increase visits for wildlife observation and
photography.
Strategy:
• Develop a Visitor Services Management Plan by 2015.
Objective 3.2: Provide opportunities for hunting and fishing on the refuge in a manner which
minimizes conflicts between consumptive and non-consumptive user groups.
Discussion: Hunting and fishing have been identified as priority public uses of the Refuge System.
Where appropriate and compatible, the best hunting and fishing opportunities possible will be made
available to the public. Historically, this area of south Louisiana is well known for its hunting, fishing,
and trapping traditions. These wildlife-dependent practices are ingrained in the culture of south
Louisiana. The continuation of these hunting and fishing activities on the refuge is very important to
the local community, as Bayou Teche NWR is one of the few areas accessible to the public. The
majority of land surrounding the refuge is owned by large corporations or families and lease prices for
these properties are increasing year-by-year. The refuge supplies the local citizens with an area to
hunt and fish, as long as they abide by the rules and regulations of the refuge. Through harvest of
these natural renewable resources, the refuge staff is able to manage and maintain wildlife
populations at carrying capacity and maintain the integrity of the habitat.
40 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Strategies:
• Evaluate user groups on a yearly basis.
• Maintain harvest records and make evaluations of harvest on a yearly basis.
• Manage hunting and fishing program to achieve population management and wildlife habitat
objectives.
• Continue to monitor areas closed to hunting for bear denning.
• Investigate practicality and usefulness of foraging habitat along rights-of-way for Louisiana
black bear and white-tailed deer.
• Maintain public access points (rights-of-way roads) to bottomland hardwood forest areas.
Objective 3.3: Provide opportunities for wildlife observation and photography on the refuge.
Discussion: Wildlife observation and wildlife photography are two closely related priority wildlife-dependent
recreational uses of the Refuge System. Programs and facilities which enable visitors to
view and photograph wildlife and their habitats are an essential part of most national wildlife refuges.
The Bayou Teche NWR nature trail will provide the public with easy access to the refuge for wildlife
observation and photography purposes, especially tourists visiting St. Mary Parish, yet some of the
most beautiful areas of the refuge are accessed by boat. Local swamp tours provide visitors insight
into the expansive fresh marshes and cypress/tupelo swamps encompassed in the refuge. Because
of the tremendous volumes of water in St. Mary Parish, many residents have a boat or access to a
vessel. Many of our hunters and fishermen also enjoy wildlife observation while utilizing the refuge.
We have designated paddling/non-motorized boat trails in the Franklin Unit. This unit is closed to
hunting presently and provides visitors with excellent opportunities to view wildlife.
Strategies:
• Maintain and improve the walking trails for birding and interpretation.
• Maintain habitat on refuge and maintain access points for watercraft where applicable.
• Create boardwalks and observation platforms through grants and additional funding sources.
• Maintain paddling trails and signage.
Objective 3.4: Increase public outreach to emphasize resource management practices.
Discussion: There is no staff currently at Bayou Teche NWR. The refuge is administered from
Mandalay NWR. The staff at Mandalay NWR presently participates in 6-8 events each year. These
events include local festivals and community group meetings, and the Wildthings Festival in
Lacombe, Louisiana. The Bayou Teche Bear Festival is held annually in Franklin, Louisiana. The
Mandalay staff, with help from Southeast Louisiana NWR Complex staff, coordinates the “bear-y-patch”
education area for the festival every year. Currently, Bayou Teche NWR has no visitor
services staff. Plans to participate in any additional activities with current staff are not feasible.
Strategy:
• Continue programs currently with minimal staffing; if staffing increases, provide more outreach
services.
Objective 3.5: Provide interpretation that promotes understanding, appreciation, and stewardship of
refuge resources.
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 41
Strategy:
• Develop interpretive panels for the office and the nature trail.
Objective 3.6: Provide environmental education programs that promote understanding, appreciation,
and stewardship of refuge resources.
Discussion: Emphasis will be placed on the unique habitats within the refuge—the wetland forests
and freshwater marshes. Programs and opportunities will be aimed to enhance public awareness of
the Louisiana black bear, coastal erosion issues, efforts being made to restore wetland areas, and to
increase environmental stewardship. The staff usually hosts several visits a year from local
community groups. The staff usually makes time in their schedule to accommodate these activities.
Current staffing at the refuge severely limits the opportunities to provide environmental services.
Currently the refuge has no staff and is administered from Mandalay NWR.
Strategy:
• Develop environmental education program on refuge and in local schools if staffing increases.
Objective 3.7: Manage the volunteer program to enhance all aspects of refuge management.
Discussion: The refuge has a few volunteers and a friends group to assist with mostly maintenance
projects. The friends group is still in the infancy stage, yet is growing each year. An outreach staff
member from the Southeast Louisiana NWR Complex assists staff with friends group relations. Staff
will continue to coordinate with these volunteers to accomplish projects on the refuge when funding
for such projects becomes available.
Strategies:
• Maintain relationship with local volunteers.
• Maintain relationship with Friends of Bayou Teche NWR.
GOAL 4. Protect the natural and cultural resources of the refuge to ensure their integrity and to fulfill
the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System.
Background: Inherent in ensuring that future generations can enjoy the refuge is protection of its
resources. Cultural resources include archaeological resources, historic and architectural properties,
and areas or sites of tradition or religious significance to Native Americans (614 FW 1, Policy,
Responsibilities, and Definitions). No comprehensive survey of refuge cultural resources has been
completed, but local archaeologists and refuge staff have knowledge of several Native American
middens (refuse piles) located along drainages off refuge. Enforcement of laws pertaining to wildlife
and other natural resources is fundamental and necessary, especially in areas of high public use.
Safety and protection of the people using the refuge is a priority. Also considered in this goal is
protection of the resources by acquisition of land included in the acquisition boundary, as recognized
in the initiating process of refuge establishment
Objective 4.1: Protect known archaeological and historical sites on the refuge from illegal take or
damage in compliance with the Archaeological Resources Protections Act, the Native American
Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act.
42 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Discussion: Although no thorough survey of the entire refuge has been accomplished, middens are
known to exist on banks of bayous in the vicinity of the refuge. These are obviously places where
nomadic groups camped as evidenced by mounds of clam shells left in the refuse piles. The slightly
higher elevation of the middens often create habitat for live oak trees.
Strategies:
• Maintain lands intact by preventing destruction or disturbance of historical ridge sites within
the refuge.
• Contact local and national archaeological groups and cultural groups to determine if any
management activities may impact their archaeological sites, including the Chitimacha Tribe.
Objective 4.2: Maintain marked refuge boundary and other identifying/directional signs
Discussion: Bayou Teche NWR is a relatively new within the Refuge System, and is still being
surveyed to determine refuge boundaries. The majority of the boundary is posted, yet some of these
areas are affected by high water moving aquatic vegetation over the boundary posts, and in some
cases the posts are lost in the marsh. Some areas of the refuge are largely inaccessible by boat or
vehicle. Some of these areas are currently being surveyed by foot. Because of frequent storm
damage and vandalism, sign replacement is necessary. Therefore, refuge boundary signing is of
high priority. Directional and informational signs should be written in clear, concise language and
placed in appropriate locations.
Strategies:
• Maintain boundary signs and refuge entrance signs.
• Within 10 years of date of this CCP, evaluate all refuge signage and replace/add signs as
needed.
Objective 4.3: Provide for visitor safety, protect resources, and ensure the public’s compliance with
refuge regulations.
Discussion: Public uses are limited to those that are compatible with refuge purposes, realizing that
wildlife needs and requirements come first. Therefore, protection of wildlife resources and laws
pertaining to wildlife are a priority of refuge law enforcement. Because of moderate visitor use, law
enforcement personnel also deal with issues such as hunter safety, illegal drugs, vandalism, thefts,
littering, and safety of visitors. Visitors should be able to enjoy a pleasurable experience with
adequate and safe access.
Strategies:
• Hire a full-time law enforcement officer.
• Retain part-time duty officer currently on staff.
• Work cooperatively with local, state, and other federal law enforcement agencies to enhance
resource protection.
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 43
Objective 4.4: Acquire those lands identified in the approved acquisition boundary.
Discussion: The 2001 establishing documents of Bayou Teche NWR contain an approved acquisition
boundary. Because of the severity and importance of Louisiana black bear habitat, coastal erosion,
and importance of forested wetlands and freshwater marsh habitat in south Louisiana, lands should
be acquired by the Service that fall within the Bayou Teche NWR acquisition boundary.
Strategy:
• When funding becomes available, purchase lands within the acquisition boundary.
Objective 4.5: Maintain more than $3,000,000 worth of capitalized equipment for the Southeast
Louisiana NWR Complex of eight refuges to be used in all aspects of refuge administration, including
habitat, wildlife, public use, and protection projects.
Discussion: The majority of equipment used by the Bayou Teche NWR staff is excess equipment
acquired from other refuges and government agencies. Since Bayou Teche NWR is one of a
complex of eight refuges, equipment is shared among the refuges instead of being assigned solely to
one refuge. The equipment referred to here is not separate from the other refuges in the Complex.
Project efficiency depends largely on age, condition, and maintenance of the equipment needed to
get work projects accomplished.
Strategies:
• Maintain programs and equipment by use of staff from other refuges in the Complex.
• Maintain a current database containing all capitalized equipment and a maintenance
schedule.
• Replace or purchase additional equipment as needed in order to have well-maintained and
working equipment for all force account work planned
44 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 45
V. Plan Implementation
INTRODUCTION
Refuge lands are managed as defined under the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act
of 1997. Congress has distinguished a clear legislative mission of wildlife conservation for all national
wildlife refuges. National wildlife refuges, unlike other public lands, are dedicated to the conservation
of the Nation’s fish and wildlife resources and wildlife-dependent recreational uses. Priority projects
emphasize the protection and enhancement of fish and wildlife species first and foremost, but
considerable emphasis is placed on balancing the needs and demands for wildlife-dependent
recreation and environmental education.
To accomplish the purpose, vision, goals, and objectives contained in this CCP for Bayou Teche
NWR, this section identifies projects, funding and personnel needs, volunteers, partnership
opportunities, step-down management plans, a monitoring and adaptive management plan, and plan
review and revision.
This CCP focuses on the importance of funding the operations and maintenance needs of the refuge
to ensure the staff can achieve the goals and objectives identified, which are crucial to fulfill the
purpose for which the refuge was established. The refuge’s role in protecting and providing habitat
for waterfowl and endangered species, such as the Louisiana black bear, is important. Proposed
priority public use programs will establish and expand opportunities for wildlife-dependent recreation,
but not without specialized staff and sufficient funding for operations and maintenance.
The following projects reflect basic needs of the refuge as identified during the development of this CCP:
PROPOSED PROJECTS
Listed below are the proposed project summaries and their associated costs for fish and wildlife
population management, habitat management, resource protection, visitor services, and refuge
administration over the next 15 years. This proposed project list reflects the priority needs identified
by the public, planning team, and refuge staff based upon available information. These projects were
generated for the purpose of achieving the refuge’s objectives and strategies. The primary linkages
of these projects to those planning elements are identified in each summary.
FISH AND WILDLIFE POPULATION MANAGEMENT
The diversity and quality of habitats on Bayou Teche NWR provide areas for feeding, roosting,
nesting, and staging for numerous species. The refuge attracts upwards of 15 species of migratory
waterfowl, including 3 species of resident waterfowl, shorebirds, wading birds, neotropical migratory
songbirds, raptors, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, and numerous fisheries species. Bald eagles
use refuge habitats for foraging.
Black bears require food, water, escape cover, den sites, and dispersal areas. Quality black bear
habitat consists of diverse forests with stable and varied food supplies, suitable denning sites, and
escape cover with minimal human contact (in Louisiana primarily bottomland hardwoods). Louisiana
black bears use a variety of habitat types within the refuge.
46 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Freshwater species are supported with the fishery varying with the seasons and accompanying shifts
in salinity. The refuge wetlands are important spawning, nursery, and feeding grounds for many
aquatic species, including crustaceans and fish species. On occasion, when salinities increase,
saltwater species may use the refuge.
Project 1 – Monitor species of concern, targeted species, and species of federal responsibility, with
emphasis on threatened Louisiana black bears.
National wildlife refuges are mandated to manage for threatened and endangered species if they
occur on a refuge. However, refuges are also responsible for management of all native species if the
action does not negatively impact the threatened or endangered species. Refuge management is
geared toward managing the ecosystem as a whole.
• An overall faunal species list will be compiled from surveys conducted by the Service and
other researchers. This list will be made available to the public through the refuge website.
Within the list, we will prioritize species based on regional and state lists of species of
concern, at risk/target species identified by Partners in Flight, and other plans.
• Develop a wildlife inventory plan based on species selected as priority species.
• Annual waterfowl surveys will be conducted from October to February.
• Secretive marsh birds will be surveyed and monitored as species of concern. Adaptive refuge
management actions will reflect data collected.
• Louisiana black bear monitoring on refuge properties will be a priority.
• Utilize the Louisiana Black Bear Management Plan for management direction.
• If opportunities are presented, trapping efforts will be conducted to radio collar females using
refuge properties and corridors to attain movement and habitat usage.
• Inventory habitat usage of bears on refuge via bait stations and trail cameras.
• Inventory threatened and endangered plant species on refuge.
One biologist and one biological technician will be required to perform duties aforementioned.
Project 2 – Monitor waterfowl use on refuge.
Hunting is offered on most of the refuge 7 days a week until noon during the state waterfowl season.
A portion of the refuge area remains closed to waterfowl hunting. This provides “safe” habitat for
resting and feeding for migratory waterfowl without hunting pressure. Refuge staff will monitor
migrating and wintering waterfowl use.
• Conduct annual waterfowl aerial surveys consisting of four to six surveys contingent on
weather conditions. Initial survey will be performed before state waterfowl hunting season
begins and last survey will be conducted after state waterfowl hunting season ends.
• Coordinate with LDWF on migration numbers on refuge.
Two Service biologists will be required to conduct surveys on the refuge. The annual cost will be $2,000.
Project 3 – Provide brood habitat and nest sites for wood ducks to support 200 hatching wood ducks
each year.
The wood duck population increase is a success story resulting from the introduction of the wood
duck box nest program. They are a common resident in fresh water swamps, sloughs, and
marshes. Wood ducks seek tree cavities within one mile of water. However, brood success is
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 47
significantly higher when nests are next to water. Forested wetlands, scrub/shrub areas, and tree
lined bayous, canals, and sloughs are the preferred habitats of nesting wood ducks.
• The refuge will install and annually maintain 30 wood duck boxes in hardwood sloughs,
swamps, and marsh edges throughout the refuge.
Wood duck nesting cavities and habitat are abundant on the refuge and within the surrounding area.
As a result, nest box usage has been minimal in past years. Maintenance costs of $5,000 are
needed annually to maintain this program.
HABITAT MANAGEMENT
The key purpose of the refuge is to provide habitat for a natural diversity of wildlife, with emphasis on
threatened and endangered species, primarily the Louisiana black bear, wintering and nesting habitat
for migratory and resident waterfowl, non-game migratory birds, and resident birds and plants. The
refuge contains approximately 7,500 acres of cypress/tupelo, scrub/shrub, and floating marsh and
1,500 acres of bottomland hardwood forests.
Project 1 – Restore marsh and fortify the shoreline of the refuge to ensure healthy and viable plant
and animal communities and protect the integrity of the refuge habitats.
The reduction or attempted halt of marsh subsidence and marsh loss is considered critical through
marsh creation projects and plantings for marsh stabilization.
• Develop grants through NAWCA, CWPPRA, and partnerships with the Nature Conservancy,
local universities, and other organizations to restore marsh habitats in open water ponds to
encourage less than 5-acre pond sizes and resulting increased emergent marsh.
• Use dedicated dredging projects, etc., to accomplish this objective.
• Utilize proven techniques for shoreline stabilization.
• Once new lands are formed, plant desired marsh grass if necessary.
Project 2 – Use beneficial dredged materials from local canals, through cooperation with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) when applicable, or oil and gas activity mitigation projects, to fill open
water areas and create new emergent marsh on the refuge. These actions can create and restore
hundreds of acres lost to erosion and subsidence on the refuge with little to no costs to the refuge.
• Partner with the USACE to plan location and elevation of material to be stacked on refuge.
• Plan locations of sediment to ensure tidal movement will reach all areas. No areas of
stagnated water shall exist.
• Monitor areas for vegetation growth and inventory species.
• Once new lands are formed, plant desired marsh grass if necessary.
• Identify wildlife use and monitor their use of the new area.
The cost for sediment placement will vary, but the funds will be through USACE navigation projects
and should be no immediate cost to the refuge. The inventory of plants and wildlife can be
accomplished by one Service biologist for $5,000 annually. Planting can be accomplished using
volunteers and a one-time cost of $40,000 for plants, travel, and supplies.
The reduction or attempted halt of marsh subsidence and marsh loss is considered critical through
marsh creation projects and plantings for marsh stabilization.
48 Bayou Teche National Wildlife Refuge
Project 3 – Restore bottomland hardwood forest through hardwood plantings and regeneration to
improve habitat for Louisiana black bears and other wildlife and plant species.
• Partner with local community groups, universities, and other non-governmental organizations
to facilitate plantings.
• Coordinate with Southeast Louisiana NWR Complex staff forester to accomplish goals.
• Have Southeast Louisiana NWR Complex forester cruise hardwood areas to determine if
silviculture practices are needed for forest management.
Project 4 – Restore cypress-tupelo wetland forest through plantings and regeneration to improve
swamp habitat and health of cypress-tupelo stands for wildlife use, including wading bird rookeries.
• Partner with local community groups, universities, and non-governmental organizations to
facilitate plantings.
• Coordinate with Southeast Louisiana NWR Complex staff forester to accomplish goals.
• Have Southeast Louisiana NWR Complex forester cruise cypress-tupelo areas to determine if
silviculture practices are needed for forest management.
Project 5 – Develop monitoring programs for marsh loss, forested wetlands loss, bottomland hardwood
health, change in water depths, submerged aquati