Comprehensive Conservation Plan North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges

              Comprehensive Conservation PlanNorth Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
September 2008Prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceAudubon National Wildlife RefugeChase Lake National Wildlife RefugeKellys Slough National Wildlife RefugeLake Alice National Wildlife RefugeLake Ilo National Wildlife RefugeLake Nettie National Wildlife RefugeLake Zahl National Wildlife RefugeMcLean National Wildlife RefugeShell Lake National Wildlife RefugeStewart Lake National Wildlife RefugeStump Lake National Wildlife RefugeWhite Lake National Wildlife RefugeandRegion 6, Mountain-Prairie RegionDivision of Refuge Planning134 Union Boulevard, Suite 300Lakewood, CO 80228
Approved by
Stephen D. Guertin DateRegional Director, Region 6U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceLakewood, COComprehensive Conservation PlanNorth Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
Submitted by
(signature of Kim Hanson), 9/30/08(signature of Kim Hanson), 9/30/08(signature of Kim Hanson), 9/30/08 (signature of Kim Hanson), 9/30/08 (signature of Kim Hanson), 9/30/08(signature of Kim Hanson), 9/30/08 (signature of Kim Hanson), 9/30/08 (signature of Kim Hanson), 9/30/08(signature of Lloyd Jones), 9/30/08 (signature of Lloyd Jones), 9/30/08 (signature of Lloyd Jones), 9/30/08 (signature of Lloyd Jones), 9/30/08(signature of Lloyd Jones), 9/30/08 (signature of Lloyd Jones), 9/30/08 (signature of Lloyd Jones), 9/30/08 (signature of Lloyd Jones), 9/30/08(signature of Lloyd Jones), 9/30/08(signature of Lloyd Jones), 9/30/08 (signature of Lloyd Jones), 9/30/08
Roger Hollevoet DateProject LeaderDevils Lake Wetland Management District Complex(Kellys Slough, Lake Alice, and Stump Lake national wildlife refuges)Devils Lake, ND
David Gillund DateProject LeaderLostwood Wetland Management District Complex(Lake Zahl and Shell Lake national wildlife refuges)Kenmare, ND
Concurred with by
(signature of Richard A. Coleman), 9/30/08 (signature of Richard A. Coleman), 9/30/08(signature of Richard A. Coleman), 9/30/08 (signature of Richard A. Coleman), 9/30/08 (signature of Richard A. Coleman), 9/30/08 (signature of Richard A. Coleman), 9/30/08 (signature of Richard A. Coleman), 9/30/08 (signature of Richard A. Coleman), 9/30/08 (signature of Richard A. Coleman), 9/30/08 (signature of Richard A. Coleman), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08 (signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08 (signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08 (signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08(signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08 (signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08 (signature of Paul Cornes), 9/30/08Contents
Abbreviations ..................................................................................ix
Summary .....................................................................................xi
1Introduction .................................................................................1
1.1 Purpose and Need for the Plan ...............................................................11.2 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Refuge System ......................................31.3 National and Regional Mandates .............................................................41.4 Refuge Contributions to National and Regional Plans ...........................................41.5 Ecosystem Description and Threats ..........................................................91.6 Planning Process ..........................................................................11
2The Refuges ................................................................................152.1 Establishment, Acquisition, and Management History .........................................152.2 Special Values ............................................................................322.3 Purposes .................................................................................322.4 Vision ....................................................................................33
2.5 Goals ....................................................................................33
2.6 Planning Issues ...........................................................................33
3Refuge Resources and Descriptions .........................................................373.1 Physical Environment .....................................................................373.2 Biological Resources .......................................................................463.3 Cultural Resources ........................................................................57
3.4 Chase Lake Wilderness ....................................................................58
3.5 Visitor Services ...........................................................................58
3.6 Partnerships ..............................................................................603.7 Socioeconomic Environment ................................................................60
3.8 Operations ...............................................................................62
4Management Direction ......................................................................634.1 Management Focus ........................................................................634.2 Goals, Objectives, Strategies, and Rationale ..................................................64Habitat and Wildlife Goal ....................................................................64
Monitoring and Research Goal ................................................................82Cultural Resources Goal .....................................................................84
Visitor Services Goal ........................................................................85
Partnerships Goal ..........................................................................89Operations Goal ............................................................................894.3 Funding and Staff .........................................................................904.4 Step-down Management Plans ..............................................................904.5 Monitoring and Evaluation .................................................................914.6 Plan Amendment and Revision ..............................................................95
Glossary .......................................................................................97vi Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
Appendixes
Appendix A—Key Legislation and Policy .......................................................107
Appendix B—Preparers and Contributors ......................................................115
Appendix C—Public Involvement .............................................................119
Appendix D—Section 7 Biological Evaluation ...................................................123
Appendix E—Environmental Compliance ......................................................127
Appendix F—Fire Management Program for National Wildlife Refuges within the Eastern
North Dakota Fire District ...................................................................131
Appendix G—Fire Management Program for National Wildlife Refuges within the Western
North Dakota Fire District ...................................................................135
Appendix H—Bird Species of the Refuges ......................................................139
Appendix I—Primary and Secondary Bird Species of the North Dakota Prairie .....................147
Appendix J—North Dakota’s Threatened and Endangered Species ................................149
Appendix K—Priority-setting Example for Native Prairie Portions of Fee-title Lands ...............151
Appendix L—Compatibility Determinations for Wildlife-dependent Recreational Uses,
Grazing, Haying, and Farming ................................................................155
Bibliography ..................................................................................165vii
Figures
1 Vicinity map for the 12 refuges, North Dakota .................................................2
2 Map of the bird conservation regions of North America .........................................6
3 Map of the Prairie Pothole Region of the United States and Canada ..............................7
4 Map of ecosystems in region 6 of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ..............................10
5 Steps in the planning process ...............................................................11
6 Map of Audubon National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
7 Map of Chase Lake National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota ....................................21
8 Map of Kellys Slough National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota ..................................22
9 Map of Lake Alice National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota .....................................23
10 Map of Lake Ilo National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota .......................................24
11 Map of Lake Nettie National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota ....................................25
12 Map of Lake Zahl National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota ......................................26
13 Map of McLean National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota .......................................27
14 Map of Shell Lake National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota .....................................28
15 Map of Stewart Lake National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota ..................................29
16 Map of Stump Lake National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota ....................................30
17 Map of White Lake National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota ....................................31
18 Map of the physiographic regions in North Dakota .............................................39
19 Map of the level 4 ecoregions in North Dakota ................................................40
20 Map of the predicted duck-pair concentrations in North Dakota .................................53
21 Map of the seven-county core area for piping plover in North Dakota ............................55
22 Map of the whooping crane sightings in North Dakota ..........................................56
23 The adaptive management process. ..........................................................95
Tables
1 Planning Process Summary for the 12 Refuges, North Dakota. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2 Land Information for the 12 Refuges, North Dakota ...........................................32
3 Ecoregions of the 12 Refuges, North Dakota ..................................................41
4 Conditional Water Permits for Lake Alice National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota ................44
5 Prairie Decline in North Dakota .............................................................46
6 State-listed Noxious Weeds Found at National Wildlife Refuges in North Dakota ..................49
7 Step-down Management Plans for Audubon National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
8 Step-down Management Plans for Chase Lake National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota ............91
9 Step-down Management Plans for Kellys Slough National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota ..........91
10 Step-down Management Plans for Lake Alice National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota .............92
11 Step-down Management Plans for Lake Ilo National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota ...............92
12 Step-down Management Plans for Lake Nettie National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota ............93
13 Step-down Management Plans for Lake Zahl National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota ..............93
14 Step-down Management Plans for McLean National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota ...............93
15 Step-down Management Plans for Shell Lake National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota .............94
16 Step-down Management Plans for Stewart Lake National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota ..........94
17 Step-down Management Plans for White Lake National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota ............94Abbreviations
Administration Act
National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966
APHIS
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
BCR
bird conservation region
CCP
comprehensive conservation plan
CFR
Code of Federal Regulations
cfs
cubic feet per second
CWCS
comprehensive wildlife conservation strategy
CWD
chronic wasting disease
district
wetland management district
DNC
dense nesting cover
DOI
U.S. Department of the Interior
EA
environmental assessment
EO
executive order
F
Fahrenheit
FMP
fire management plan
FTE
full-time equivalent
GIS
Geographic Information System
gpm
gallons per minute
GPS
Global Positioning System
GS
General Schedule (employment)
HAPET
Habitat and Population Evaluation Team
HPAI
highly pathogenic avian influenza
Improvement Act
National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997
IPM
integrated pest management
ISST
invasive species strike team
msl
mean sea level
NABCI
North American Bird Conservation Initiative
ND
North Dakota
NDGF
North Dakota Game and Fish Department
NEPA
National Environmental Policy Act
NHPA
National Historic Preservation Act
NRCS
Natural Resources Conservation Service
PIF
Partners in Flight program
PL
public law
PPJV
Prairie Pothole Joint Venture
Refuge System
National Wildlife Refuge System
region 6
Mountain–Prairie Region of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
RLGIS
Refuge Lands Geographic Information System
Service
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Servicex Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
SWG
state wildlife grant
USC
United States Code
USDA
U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFWS
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS
U.S. Geological Survey
VOR
visual obstruction reading
WG
Wage Grade schedule (employment)
WUI
wildland–urban interfaceSummaryPhoto caption: Photo credit:
This is a summary of the comprehensive conservation plan for 12 of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s national wildlife refuges in North Dakota: Audubon Lake Ilo Shell LakeChase Lake Lake Nettie Stewart LakeKellys Slough Lake Zahl Stump LakeLake Alice McLean White LakeThe National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 requires the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to develop a comprehensive conservation plan by 2012 for each national wildlife refuge. In September 2008, the Service approved the plan for the 12 national wildlife refuges, which will guide management of the refuges for the next 15 years.
The Refuges
The 12 national wildlife refuges were established under different authorities:Audubon National Wildlife Refuge was established QQunder the authority of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. Under executive order, President Theodore QQRoosevelt established 2 of the 12 refuges as preserves and breeding grounds for native birds: Chase Lake and Stump Lake national wildlife refuges. Under executive order, President Franklin D. QQRoosevelt established 8 of the 12 refuges as breeding grounds for migratory birds and other wildlife: Kellys Slough, Lake Ilo, Lake Nettie, Lake Zahl, McLean, Shell Lake, Stewart Lake, and White Lake national wildlife refuges.
Lake Alice National Wildlife Refuge was QQestablished under the authority of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act.To secure lands for migratory birds, the United States Congress established the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund to acquire lands for conservation, to maintain acquired lands for habitat preservation, and to fund expenses necessary for the administration, development, and maintenance of such areas. Associated activities include construction of dams, dikes, ditches, spillways, and flumes for improving habitat and mitigation of pollution threats to waterfowl and migratory birds. The refuges protect habitat with primarily two tools: fee-title ownership and conservation easements.The prairies of North Dakota have become an ecological treasure of biological importance for waterfowl and other migratory birds. The prairie potholes of North Dakota support a wide diversity of wildlife, but they are most famous for their role in waterfowl production. Although the Prairie Pothole Region occupies only 10% of North America’s waterfowl breeding range, it produces approximately 50% of the continent’s waterfowl population.Complexes of wetlands scattered throughout the refuges and surrounding areas attract breeding duck pairs. The refuges provide northern staging areas and habitat for migrating waterfowl. Semipermanent and permanent wetlands provide brood-rearing habitat and migratory stopover habitat, respectively. However, it is the smaller temporary and seasonal wetlands that draw breeding duck pairs to the North Dakota prairies, including the refuges, and other parts of the Prairie Pothole Region.
The Planning Process
The planning process, which included an environmental analysis, began in February 2007 with the issuance of a notice of intent in the Federal Register. Public and partner involvement were encouraged and valued throughout the process. The refuge staffs and the public identified the primary issues for the refuges, which the plan addresses. The Service’s planning team developed and evaluated management alternatives to meet the purposes, vision, and goals of the refuges. With the selection of alternative B as the preferred alternative, the Service finalized the comprehensive conservation plan in September 2008.xii Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
Issues
Information from the public scoping, which the Service
began in 2007, along with refuge information, identified
five major areas of concern about management of the
refuges.
Wetland and Upland Habitats
Aggressive management of wetland and upland habitats
must be conducted to achieve the goals and objectives
of the refuges. Habitat protection needs to be evaluated
through a priority system so that different means of
protection, through either fee title or conservation
easement, can be evaluated. Most of the refuges’
uplands that were previously farmed and since restored
have the native vegetation character, but have been
compromised by invading species such as leafy spurge,
Canada thistle, and Kentucky bluegrass. Invasive
plants substantially diminish the suitability of upland
habitat for many native wildlife species.
While the Service works to minimize the negative
effects of energy development, the demand for
energy is an increasing factor in habitat quality and
preservation at the refuges. The production of biofuels,
coal, oil, gas, and wind energy has the potential to
impact effectiveness of many refuge programs. The
loss of native prairie is occurring at an alarming rate.
Prairie is being converted for corn production to
produce ethanol, which also has additional needs for
irrigation water.
Wildlife Management
Priority species, predators, and wildlife disease require
specific management strategies that the refuges need
to adopt. Of importance for priority species is monitoring
and the provision of essential habitat that promotes
increased recruitment or population protection. Several
predatory species including the red fox are found at
higher than historical levels due to modifications of
habitat. These species can adversely affect migratory
bird populations. There is an ongoing issue of striking
a balance between managing botulism, providing
optimal habitats, and maintaining other refuge
programs.
Monitoring and Research
The Service needs basic data about recruitment,
mortality, and habitat use for representative groups
of species. It is important to collect and analyze these
data on a regular basis so the Service can make
appropriate decisions about the habitats on which
these species depend.
Visitor Services
A growing demand for public recreation in North
Dakota and the nation makes these refuge uses
primary issues of interest: hunting, fishing, wildlife
observation, photography, environmental education,
and interpretation.
Operations
The efficient use of staff, partnerships, volunteers,
and funding—through effective communication and
innovation—is needed to support each of the refuges.
Facilities at the refuges need to be evaluated and
upgraded.
The Future of the Refuges
The issues, along with resource conditions, were
important considerations during the development of
the vision and goals for the 12 refuges.
VIsIon
This collection of unique and diverse refuges
encompasses a broad range of North Dakota
habitat types and landscapes.
These refuges provide vital resting and breeding
habitat for waterfowl, other migratory birds,
and resident fish and wildlife species.
Visitors to these prairie refuges experience
wide-open spaces, skies filled with migratory
birds, places to learn, and welcome solitude.
The responsible management of these
special places requires adequate funding,
dedicated personnel, and
successful partnerships.
Achievement of this vision ensures
that the American people retain a legacy
of wildlife and prairie habitats
for future generations.
Goals
The Service developed the following goals to meet
the vision for the refuges.
Habitat and Wildlife Goal
Conserve, restore, and enhance the ecological diversity
of grasslands and wetlands of the North Dakota
prairie to support healthy populations of ducks and
geese, other migratory birds, native species, and
other wildlife.
Monitoring and Research Goal
Use science, monitoring, and applied research to
advance the understanding of natural resources
and management within the North Dakota national
wildlife refuges.
Summary xiii
Cultural Resources Goal
Identify and evaluate cultural resources that are on Service-owned lands or are affected by Service undertakings. Protect resources determined to be significant and, when appropriate, interpret resources to connect staff, visitors, and communities to the area’s past.
Visitor Services Goal
Provide visitors with opportunities to enjoy wildlife-dependent recreation where compatible and expand their knowledge and appreciation of the prairie landscape and the National Wildlife Refuge System.
Partnerships Goal
A diverse network of partners join with the North Dakota national wildlife refuges to support research, accomplish habitat conservation, and foster awareness and appreciation of the prairie landscape.
Operations Goal
Efficiently employ staff, partnerships, and volunteers and secure funding in support of the Refuge System’s mission.
ManaGeMent DIrectIon
Management objectives for habitat types are based on the habitat preferences of groups of target species such as waterfowl, migratory shorebirds, grassland birds, and priority species. The Service will focus on management of high- and medium-priority habitats, and will identify and restore other degraded habitat tracts to native species. Invasive species management will be limited to legally listed species and those of ecological concern that occur on high- and medium-priority tracts. The refuges’ staffs and partners will expand biological surveys on high- and medium-priority tracts.The Service will document and protect cultural resources, and will maintain and preserve historical sites. In addition, the Service will conduct educational programs and partner research and inventories on a limited basis.Refuge staffs will improve and expand programs for youth and conservation groups, and will develop “friends groups.” The Service will start or expand environmental education programs for Kellys Slough and Lake Alice national wildlife refuges. A new environmental learning center is planned for Audubon National Wildlife Refuge.Refuge staffs will expand existing partnerships to address improvement of habitat for migratory birds, and will work with local, state, and federal agencies to promote and protect migratory bird habitat within the refuges.
Great Blue Heron© Cindie Brunner1 IntroductionPhoto caption: Photo credit:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) developed this comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) to provide the foundation for the management and use of 12 national wildlife refuges in North Dakota (see figure 1, vicinity map):Audubon National Wildlife RefugeQQChase Lake National Wildlife RefugeQQKellys Slough National Wildlife RefugeQQLake Alice National Wildlife RefugeQQLake Ilo National Wildlife RefugeQQLake Nettie National Wildlife RefugeQQLake Zahl National Wildlife RefugeQQMcLean National Wildlife RefugeQQShell Lake National Wildlife RefugeQQStewart Lake National Wildlife RefugeQQStump Lake National Wildlife RefugeQQWhite Lake National Wildlife RefugeQQBased on the results of an environmental analysis and public involvement, the Service’s director of region 6 made the decision, on September 30, 2008, to implement this CCP to guide the 12 refuges for the next 15 years. Chapter 4, Management Direction, specifies the actions
necessary to achieve the purposes and vision for the 12 national wildlife refuges. Wildlife is the first priority in refuge management, and the Service allows and encourages wildlife-dependent recreational use as long as it is compatible with the refuges’ purposes. The Service developed the CCP in compliance with the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Improvement Act) and Part 602 (National Wildlife Refuge System Planning) of The Fish and Wildlife Service Manual. The actions described in this CCP meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). Compliance with NEPA included the involvement of the public. The planning process and public involvement are further described in this chapter, under 1.6, The Planning Process.
1.1 Purpose and Need for the Plan
The purpose of this CCP is to identify the role that the refuges play in support of the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System) and to provide long-term guidance for management of the refuges’ programs and activities. 2 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
Figure title: Chapter 1—Introduction 3
The CCP is neededto communicate with the public and other partners in efforts to carry out the mission of the Refuge System;to provide a clear statement of direction for management of the refuges;to provide neighbors, visitors, and government officials with an understanding of the Service’s management actions on and around the refuges;to ensure that the Service’s management actions are consistent with the mandates of the Improvement Act;to ensure that management of the refuges is consistent with federal, state, and county plans;to provide a basis for development of budget requests for the refuges’ operation, maintenance, and capital improvement needs.Sustaining the nation’s fish and wildlife resources is a task that can be accomplished only through the combined efforts of governments, businesses, and private citizens.
1.2 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Refuge System
The Service is the principal federal agency responsible for fish, wildlife, and plant conservation. The Refuge System is one of the Service’s major programs.
u.s. FIsh anD WIlDlIFe serVIce
The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, working with others, is to conserve, protect, and enhance fish and wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people.Over a century ago, America’s fish and wildlife resources were declining at an alarming rate. Concerned citizens, scientists, and hunting and angling groups joined together to restore and sustain America’s national wildlife heritage. This was the genesis of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.Today, the Service enforces federal wildlife laws, manages migratory bird populations, restores nationally significant fisheries, conserves and restores vital wildlife habitat, protects and recovers endangered species, and helps other governments with conservation efforts. In addition, the Service administers a federal aid program that distributes hundreds of millions of dollars to states for fish and wildlife restoration, boating access, hunter education, and related programs across America.
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
Service activities in North Dakota contribute to the state’s economy, ecosystems, and education programs. The following list describes the Service’s presence and activities:QQEmploys 170 people in North Dakota.QQHelped by 539 volunteers who donated more than 10,200 hours with Service projects.QQManages two national fish hatcheries and one fish and wildlife management assistance office.QQManages 65 national wildlife refuges encompassing 343,145 acres (0.8% of the state).QQManages 11 wetland management districts.—Q284,660 acres of fee waterfowl production areas (0.6% of the state)—Q1,080,636 wetland acres under various leases or easements (2.4% of the state)QQHosts more than 385,300 annual visitors to Service-managed lands.—Q166,908 hunting visits—Q59,500 fishing visits—Q26,346 photography visitsQQProvided $3.8 million to the NDGF for sport fish restoration and $3.9 million for wildlife restoration and hunter education.QQHelped private landowners restore, create, and enhance more than 214,000 acres on 8,400 sites and restore 17 miles of river since 1987 through the Partners for Wildlife Program.QQEmploys 11 Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program biologists.QQPaid North Dakota counties $435,325 under the Refuge Revenue Sharing Act (funds used for schools and roads).
natIonal WIlDlIFe reFuGe systeM
In 1903, President Theodore Roosevelt designated the 5.5-acre Pelican Island in Florida as the nation’s first wildlife refuge for the protection of brown pelicans and other native, nesting birds. This was the first time the federal government set aside land for wildlife. This small but significant designation was the beginning of the Refuge System.One hundred years later, the Refuge System has become the largest collection of lands in the world specifically managed for wildlife, encompassing more than 96 million acres within 546 refuges and more than 3,000 small areas for waterfowl breeding and nesting. Today, there is at least one refuge in every state including Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.In 1997, the Improvement Act established a clear mission for the Refuge System.4 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
The mission of the
National Wildlife Refuge System
is to administer a national network
of lands and waters for the conservation,
management, and where appropriate,
restoration of the fish, wildlife and plant
resources and their habitats within
the United States for the benefit of
present and future generations
of Americans.
The Improvement Act states that each national wildlife
refuge shall be managed
to fulfill the mission of the Refuge System;
to fulfill the individual purposes of each refuge;
to consider the needs of fish and wildlife first;
to fulfill the requirement of developing a CCP for
each unit of the Refuge System and fully involve
the public in the preparation of these plans;
to maintain the biological integrity, diversity,
and environmental health of the Refuge System;
to recognize that wildlife-dependent recreational
uses including hunting, fishing, wildlife observation,
photography, and environmental education and
interpretation are legitimate and priority public
uses;
to retain the authority of refuge managers to
determine compatible public uses.
In addition to the mission for the Refuge System, the
wildlife and habitat vision for each unit of the Refuge
System stresses the following principles:
QQ Wildlife comes first.
QQ Ecosystems, biodiversity, and wilderness are
vital concepts in refuge management.
QQ Habitats must be healthy.
QQ Growth of refuges must be strategic.
QQ The Refuge System serves as a model for habitat
management with broad participation from others.
Following passage of the Improvement Act, the
Service immediately began to carry out the direction
of the new legislation, including preparation of CCPs
for all national wildlife refuges. Consistent with the
Improvement Act, the Service prepares CCPs in
conjunction with public involvement. Each refuge
is required to complete its CCP within the 15-year
schedule (by 2012).
People and the Refuge System
The nation’s fish and wildlife heritage contributes to
the quality of American lives and is an integral part
of the country’s greatness. Wildlife and wild places
have always given people special opportunities to
have fun, relax, and appreciate the natural world.
Whether through bird watching, fishing, hunting,
photography, or other wildlife pursuits, wildlife
recreation contributes millions of dollars to local
economies. In 2002, approximately 35.5 million
people visited the Refuge System, mostly to observe
wildlife in their natural habitats. Visitors are most
often accommodated through nature trails, auto
tours, interpretive programs, and hunting and fishing
opportunities. Significant economic benefits are
generated in the local communities that surround
refuges. Economists report that Refuge System
visitors contribute more than $792 million annually
to local economies.
1.3 National and Regional
Mandates
Refuge System units are managed to achieve the
mission and goals of the Refuge System, along with
the designated purpose of the refuges (as described
in establishing legislation, executive orders, or other
establishing documents). Key concepts and guidance
of the Refuge System are in the Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966 (Administration Act),
Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFRs),
The Fish and Wildlife Service Manual, and the
Improvement Act.
The Improvement Act amends the Administration
Act by providing a unifying mission for the Refuge
System, a new process for determining compatible
public uses at refuges, and a requirement that each
refuge be managed under a CCP. The Improvement
Act states that wildlife conservation is the priority
for Refuge System lands and that the Secretary of
the Interior will ensure that the biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health of refuge lands
are maintained. Each refuge must be managed
to fulfill the Refuge System’s mission and the
specific purposes for which it was established. The
Improvement Act requires the Service to monitor
the status and trends of fish, wildlife, and plants in
each refuge.
A detailed description of these and other laws and
executive orders that may affect the CCP or the
Service’s implementation of the CCP is in Appendix A,
Key Legislation and Policy. Service policies on planning
and day-to-day management of refuges are in the
Refuge System Manual and The Fish and Wildlife
Service Manual.
1.4 Refuge Contributions to
National and Regional Plans
The North Dakota refuges contribute to the
conservation efforts described in this section.
Chapter 1—Introduction 5
FulFIllInG the ProMIse
A 1999 report, Fulfilling the Promise—The National Wildlife Refuge System (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 1999a), is the culmination of a yearlong process by teams of Service employees to evaluate the Refuge System nationwide. This report was the focus of the first national Refuge System conference (in 1998)—attended by refuge managers, other Service employees, and representatives from leading conservation organizations.The report contains 42 recommendations packaged with three vision statements dealing with wildlife and habitat, people, and leadership. This CCP deals with all three of these major topics. The planning team looked to the recommendations in the document for guidance during CCP planning.
Partners In FlIGht
The Partners in Flight program (PIF) began in 1990 with the recognition of declining population levels of many migratory bird species. The challenge, according to the program, is managing human population growth while maintaining functional natural ecosystems. To meet this challenge, PIF worked to identify priority, land bird species and habitat types. PIF activity has resulted in 52 bird conservation plans covering the continental United States.The primary goal of PIF is to provide for the long-term health of the bird life of this continent. The first priority is to prevent the rarest species from going extinct. The second priority is to prevent uncommon species from descending into threatened status. The third priority is to “keep common birds common.”PIF splits North America into seven avifaunal biomes (birds of an ecological regional area) and 37 bird conservation regions (BCRs) for planning purposes (see figure 2, map of BCRs). The 12 national wildlife refuges are within the prairie avifaunal biome in BCRs 11 and 17.BCR 11 is the most important waterfowl production area on the North American continent, despite extensive wetland drainage and tillage of native grasslands. The density of breeding dabbling ducks commonly exceeds 100 pairs per square mile in some areas during years with favorable wetland conditions. The area comprises the core of the breeding range of most dabbling duck and several diving duck species. BCR 11 provides critical breeding and migration habitat for more than 200 other bird species, including such species of concern as Franklin’s gull and yellow rail and a threatened species, the piping plover. In addition, Baird’s sparrow, Sprague’s pipit, chestnut-collared longspur, Wilson’s phalarope, marbled godwit, and American avocet are among the many priority nonwaterfowl species that breed in BCR 11. According to the NABCI, wetland areas also provide key spring
migration sites for Hudsonian godwit, American golden-plover, white-rumped sandpiper, and buff-breasted sandpiper (NABCI 2007).Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo credit:
BCR 17 is dominated by mixed-grass prairie that lies west and south of the glaciated Prairie Pothole Region (see figure 3, map of the Prairie Pothole Region), east of the Rocky Mountains, and north of the true short-grass prairie. Mostly due to the continued dominance of ranching, many contiguous grassland tracts of significant size persist. As a result, this area is habitat for some of the healthiest populations of high-priority, dry-grassland birds on the continent including mountain plover, McCown’s longspur, and long-billed curlew. The relatively small number of wetlands—including small impoundments created to serve as livestock water sources—receives intensive use by upland-nesting waterfowl and broods (NABCI 2007).PIF conservation priorities in the prairie avifaunal biome focus on protection of remaining prairies, management of existing grasslands with fire and grazing, and control of invasive plants including woody plant encroachment.
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Written in 1986, the North American Waterfowl Management Plan envisioned a 15-year effort to achieve landscape conditions that could sustain waterfowl populations. Specific objectives of the plan are to increase and restore duck populations to the average levels of the 1970s—62 million breeding ducks and a fall flight of 100 million birds.6 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
Figure title:
By 1985, waterfowl populations had plummeted to record lows. Habitat that waterfowl depend on was disappearing at a rate of 60 acres per hour. Recognizing the importance of waterfowl and wetlands to North Americans and the need for international cooperation to help in the recovery of a shared resource, the United States and Canada governments developed a strategy to restore waterfowl populations through habitat protection, restoration, and enhancement. Mexico became a signatory to the plan in 1994.The plan is innovative because of its international scope, plus its implementation at the regional level. Its success depends on the strength of partnerships called joint ventures, which involve federal, state, provincial, tribal, and local governments; businesses; conservation organizations; and individual citizens.Joint ventures are regional, self-directed partnerships that carry out science-based conservation through community participation. Joint ventures develop implementation plans that focus on areas of concern identified in the plan.
The 9 of the 12 refuges lie within the Prairie Pothole Joint Venture (PPJV), which covers the Prairie Pothole Region of Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, and Iowa:Audubon National Wildlife RefugeQQChase Lake National Wildlife RefugeQQKellys Slough National Wildlife RefugeQQLake Alice National Wildlife RefugeQQLake Nettie National Wildlife RefugeQQLake Zahl National Wildlife RefugeQQMcLean National Wildlife RefugeQQShell Lake National Wildlife RefugeQQStump Lake National Wildlife RefugeQQEstablished in 1987, the PPJV is one of the original six priority joint ventures under the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. The joint venture protects, restores, and enhances high-priority wetland and grassland habitat to help sustain populations of Chapter 1—Introduction 7
Figure title: 8 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
waterfowl, shorebirds, waterbirds, and prairie land birds. The PPJV includes one-third (100,000 square miles) of North America’s Prairie Pothole Region. The remaining 200,000 acres is located in the Canadian provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta. This unique area contains millions of depressional wetlands (potholes) that constitute one of the richest wetland systems in the world. These glacially formed prairie potholes and their surrounding grasslands are highly productive and support an incredible diversity of bird life.
PPJV IMPleMentatIon Plan
The Prairie Pothole Region remains the most important waterfowl-producing region on the continent, generating more than half of North America’s ducks. Nearly 15% of the continental waterfowl population comes from the PPJV region (Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, and Iowa). As many as 10 million ducks and 2 million geese use the PPJV region during migration or for nesting. The wetlands and associated grassland habitat in the PPJV region provide breeding habitat to more than 200 species of migratory birds. Bald eagles, peregrine falcons, whooping cranes, piping plovers, and interior least terns frequent the PPJV region during migration and breeding periods.The PPJV implementation plan was prepared in 2005 and outlined a mission, goals, objectives, and strategies for joint venture activities. Individual state action groups and steering committees prepared state action plans that “stepped down” joint venture activities to the state and local level.The goal of the PPJV is to increase waterfowl populations through habitat conservation projects that improve natural diversity across the prairie pothole landscape of the United States. The joint venture attempts to carry out landscape-level habitat projects so that waterfowl populations increase during the wet years and stabilize under moderate conditions. Since little can be done to stabilize the breeding populations across the Prairie Pothole Region during extended drought, joint venture strategies are designed to carry out actions that take advantage of years when precipitation is at least normal.
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
The Northern Great Plains Joint Venture (NGPJV) project area lies between the Missouri River on the east and north, the foothills of the Rocky Mountains on the west, and the sand hills and playa lakes of Wyoming and Nebraska on the south. Three of the 12 refuges are in the NGPJV:Lake Ilo National Wildlife RefugeQQStewart Lake National Wildlife RefugeQQWhite Lake National Wildlife RefugeQQ
The primary purpose of the NGPJV is to contribute to the attainment of continental population goals (developed under the NABCI) by strategically conserving habitat within the northern Great Plains ecosystem. The NGPJV partnership embraces the goals of NABCI “to deliver the full spectrum of bird conservation through regionally based, biologically driven, landscape-oriented partnerships.” The goal of the NGPJV is to maintain and increase populations of the high-priority bird species in the grassland, wetland, riparian, and forest habitats within the NGPJV.The uniqueness of the northern Great Plains is its arid climate and relatively intact, grassland-dominated landscape. Within this landscape are habitats that have significant value to species of the northern Great Plains; these habitats include big sagebrush areas in Wyoming and Montana, short-grass prairie of the Conata Basin in South Dakota, and riparian corridors in the badlands of North Dakota and South Dakota. It is this variety of habitat types within the larger grassland context that supports such a diversity of birds—from raptors such as the ferruginous hawk and golden eagle, to waterfowl and shorebirds like the northern pintail and piping plover, and declining grassland birds such as Baird’s sparrow and McCown’s longspur.The NGPJV implementation plan (Pool and Austin 2006) has a mission to seek new opportunities and foster new partnerships while strengthening existing alliances for the protection, enhancement, and restoration of prairie, wetland, riparian, and forest ecosystems. These conservation actions will place an emphasis on sustaining and increasing populations of migratory birds and resident birds, consistent with bird conservation objectives in regional, national, and international plans.
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Where federally listed threatened or endangered species occur at the 12 refuges, the Service will follow management goals and strategies in the species’ recovery plans. The list of threatened or endangered species that occur at the refuges will change as species are listed or delisted, or as listed species are discovered on refuge lands.The refuges are following the recovery plans for the following species:piping plover (threatened) in the northern QQGreat Plains (USFWS 1994a)whooping crane (endangered) (USFWS 1994b)QQinterior least tern (endangered) (USFWS 1990)QQwestern prairie fringed orchid (threatened) QQ(USFWS 1996)Chapter 1—Introduction 9
Marbled Godwit
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
Over the past several decades, documented declines of wildlife populations have occurred nationwide. Congress created the state wildlife grant (SWG) program in 2001. This program provides states and territories with federal dollars to support conservation aimed at preventing wildlife from becoming endangered and in need of protection under the Endangered Species Act. The SWG program represents an ambitious endeavor to take an active hand in keeping species from becoming threatened or endangered in the future.According to the SWG program, each state, territory, and the District of Columbia must complete a comprehensive wildlife conservation strategy (CWCS) by October 1, 2005, to receive future funding.These strategies will help define an integrated approach to the stewardship of all wildlife species, with additional emphasis on species of concern and habitats at risk. The goal is to shift focus from single-species management and highly specialized individual efforts to a geographically based, landscape-oriented, fish and wildlife conservation effort. The Service approves these plans and administers SWG program funding.North Dakota’s CWCS is a strategic vision with the goal of preserving the state’s wildlife diversity. It is intended to identify species of greatest conservation need, provide fundamental background information, strategic guidance, and a framework for developing and coordinating conservation actions to safeguard all fish and wildlife resources.The state of North Dakota has taken a landscape approach to conservation planning, which has numerous advantages. It allows the state to link species requiring conservation to a key landscape and habitat, often within a specific geographic area. This approach also
provides a comprehensive listing of all other fish and wildlife using the landscape, while providing relative plant and soil conditions applicable to the landscape. A landscape approach helps to identify corresponding conservation actions needed across the landscape, along with the potential partners who are or could be addressing them. Three tools are used to identify landscape components: land cover information, ecoregions, and statistical models. Ecoregions were defined based on general similarity of geology, physiography, vegetation, climate, soils, land use, wildlife, and hydrology. The CWCS recognizes four ecoregions commonly referred to as the Red River Valley, Drift Prairie, Missouri Coteau, and Missouri Slope.The CWCS identified conservation problems encountered in North Dakota that apply to all four of the ecoregions. Direct loss of habitat is a key issue because very little, native, tall-grass prairie remains in the state. The conservation action will be to protect native tall-grass prairie where possible.Habitat fragmentation is occurring throughout the state due to construction of roads, shelterbelts, and agricultural practices. Actions will include the removal of dilapidated shelterbelts or stands of trees within grasslands. Habitat degradation occurring from improper grazing practices and loss of the historical fire regime can be fixed by carrying out grazing systems to benefit tall-grass species and promoting the use of fire. Other actions include extending the time between haying and grazing, promoting mid-term required management, and providing incentives to defer or idle cutting of tame grass (cultivated, nonnative grass such as smooth brome). Invasive plants, including noxious weeds such as leafy spurge, will be controlled through biological and chemical methods.The CWCS for the state of North Dakota was reviewed and information was used during development of the CCP. Carrying out CCP habitat goals and objectives will support the goals and objectives of the CWCS.
1.5 Ecosystem Description and Threats
The Service has adopted watersheds as the basic building blocks for carrying out ecosystem conservation. The refuges span two Service-designated ecosystems —the Missouri River main stem ecosystem and the Hudson Bay ecosystem—with the majority falling within the former (see figure 4, map of ecosystems).Major threats identified for these ecosystems include native prairie conversion to cropland, expansion of invasive plant species, and wetland drainage and degradation. The refuges play a major role in (1) continued leadership and support of regional initiatives such as the PPJV, and (2) continued support of our conservation partners including the NDGF and private organizations such as Ducks Unlimited. 10 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
Figure title: Chapter 1—Introduction 11
In addition, the Service is continually working with
private landowners through the Partners for Fish and
Wildlife Program to restore and improve grassland
and wetland habitats on private lands.
1.6 Planning Process
This CCP for the refuges is intended to comply with
the Improvement Act, NEPA, and the implementing
regulations of these acts.
The Service issued its Refuge System planning policy
in 2000. This policy established requirements and
guidance for refuge plans—including CCPs and step-down
management plans—to ensure that planning
efforts comply with the Improvement Act. The
planning policy identified several steps of the CCP
and environmental analysis process (see figure 5,
steps in the planning process). Table 1 summarizes
accomplishment of the main planning steps for this
CCP effort.
The Service began “preplanning” in August 2006. The
planning team was Service personnel from the affected
North Dakota refuges; the regional divisions of refuge
planning, realty, and education and visitor services;
and the NDGF (see Appendix B, Preparers and
Contributors). During preplanning, the team developed
a mailing list, internal issues, and a special qualities
list. The planning team identified the current status
of refuge programs, compiled and analyzed relevant
data, and determined the purposes of the refuges.
A notice of intent to prepare the CCP was published
in the Federal Register on February 28, 2007. Public
scoping began in April 2007, after a planning update
and comment form was mailed to interested parties
in March 2007.
The Service complied with NEPA through public
involvement and environmental analysis (see
Appendix C, Public Involvement).
S
The notice of intent started scoping for the CCP.
Scoping is the process of obtaining information from
the public for input into the planning process. Table 1
summarizes all scoping activities.
The Service received 25 written comments
throughout the scoping process. The planning team
used the comments collected from scoping meetings
and correspondence in the development of a final list
of issues addressed in this CCP (see chapter 2, 2.6,
Planning Issues). In addition, over the course of
preplanning and scoping, the planning team collected
available information about the resources of the refuges
and surrounding areas. Chapter 3, Refuge Resources
and Descriptions, summarizes this information.
Comprehensive
Conservation Planning Process
and
Compliance with the
National Environmental
Policy Act
3. Draft Vision Statement
and Goals
Determine Substantive
Issues
4. Develop and Analyze
Alternatives
Create a reasonable range
of alternatives including
a “no-action” alternative.
1. Preplanning
Plan the plan. 2. Initiate Public
Involvement
and Scoping
Involve the public.
8. Review and Revise
Plan
Public involvement when
applicable.
7. Implement Plan
Monitor and Evaluate
Public involvement when
applicable.
6. Prepare and Adopt
Final Plan
Respond to public comments.
Select preferred alternative.
5. Prepare Draft Plan and
National Environmental
Policy Act Document
Public comment and
review.
➠
➠
➠
➠
➠
➠
➠
➠
Figure 5. Steps in the planning process.
12 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
Table 1. Planning Process Summary for the 12 Refuges, North Dakota.
Date
Event
Outcome
May 2006
Initial Service meeting.
The project leaders for the North Dakota refuges and other Service staff completed an overview of the CCP process.
August 2006
Service field review.
The Service finalized the planning team. The planning team reviewed biological and visitor services issues.
December 2006
Service kick-off meeting.
The planning team identified the refuge purposes; developed a list of initial issues and qualities; started the mailing list; identified biological and mapping needs; and planned public scoping activities.
February 2007
Publication in the Federal Register of the notice of intent to prepare a CCP.
The Service officially notified the public about the CCP to be developed for the refuges.
March 2007
Initial public contact: mailing of planning updates, comment forms, and postage-paid return envelopes.
The planning team offered the public an opportunity to learn about the CCP and provide comments.
March–April 2007
Six public meetings.
The planning team offered the public an opportunity to learn about the CCP and provide comments.
March–April 2007
Development of alternatives.
The planning team developed alternatives for management of the refuges.
February–May 2007
Development of biological objectives.
The planning team developed objectives and strategies for the biological aspects of management at the refuges.
June–July 2007
Development of visitor services objectives.
The planning team developed objectives and strategies for visitor services at the refuges.
May 2008
Service review of the draft CCP and EA.
The Service’s regional staff reviewed the draft CCP and EA and provided comments to the planning team.
August 2008
Draft CCP and EA release to the public.
The Service published and distributed the draft CCP and EA. The public had 30 days to review and comment on the document.
September 2008
Nine public meetings.
Refuge staffs presented the draft CCP and EA and collected public comments.
September 2008
Final plan approval.
The planning team addressed the public comments and finalized the CCP. The regional director determined a “finding of no significant impact” and approved the final plan.
PublIc coorDInatIon
A mailing list of more than 1,025 names includes private citizens; local, regional, and state government representatives and legislators; other federal agencies; and interested organizations (see Appendix C, Public Involvement).
In April 2007, the Service sent the first planning update issue to everyone on the mailing list. The planning update provided information about the history of the refuges and the CCP process, along with an invitation to public scoping meetings. A comment form and postage-paid envelope to gave the public an opportunity to easily provide comments. Chapter 1—Introduction 13
In addition, the local media announced the public meetings.The Service held six public scoping meetings during March–April 2007 (see table 1 for details). Each attendee received a comment form to submit questions or comments in writing.
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
On September 12, 2006, an invitation letter to participate in the CCP process was sent by the Service’s director of region 6 to the director of the NDGF. Two representatives from the NDGF were part of the CCP planning team. Local NDGF wildlife managers and the refuge staffs maintain excellent and ongoing working relations, which preceded the start of the CCP process.The NDGF’s mission is to “protect, conserve, and enhance fish and wildlife populations and their habitats for sustained public consumptive and nonconsumptive uses.” The NDGF is responsible for managing natural resource lands owned by the state, in addition to enforcement responsibilities for the state’s migratory birds and endangered species. The state manages more than 78,000 acres in support of wildlife, recreation, and fisheries.
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
On October 19, 2006, the Service’s director of region 6 sent a letter to six Native American tribal governments in North Dakota, South Dakota, and Minnesota:Sisseton-Wahpeton OyateQQSpirit Lake Tribal CouncilQQStanding Rock SiouxQQThree Affiliated TribesQQWhite Earth Band of ChippewaQQTurtle Mountain Band of ChippewaQQWith information about the upcoming CCP, the letter invited tribal recipients to serve on the planning team. None of the tribes expressed interest in participating in the process.
DraFt Plan
The Service considered all input during development of the draft CCP and environmental assessment (EA). This included changes to the refuges’ current management that were suggested by the public and other groups. The planning process ensured that issues with the greatest effects on the refuges were resolved or given priority.After scoping and detailed analysis, the planning team developed three management alternatives that best addressed the issues. The Service identified alternative B as the proposed action.On August 28, 2008, the Service published a notice of availability in the Federal Register to announce that the draft CCP and EA document was available for a 30-day public review. A summary of written comments gathered during the review period, along with the Service’s responses, is in Appendix C, Public Involvement.
FInal Plan
After an analysis of the public comments, the Service’s director of region 6 selected alternative B as the preferred alternative. Subsequently, the planning team produced this final CCP, based on the draft CCP with minor changes. The biological evaluation for the final CCP determined that there would likely be no adverse effect on threatened or endangered species or critical habitats as a result of the actions of the CCP (see Appendix D, Section 7 Biological Evaluation).The regional director approved the final CCP in September 2008 after a “finding of no significant impact” (see Appendix E, Environmental Compliance).Chapter 4, Management Direction, outlines the long- term guidance for management decisions, sets forth objectives and strategies to address the purposes for the refuges and meet goals, and identifies the Service’s best estimate of future needs. The CCP details program levels that are sometimes substantially above current budget allocations and, as such, are primarily for strategic planning purposes.2 The RefugesPhotograph caption: Photograph credit: Photograph credit: Photograph credit:
This chapter describes the establishment, special values, purposes, vision, goals, and planning issues for the 12 North Dakota refuges.
2.1 Establishment, Acquisition, and Management History
The 12 national wildlife refuges are located throughout the state of North Dakota. All 12 refuges are managed toward a common primary purpose to provide habitat and breeding ground for migrating waterfowl, shorebirds, and other wildlife. The refuges were established under several different authorities:QQAudubon National Wildlife Refuge was established under the authority of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. QQUnder executive order, President Theodore Roosevelt established 2 of the 12 refuges as preserves and breeding grounds for native birds: Chase Lake and Stump Lake national wildlife refuges. QQUnder executive order, President Franklin D. Roosevelt established 8 of the 12 refuges as
breeding grounds for migratory birds and other wildlife: Kellys Slough, Lake Ilo, Lake Nettie, Lake Zahl, McLean, Shell Lake, Stewart Lake, and White Lake national wildlife refuges.QQLake Alice National Wildlife Refuge was established under the authority of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act.A brief description of each refuge follows. Maps for each refuge (figures 6–17) are after the description of White Lake National Wildlife Refuge.
auDubon natIonal WIlDlIFe reFuGe
Established as Snake Creek National Wildlife Refuge in 1955 under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, the refuge provides habitat for a wide variety of wildlife. Developed to compensate for habitat lost when Garrison Dam flooded Missouri River bottomlands, the refuge was renamed in 1967 in honor of John James Audubon. A 19th century naturalist and wildlife artist, Audubon spent the summer of 1843 in what is now northwestern North Dakota collecting and painting wildlife of the northern plains. 16 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
The Service manages the Audubon National Wildlife Refuge (figure 6); the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers owns the land. The refuge is in McLean County in west-central North Dakota; its headquarters are in Coleharbor, North Dakota, from where it is administered as part of the Audubon National Wildlife Refuge Complex.Much of the 14,739-acre refuge is comprised of Lake Audubon (10,421 acres). The refuge is an important feeding and resting area for waterfowl migrating in the Central Flyway. More than 3,000 acres of grassland are habitat for upland wildlife of all sizes including Baird’s and Le Conte’s sparrows, sharp-tailed grouse,fox, coyote, and white-tailed deer. The refuge also hascropland and several large-tree plantings. The 370 acres of wetland provide habitat for shorebirds, gulls,terns, rails, and cranes. Almost 100 islands dot Lake Audubon—enough for 450 acres of giant Canada goose and duck-nesting habitat. Visitor activities include a 7.5-mile interpretive auto tour route for exploring (1) the area’s history, (2) agriculture’s role in benefiting wildlife, (3) wetlands and native prairie, and (4) the refuge’s contribution in restoration of the giant Canada goose—a bird once on the verge of extinction on North Dakota’s prairies. A 1-mile interpretive hiking trail offers a first-hand look at prairie and wetlands. The Service allows fishing during winter and hunters have opportunities for upland birds and deer during special seasons.
chase lake natIonal WIlDlIFe reFuGe
Large numbers of American white pelicans nested at Chase Lake in 1863 when General Sibley was active in the area. In 1872, the Northern Pacific Railroad reached Jamestown, North Dakota, and brought a flood of settlers to the area. Market hunting and indiscriminate killing had drastic effects on wildlife populations before the establishment of laws protecting wildlife. In 1905, local resident H.H. McCumber reported about 500 pelicans were left on the lake. By the time the government investigated the area, only 50 pelicans remained. On August 28, 1908, President Theodore Roosevelt established Chase Lake National Wildlife Refuge as a “reserve and breeding area for native birds,” making it one of the oldest refuges in the country. Found in south-central North Dakota, the 4,440-acre refuge is in Stutsman County and has its headquarters in Woodworth, North Dakota (see figure 7). The refuge is part of the Arrowwood National Wildlife Refuge Complex.The refuge and surrounding area provide breeding and resting habitat for more than 293 bird species, including the largest breeding colony of American white pelicans in North America. The American Bird Conservancy has designated Chase Lake National Wildlife Refuge as one of America’s top 100 globally important bird areas. The refuge includes Chase
Lake, along with native prairie, dense nesting cover, and an amazing density of wetlands. Most of this land has not been altered since Euro-American settlement times. Thus, Chase Lake National Wildlife Refuge was also designated as Chase Lake Wilderness in 1975. This is one of only two refuges in North Dakota with designated wildernesses. The refuge offers opportunities for hunting and wildlife observation.
Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption:
Photo credit:
KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK
In 1936, President Franklin D. Roosevelt established Kellys Slough National Wildlife Refuge “as a refuge and breeding ground for migratory birds and other wildlife.” The refuge was established to develop and manage a system of wetlands and grasslands that is unique to the Red River Valley of North Dakota. The 1,270-acre refuge (figure 8) is in Grand Forks County in northeastern North Dakota; its headquarters are in Devils Lake, North Dakota, from where it is administered as part of the Devils Lake Wetland Management District Complex.The refuge contains an intermittent stream that flows into the Turtle River, a tributary of the Red River. Since the 1960s, the Service has been purchasing lands around the original refuge with federal Duck Stamp money and developing these into waterfowl production areas. In 1991, the Service, with the help of Ducks Unlimited, began constructing several dikes and water control structures with funding from two North American Waterfowl Management Plan grants. Chapter 2—The Refuges 17
Recent and future land purchases are aimed at acquiring land needed to develop more managed pools for waterfowl on the refuge. Kellys Slough National Wildlife Refuge supports a diversity of wetland and grassland wildlife, while providing for wildlife-dependent recreation including environmental education and interpretation. The Service does not allow hunting or fishing at the refuge.Although waterfowl production areas are open to public hunting and other wildlife-dependent recreational use by regulation, several of these areas within and surrounding the original refuge were formally closed to the public through administrative procedures and published in 50 CFR 32.53 (see figure 8). Several other waterfowl production areas near the refuge remain open to public hunting and other recreational activities (see figure 8).
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
Lake Alice National Wildlife Refuge (figure 9) was established in 1935 under the Migratory Bird Conservation Act as a sanctuary for migratory birds. The refuge is a point of major waterfowl concentration during spring and fall migrations, as well as a significant breeding area for wetland wildlife.The 12,096-acre refuge is in Ramsey County in northeastern North Dakota; its headquarters are in Devils Lake, North Dakota, from where it is administered as part of the Devils Lake Wetland Management District Complex.The relatively flat landscape of the area is intertwined with wetlands and marshes. Often called prairie potholes, these wetlands were created by large continental glaciers during the last ice age and provide excellent habitat for a variety of wetland wildlife. Tens of thousands of snow geese, Canada geese, sandhill cranes, and ducks use the lake and surrounding lands each year. Most of the area within the refuge was farmed at one time, so very little native prairie remains.
A mixture of grasses and legumes have been planted throughout most of the refuge to provide cover for a variety of ground-nesting birds, as well as winter cover and food for many species of resident wildlife.The refuge provides many photography and wildlife-viewing opportunities, an auto tour, and hiking trails and serves as an outdoor classroom for local schools. The Service allows hunting, but no fishing, at Lake Alice National Wildlife Refuge.
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
Newspaper accounts in the early 1930s indicate Dunn County citizens envisioned creating a lake to enrich their lives. Circumstances became reality in 1936 when a dam was constructed near the confluence of Spring and Murphy creeks. The federal government built the dam as a water conservation project through the Works Progress Administration during the Depression years. Several hundred local citizens were hired during dam construction in 1936 and 1937. The new dam created the Lake Ilo, the first major lake in western North Dakota.In 1939, Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the executive order establishing Lake Ilo National Wildlife Refuge (figure 10) as a breeding ground for migratory birds and other wildlife. Other refuge purposes include fish- and wildlife-oriented recreation, environmental education, interpretation, conservation of endangered species, and protection of cultural and natural resources. The 4,033-acre refuge is in Dunn County and has its headquarters in Coleharbor, North Dakota, where it is administered as part of the Audubon National Wildlife Refuge Complex.Over the years, the Service developed wetlands, shelterbelts, and grassland habitats that created an oasis for both migratory birds and resident wildlife. Lake Ilo covers 1,240 acres with a maximum depth of 15 feet. Refuge uplands, amounting to 2,650 acres, are comprised of native prairie, introduced grasses, cropland, and tree plantings. Refuge management is directed at preserving native plants and animals and creating as much species diversity as possible. The refuge is unique for its archeological sites dating back 11,000 years. The refuge offers fishing opportunities, but hunting is not allowed.
Photo caption:
Photo credit:
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
President Franklin D. Roosevelt established Lake Nettie National Wildlife Refuge (figure 11) in 1935 as an easement refuge, where there now are fee-title lands and conservation easements. The Service purchased 18 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
easements on privately owned land and maintains them as breeding grounds for migratory birds and other wildlife.Located 5 miles east of Lake Audubon in west-central North Dakota, the 3,055-acre refuge is in McLean County and has its headquarters in Coleharbor, North Dakota, from where it is administered as part of the Audubon National Wildlife Refuge Complex.Half of the refuge is made up of diverse wetlands. The wetlands are influenced by the water flows of Turtle Creek and agricultural drainage. Uplands, with both native and introduced grass species, make up the other half of Lake Nettie National Wildlife Refuge. In 1962, the Service was authorized to acquire easement lands from private landowners for the purpose of wetland protection, water management, and waterfowl and other wildlife management. In 1966, the Migratory Bird Commission approved acquisition of additional acreage within the meander line of Lake Nettie. In 1997, the Service bought additional acreage under the Garrison Diversion Unit Reformulation Act of 1986. This act required mitigation for Service lands flooded at Audubon National Wildlife Refuge. The refuge offers opportunities for hunting white-tailed deer. The Service does not allow fishing.
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
Lake Zahl National Wildlife Refuge (figure 12) was established on June 15, 1939 as a “breeding ground for migratory birds and other wildlife.”The 3,823-acre refuge is in Williams County in northwestern North Dakota; its headquarters are in Crosby, North Dakota, from where it is administered by the Crosby Wetland Management District.Encompassing 3,219 acres in fee title and 604 acres in easements, the refuge includes two large wetland pools totaling 1,226 acres and 350 acres of seasonal wetlands. A dam constructed by the Civilian Conservation Crops in the 1940s maintains the two pools; Ducks Unlimited repaired and upgraded the dam in the 1990s. The wetlands are used by all species of prairie waterfowl, as well as Wilson’s phalarope; ring-billed and California gulls; and common, Forster’s, and black terns. Lake Zahl was one of the original release sites for the giant Canada goose reintroduction program. Refuge wetlands are important feeding and resting areas for waterfowl migrating in the Central Flyway. Ten artificial islands constructed by Ducks Unlimited provide secure nesting habitat for waterfowl.Upland habitat includes more than 1,200 acres of native prairie grassland, plus 400 acres of areas seeded with tame grass. The grasslands provide for a wide variety of songbirds including Le Conte’s sparrow, Baird’s sparrow, Sprague’s pipit, Nelson’s sharp-tailed sparrow, and chestnut-collared longspur. The uplands are also home to red fox, gray coyote, white-tailed deer, sharp-tailed grouse, and ring-necked
pheasant. In an attempt to curtail winter depredation in the area, 50 acres of cropland provide feed for a large, overwintering population of white-tailed deer.Visitors use Lake Zahl National Wildlife Refuge for bird watching and hunting. Lake Zahl is open annually for hunting white-tailed deer and upland game birds. The Service does not allow fishing at the refuge.
Mclean natIonal WIlDlIFe reFuGe
Originally established as Lake Susie Migratory Waterfowl Refuge by Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1939, the refuge changed its name to McLean National Wildlife Refuge with the same purpose of protecting breeding grounds for migratory birds and other wildlife.The 760-acre refuge (figure 13) is in McLean County in western North Dakota; its headquarters are in Coleharbor, North Dakota, from where it is administered as part of the Audubon National Wildlife Refuge Complex. This refuge has fee-title lands and conservation easements.The refuge includes acreage owned by the North Dakota State Land Department as an easement. A dam built in the 1930s and reconstructed in 2003 creates the large wetland that is locally known as Lake Susie and provides excellent wetland habitat for migratory birds. The Service does not allow hunting or fishing at the refuge.
Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo caption:
Photo credit: Photo credit: Photo credit: Chapter 2—The Refuges 19
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
President Franklin D. Roosevelt established Shell Lake National Wildlife Refuge (figure 14) on June 12, 1939, as a refuge for breeding migratory birds and other wildlife.Found in northwestern North Dakota, the 1,835-acre refuge is in Mountrail County; its headquarters are in Kenmare, North Dakota, from where it is administered as part of the Lostwood Wetland Management District Complex. This refuge has fee-title lands and conservation easements.The refuge comprises 785 acres in fee-title and 1,050 acres in easements. The refuge includes Shell Lake, a 450-acre area of open water and wetland that provides excellent habitat for all species of prairie waterfowl, as well as Wilson’s phalarope; ring-billed and California gulls; and common, Forster’s, and black terns. In many years, especially in the fall, Shell Lake is the only wetland in the immediate area that provides a critical resting area for migratory waterfowl.Uplands, comprised of native prairie and introduced grasses, provide for a wide variety of breeding songbirds including Le Conte’s sparrow, Baird’s sparrow, Sprague’s pipit, Nelson’s sharp-tailed sparrow, and chestnut-collared longspur. Other common wildlife species are red fox, coyote, white-tailed deer, sharp-tailed grouse, and ring-necked pheasant.Public use is restricted to protect the integrity of Shell Lake National Wildlife Refuge as a sanctuary for breeding and migratory birds. However, opportunities for wildlife viewing of large concentrations of migratory waterfowl exist from adjacent public roads. The Service does not allow hunting or fishing at the refuge.
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
By executive order in 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt established Stewart Lake National Wildlife Refuge (figure 15) as a breeding ground for migratory birds and other wildlife.The 2,230-acre refuge is in Slope County in southwestern North Dakota; its headquarters are in Coleharbor, North Dakota, from where it is administered as part of the Audubon National Wildlife Refuge Complex. This refuge has fee-title lands and conservation easements.The centerpiece of the refuge is a 197-acre impoundment constructed in 1936. This impoundment wetland serves as breeding, brooding, and migration habitat for migratory birds and other wildlife. Large wetlands are not typical in western North Dakota and Stewart Lake serves as an oasis in a generally well-drained landscape. The uplands surrounding the impoundment are characterized by short- to midgrass prairie and planted wildlife cover.
The Service does not allow hunting or fishing at Stewart Lake National Wildlife Refuge.
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
By executive order in 1905, President Theodore Roosevelt established Stump Lake National Wildlife Refuge (figure 16), the third national wildlife refuge in the nation and the first in North Dakota. Roosevelt established the refuge as a preserve and breeding ground for native birds; the refuge originally consisted of four small islands. Historically, Stump Lake was a nationally significant staging area for canvasbacks and tundra swans due to the uniquely large beds of sago pondweed.Found in eastern North Dakota, the 27-acre refuge is in Nelson County; its headquarters are in Devils Lake, North Dakota, from where it is administered as part of the Devils Lake Wetland Management District Complex. This refuge has fee-title lands.At the time of refuge establishment in 1905, the elevation of Stump Lake was 1,411.75 feet at mean sea level (msl). In 1990, the elevation of the lake was approximately 1,400 feet msl. In 1993, the levels of Stump Lake and adjacent Devils Lake began rising. By 2005, the original refuge islands were completely inundated. Stump and Devils lakes equalized at 1,447 feet msl in 2007, effectively placing the highest elevation of the original islands under 15 feet of water. The Service has closed this refuge to the public.
WhIte lake natIonal WIlDlIFe reFuGe
By executive order in 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt established White Lake National Wildlife Refuge (figure 17) as a breeding ground for migratory birds and other wildlife. The 1,040-acre refuge is in Slope County in southwestern North Dakota, 4 miles east of Amidon. Refuge headquarters are in Coleharbor, North Dakota, from where it is administered as part of the Audubon National Wildlife Refuge Complex. This refuge has fee-title lands.Development of the refuge began in 1936 as a cooperative venture between the Bureau of Biological Survey and the Works Projects Administration: a dam, primary spillway, and emergency spillway were constructed and a 190-acre impoundment wetland was created. This wetland serves as valuable wildlife habitat in a landscape that is generally well drained and contains few natural wetlands. Refuge uplands are characterized by short- to midgrass prairie. The Service has closed this refuge to the public.
LLLLLLLLLLLL
Figures 6–17 are maps of each refuge and show the refuges’ boundaries and ownership.20 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
Figure title: Chapter 2—The Refuges 21
Figure title: 22 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
Figure title: Chapter 2—The Refuges 23
Figure title: 24 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
Figure title: Chapter 2—The Refuges 25
Figure title: 26 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
Figure title: Chapter 2—The Refuges 27
Figure title: 28 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
Figure title: Chapter 2—The Refuges 29
Figure title: 30 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
Figure title: Chapter 2—The Refuges 31
Figure title: 32 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
Refuge Summmmary
Table 2 provides a summary of acreages of protected habitat managed by each refuge.
2.2 Special Values
Early in the planning process, the planning team and
public identified the outstanding qualities of the 12 refuges. Refuge qualities are the characteristics and features of each refuge that makes it special, valuable for wildlife, and worthy of refuge status. It was important
to identify the special values of each refuge to recognize
its worth and to ensure that the special values of the
refuges are preserved, protected, and enhanced through
the planning process. Refuge qualities can be unique
biological values, as well as something as simple as, “a
quiet place to see a variety of birds and enjoy nature.”
The following summarizes the qualities that make the refuges unique and valued:
The refuges provide critical spring breeding QQgrounds and staging areas for millions of migratory birds that gather from Mexico and South America.
The refuges are comprised of and provide QQprotection to two ecosystems: tall- and mixed-grass prairie with an abundance of permanent and seasonal wetlands.
Wildlife is abundant and highly visible because QQof varied habitat types and relatively low disturbance levels.
Visitors can still find wide-open spaces that QQremain relatively undisturbed.
Refuges provide for high-quality environmental QQeducation.
2.3 Purposes
For this CCP process, the Service combined the 12 national wildlife refuges for evaluation as a group and program. The purposes and management capabilities and challenges are similar for all 12 refuges. The refuges
were established under several authorities to provide breeding grounds for migratory birds and other wildlife.
The Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act of March 16,
1934, and the Migratory Bird Conservation Act of February 18, 1929, have been used to increase the acreage of the refuges for migratory bird habitat protection:
The Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act provides
QQfor the conservation, protection, and propagation
of native species of fish and wildlife, including migratory birds threatened with extinction.
The Migratory Bird Conservation Act provides QQfor meeting the obligations of the United States under a migratory bird treaty with Great Britain by the following:
lessening the dangers threatening migratory — —game birds from drainage and other causes
acquisition of areas of land and water for the — —adequate protection of migratory birds
authorizing appropriations for the — —establishment of such areas, their maintenance
and improvement, and for other purposes
In addition, Audubon and Lake Nettie national wildlife
refuges increased their area for migratory bird habitat
protection through the Garrison Diversion Unit Reformulation Act of 1986. This act required mitigation
for Service lands flooded as a result of the construction
of the Garrison Dam and Audubon Lake.
Table 2. Land Information for the 12 Refuges, North Dakota.
National
Wildlife Refuge
Acres Reserved from the
Public Domain
Fee-title Acres from Other Agencies
Gift Acres
Purchased Fee-title Acres
Easement Acres
Total Acres
Audubon
0
14,739.19
0
0
0
14,739.19
Chase Lake
0
0
0
4,449.47
0
4,449.47
Kellys Slough
0
680.00
0
0
589.50
1,269.50
Lake Alice
0
160.00
2.18
8,349.86
3,583.50
12,095.54
Lake Ilo
0
0
10.71
3,186.50
835.91
4,033.12
Lake Nettie
0
0
0
2,420.60
634.30
3,054.90
Lake Zahl
40.00
0
0
3,178.98
604.21
3,823.19
McLean
0
0
0
344.00
416.00
760.00
Shell Lake
0
0
0
785.20
1,049.90
1,835.10
Stewart Lake
0
0
3.99
636.01
1,590.40
2,230.40
Stump Lake
27.39
0
0
0
0
27.39
White Lake
0
0
0
1,040.00
0
1,040.00Chapter 2—The Refuges 33
2.4 Vision
At the beginning of the planning process, the Service
developed a vision for the refuges. The vision describes
the focus of refuge management, including what will
be different in the future, and is the essence of what
the Service is trying to accomplish by the end of the
15-year CCP period. The vision for the refuges follows.
This collection of
unique and diverse refuges
encompasses a broad range of
North Dakota habitat types
and landscapes.
These refuges provide
vital resting and breeding habitat
for waterfowl, other migratory birds,
and resident fish and wildlife species.
Visitors to these prairie refuges
experience wide-open spaces,
skies filled with migratory birds,
places to learn, and
welcome solitude.
The responsible management
of these special places
requires adequate funding,
dedicated personnel, and
successful partnerships.
Achievement of this vision
ensures that the American people
retain a legacy of
wildlife and prairie habitats
for future generations.
Several thousand sandhill cranes stage in the refuges
each spring and fall.
John and Karen Hollingsworth/USFWS
2.5 Goals
The Service developed six goals for the refuges based
on the Improvement Act and information developed
during planning. The goals direct work toward
achieving the vision and purposes of the refuges and
outline approaches for managing refuge resources.
H
Conserve, restore, and enhance the ecological diversity
of grasslands and wetlands of the North Dakota prairie
to support healthy populations of ducks and geese,
other migratory birds, native species, and other wildlife.
MonItorInG anD research Goal
Use science, monitoring, and applied research to
advance the understanding of natural resources
and management within the North Dakota national
wildlife refuges.
C
Identify and evaluate cultural resources that are
on Service-owned lands or are affected by Service
undertakings. Protect resources determined to be
significant and, when appropriate, interpret resources
to connect staff, visitors, and communities to the
area’s past.
VIsItor serVIces Goal
Provide visitors with opportunities to enjoy wildlife-dependent
recreation where compatible and expand
their knowledge and appreciation of the prairie
landscape and the National Wildlife Refuge System.
PartnershIPs Goal
A diverse network of partners join with the North
Dakota national wildlife refuges to support research,
accomplish habitat conservation, and foster awareness
and appreciation of the prairie landscape.
O
Efficiently employ staff, partnerships, and volunteers
and secure funding in support of the Refuge System’s
mission.
2.6 Planning Issues
Several key issues were identified following the
analysis of comments collected from Service staff and
the public and a review of the requirements of the
Improvement Act and NEPA. Substantive comments
(those that could be addressed within the authority
and management capabilities of the Service) were
considered during the formulation of the alternatives
for future management. These key issues are
summarized below.
34 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
WetlanD anD uPlanD habItats
All of the refuges have a primary purpose to provide optimal habitat conditions for the needs of a suite of waterfowl, shorebirds and other migratory birds, and, to a lesser extent native, resident wildlife. Wetland and upland habitats need to be protected and enhanced through management to achieve goals and objectives. Habitat protection needs to be evaluated through a priority system so that different means of protection, through either fee title or easement, can be evaluated.
Invasive Species
The refuges include uplands, which were previously farmed. Farmed uplands have since been restored to mixes of tame and native grasses and are interspersed with native uplands, the bulk of which have the native vegetation character but are compromised by invading species. The primary invasive plants are leafy spurge, Canada thistle, and absinth wormwood. Kentucky bluegrass and smooth brome are primary invasive grass species. These nonnative grasses and forbs, and potentially invasive native woody species, substantially diminish the quality and suitability of upland habitat for many native wildlife species. Western snowberry and silverberry are native shrubs that have greatly expanded their coverage in some areas where natural regimes of fire and grazing have been altered.
Photo caption: Photo caption:
Photo credit: Photo credit: Photo credit: Photo credit: Photo credit:
Energy Development
While the Service works to minimize the negative effects of energy development, the demand for energy is an increasing factor in habitat quality and preservation at the refuges. The production of biofuels, coal, oil, gas, and wind energy has the
potential to impact effectiveness of many refuge programs. The Service supports research that helps to understand the effects on wildlife of such energy projects as wind towers and conversion of grassland to cropland to support production of ethanol. It is a high priority for the Service to work in partnership with conservation and agricultural groups to support conservation programs such as the following: federal Farm Bill legislation, NDGF projects, water quality and watershed projects, and private conservation efforts. The physical structure of wind power turbines has unknown effects on birds. Through studies and analysis, the Service is currently evaluating wind towers to determine their effect on wildlife. In addition, it is unknown if wind power would affect the potential for future habitat protection through conservation easements. The Service needs to evaluate oil and gas development. Effects on some refuges—including salt-water contamination, filling of wetlands, and road development—have increased as increasing exploration takes place in North Dakota.
Prairie Conversion
The loss of native prairie is occurring at an alarming rate. Prairie is being converted for corn production to produce ethanol, which also has additional needs for irrigation water. An active role by the agricultural community, in partnership with conservation groups, will need to be taken to protect the federal Farm Bill and its conservation provisions, such as the Conservation Reserve Program and swampbuster and sodsaver provisions in the Farm Bill.
WIlDlIFe ManaGeMent
Priority species, predators, and wildlife disease are issues for the refuges.
Priority Species
The piper plover is a federally listed, threatened, shorebird. Breeding piping plovers occur in small numbers on numerous alkali wetlands in the northwestern part of the state. Endangered whooping cranes can be observed in refuge marshes. Chase Lake National Wildlife Refuge is home to the largest population of breeding American white pelican in North America. The primary issues related to these and other priority species center on the following: (1) monitoring populations; (2) monitoring habitat use; (3) identifying, securing, and maintaining essential habitat; and (4) developing habitat conditions in areas with potential for these species and that will promote increased recruitment or population protection to secure and increase their populations.
Predator Management
Several species including red fox, coyote, striped skunk, Franklin’s ground squirrel, mink, badger, and Chapter 2—The Refuges 35
raccoon are found at higher than historical levels due to modifications of habitat and other factors. These species can adversely affect—primarily by predation on nests of grassland-nesting bird species—waterfowl and other migratory bird populations and reduce the likelihood of reaching wildlife population goals and objectives. The woody vegetation has a negative influence on grassland songbirds because it provides habitat for predators and attracts forest-edge bird species that may displace grassland species.
Wildlife Disease
The refuges administer migratory bird programs and have the lead role in addressing wildlife and, in particular, bird disease issues. National wildlife refuges in North Dakota have a history of botulism outbreaks. Success in combating botulism occurs at the expense of other resources. There is the ongoing issue of striking a balance between providing optimal habitats, maintaining other refuge programs, and managing botulism.
MonItorInG anD research
Monitoring habitat and wildlife populations is an essential element in achieving the primary goals and objectives of the refuges. The Service needs basic data about recruitment, mortality, and habitat use for representative groups of species. It is important to collect and analyze these data on a regular basis so the Service can make appropriate decisions about the habitats on which these species depend. The use of the refuges as research field stations could make
valuable strides in development of new directions in management and expansion of the knowledge of field biologists.
VIsItor serVIces
The Service allows hunting only at Audubon, Chase Lake, Lake Alice, Lake Nettie, and Lake Zahl national wildlife refuges. Fishing is allowed only at Audubon and Lake Ilo national wildlife refuges. Wildlife observation, photography, environmental education, and interpretation are wildlife-dependent recreational uses at 10 of the refuges, with the exception of White Lake and Stump Lake national wildlife refuges, which are closed to all public use. A growing demand for public recreation in North Dakota and the nation makes the six wildlife-dependent recreational uses, as specified in the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act, a primary issue of interest. Some of the commenting public want more opportunity to participate in these activities.
OOOOOOOOOO
Funding and staff are not sufficient to fulfill the purposes and meet the goals of the refuges. Identification of priorities and direction of resources efficiently will always be an issue for the refuges. Refuge staffs need to identify and describe unfunded needs to be able to compete effectively for additional money from within the Service and from partners and other sources. Refuge facilities need to be evaluated and upgraded.3 Refuge Resources and Description Photo caption: Photo credit:
The prairies of North Dakota have become an ecological treasure of biological importance for waterfowl and other migratory birds. The prairie potholes of North Dakota and South Dakota support a wide diversity of wildlife, but they are most famous for their role in waterfowl production. Although the Prairie Pothole Region occupies only 10% of North America’s waterfowl- breeding range, it produces approximately 50% of the continent’s waterfowl population.This chapter describes the physical environment and biological resources of lands within the 12 national wildlife refuges. In addition, this chapter addresses the fire and grazing history, cultural resources, visitor services, socioeconomic environment, and operations of the refuges.
3.1 Physical Environment
The refuges are located across North Dakota from the Canadian border south to the state line of South Dakota.
Global WarMInG
The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) issued an order in January 2001 requiring federal agencies under its direction that have land management responsibilities to consider potential climate change effects as part of long-range planning endeavors.The Department of Energy’s report, “Carbon Sequestration Research and Development,” concluded that ecosystem protection is important to carbon sequestration and may reduce or prevent loss of carbon currently stored in the terrestrial biosphere. The report defines carbon sequestration as “the capture and secure storage of carbon that would otherwise be emitted to or remain in the atmosphere.”The increase of carbon dioxide (CO2) within the earth’s atmosphere has been linked to the gradual rise in surface temperature commonly referred to as global warming. In relation to comprehensive conservation planning for Refuge System units, carbon sequestration constitutes the primary climate-related effect to be considered in planning.38 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
Vegetated land is a tremendous factor in carbon sequestration. Large, naturally occurring communities of plants and animals that occupy major habitats—grasslands, forests, wetlands, tundra, and desert—are effective both in preventing carbon emission and in acting as biological “scrubbers” of atmospheric CO2.One Service activity in particular—prescribed burning —releases CO2 directly to the atmosphere from the biomass consumed during combustion yet results in no net loss of carbon because new vegetation quickly germinates and sprouts to replace the burned-up biomass. This vegetation sequesters an approximately equal amount of carbon as was lost to the air (Dai et al. 2006). Several other effects of climate change may need to be considered in the future:QQHabitat available in lakes and streams for cold-water fish such as trout and salmon could be reduced.QQForests may change, with some plant species shifting their range northward or dying out and other trees moving in to take their place.QQDucks and other waterfowl could lose breeding habitat because of stronger and more frequent droughts.QQChanges in the timing of migration and nesting could put some birds out of synchronization with the life cycles of their prey.
clIMate
The normal average annual temperature in North Dakota ranges from 37º Fahrenheit (F) in the northeast to 43ºF along the southern border. January is the coldest month with average temperatures ranging from 2ºF in the northeast to 17ºF in the southwest. July is the warmest month with temperatures averaging 67ºF in the northeast to 73ºF in parts of the south. The range of normal average monthly temperatures between the coldest and warmest months is 54ºF in the southwest and 65ºF in the northeast. These large annual ranges attest to the continental nature of North Dakota’s climate (Jensen, no date).The highest temperature ever recorded in North Dakota was 121ºF at Steele on July 6, 1936, and the lowest temperature measured was –60ºF at Parshall on February 15, 1936. Temperatures of 100ºF or higher occur nearly every year somewhere in North Dakota. Chances of this occurring are greatest in the south- central area where in about 85% of the years maximum temperature will equal or exceed 100ºF. These temperatures of 100ºF or more last only for a day or two. In the northeast, temperatures reach 100ºF or higher in only 3 years out of 10 (Jensen, no date).Annual precipitation ranges from less than 13 inches in the northwest to more than 20 inches in parts of the Red River Valley and southeast. The lines of equal precipitation, although subject to some meandering,
are oriented north–south; as a generalization, precipitation increases about 1 inch for every 50 miles of eastward movement.There are two areas where the general increase of precipitation in an easterly direction does not apply:One area is located in the southwest where the QQannual precipitation of more than 16 inches is higher than the surrounding area. This area of higher precipitation is largely a result of topographic uplift.The other area is in the north-central part of the QQstate, where the annual precipitation of less than 16 inches is lower than surrounding areas. This area is caused primarily by air moving downhill from all but a southerly direction, which works against the precipitation process (Jensen, no date).Annual snowfall in North Dakota ranges from less than 26 inches in parts of Mountrail and McLean counties (west-central part of the state) to about 38 inches in a belt extending diagonally across the state northeast–southwest (Jensen, no date).
PhysIoGraPhy, GeoGraPhy, anD soIls
Because the refuges cover such a large geographic area, the physical environment and biological resources are described in terms of physiographic region (or level 3 and level 4 ecoregions) (Bryce et al. 1996) in which each refuge is located. Five physiographic regions occur in the 12-refuge area: Red River Valley, glaciated plains, Missouri Coteau, and coteau slope (see figure 18, map of physiographic regions). These physiographic regions correspond closely to the level 3 ecoregions described below.
Ecoregions
Four level 3 ecoregions cover the 12 refuges: Lake Agassiz basin, northern glaciated plains, northwestern glaciated plains, and northwestern Great Plains. The differences in ecosystem properties and functions in the level 3 ecoregions are distinguished by the patterns of biotic and abiotic phenomena: vegetation, climate, soils, land use, wildlife use, and hydrology. Local biotic and abiotic factors have further refined the ecoregions. Each level 3 ecoregion is subdivided into several level 4 ecoregions (see figure 19); level 4 ecoregions are the finest level in the hierarchy (Bryce et al. 1996). Table 3 displays the level 3 ecoregions in which each refuge occurs.Descriptions of each of the four level 3 ecoregions follow (see figure 19), along with their level 4 ecoregions relevant to the refuges. Most text and graphics in this section are from “Ecoregions of North Dakota and South Dakota” (USGS 2006).
Northwestern Glaciated Plains Ecoregion 42 (Level 3)
Audubon, Chase Lake, Lake Nettie, Lake Zahl, McLean, and Shell Lake national wildlife refuges occur within this ecoregion.Chapter 3—Refuge Resources and Description 39
Figure title: 40 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
Figure title: Chapter 3—Refuge Resources and Description 41
Table 3. Ecoregions of the 12 Refuges, North Dakota.
National Wildlife Refuge
Level 3 Ecoregion Name and Number
Audubon
Northwestern glaciated plains, 42
Chase Lake
Northwestern glaciated plains, 42
Kellys Slough
Lake Agassiz basin, 48
Lake Alice
Northern glaciated plains, 46
Lake Ilo
Northwestern Great Plains, 43
Lake Nettie
Northwestern glaciated plains, 42
Lake Zahl
Northwestern glaciated plains, 42
McLean
Northwestern glaciated plains, 42
Shell Lake
Northwestern glaciated plains, 42
Stewart Lake
Northwestern Great Plains, 43
Stump Lake
Northern glaciated plains, 46
White Lake
Northwestern Great Plains, 43
The northwestern glaciated plains ecoregion marks the westernmost extent of continental glaciation. The youthful morainal (ridges of rock debris at the margins of glaciers) landscape has significant surface irregularity and high concentrations of wetlands. The rise in elevation along the eastern boundary defines the beginning of the Great Plains. Land use is transitional between the intensive dryland farming in Drift Plains ecoregion 46i (below) to the east and the predominance of cattle ranching and farming to the west in the northwestern Great Plains ecoregion 43 (below).
Collapsed Glacial Outwash Ecoregion 42b (Level 4)
Areas of collapsed glacial outwash formed from gravel and sand that was deposited by glacial meltwater and precipitation runoff over stagnant ice. Many large, shallow lakes are found in these areas; these lakes and wetlands tend to be slightly to very alkaline depending on the flow path of groundwater moving through the permeable outwash deposits. They attract birds preferring large areas of open water such as American white pelican, black tern, and Forster's tern, as well as those living in brackish water such as American avocet and tundra swan.
Glaciated Dark Brown Prairie Ecoregion 42i (Level 4)
The boundary of the glaciated dark brown prairie marks a transition to drier conditions. This ecoregion has a well-defined drainage system and fewer wetlands compared with the more recently glaciated Missouri Coteau slope ecoregion 42c to the east. Land use is a mosaic of cropland and rangeland.Lake Ilo, Stewart Lake, and White Lake national wildlife refuges occur within this ecoregion.
Northwestern Great Plains Ecoregion 43 (Level 3)
The northwestern Great Plains ecoregion encompasses the Missouri Plateau section of the Great Plains. It is
a semiarid rolling plain of shale, siltstone, and sandstone punctuated by occasional buttes and badlands. Native grasslands persist in areas of steep or broken topography, but they have been largely replaced by spring wheat and alfalfa over most of the ecoregion. Agriculture is limited by erratic precipitation patterns and limited opportunities for irrigation.
Missouri Plateau Ecoregion 43a (Level 4)
On the Missouri Plateau west of the Missouri River, the landscape displays the wide open spaces of the American West. The topography of this ecoregion was largely unaffected by glaciation and retains its original soils and complex stream drainage pattern. A mosaic of spring wheat, alfalfa, and grazing land covers the short-grass prairie where herds of bison, pronghorn, and elk once grazed.
Northern Glaciated Plains Ecoregion 46 (Level 3)
Lake Alice and Stump Lake national wildlife refuges occur within this ecoregion. Also commonly referred to as the Drift Plains or Drift Prairie, this area was subject to scouring and deposition due to prolonged glacier activity between 70,000 and 10,000 years ago.A flat to gently rolling landscape of glacial drift characterizes the northern glaciated plains ecoregion. The subhumid conditions foster a grassland transition between the tall- and short-grass prairies. High concentrations of temporary and seasonal wetlands create favorable conditions for duck nesting and migration. Although the tilled soil is very fertile, agricultural success is subject to annual climatic fluctuations.
Glacial Lake Basins Ecoregion 46c (Level 4)
Lake Souris, Devils Lake, and Lake Dakota once occupied the glacial lake basins. These proglacial (adjacent to a glacier) lakes were formed when major stream or river drainages were blocked by glacial ice during the Pleistocene era. The smooth topography of the glacial lake basins—even flatter than the surrounding Drift Plains (ecoregions 46g, 46i, and 46n)—resulted from the slow buildup of water-laid sediments. The level, deep soils in the lake plains are intensively cultivated. In the north, the primary crops are spring wheat, other small grains, and sunflowers; in the Lake Dakota basin of South Dakota, corn and soybeans are more prevalent.
Lake Agassiz Basin Ecoregion 48 (Level 3)
Kellys Slough National Wildlife Refuge occurs in this ecoregion.Glacial Lake Agassiz was the last in a series of proglacial lakes to fill the Red River Valley since the beginning of the Pleistocene era. The Lake Agassiz plain is comprised of thick lacustrine (formed in lakes) sediments underlain by glacial till. It is extremely flat and has fewer lakes and pothole wetlands than neighboring ecoregions. The historical tall-grass prairie has been replaced by intensive agriculture. The preferred crops 42 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
in the northern half of the region are potatoes, beans and wheat; soybeans and corn dominate in the south. Sugar beets are grown throughout the ecoregion.
Saline Area of the Lake Agassiz Ecoregion 48c (Level 4)
In the saline area of the Lake Agassiz basin, salty artesian groundwater flows to the surface through glacial till and lacustrine sediments from the underlying beds of Cretaceous sandstone. The regional boundary of the saline area of the Lake Agassiz basin delineates an area where salt effects are most evident. Other saline areas occur along the tributaries of the Park, Forest, and Turtle rivers in northeastern North Dakota. Salt-affected soils in the saline area reduce crop productivity. Many areas are not suitable for farming, but are used for range or wildlife habitat.
Soils
Data for soil temperature and frost penetration in North Dakota are scarce. Dr. Guy Wilkinson of the department of soils at North Dakota State University did the most complete study of soil temperatures. Wilkinson measured soil temperature at Fargo, North Dakota, continuously over a 4-year period (Jensen, no date).At Fargo, the average date of soil surface freezing was November 26. Freezing progressed to greater depths throughout the winter until the average maximum frost penetration depth of 4.5 feet was reached April 1. Surface thawing in the spring began on March 26, a few days earlier than the occurrence of maximum frost penetration. After April 1, soil thawing proceeded both downward from the surface and upward toward the surface from the deeper unfrozen soil until May 1, when the last of the frozen soil at about the 3-foot level was thawed (Jensen, no date).The lowest average soil temperature of 8.2°F was found at a depth of 0.25 inch on January 17. The time of minimum soil temperature for deeper soil depths was progressively later, with minimum soil temperatures at the 4.5-foot depth occurring on April 1. Highest average soil temperature at the 0.25-inch depth reached the low 80s during the third week in July. As in winter, soil temperatures at greater depths reached their highest levels later in the season. For instance, soil temperatures at the 2-foot depth did not reach their highest levels until about August 6, while 3-feet deep maximum temperatures were reached August 15 (Jensen, no date).
Water resources
This section has descriptions of the drainages in which the refuges occur (North Dakota State Water Commission 2005), water quality of the area, and water rights for each refuge.North Dakota is separated into two major drainage basins by a continental divide running from the northwest and through the central and southeastern part of the state. The northeastern portion of the
state falls generally within the Hudson Bay drainage basin, while the southwestern part is drained by the Missouri River into the Gulf of Mexico.
Hudson Bay Drainage Basin
The Hudson Bay drainage basin includes the Souris and Red river systems plus the large, currently noncontributing, Devils Lake basin. Of the 12 refuges, Kellys Slough, Lake Alice, and Stump Lake national wildlife refuges fall within these basins.The Souris River originates in Saskatchewan, Canada, and forms a 357-mile loop through North Dakota before it reenters Canada west of the Turtle Mountains. The Souris River drains portions of Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Montana, and North Dakota. There are seven major tributaries in North Dakota; the principal tributary is the Des Lacs River. Annual mean precipitation ranges from 13 inches in the west to 17 inches in the east.The Red River is the principal river of the basin. From its origin at the confluence of the Ottertail and Bois de Sioux rivers at Wahpeton, North Dakota, and Breckenridge, Minnesota, the Red River winds northerly almost 400 river miles, forming the boundary between North Dakota and Minnesota. From the International Boundary, the Red River flows about 155 river miles to Lake Winnipeg in Manitoba. The valley through which the river flows is actually the bed of glacial Lake Agassiz. The lake bed is very flat and accounts for the meandering course and low gradient of the river. The headwaters of most of the eight major tributaries in North Dakota begin in the drift prairie in the western part of the basin where valleys are narrow and steep-sided. As the tributaries enter the lowlands of the lake bed, the river slopes become very flat, with poorly-defined watershed boundaries. The Devils Lake basin is currently a noncontributing subbasin within the Red River basin. This basin became a closed basin after the last continental ice sheets receded and southerly drainage to the Sheyenne River ceased. The drainage system of the Devils Lake basin is formed by chains of waterways and connecting lakes, with the majority of the basin’s water reaching its ultimate collection point at Devils Lake. Because of the poorly-defined drainage system, approximately 1,300 square miles do not contribute runoff to Devils Lake.
Missouri River Drainage Basin
The Missouri River drainage basin includes the Missouri and James rivers. Nine of the 12 refuges are within this basin: Audubon, Chase Lake, Lake Ilo, Lake Nettie, Lake Zahl, McLean, Shell Lake, Stewart Lake, and White Lake national wildlife refuges.The Missouri River basin is the largest in the state, draining approximately 48% of North Dakota’s total area. The basin coincides roughly with the part of the state having a semiarid climate. The tributaries on the south and west sides of the Missouri River typically occupy small but sharply defined valleys. This area Chapter 3—Refuge Resources and Description 43
is well drained with very few natural lakes. The topography is characterized by numerous flat-topped, steep-sided buttes and hills. The area east of the Missouri River is characterized by numerous small lakes and wetlands. Annual mean precipitation in the basin ranges from 13 inches in the northwest to 17 inches in the east. The James River, a major tributary of the Missouri River, begins in central North Dakota but does not join the Missouri River until it reaches Yankton, South Dakota. The James River in North Dakota is 260 miles long. Ninety-two percent of the James River basin is used for agricultural purposes.Watershed drainage is the primary source of water supply for the refuges. Water levels in refuge impoundments depend on spring runoff. Impoundments range from natural depressions to those that have structures to control the water level within a lake or pond. Impoundments with control structures function as artificial freshwater wetlands. By varying the water levels in the impoundments, refuge staffs can influence the types of plant and animal communities living in or near the impoundments. Through the change in water level, refuge staffs can also reduce the occurrence of botulism in waterfowl. All surface water control occurs under the jurisdiction of a state permit issued to the refuges.Photo caption: Photo caption: Photo credit:
Water Quality
Some wetland basins function as groundwater recharge areas; such basins tend to be temporarily or seasonally flooded. These basins hold water for only a few months each year, and the water is generally low in dissolved solids. Some basins are through-flow systems with respect to groundwater; that is, groundwater flows in through parts of their bed while other parts recharge groundwater. Through-flow basins hold water over longer periods and the water tends to have higher concentrations of dissolved solids. Some basins serve only as discharge areas for groundwater. Lakes that receive discharge from both regional and local groundwater flow systems and do not lose water to seepage or surface outflow are highly saline (Kantrud et al. 1989).Human-related disturbance such as drainage and cultivation are the most extreme disturbances seen in most prairie wetlands in North Dakota and South Dakota. In some instances, fill (earth or rocks) or use for solid waste disposal has also destroyed the basins (Kantrud et al. 1989).
Water Rights
During the 1930s, the U.S. Bureau of Biological Survey on behalf of the federal government submitted declarations of filing in North Dakota for many impoundments on national wildlife refuges. Such filing applies for and documents the claim of ownership of the right to use water for current purposes. In 1930, there was a fire at the state capitol that destroyed
most of these early filings, and, subsequently, new legislation was introduced to alter the way in which water rights were applied for and processed. As a result, there are many old declarations of filing that have not been entered into the state’s water rights database and have never been perfected (described in the following paragraph) in the same manner as the newer water right permits.The state of North Dakota currently issues a conditional water permit when an application for a water right is made. This permit grants the claimant the right to develop the structure or structures necessary to put the water to beneficial use. After the claimant has developed the necessary structures and put the water to beneficial use, the North Dakota State Water Commission has to inspect the project and verify that the water as claimed is being put to beneficial use. The North Dakota State Engineer then issues a perfected water permit.Early water rights usually included a storage amount as well as an amount for seasonal use. The seasonal use is the water needed to offset evaporation and is generally seen only in connection with a reservoir. The state instituted a one-time fill rule, eliminating the ability to offset evaporation. This rule was waived in some cases, but many of the later water rights only list a storage volume.Some water rights—particularly groundwater rights, but also some surface water rights—have an associated flow rate. If there is a decreed flow rate, this is the maximum rate at which water can be pumped or diverted.The following section is a summary of water rights for each of the 12 refuges.
Audubon National Wildlife Refuge
A letter of understanding between the Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, NDGF, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers outlines the 44 Comprehensive Conservation Plan—North Dakota National Wildlife Refuges
operation, including water levels, of Lake Audubon. The Bureau of Reclamation secured Conditional Water Permit Number 1416, which includes 230,000 acre-feet for fish, wildlife, and recreation purposes.The Service holds four perfected water permits, all for fish and wildlife purposes, for the Audubon National Wildlife Refuge as follows:Perfected Water Permit Number 3804, priority QQdate June 27, 1985—325.0 acre-feet for storage plus 52.0 acre-feet to offset evaporative losses.Perfected Water Permit Number 3805, priority QQdate June 27, 1985—5.7 acre-feet for storage plus 4.8 acre-feet to offset evaporative losses.Perfected Water Permit Number 3378, priority QQdate January 29, 1981—17.1 acre-feet to offset evaporative losses in a 5.7-acre impoundment.Perfected Water Permit Number 3379, priority QQdate January 29, 1981—26.9 acre-feet for storage plus 100.0 acre-feet to offset evaporative losses.
Chase Lake National Wildlife Refuge
A water right claim was filed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture on May 25, 1938. The water right is for all creeks, intermittent streams, and other watersheds and their tributaries that empty into Chase Lake, sufficient to maintain the water level at its meander line, which includes approximately 2,576 acres of water surface.The Service recorded a declaration of filing with the North Dakota State Engineer, priority date September 1, 1934. Records need to be updated and water rights perfected.
Kellys Slough National Wildlife Refuge
A water right claim was filed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture on August 30, 1937, priority date September 1, 1934. The 585.0-acre-foot claim was for 195.0 acre-feet for storage plus 390.0 acre-feet for seasonal use. Inadvertently, the state issued Perfected Water Permit Number 169-59 on August 12, 1992, for
190.0 acre-feet for storage plus 90.0 acre-feet for annual use for fish and wildlife purposes, which abandoned and voided the additional amount of water the Service had claimed.The Service holds four perfected water permits, all for fish and wildlife purposes, for the Kellys Slough National Wildlife Refuge as follows:Perfected Water Permit Number 4761, priority QQdate March 4, 1994, Upper Pool 1—1,228.0 acre-feet for storage minus 266.0 acre-feet to offset evaporative losses.Perfected Water Permit Number 4471, priority QQdate May 14, 1991, Lower Pool 1—404.0 acre-feet for storage minus 100.7 acre-feet to offset evaporative losses.Perfected Water Permit Number 4309, priority QQdate October 22, 1990, Pool 5—21.0 acre-feet for storage minus 5.3 acre-feet to offset evaporative losses.
Lake Alice National Wildlife Refuge
The Service recorded a declaration of filing with the North Dakota State Engineer February 21, 1935, claiming use of unappropriated water in the Mauvais Coulee watershed to be used on six projects including Lac Aux Mortes (Lake Alice). The right was filed for record on May 12, 1938, claiming 23,940.0 acre-feet (10,260.0 acre-feet for seasonal use and 13,680.0 acre- feet for storage). Perfected Water Permit Number169A (Lake Alice control structure)—dated November 21, 1967—recognized a priority date of May 25, 1938, for the refuge’s water right. However, it established the right for 10,260.0 acre-feet for annual use and 9,200.0 acre-feet for storage, the amounts indicated on the Service’s application for a permit (169A) filed in 1966. The purposes stated on the permit are waterfowl wetlands and flood control.In addition to the declaration of filing, table 4 lists the conditional water permits that Lake Alice National Wildlife Refuge has for fish and wildlife purposes.
Table 4. Conditional Water Permits for Lake Alice National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota.
Permit Number
Structure Name
Priority Date
Water Flow Rate
Storage
(acre-feet)
Seasonal Use1 (acre-feet)
4565
Outlet Marsh
March 9, 1992
24 cfs2
229.0
126.0
5060
Pintail Marsh
September 30, 1996
10,000 gpm3
243.0
93.0
5075
Jerome Marsh
November 21, 1996
—
45.2
25.0
5076
Kenner Marsh
November 21, 1996
—
87.1
42.0
5077
Redhead Slough
November 21, 1996
—
77.0
39.0
5142
Elsperger Marsh
July 28, 1997
10,000 gpm
175.0
175.0
5143
West Chain Lake
July 28, 1997
10,000 gpm
357.6
270.0
5493
Hansen Marsh
April 2, 2001
10,000 gpm
270.6
96.1
1To offset evaporative losses.
2cfs=cubic feet per second.
3gpm=gallons per minute.Chapter 3—Refuge Resources and Description 45
Lake Ilo National Wildlife Refuge
The Service recorded a declaration of filing with the North Dakota State Engineer, priority date September 1, 1934, for 10,850.0 acre-feet from Spring Creek: 7,130.0 acre-feet for storage and 3,720.0 acre- feet for seasonal use as a refuge and breeding ground for migratory birds and other wildlife. Spring Creek is a tributary to the Knife River in the Missouri River watershed. A 1994 review of the original filing documents, more recent survey information, and a more accurate net evaporation calculation resulted in an updated surface acreage, capacity at spillway, and seasonal use. Records should be updated to reflect a total of 6,850.0 acre-feet: 5,157.0 acre-feet for storage and 1,693.0 acre-feet for seasonal use. Records need to be updated and water rights perfected with the North Dakota State Engineer.Lake Ilo National Wildlife Refuge has Perfected Water Permit Number 4746, priority date January 18, 1994, for 15.9 acre-feet from Spring Creek for storage. For fish and wildlife use, 7.0 acre-feet will be used to offset evaporative losses in borrow areas created during repair and reconstruction of the Lake Ilo dam.
Lake Nettie National Wildlife Refuge
For Lake Nettie National Wildlife Refuge, the Service recorded a declaration of filing with the North Dakota State Engineer, priority date September 1, 1934, for 3,528.0 acre-feet from Turtle Creek in the Missouri River watershed: 2,268.0 acre-feet for storage and 1,260.0 acre-feet for seasonal use. Records need to be updated and water rights perfected with the North Dakota State Engineer.
Lake Zahl National Wildlife Refuge
For Lake Zahl National Wildlife Refuge, the Service recorded a declaration of filing with the North Dakota State Engineer, priority date September 1, 1934, for 6,903.0 acre-feet from the Little Muddy Creek in the Misso